I’ve just read a discussion on Quora (I know, I know), about the Monty Hall problem.

You all know the MH problem, right?

Of the four answers, three said: It’s done and dusted, Marilyn VS got it right, almost everyone else got it wrong, get over it.

But one said:
It’s done and dusted, Marilyn VS got it wrong, many people who understood the problem told her where she went wrong, then she got it wrong again, then we told her where she went wrong again, then she finally got it right, get over it.

And the latter response also said:
“anyone who watched the show knew that was not Monte’s strategy. Sometimes he opened another door and gave a chance to switch, sometimes he didn’t. He was well aware of the problem if he followed Marilyn’s assumed strategy, and was scrupulous about not giving any advantage to the contestant. You can tell this from statistics on the show—on average it didn’t pay to switch—and his published statements.”

And the interesting thing from all that is that the very lengthy TATE article on the topic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem), which generally follows the Marylin VS got it right tack) doesn’t even mention that on the actual show the contestants may not be given the chance to switch.

Which I thought was QI with regard to acceptance of “authority”, and who get’s to be an “authority”, and how it is reported to the ignorant masses.

The Rev Dodgson said:

I’ve just read a discussion on Quora (I know, I know), about the Monty Hall problem.

You all know the MH problem, right?

Of the four answers, three said: It’s done and dusted, Marilyn VS got it right, almost everyone else got it wrong, get over it.

But one said:
It’s done and dusted, Marilyn VS got it wrong, many people who understood the problem told her where she went wrong, then she got it wrong again, then we told her where she went wrong again, then she finally got it right, get over it.

And the latter response also said:
“anyone who watched the show knew that was not Monte’s strategy. Sometimes he opened another door and gave a chance to switch, sometimes he didn’t. He was well aware of the problem if he followed Marilyn’s assumed strategy, and was scrupulous about not giving any advantage to the contestant. You can tell this from statistics on the show—on average it didn’t pay to switch—and his published statements.”

And the interesting thing from all that is that the very lengthy TATE article on the topic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem), which generally follows the Marylin VS got it right tack) doesn’t even mention that on the actual show the contestants may not be given the chance to switch.

Which I thought was QI with regard to acceptance of “authority”, and who get’s to be an “authority”, and how it is reported to the ignorant masses.

It’s done and dusted.

mollwollfumble said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

I’ve just read a discussion on Quora (I know, I know), about the Monty Hall problem.

You all know the MH problem, right?

Of the four answers, three said: It’s done and dusted, Marilyn VS got it right, almost everyone else got it wrong, get over it.

But one said:
It’s done and dusted, Marilyn VS got it wrong, many people who understood the problem told her where she went wrong, then she got it wrong again, then we told her where she went wrong again, then she finally got it right, get over it.

And the latter response also said:
“anyone who watched the show knew that was not Monte’s strategy. Sometimes he opened another door and gave a chance to switch, sometimes he didn’t. He was well aware of the problem if he followed Marilyn’s assumed strategy, and was scrupulous about not giving any advantage to the contestant. You can tell this from statistics on the show—on average it didn’t pay to switch—and his published statements.”

And the interesting thing from all that is that the very lengthy TATE article on the topic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem), which generally follows the Marylin VS got it right tack) doesn’t even mention that on the actual show the contestants may not be given the chance to switch.

Which I thought was QI with regard to acceptance of “authority”, and who get’s to be an “authority”, and how it is reported to the ignorant masses.

It’s done and dusted.

Which way?

I am not aware of the variation where the contestant was never given the opportunity to switch, I thought this was an integral (and critical) part of the rules defining the game.

Maybe they edited that bit out for some episodes sent to air for the sake of time.

Not sure if this link has been seen by everyone.

https://www.newsflare.com/video/371810/unseen-footage-shows-moment-of-beirut-explosion-in-4k-slow-motion

It really is awesome.

party_pants said:

I am not aware of the variation where the contestant was never given the opportunity to switch, I thought this was an integral (and critical) part of the rules defining the game.

Maybe they edited that bit out for some episodes sent to air for the sake of time.

Well I’ve never watched it, but it seems there is still some debate about how it all works.

roughbarked said:

Not sure if this link has been seen by everyone.

https://www.newsflare.com/video/371810/unseen-footage-shows-moment-of-beirut-explosion-in-4k-slow-motion

It really is awesome.

DO put it up yesterday evening.

Yes, incredible.

roughbarked said:

Not sure if this link has been seen by everyone.

https://www.newsflare.com/video/371810/unseen-footage-shows-moment-of-beirut-explosion-in-4k-slow-motion

It really is awesome.

I think that would really be a disproportionate response to choosing the wrong door.

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

Not sure if this link has been seen by everyone.

https://www.newsflare.com/video/371810/unseen-footage-shows-moment-of-beirut-explosion-in-4k-slow-motion

It really is awesome.

I think that would really be a disproportionate response to choosing the wrong door.

oops.

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

Not sure if this link has been seen by everyone.

https://www.newsflare.com/video/371810/unseen-footage-shows-moment-of-beirut-explosion-in-4k-slow-motion

It really is awesome.

I think that would really be a disproportionate response to choosing the wrong door.

oops.

I’m not sure that “oops” really covers it :)

Arrrrgggggg, not again.

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants said:

I am not aware of the variation where the contestant was never given the opportunity to switch, I thought this was an integral (and critical) part of the rules defining the game.

Maybe they edited that bit out for some episodes sent to air for the sake of time.

Well I’ve never watched it, but it seems there is still some debate about how it all works.

Me neither.

I have watched the Mythbusters episode about it, amongst a few others. For the purposes of explaining the paradox the rules seem well defined enough. Indeed the whole premise of the paradox is about whether it is better to switch or not to switch. Switching is problem to be solved. Therefore it seems odd to play the game without the person being able to switch – then it becomes some other game and not the game as defined in the paradox.

party_pants said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants said:

I am not aware of the variation where the contestant was never given the opportunity to switch, I thought this was an integral (and critical) part of the rules defining the game.

Maybe they edited that bit out for some episodes sent to air for the sake of time.

Well I’ve never watched it, but it seems there is still some debate about how it all works.

Me neither.

I have watched the Mythbusters episode about it, amongst a few others. For the purposes of explaining the paradox the rules seem well defined enough. Indeed the whole premise of the paradox is about whether it is better to switch or not to switch. Switching is problem to be solved. Therefore it seems odd to play the game without the person being able to switch – then it becomes some other game and not the game as defined in the paradox.

The standard assumption is that you are always offered the opportunity to switch, but if in the actual game the Monty can choose whether to offer the opportunity to switch or not, then it changes the outcome, so the standard assumption does not describe the actual game.

And it seems strange not to mention that.

It’s just an illustration of how the wording of these puzzles is absolutely crucial.

As stated in the MvS article, the problem was:

Suppose you’re on a game show, and you’re given the choice of three doors: Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say No. 1, and the host, who knows what’s behind the doors, opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat. He then says to you, “Do you want to pick door No. 2?” Is it to your advantage to switch your choice?

Does Monty always pick another door and offer a switch? Does he only pick another door and offer a switch half the time? Does he only offer a switch if you picked a goat? Does he only offer a switch if he picked the car? Does he sometimes pick a random door and reveal the car?

The puzzle as stated here doesn’t say. So a completely accurate answer would be “we need more information in order to assess this”.

MvS’s assumptions were, to my mind, reasonable but honestly the ambiguity and strife could have been avoided if a single phrase were added to the problem as stated:

“and the host, who knows what’s behind the doors, as always opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat”.

I wonder how many contestants enjoyed a nice goat stew as a consolation prize.

Just had a look on Youtube for a clip from the actual show, and it seems there are none, but I did find way down the the list of explanations of this problem, this link, which explains everything, from the real live Monty Hall:

Monty Hall on the Monty Hall problem

dv said:

It’s just an illustration of how the wording of these puzzles is absolutely crucial.

As stated in the MvS article, the problem was:

Suppose you’re on a game show, and you’re given the choice of three doors: Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say No. 1, and the host, who knows what’s behind the doors, opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat. He then says to you, “Do you want to pick door No. 2?” Is it to your advantage to switch your choice?

Does Monty always pick another door and offer a switch? Does he only pick another door and offer a switch half the time? Does he only offer a switch if you picked a goat? Does he only offer a switch if he picked the car? Does he sometimes pick a random door and reveal the car?

The puzzle as stated here doesn’t say. So a completely accurate answer would be “we need more information in order to assess this”.

MvS’s assumptions were, to my mind, reasonable but honestly the ambiguity and strife could have been avoided if a single phrase were added to the problem as stated:

“and the host, who knows what’s behind the doors, as always opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat”.

Yes agreed.

Seems a little strange that TATE should not make that simple statement.

And it seems the actual Monty Hall show did not open any doors anyway (see video), he offered people money instead of the chance of a car or a goat.

So much like the money or the box show.

Peak Warming Man said:

Arrrrgggggg, not again.

Quite.

dv said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Arrrrgggggg, not again.

Quite.

???

Well if the widely accepted response to the problem is missing key facts that totally change the answer, isn’t that worth talking about?

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

It’s just an illustration of how the wording of these puzzles is absolutely crucial.

As stated in the MvS article, the problem was:

Suppose you’re on a game show, and you’re given the choice of three doors: Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say No. 1, and the host, who knows what’s behind the doors, opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat. He then says to you, “Do you want to pick door No. 2?” Is it to your advantage to switch your choice?

Does Monty always pick another door and offer a switch? Does he only pick another door and offer a switch half the time? Does he only offer a switch if you picked a goat? Does he only offer a switch if he picked the car? Does he sometimes pick a random door and reveal the car?

The puzzle as stated here doesn’t say. So a completely accurate answer would be “we need more information in order to assess this”.

MvS’s assumptions were, to my mind, reasonable but honestly the ambiguity and strife could have been avoided if a single phrase were added to the problem as stated:

“and the host, who knows what’s behind the doors, as always opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat”.

Yes agreed.

Seems a little strange that TATE should not make that simple statement.

So fix it

dv said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

It’s just an illustration of how the wording of these puzzles is absolutely crucial.

As stated in the MvS article, the problem was:

Suppose you’re on a game show, and you’re given the choice of three doors: Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say No. 1, and the host, who knows what’s behind the doors, opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat. He then says to you, “Do you want to pick door No. 2?” Is it to your advantage to switch your choice?

Does Monty always pick another door and offer a switch? Does he only pick another door and offer a switch half the time? Does he only offer a switch if you picked a goat? Does he only offer a switch if he picked the car? Does he sometimes pick a random door and reveal the car?

The puzzle as stated here doesn’t say. So a completely accurate answer would be “we need more information in order to assess this”.

MvS’s assumptions were, to my mind, reasonable but honestly the ambiguity and strife could have been avoided if a single phrase were added to the problem as stated:

“and the host, who knows what’s behind the doors, as always opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat”.

Yes agreed.

Seems a little strange that TATE should not make that simple statement.

So fix it

Sorry, I have Quora and Standards Australia procedures for design for shear in reinforced concrete to fix, no time for TATE.

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Arrrrgggggg, not again.

Quite.

???

Well if the widely accepted response to the problem is missing key facts that totally change the answer, isn’t that worth talking about?

I believe we’ve discussed this before

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Yes agreed.

Seems a little strange that TATE should not make that simple statement.

So fix it

Sorry, I have Quora and Standards Australia procedures for design for shear in reinforced concrete to fix, no time for TATE.

all evidence to the contrary

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Yes agreed.

Seems a little strange that TATE should not make that simple statement.

So fix it

Sorry, I have Quora and Standards Australia procedures for design for shear in reinforced concrete to fix, no time for TATE.

Can you come and fix mine?

dv said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

Quite.

???

Well if the widely accepted response to the problem is missing key facts that totally change the answer, isn’t that worth talking about?

I believe we’ve discussed this before

Quite possibly :)

(I’m pretty sure I didn’t find the video before though)
((I hope))

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

???

Well if the widely accepted response to the problem is missing key facts that totally change the answer, isn’t that worth talking about?

I believe we’ve discussed this before

Quite possibly :)

(I’m pretty sure I didn’t find the video before though)
((I hope))

Well thank for finding the video, which establishes that MvS was not describing a scenario that should have been known to her readers in detail: she was creating the puzzle de novo so the onus was on her to clarify as much as possible.

Imagine If Models Of Reality Were Not Full Descriptions Of Reality, Assuming There Really Is Such A Thing As Reality

SCIENCE said:

Imagine If Models Of Reality Were Not Full Descriptions Of Reality, Assuming There Really Is Such A Thing As Reality

SCIENCE isn’t real.

it really isn’t