This doesn't seem possible. Surely someone who thought the way he did would have realised that you could sort the money in advance.
This doesn't seem possible. Surely someone who thought the way he did would have realised that you could sort the money in advance.
Anyway, I know lotteries and gambling are regulated, what about e.g. radio or charity raffles?
Same with email signup regulations. Plenty of laws and regulations, yet it's really hard for people to get caught and fined for misbehaving.
So, thinking about how you would run this contest, you've got three basic ways of generating a random serial number.
The first is literally generating a random serial number; the problem being, there is an infinitesimal chance the serial number you just generated is in the pocket of someone in your listening area.
The second is to choose a sibling serial number of a bill in your pocket -- change one of the last couple of digits. If you're lucky, the sibling bills will have been delivered to the same bank in the same area and still be in circulation. But there's still a pretty slim chance it's even possible.
The best way to ensure that your contest is actually winnable, that your target bill is in circulation would be to start the contest by taking all the bills from your collective pockets, at the studio, writing down the serial numbers, and then handing them to someone to go buy coffee for the studio across the street. Wait a week or two, and your target bills will have circulated through the area enough, but almost certainly be in the pockets of people who could tune in and listen, and not someone halfway across the country.
So enter the 100,000 $1 bills sitting in stacks in this dude's house. Not circulating. At first, this isn't a problem -- he took out the bills after the contest start, after all -- but as time goes on, and the studio repeats the process of tagging and releasing new bills in circulation to generate new numbers to call out, suddenly, there is no chance that any of these hundred-thousand bills you are laboriously checking will work.
At the start of the contest, you might have 0.1% of the people in your listening area tuning in for the reading of the serial number, and by the end, 1-5%, before dropping down to, say, 0.2-0.5% after the contest is over. Early on, there's a 1 in a 1000 chance of someone listening having the bill, more or less, so the contest won't end too early, but by the end, you are up to a 1-in-20 chance, so once it gets popular enough, it will end fast enough that people don't get too much into grumbling that your contest is rigged.
Meanwhile, the radio station probably didn't actually put up the $30,000 -- it was probably an advertiser who paid the radio station $40,000 out of their advertising budget to run the contest, or should I say, the Wonder Widget's daily drawing, brought to you by Wonder Widgets, your wonderful source of wonderful widgets. You repeat the advertiser's slogan three or four times as people are tuning in to the station to listen for the day's serial number, and three or four more times throughout the day reminding people to tune in at X o'clock.
There's no need for the contest to be rigged or unwinnable -- it's a bargain for everyone at half the price. The advertiser knows people are listening to their ads, the radio station is getting paid outright as well as getting a boost in their listeners (which gets them more money from other advertisers). And actually paying out the money, eventually, lets you go back to that same gold mine again and again.
This all reminds me of the lengths I went to a few years ago. An admin assistant in my office was really into these contests. She would listen to all the various stations and call in. There was a contest that was "identify this song" and everyday it went unguessed, they would add to the pot. It was getting up to $20,000 or something and no one could guess. I ended up downloading the clip and putting it through various Shazam like programs trying to help identify it. Never did win, but it was exciting for a short time. If after 30 days, they had just said, no one wins, I would have been pretty erked.
This is definitely not a requirement according to some business owners. No shortage of faux competitions used to generate email signups around, even from reputable companies.
Bonus points for using this to generate evidence for VCs you're courting.
Option 1:
Use the last two digits of some commonly available public number that was, essentially, random or at least unpredictable and not controllable. A good example today would be the cents portion of the SP500 index.
Options 2:
Tally up which of the numbers had the least amount of money bet on it and then make that the number.
You can guess which of the two options the more nefarious organizations used.
Interesting related note: back in the first half of the 20th century, there used to be a game in the newspapers where you were presented with a grid of faces, each one being numbered. The goal was to pick the face that you though OTHER people would pick most often. In other words, if you picked the most popular face, you would win. This led to lots of "well which face do I think other people will think is most popular etc"
John Maynard Keynes used the game above as a proxy for the stock market with stocks being the faces e.g. you were trying to pick the stock you thought that everyone else would buy.
I mean, pretending that it's random is fraud, but if you were honest about the affair, that would actually make for a mildly interesting game.
But if the game were that you need to pick others consider the least popular....
It happened more than once that the marketing side would come back and ask for a new winner because of a situation like us doing a drawing for a prize from an ISP, and the winner's email being "@competitorisp.net".
As far as I know (and I've got a reasonable basis for this), the clients never requested this or anything. It was purely our marketing guys not liking the optics of telling the client that a competitor's customer won.
And yeah, for some giveaways and stuff they'd take a list of people and trawl through their social media accounts to figure out who'd have the most impact.
Again, don't think the clients had requested this, it just made the job we're doing look better to show the client "Yeah this person won and look at all the social media buzz it created!" rather than "Yeah we gave it to someone that looks like a troll, has no media presence, and the only people that will probably hear about this are a few people in an IRC chatroom."
If it's not regulated (or small enough that the regulators won't notice), I'd assume any contest/etc like this is probably rigged. Marketing is, generally, an industry full of lies. The contests are no different.
n = 100_000
K = 2 # seconds
time_secs = K * n * log(n)
t = timedelta(seconds=time_secs)
t # datetime.timedelta(days=26, seconds=56185, microseconds=92994)
So around a month (at 24×7, so in reality more like 3 months) of time sorting if in a horrendous abuse of big O notation we assume that sorting the notes takes 2 * n * log(n) seconds.I guess he could use a pigeonhole sort though - at constant factor of 10 seconds this gives 11 days 49600 seconds.
[1] https://www.titlemax.com/discovery-center/money-finance/how-...
What is interesting is that you could theoretically deposit (part of) the money into your account and then withdraw somewhere else, so change the odds slightly.
This was the mid-to-late 80's... it wasn't THAT long ago. The majority of people reading this were alive back then. Yes interest rates were higher in the 80s and 90s, but not as high as you are insinuating. At this time (from my memory) you could expect about 1% per year in interest. Maybe upwards of 2% annual interest if you had a very generous deal with a bank, but even that is unlikely.
At 1% a year, his $100,000 is generating ~$83 per month in interest.
Granted he could do other things with his money to appreciate it. Which would increase his time value of money. But the opportunity cost of checking/savings account interest was pretty small.
Granted the guy was stupid to begin with for even thinking he could win this contest and for putting $100k in cash in his house in case... I don't know, someone broke in or something... wait, that's what happened.
https://www.bankrate.com/banking/cds/historical-cd-interest-...
https://barbarafriedbergpersonalfinance.com/savings-account-...
Also, due to inflation, if you want to compare with today's dollars you need to multiply the amounts by approximately 4.
MARCH 31, 1986
"A wealthy San Francisco socialite in her 80s keeps $1 million in a passbook savings account earning a mere 5.5% interest."
A "mere" 5.5% is quite higher than 1%.
By the time you could even buy an 8-bit home computer for couple hundred dollars, store all the serial numbers on a floppy and simply search through them once per day
Then, once you know you have the winner, how long is it going to take you to find it?
If he had invested the $110k in the stock market in 1984 he would have been a millionaire at the time of his death in 1999, but crazies and normal people never see that.
https://www.noelwhittaker.com.au/resources/calculators/stock...
You trade an O(bucket size) linear search for the (log n) in the O(n log n) (assuming you optimally sort), which in computer terms is usually a bad idea but in this case, a significant savings.
For example when pairing socks, first sort them by color. Or when doing hit-box-detection in xyz, first sort by one of the axis.