Making a buck cleaning Lester's spittle trays on Sequels' 22-year old supermodel abs

[spookyfish]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
That's what I said!

This is what I'm starting to try to come to terms with: "The probability of winning by switching then reduces to the probability of picking the wrong door in the initial stage which is clearly 2/3."

I'm going to have to do this experiment on my own time with actual doors, cars and donkeys. (Yeah, I'm leaving myself open, I want to see what you suckers got.)

TM

I'm not going to bite. Statistics show that the majority of people on this board will.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I'm not a contrarian all the time, which I guess makes me a contrarian in regard to the average contrarian ethos. My thinking is that you're just as likely to be safe following your gut, as spooky suggested, as you are following volumes of studies. Say that to a person who believes in statistics and you're decreid a heretic.

Re epidemiology, a family member who is an oncologist scoffs at the idea of predicting anything unless the predictor being used is genetic heritage. He showed me that govt stats on what you're "supposed" to get if you do "[insert behavior]." If these stats were at all even close to accurate, we'd have all died of STDs, liver disease, cancer and heart attacks years ago. As this particular person said once, "Other than the genetic thing, we have as much clue about what causes disease now as we did in 1950. Its a crapshoot - a variety of circumstances all hitting at the right place at the right time which probably causes disease, so trying to find a single cause is pretty futile" (paraphrased). I think the same applies to most economic studies. Too many intervenin circumstances IRL.

I so want to follow you around for a day to witness your conversations IRL. Fly on a wall or whatever. I never get called (and especially not decried as) a heretic. It must be so exciting.

[dtb]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
That's what I said!

This is what I'm starting to try to come to terms with: "The probability of winning by switching then reduces to the probability of picking the wrong door in the initial stage which is clearly 2/3."

I'm going to have to do this experiment on my own time with actual doors, cars and donkeys. (Yeah, I'm leaving myself open, I want to see what you suckers got.)

TM

I do not think that means what they think it means.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
I so want to follow you around for a day to witness your conversations IRL. Fly on a wall or whatever. I never get called (and especially not decried as) a heretic. It must be so exciting.

I get bored with regular words.

[Shape Shifter]

Statistically speaking, Bo is the obvious frontrunner. I retract what I said yesterday about Carrie's movement. Shaking her equinivore 17 yo hips on the last number gets her to the final. I reserve the right to switch my pick between them next week in order to improve my chances of winning.

Paula criticizes nothing but song choice for everybody all season and then she picks Satisfaction for Bo? Is that the only "rocker" song she knows?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
My thinking is that you're just as likely to be safe following your gut . . .

More anatomically correct, too, unless you walk backwards a lot.

[notcasesensitive]

Fine. I Tivoed and watched Chaotic last night. I was sort of hoping that it might be some sort of unintentionally funny trainwreck. I was only half right. She's an idiot, alright. But she is a ridiculously boring, way too sure she's funny and deep idiot. Neither intentionally nor unintenionally funny. Just stupid and pathetic.

How did Madonna let this thing get on the air? I thought she had Britney's back.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Neeew, that was the painful lesson that taught me NOT to do what people said I ought to. How's that tune go.... "Wish that I knew what I know now..." Fuck it. Wtare under the bridge. Live and learn.

If you are so contrarian, why do you persist in insisting you went on strike when the union said you should?

[ABBAKiss]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
There's gangly and there's ugly gangly. You know the fine distinction I'm describing here.

Some people have thin body types -- like Paris. Some do not -- like Lindsay. This is why Paris is not touted as anorexic (she is just how she is, and there is nothing "wrong" with that) but Lindsay is being gossiped about for her weight (and in my opinion, she is anorexic, though of course I base this on nothing but her appearance).

I have a Lindsay body type and when I was anorexic I looked like how she looks now -- it is not that she doesn't weigh enough in general, it is that she weighs far less than her body is meant to weigh. Looking at pictures of me "before" (Lindsay and Nicole's "after") makes me feel really sick and sad for them. I bet they think they look great and would argue "but I weigh the same as so and so and no one says anything about HER being anorexic!"

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
Someone explain this to me.

I cannot explain this, but I have read enough of Parade -- I could say I read it just for Walter Scott's Personality Parade, but who would believe me? -- to know that Marilyn Vos Savant (the world's smartest person (tm)) (not her real name, I'm thinking) can explain this up and down. I would ask your secretary to run down her explanation. Or, have her look here:



Or, if you don't want to ask her to do this, just look at this.

STP, no doubt. I'm sure someone beat me to the Walter Scott thing.

[Not Bob]

Dear FB,

I became a liberal arts major -- and then went to law school -- to avoid math. It's bad enough that I have to calculate pre-judgment interest for clients on occasion (thank God that Fenwick figured out how to get Excel to do it for me), but now I have to read about math here? I say no.

The FB is all about one thing -- entertaining Not Bob. I know, I know. I'm usually pretty low key about reminding people that I am The Poster Around Whom This Universe Revolves (Or Rotates, Whichever), and I occasionally allow people to think that it is about other things. Like puppies. Or 42. Or Penskeism. But I only do this because it entertains me to do so.

Accordingly, please end the discussion about this Monte Hall problem immediately, and resume talking about important things. Things like Lindsey Lohan's cocaine and nicotine diet, Angelina versus Jennifer (and whether Angelina is responsible for Brad's waxy and tired appearance), and whether LCD Soundsystem's "Daft Punk Is Playing In My House" is really a song about The Pretty One.

Thanks.

Love,

Not Bob

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
If you are so contrarian, why do you persist in insisting you went on strike when the union said you should?

You'll have to raise that issue with The Hives.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I cannot explain this, but I have read enough of Parade -- I could say I read it just for Walter Scott's Personality Parade, but who would believe me? -- to know that Marilyn Vos Savant (the world's smartest person (tm)) (not her real name, I'm thinking) can explain this up and down. I would ask your secretary to run down her explanation. Or, have her look here:

Or, if you don't want to ask her to do this, just look at this.

STP, no doubt. I'm sure someone beat me to the Walter Scott thing.

uuuuuggghhhhh did you have to post that huge retouched-to-within-an-inch-of-its-life picture of her face?

ETA but thanks for

"The solution to the problem is yes; the chance of winning the car is doubled when the contestant switches to another door rather than sticking with the original choice.

There are three possible scenarios, all with equal probability (1/3):

The contestant picks goat number one. Monty picks goat number two. Switching will win the car.
The contestant picks goat number two. Monty picks goat number one. Switching will win the car.
The contestant picks the car. Monty picks either of the two goats. Switching will lose. "

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Dear FB,

I became a liberal arts major -- and then went to law school -- to avoid math. It's bad enough that I have to calculate pre-judgment interest for clients on occasion (thank God that Fenwick figured out how to get Excel to do it for me), but now I have to read about math here? I say no.

The FB is all about one thing -- entertaining Not Bob. I know, I know. I'm usually pretty low key about reminding people that I am The Poster Around Whom This Universe Revolves (Or Rotates, Whichever), and I occasionally allow people to think that it is about other things. Like puppies. Or 42. Or Penskeism. But I only do this because it entertains me to do so.

Accordingly, please end the discussion about this Monte Hall problem immediately, and resume talking about important things. Things like Lindsey Lohan's cocaine and nicotine diet, Angelina versus Jennifer (and whether Angelina is responsible for Brad's waxy and tired appearance), and whether LCD Soundsystem's "Daft Punk Is Playing In My House" is really a song about The Pretty One.

Thanks.

Love,

Not Bob

What are the odds of sebby kissing a girl after she licks his ass?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
uuuuuggghhhhh did you have to post that huge retouched-to-within-an-inch-of-its-life picture of her face?

In a word, yes, but thanks for asking.