morgandnb:

tobeinspiring:

kyraneko:

sonickitty:

fandomsandfeminism:

clexarkie:

fandomsandfeminism:

churchoftheshinji:

fandomsandfeminism:

snappysprinkledog:

fandomsandfeminism:

clear–cut:

matthews-and-hart:

gaycloak:

scullysthumbtacks:

the monty hall saga

please watch brooklyn nine-nine

Can we just applaud b99 for addressing gay sex as casually as it would heterosexual sex because it’s disturbingly rare?

PLEASE WATCH BROOKLYN NINE NINE

But what’s the answer though?!

You are twice as likely to win if you switch doors.

Why?

When you select door 1 there is a 1/3 chance you win and a 2/3 chance you lose. The host, who knows which door is right, will always eliminate an empty door (this only works because the host has more information than you)
So now you get to choose between the 1/3 chance you were right the first time, or the 2/3 chance you were originally wrong.

To think of it another way, the set of doors 2 and 3 have a probability of 2/3. Because tje host eliminates an empty door (making the open door a 0 probability now), that 2/3 chance “collects” in the remaining door. Your original door is still only 1/3 because you made that choice before you had the new information.

when you select your door initially, it DOESN’T MATTER AT ALL
what it boils down to, is a decision between keeping the door you initially picked (with a 50% chance of being the right one at this point) or picking the OTHER door (which ALSO has a 50% chance of being correct)

To put in other terms, when you initially select one door you have a 1/3 chance of it being correct. The host eliminates a door that you did not pick, a door that would have been a losing choice. You now have a choice between two doors. You have received no additional information about these doors. You have a 50/50 shot with either of them. Because probability isn’t affected by prior choices.

But you did initially have a 1/3
The host can only choose between the doors you didnt choose. So when he eliminates all but 1 remaining door, he isnt affecting the probability of your door, only the door he is leaving.

https://youtu.be/4Lb-6rxZxx0

No, once one of the doors is revealed the odds slip from 1/3 to ½ for each unopened door

No. The host can only remove a door ypu didnt choose, so your doors probability isnt affected by the new information. Opening an empty door narrows the “you were originally wrong” choice to just 1 door, but still with the 2/3 probability.

Again, you can actually test this in simulation.

2/3 is correct. I spent an hour looking at this on Wikipedia on Friday. While I was at work. Because I’d recently reblogged this and it started bothering me.

Look at it another way: the host is, effectively, removing all but one of the losing doors.

If there were 100 doors, and you picked one, and the host removed 98 out of the 99 wrong doors, leaving one wrong door and one right door, you’d switch doors in a heartbeat.

Why? Because you knew that the door you picked was only 1 in 100 likely to be the correct door. Well, nothing changed, the prize didn’t move anywhere, and there’s nothing special about the door you picked; the ONLY reason it’s one of the top two is because you picked it.

As one out of one hundred.

This door you picked first is the Miss Congeniality of doors. There is nothing special about it except that you chose it. You eliminated it from being among the of 99 losing doors selected. The other door, on the other hand? They have to leave the winning door in play. Odds are thus 99 to 1 that they selected that door to leave because it’s the winning door. The only chance it’s a random door is if you selected the right door out of 100 doors the first time. At 1 in 100 odds.

The fact that there’s only one wrong door to remove is a deliberate red herring, a choice by the game’s designers to obscure that detail. [All but one of the losing doors] gets mistaken for [one of two losing doors] as the important part.

The other deliberate misdirection in the game is the cognitive bias where it feels worse to have something and lose it through your own actions than to never have it at all. If you switched doors and the new door lost, you’d kick yourself for having picked the winning door and given it up, much harder than you would if you kept the door and the other one won. Making a decision that loses what you’ve got feels much more like a mistake than making a decision that loses what you’ve never had.

And given that one-in-three odds are not that much less than one-in-two odds, switching doors and losing because of it is a real threat in the three-door game. This induces people to prefer to keep the originally-selected door, which is in the house’s favor. Again, this is deliberate.

Sounds like everyone here just needs to bone

Reblogging for the last comment