Hoagy

Late to the party but does anybody know if this is connected to the findings a few weeks ago that this Quanta article is replying to? (https://www.quantamagazine.org/no-dark-energy-no-chance-cosm...)

I know they are proposing different mechanisms for the error in calculation but it gives a sense of a 'moment' shifting against dark energy. Coincidence?

I thought this initially as well: if there are many of each colour, and the only information is that there is at least one blue dot, how could this be new information to trigger the suicides?

But this isn't correct. Let's say n = 6, a-c are blue, d-f are red, and the information is that there is at least one blue dot. a knows there are at least two, but thinks b may believe there is only one blue dot. Moreover, a believes b may believe that c may believe that there are no blue dots.

So if a was red, the information would mean that b would commit suicide if c did not initially commit suicide, but since neither has happened, a must have a blue dot and therefore must commit suicide.

A convoluted process to be sure but does it make sense how the information transmits by ruling out hypotheticals?

Wow, that is very counterintuitive..

I suppose you could set any threshold x, and play so that if the first number is bigger than x you stick, otherwise you switch. This would be strictly better than random (break even) if x is within the range of numbers that A is picking from and the same as random if not.

It depends on when you measure your chances: before A has picked a generator this gives you >50% chance but if A has already picked a range to draw from that doesn't contain x then you're back to 50/50. Still, I think this would count as guaranteeing >50%?

Hah! New rule: only non-useless projects to be funded. Uselessness to be determined by investors on application for funds.

Did they explain why?

I agree with this. I am surprised that rather than trying to define itself as journalistic, Google isn't trying to present itself as an archivist (I am unaware if this has any legal meaning).

I wonder what would happen if an explicitly archival service like the Wayback Machine got itself a state of the art search algorithm and became widely used in casual search. Would it also be required to delist?