The point that people miss when thinking about the Monty hall Problem is that the host is only allowed to reveal a door with no prize behind it. If he were allowed to reveal the door with the prize aswell, then the chances would not change and our intuition would be right but of course revealing the door with the prize makes no sense from the shows perspective. What happens is basically: At the beginning, you have a 1/3 chance to be correct. Then one door gets eliminated by the host and you can switch. So in 1/3 of the cases, switching would be bad because you got it right initially but in 2/3 of the cases, switching is good because you were wrong initially and now automatically switch to the right door due to the elimination of the 3rd one by the host. So it’s not even about the probability changing to 50/50 or anything, all the magic happens when you make your first choice because the host is always forced to eliminate the door to your advantage
The host must *also* be forced to open a door. If the host can choose to skip the door open thing the odds can change. As a proof: imagine the host opens an empty door if you pick the car, and opens no door if you pick a goat. If you know the host always opens a goat door, the math holds.
Its also easier to consider an extreme case, If there were instead 100 doors to choose from, and after you selected one the host reveals 98 of them that were the wrong choice, suddenly it makes sense to swap your selection when only 2 remain.
Are you sure that's relevant? I'm pretty sure the probabilities would still be the same. The way I was able to grok the Monty Hall problem is by considering the cases. Doors: A, B, C and you chose door A. Case 1: Door A has the winning selection and you chose it. The host reveals that door B or door C (they can show either) is also a miss. Case 2: Door B has the winning selection. The host reveals that door C is also a miss. Case 3: Door C has the winning selection. The host reveals that door B is also a miss. If we switch 2/3 times we win (we are in Case 2 or Case 3) and 1/3 times we lose (Case 1). All cases have equal probability of occurring so each happens one third of the time. I don't think it's relevant whether the host is forced to show us a bad outcome or if they choose randomly. If they are not forced then we gain just as much information when a bad outcome is revealed to us, and if they show us where the winner is we either win 100% of the time in that case ("Hey I'll switch to the good door please"), so our overall winning chances are even better, or the game has to be redone or something. My point is that when you pick a door, and are shown another door is bad, it doesn't matter whether you were randomly shown or not. So long as there's always one winner amongst three doors and we now see that one of the doors would have been a mistake the probabilities run out identically and we really ought to change our mind about our door. Unless I am missing something :) EDIT: Things get weird if we pick door A and the host is allowed to show us that door A was a miss. In that case it is in fact 50/50 if we can pick from door B or door C, but if we pick A and either B or C is shown to be bad then you should still switch. I'm assuming they cannot reveal the door we have chosen!
@@canadianbakn The host runs this program: IF (you picked prize) THEN (open a different door and offer to let them swap). ELSE (do not offer to let them swap) If you have this host swapping when offered is a bad idea. The host must be forced to show you a door, or the offer may be a trap.
I've always been amazed at how large your vocabulary is for a non-native English speaker. Never really hear anything being mispronounced. Even times when you're not sure if you're using the right words, you were usually using the right word from the start.
A good way to remember the correct answer in the Monty hall problem is to imagine that there were 100 doors instead of 3. The host lets you pick, then opens 98 incorrect doors, leaving 2. You get to choose to stay with your first pick, or switch to the second one. In this case, the chance that your first pick was correct is 1%. By eliminating all the other incorrect doors, the other 99% is collapsed on the remaining door, which you should switch to.
There's two possible routes in the Monty Hall problem: 1) You picked the correct door (1 out of 3, or ~33%) and Monty could reveal either remaining door as an incorrect door. 2) You picked one of the incorrect doors (2 out of 3, or 67%) and Monty can then only reveal the one remaining incorrect door, leaving you to pick the other door. You are twice as likely to be on the 2nd route, and so you should always switch to the remaining third door when given the choice.
@@thesultan1212 That's the suggestion I use to help make it intuitive rather than purely mathematical... since a lot of people seem to zone out when you start spouting fractions and percentages which is probably why people are still confused even after knowing the problem.
@@fluffyfang4213 The thing I had to do to really figure it out was to draw on a piece of paper every possible scenario, It becomes very clear when you do that.
Great analysis, but I would like to add a small point. There is another possible route that the game can take depending on whether the host chooses to reveal an empty door to the contestant or the host randomly picks a door to reveal to the contestant. Suppose the host knows which door the prize is behind, then the host is revealing extra information by opening a door which he knows doesn't contain the prize. This is the schenario described in the comment by @truthless4720. The strategy to switch wins with probability of 2/3, while the strategy to stay wins with probability of 1/3 which is lower. Suppose instead that the host doesn't know which door the prize is behind and they randomly opened one of the two remaining doors, which just happened to be empty. Then the only information the contestant gets is that the open door doesn't have a prize, and so it makes no difference whether you switch or not. Either way the probability of winning is one half. It really depends on how the host decides which door to reveal to the contestant. This is really why the question was popular and controversial. One needs to know the probability of the host revealing an empty door given the contestant initially chose one of the empty doors. In a typical game show it is reasonable for the host to know which door has the prize, so we are likely in the first scenario and the analysis of @truthless4720 applies.
Nicely explained, but I think it becomes even more obvious, if you ignore the elimination of the door. Rather imagine you were asked whether instead of the door you just choose you would rather have both the remaining doors. That's kind of what you get by the rules allowing for the elimination of an empty door only. If the door would be eliminated randomly you really would get a 50/50 chance between the remaining doors, but also an overall 1/3 chance of both remaining doors being empty. Interestingly, when the problem first got public, apparently quite a few high level mathematicians got it wrong.
Wow, I can't believe Mr. Blizzard personally delivered a letter on Christmas Day to Harstem to tell him they were taking away his cannon rush spots and then kicked him in the balls!!! The gross injustice!!!
He even went to the troubles to find Mr. Harstem's address via questionable means (to say the least), darn that's next level persistency. I hope Mr. Harstem will develop these conspiracy theories, seems very proper. (do note conspiracy = more than one entity using their combined resources to do a thing, usually in secret)
Hey Captain, I have an idea for your "beating GMs with stupid stuff" Pick zerg, rush into mass overseers, use Contaminate on every production building you can and when you can. And behind that you just fight as always, trade, replenish your army and enemy can't replenish his coz of no production😂
Actually, the Monty Hall problem does involve Monty Hall's package, if you hear the full problem, that's why it's also known as the Full Monty. As a film in buff, I'm surprised you didn't know this, Captain.
Nice defense vs Boanan. He's a fun player to watch people face off against, especially him vs the actual cheesiest man. 100% agree that mapmakers are crippling cannon rushers to appease the sweaty masses. A good cannon rush is a thing of beauty, and so is a good cannon rush defense. It's anti-cannon bias and erasure of Protoss culture, plain and simple.
I enjoy all your content and see most of it! Also, I really think youve been doing a lot better recently in terms of mechanics and mental power. I'm very proud of you. At 8:00 you make a misplay by hurting your own mental. Visualization is really important for maintaining peak gamesense and execution. Recently its been clear to me that you perform much better in neutral and disadvantage when you produce neutral or positive commentary. We're rooting for you Mr. Koning!🤓
Supposedly the English started dropping their Rs ( became non-rhotic) due to a dialect of lower class londoners that became popularized. The Cornwall accent retains this ancient rhotic accent, which sounds like pirate-speech to a greater or lesser degree to modern ears due to pirates of Penzance or something
Switching doors is 2/3, because Monty always reveals a door with no prize. If you picked out of 100 doors, and Monty opened every door such that only your door and one other was left, it is obvious that switching is the right move.
Best recent pro cannon rush I saw was Zest vs Ryung in GSL.. elimination match, game 3, Hardwire.. it almost worked. 3+0 min game Ryung with a miracle win.
Its not that american english is proper old english. Its more like southern american english is closer to older english because of its relative isolation and small immigration numbers. The southern states arent in europe so they missed a lot of the vowel shifts that happened in the 1800s in europe and also they werent impacted by other accents or anything because new york was absorbing all the immigration
Hey Captain, great video. Where exactly do you work on accent reduction? I'm looking for just the same thing, but I'm struggling to see who can help me with it.
Discarding one of 3 options and letting you choose of two remaining options puts you in a a new situation of 50/50. Monty-Hall paradox is a clear example of overthinking a simple problem.
Btw. for the host who knows which door holds what there are no probabilities about the prize. There is only a probability of the contestant changing his choice or not :). So it's very relative and depending on perception
I watched Klaus the last time Harstem recommended it and it's indeed good. When will we finally see some innovative movie recommendations from Harstem?
do a "winning with lots off collossus" vid ^^ they are my fav unit, but just so bad we rarely ever see it, and when we do it usually end with vipers mass pulling them ezz or vikings sniping them ezz; the challenge could be to see if you can manage to keep them alive and make them have high cost-efficiency :D so too far away to be pulled, protected by cannons and shieldbats, aoe and anti mass viking, maybe even a mothership hanging out back to recall them an extra time when the front is collapsing ;)
Yo harstem! I noticed that whenever I watch people cannon rush Zergs, they will pull three to four drones all the way from their main into the natural as soon as they see the pylon. What if you made a pylon as if you were cannon rushing, only to cancel it at the last minute, but with no forge? I imagine you would cost the Zerg a lot of mining time and it would cost you very little while also allowing your drone to scout. Seems weird that it’s not part of the meta already vs Zerg…
But Harstem, nobody, nobody gives their address to anyone who will give it to Blizz for them to send you the Christmas Morning letter. You should know better ! Happy for you you liked the game that went well :) Love the existential stuff, ty
Harstem - do you make up your bulldada on the fly, or do actually scrpit these things out? I can see you thinking "It's time for another cheesiest man alive, and I've been really s**king at cannon rushes lately, so I'll claim it's all Blizzard's fault. No, wait, that's too lame. I'll claim that Blizzard hates me personally. Better, but what can I use to back up my claim? I've got it! I'll claim I have a letter from Blizzard that proves they're a bunch of Scrooges, well technically, it's just one intern that Apple hasn't figured is the tech support for Starcraft 2 yet, so ..."
First! Love the content and maybe I will start to play SC2 again because of your content. May the cheese continue! Tragic note, I don't think I was first but sure was close!
The initial decision had a 67% chance of being wrong. That is still true after door is removed. Therefore, the other door left has a 67% chance of being correct.
Monthy Hall isn't even a problem. The real problem is the fake claim of gambler's fallacy. If you get 10 heads in a row on a coin toss chances are that the 11th result will be tails. That's 99.97% chance or something, YET the actual chance is 50/50 - go explain this paradox/problem if you think you are smarter than me!
Interesting to hear about the accent reduction lessons, I feel your accent is very minimal already. I assumed you lived in the US at some point because of how reduced your accent is and how familiar you are with colloquialisms.
24:20 - the quick and dirty on Monty Hall is that yes you had it correct Captain. At time of choice 1 : 33% Reveal happens, you should always switch because NOW you have a 50/50. Lots of different ways to describe it but I guess you could call it probability transformation. Either way, it’s important. It’s the same reason certain hands in Poker can become dead even while starting out great and vice-versa when playing GTO (game theory optimal) Poker.
This isn't correct. The point is the probabilities don't change. When you pick the first door, the probability of being correct is 1/3. The host opening a door has no impact on this probability, so it remains at 1/3. As we know probabilities must add up to 1, the remaining door must have probability of (1-1/3) = 2/3. That being said, this problem assumes that the host doesn't open doors randomly, and instead chooses to never open a door with the prize behind it. If the host opens doors randomly, then it truly is 50/50, it doesn't matter if you swap or stay.
@@tinsunmak9680 The problem usually states that the host cannot open the door with the prize behind it, otherwise there would be a 33% chance you get to see the prize, but can't select that door xD
Disney is dying, and good riddance if they keep publishing such trash where the only thing they are interested in is pushing an agenda rather than telling a good story
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
The point that people miss when thinking about the Monty hall Problem is that the host is only allowed to reveal a door with no prize behind it. If he were allowed to reveal the door with the prize aswell, then the chances would not change and our intuition would be right but of course revealing the door with the prize makes no sense from the shows perspective.
What happens is basically: At the beginning, you have a 1/3 chance to be correct. Then one door gets eliminated by the host and you can switch. So in 1/3 of the cases, switching would be bad because you got it right initially but in 2/3 of the cases, switching is good because you were wrong initially and now automatically switch to the right door due to the elimination of the 3rd one by the host.
So it’s not even about the probability changing to 50/50 or anything, all the magic happens when you make your first choice because the host is always forced to eliminate the door to your advantage
The host must *also* be forced to open a door. If the host can choose to skip the door open thing the odds can change. As a proof: imagine the host opens an empty door if you pick the car, and opens no door if you pick a goat.
If you know the host always opens a goat door, the math holds.
Its also easier to consider an extreme case,
If there were instead 100 doors to choose from, and after you selected one the host reveals 98 of them that were the wrong choice, suddenly it makes sense to swap your selection when only 2 remain.
Are you sure that's relevant? I'm pretty sure the probabilities would still be the same.
The way I was able to grok the Monty Hall problem is by considering the cases. Doors: A, B, C and you chose door A.
Case 1: Door A has the winning selection and you chose it. The host reveals that door B or door C (they can show either) is also a miss.
Case 2: Door B has the winning selection. The host reveals that door C is also a miss.
Case 3: Door C has the winning selection. The host reveals that door B is also a miss.
If we switch 2/3 times we win (we are in Case 2 or Case 3) and 1/3 times we lose (Case 1). All cases have equal probability of occurring so each happens one third of the time.
I don't think it's relevant whether the host is forced to show us a bad outcome or if they choose randomly. If they are not forced then we gain just as much information when a bad outcome is revealed to us, and if they show us where the winner is we either win 100% of the time in that case ("Hey I'll switch to the good door please"), so our overall winning chances are even better, or the game has to be redone or something.
My point is that when you pick a door, and are shown another door is bad, it doesn't matter whether you were randomly shown or not. So long as there's always one winner amongst three doors and we now see that one of the doors would have been a mistake the probabilities run out identically and we really ought to change our mind about our door. Unless I am missing something :)
EDIT: Things get weird if we pick door A and the host is allowed to show us that door A was a miss. In that case it is in fact 50/50 if we can pick from door B or door C, but if we pick A and either B or C is shown to be bad then you should still switch. I'm assuming they cannot reveal the door we have chosen!
@@canadianbakn The host runs this program:
IF (you picked prize) THEN (open a different door and offer to let them swap).
ELSE (do not offer to let them swap)
If you have this host swapping when offered is a bad idea.
The host must be forced to show you a door, or the offer may be a trap.
I've always been amazed at how large your vocabulary is for a non-native English speaker. Never really hear anything being mispronounced. Even times when you're not sure if you're using the right words, you were usually using the right word from the start.
A good way to remember the correct answer in the Monty hall problem is to imagine that there were 100 doors instead of 3. The host lets you pick, then opens 98 incorrect doors, leaving 2. You get to choose to stay with your first pick, or switch to the second one. In this case, the chance that your first pick was correct is 1%. By eliminating all the other incorrect doors, the other 99% is collapsed on the remaining door, which you should switch to.
There's two possible routes in the Monty Hall problem:
1) You picked the correct door (1 out of 3, or ~33%) and Monty could reveal either remaining door as an incorrect door.
2) You picked one of the incorrect doors (2 out of 3, or 67%) and Monty can then only reveal the one remaining incorrect door, leaving you to pick the other door.
You are twice as likely to be on the 2nd route, and so you should always switch to the remaining third door when given the choice.
Also if it is "hard to see" how it works, play the same game with 100 doors instead of 3, you will quickly realise you need to switch, always
@@thesultan1212 That's the suggestion I use to help make it intuitive rather than purely mathematical... since a lot of people seem to zone out when you start spouting fractions and percentages which is probably why people are still confused even after knowing the problem.
@@fluffyfang4213 The thing I had to do to really figure it out was to draw on a piece of paper every possible scenario, It becomes very clear when you do that.
Great analysis, but I would like to add a small point. There is another possible route that the game can take depending on whether the host chooses to reveal an empty door to the contestant or the host randomly picks a door to reveal to the contestant.
Suppose the host knows which door the prize is behind, then the host is revealing extra information by opening a door which he knows doesn't contain the prize. This is the schenario described in the comment by @truthless4720. The strategy to switch wins with probability of 2/3, while the strategy to stay wins with probability of 1/3 which is lower.
Suppose instead that the host doesn't know which door the prize is behind and they randomly opened one of the two remaining doors, which just happened to be empty. Then the only information the contestant gets is that the open door doesn't have a prize, and so it makes no difference whether you switch or not. Either way the probability of winning is one half.
It really depends on how the host decides which door to reveal to the contestant. This is really why the question was popular and controversial. One needs to know the probability of the host revealing an empty door given the contestant initially chose one of the empty doors. In a typical game show it is reasonable for the host to know which door has the prize, so we are likely in the first scenario and the analysis of @truthless4720 applies.
Nicely explained, but I think it becomes even more obvious, if you ignore the elimination of the door. Rather imagine you were asked whether instead of the door you just choose you would rather have both the remaining doors. That's kind of what you get by the rules allowing for the elimination of an empty door only.
If the door would be eliminated randomly you really would get a 50/50 chance between the remaining doors, but also an overall 1/3 chance of both remaining doors being empty.
Interestingly, when the problem first got public, apparently quite a few high level mathematicians got it wrong.
Wow, I can't believe Mr. Blizzard personally delivered a letter on Christmas Day to Harstem to tell him they were taking away his cannon rush spots and then kicked him in the balls!!! The gross injustice!!!
He even went to the troubles to find Mr. Harstem's address via questionable means (to say the least), darn that's next level persistency.
I hope Mr. Harstem will develop these conspiracy theories, seems very proper. (do note conspiracy = more than one entity using their combined resources to do a thing, usually in secret)
They came to my house after to do the same in case he forgot. They also threatened to buff the ghost and decrease the cost of a scan if I complained.
Hey Captain, I have an idea for your "beating GMs with stupid stuff"
Pick zerg, rush into mass overseers, use Contaminate on every production building you can and when you can.
And behind that you just fight as always, trade, replenish your army and enemy can't replenish his coz of no production😂
Spirit should always switch, since he gets 2/3 chance of receiving the package. However, we don't really want Spirit to receive the package, do we?
Receiving packages during sc2 is the New Meta, haven't you noticed it lately ?
@@tondekoddar7837 Oh right, I forgot that receiving packages of smelly cheese from Harstem is the new meta.
Actually, the Monty Hall problem does involve Monty Hall's package, if you hear the full problem, that's why it's also known as the Full Monty. As a film in buff, I'm surprised you didn't know this, Captain.
So from what I gather the insane cannonrush counter is playing on equilibrium, fair enough it does counter it very well.
Nice defense vs Boanan. He's a fun player to watch people face off against, especially him vs the actual cheesiest man.
100% agree that mapmakers are crippling cannon rushers to appease the sweaty masses. A good cannon rush is a thing of beauty, and so is a good cannon rush defense. It's anti-cannon bias and erasure of Protoss culture, plain and simple.
I enjoy all your content and see most of it! Also, I really think youve been doing a lot better recently in terms of mechanics and mental power. I'm very proud of you.
At 8:00 you make a misplay by hurting your own mental. Visualization is really important for maintaining peak gamesense and execution. Recently its been clear to me that you perform much better in neutral and disadvantage when you produce neutral or positive commentary.
We're rooting for you Mr. Koning!🤓
This one is comedic gold! Entertaining as always! Thanks for the great content.
I haven't played Starcraft in 6 years but i love these cannon rush videos
Great points about the movie industry. Only undermined by the fact that Disney owns Pixar. And Pixar made Soul. :3
15:49 those two probes staring at the pylon are just like me fr
WHAT I want to hear more about Harstem's experience becoming a pilot!
me watching the games, the micro, the macro, thinking "pls harstem stop, its not your day" - but he kept on queing. respect
"Unovercomable" the word you are looking for is "Insurmountable"
Supposedly the English started dropping their Rs ( became non-rhotic) due to a dialect of lower class londoners that became popularized. The Cornwall accent retains this ancient rhotic accent, which sounds like pirate-speech to a greater or lesser degree to modern ears due to pirates of Penzance or something
Switching doors is 2/3, because Monty always reveals a door with no prize.
If you picked out of 100 doors, and Monty opened every door such that only your door and one other was left, it is obvious that switching is the right move.
Hey now I understand, your dream is to be a jazz teacher. I think you should go for it Harstem!
1. Attracts SCVs/Probes away from ore.
2. Built 3 (or more) pylons between the ore and the CC/Nexus.
3. Profit!
That should be the next beating gm with stupid stuff, except they might not chase at all ofc.
Amount of babbling capitan can do is on pair with his SC2 skill
I love when he started talking about movies haha, it was fun.
Best recent pro cannon rush I saw was Zest vs Ryung in GSL.. elimination match, game 3, Hardwire.. it almost worked. 3+0 min game Ryung with a miracle win.
Its not that american english is proper old english. Its more like southern american english is closer to older english because of its relative isolation and small immigration numbers. The southern states arent in europe so they missed a lot of the vowel shifts that happened in the 1800s in europe and also they werent impacted by other accents or anything because new york was absorbing all the immigration
Hey Captain, great video. Where exactly do you work on accent reduction? I'm looking for just the same thing, but I'm struggling to see who can help me with it.
I believe that zerg in the second and third games was the "Iba" that Mcanning mentioned in the last Rank Roulette episode..
i always enjoy watching harstem, i don't even question how we get from cannon rush counter to shower handles..
That commentary after the first match 😂
Discarding one of 3 options and letting you choose of two remaining options puts you in a a new situation of 50/50. Monty-Hall paradox is a clear example of overthinking a simple problem.
Btw. for the host who knows which door holds what there are no probabilities about the prize. There is only a probability of the contestant changing his choice or not :). So it's very relative and depending on perception
And yet, the real answer is swapping gives you a 66% chance of getting the prize, there is no 50/50.
@@Random595 apparently you are right. It's actually easy to test and prove and chat GPT-4 explains all the nuances very well.
"AHAHA you think I am an IDIOT, you think I am a FIVE YEAR OLD"
[ LOSES ]
When people canon rush I just build a 3rd near there base sometimes cancel my 2nd rught before it finishes or sometime I just keep it for the lava
Soul and Klaus were indeed good movies, agree with you on the whole film making arugument !
have you heard of audio normalisation?
I watched Klaus the last time Harstem recommended it and it's indeed good.
When will we finally see some innovative movie recommendations from Harstem?
When Innovation makes movies.
4:38 I think the real question you should be asking is “is it imba or do I suck?”
i'm just imagining spirit has a hallway full of doors lmfao
like ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Harstem, we love you
"thousands of nerds" - Okay then.
do a "winning with lots off collossus" vid ^^ they are my fav unit, but just so bad we rarely ever see it, and when we do it usually end with vipers mass pulling them ezz or vikings sniping them ezz; the challenge could be to see if you can manage to keep them alive and make them have high cost-efficiency :D so too far away to be pulled, protected by cannons and shieldbats, aoe and anti mass viking, maybe even a mothership hanging out back to recall them an extra time when the front is collapsing ;)
Yo harstem! I noticed that whenever I watch people cannon rush Zergs, they will pull three to four drones all the way from their main into the natural as soon as they see the pylon.
What if you made a pylon as if you were cannon rushing, only to cancel it at the last minute, but with no forge? I imagine you would cost the Zerg a lot of mining time and it would cost you very little while also allowing your drone to scout. Seems weird that it’s not part of the meta already vs Zerg…
even with the dirtiest cheese tactics, he still gets 64% ggs, thats pretty nice from the community
Merry Christmas and FU! - Blizzard
Mentioning the Monty Hall problem to get more comments, genius.
I too wanted to be a pilot, but a fighter jet pilot, when I was 4.
Wanting to be a pilot? Playing lots of sc2. And talking about his push day workout. You and I are very similar people Harstem 😂
Your accent is wonderful and you speak english as well as i do and i'm a native speaker.
"didn't check my other gold" 😆
I like your accent Harstem. English is a language with no proper accents imo. Certainly not my silly canadian one 🇨🇦
17:19 really it's just badic linguistics. The more people speak in a language, the slower it evolves
But Harstem, nobody, nobody gives their address to anyone who will give it to Blizz for them to send you the Christmas Morning letter. You should know better !
Happy for you you liked the game that went well :) Love the existential stuff, ty
haha i'm seeing Soul today in theatres because it's in limited release.
First Game you should have just let him finish like he won then recall everything right in his face to the gold base.
Also, ... not enough pylons
Harstem - do you make up your bulldada on the fly, or do actually scrpit these things out? I can see you thinking "It's time for another cheesiest man alive, and I've been really s**king at cannon rushes lately, so I'll claim it's all Blizzard's fault. No, wait, that's too lame. I'll claim that Blizzard hates me personally. Better, but what can I use to back up my claim? I've got it! I'll claim I have a letter from Blizzard that proves they're a bunch of Scrooges, well technically, it's just one intern that Apple hasn't figured is the tech support for Starcraft 2 yet, so ..."
First! Love the content and maybe I will start to play SC2 again because of your content. May the cheese continue! Tragic note, I don't think I was first but sure was close!
Be careful with sqats becouse you risk going through the ceiling
Always switch. 67% to win when you switch.
The initial decision had a 67% chance of being wrong. That is still true after door is removed. Therefore, the other door left has a 67% chance of being correct.
Monthy Hall isn't even a problem. The real problem is the fake claim of gambler's fallacy. If you get 10 heads in a row on a coin toss chances are that the 11th result will be tails. That's 99.97% chance or something, YET the actual chance is 50/50 - go explain this paradox/problem if you think you are smarter than me!
Sweet chest Harstem
Interesting to hear about the accent reduction lessons, I feel your accent is very minimal already. I assumed you lived in the US at some point because of how reduced your accent is and how familiar you are with colloquialisms.
If you bringing your silver plaque to the gym with you was true that would be so pathetic 😂
Reporting for algo duty capn
its 66%. not 50%. 2 out of 3
Why you always hating on us Americans? 😂
24:20 - the quick and dirty on Monty Hall is that yes you had it correct Captain.
At time of choice 1 : 33%
Reveal happens, you should always switch because NOW you have a 50/50.
Lots of different ways to describe it but I guess you could call it probability transformation.
Either way, it’s important. It’s the same reason certain hands in Poker can become dead even while starting out great and vice-versa when playing GTO (game theory optimal) Poker.
This isn't correct. The point is the probabilities don't change. When you pick the first door, the probability of being correct is 1/3. The host opening a door has no impact on this probability, so it remains at 1/3.
As we know probabilities must add up to 1, the remaining door must have probability of (1-1/3) = 2/3.
That being said, this problem assumes that the host doesn't open doors randomly, and instead chooses to never open a door with the prize behind it. If the host opens doors randomly, then it truly is 50/50, it doesn't matter if you swap or stay.
@@tinsunmak9680 The problem usually states that the host cannot open the door with the prize behind it, otherwise there would be a 33% chance you get to see the prize, but can't select that door xD
Por favor, aprenda a colocar canhões paea defender sua base!
First! Haha hai capt!
Erster 🥇
man i used to respect you bro then this ........ok mana
Disney is dying, and good riddance if they keep publishing such trash where the only thing they are interested in is pushing an agenda rather than telling a good story