The official vote balance topic
-
@Gąska the whole point of (most) random number generators is that their results are uniformly distributed across a given range. If you're breaking the range into discrete, equally-sized subsets, they have an equal chance of occurring; given enough samples, the results will converge like mine did.
It doesn't matter whether the numbers are pseudo-random or "really" random; uniform distribution is typically part of the definition of "good" randomness.
-
@anotherusername there's "good" randomness, and "real" randomness. And in "good" randomness, you have statistically "good" randomness (linear or bell curve distribution), cryptographically "good" randomness (no predictability and low repeats), and gaming "good" randomness (which is specifically designed to guarantee each possible result to happen in relatively short time, so an event with 70% chance of happening observably happens 70% times in a single session). And "real" randomness rarely meets any of those "good" randomness standards.
-
This post is deleted!
-
@anotherusername Not really. That's the entire point of probability distributions.
For example, a random bit generator can generate 0s with 80% probability and 1s with 20% probability. It's still impossible to predict when the next 1 will happen so it's random.
-
@anonymous234 none of what you just said contradicts anything in my post.
-
FWP: I want to upvote but the post is deleted :(
-
@Yamikuronue that should be against the rules, like it is in the Likes topic.
FWP: my script probably ... did something, before he managed to delete the post. But I can't tell what it did, because the post is deleted.
-
@anotherusername I can still see the post, though. My other script cached it.
I just can't see the votes.
-
@anotherusername said in The official vote balance topic:
I'm not sure what the mathematical notation for random is.
It depends upon the distribution from which you draw. Saying "random" just means that you don't know how predict the outcome.
-
note to self: stop posting in this topic, it generates a lot of notifications....
-
@anotherusername said in The official vote balance topic:
As the number of votes given goes to infinity, the number of upvotes and downvotes given will approach parity.
.. is false, but
@anotherusername said in The official vote balance topic:
the limit of the ratio between upvotes and downvotes is not indeterminate.
is true.
The magic phrase to google for here is "random walk". This sort of thing arises naturally in some contexts in physics; IIRC the expected distance from 0 after N steps grows like the square root of N. (It follows that the ratio of upvotes to downvotes converges to 1, as you would expect.)
-
This is more fun that I thought it would be
-
@Scarlet_Manuka they approach parity, in terms of the fraction of the total that they represent. You're correct, though, that you cannot expect them to be equal in number.
In other words, while you can't expect (up - down) to go to 0, you can expect (up - down) / (up + down) to go to 0.
-
@anotherusername Yes, but the original quote to which I was replying explicitly said "the number of upvotes and downvotes given will approach parity".
I did agree that
the ratio of upvotes to downvotes converges to 1, as you would expect.
which is the same as your statement that (up - down) / (up + down) goes to 0.
-
It's all balanced. I suppose I'd better give people something to do
-
Ahh, a whole thread with no post with 0 net votes. Such a beautiful sight...
-
@cark the funny thung is, as soon as you posted it, it stopped being true.
-
@Gąska What did you say? Sorry, couldn't hear you over the sound of TOO MUCH TIME ON MY HANDS
-
-
There are still two posts in the first page (yes, pagination, TRWTF, shh) that have an upvote we can't seem to curb...
-
fixed.
-
@JazzyJosh And the votes were balanced again... For an all too short period :(
-
@cark said in The official vote balance topic:
TOO MUCH TIME ON MY HANDS
Is it any wonder I've got
TOO MUCH
TIME ON MY HANDSit's ticking away with my sanity
-
Started unbalancing but that infiniscroll jellypotato makes it more work than I can be bothered with
-
@cark said in The official vote balance topic:
This is more fun that I thought it would be
Isn't it just?
Also, rebalanced a couple of posts because CDO and rules, or something.
-
@Arantor said in The official vote balance topic:
Also, rebalanced a couple of posts because CDO and rules, or something.
That's easy enough to fix.
-
@boomzilla Except for my own post that I can't upvote, of course.
HOLY HELL, I got downvoted in the time it took to get back to the topic after posting. way to go guyz.
-
I've noticed the earlier posts seem a lot more stable than the later ones...
-
@dcon said in The official vote balance topic:
I've noticed the earlier posts seem a lot more stable than the later ones...
They also have a net of like 26 votes...
-
Just found a post that I'd previously upvoted which was on +2, and I flipped my vote to make it 0, which made me happy.
-
@Arantor said in The official vote balance topic:
HOLY HELL, I got downvoted in the time it took to get back to the topic after posting. way to go guyz.
I was under the impression @anotherusername had an event handler to
downvoteupvote any post in this topic?@by-joining-this-group-you-agree-to-be-mentioned-randomly-for-no-reason-is-that-okay-yes-no
-
@cark Huh, seems I missed that.
Also switched downvotes to upvotes and vice versa to rebalance the thread. Pray I do not rebalance it further.
-
@cark said in The official vote balance topic:
@Arantor said in The official vote balance topic:
HOLY HELL, I got downvoted in the time it took to get back to the topic after posting. way to go guyz.
I was under the impression @anotherusername had an event handler to
downvoteupvote any post in this topic?@by-joining-this-group-you-agree-to-be-mentioned-randomly-for-no-reason-is-that-okay-yes-no
Yes, and it's random in this topic... sometimes it upvotes, sometimes it downvotes.
-
Thread is almost completely fixed again!
-
@pydsigner said in The official vote balance topic:
Thread is almost completely fixed again!
Not entirely. There are quite a few posts in the middle range or so that have nonzero scores.
edit: oh, almost.
-
I just tried to rebalance this thread, but was unable to do so due to a few posts that are too unbalanced. Perhaps someone else can help me out here?
I don't think @by-joining-this-group-you-agree-to-be-mentioned-randomly-for-no-reason-is-that-okay-yes-no has been mentioned in this thread yet. There's also @mikeTheLiar, @presidentsdaughter, and I forget who else right now, but I'm too lazy to find them in the Likes thread. But I'm not so lazy that I can't talk about how lazy I am.
-
@djls45 said in The official vote balance topic:
I just tried to rebalance this thread, but was unable to do so due to a few posts that are too unbalanced. Perhaps someone else can help me out here?
I don't think @by-joining-this-group-you-agree-to-be-mentioned-randomly-for-no-reason-is-that-okay-yes-no has been mentioned in this thread yet. There's also @mikeTheLiar, @presidentsdaughter, and I forget who else right now, but I'm too lazy to find them in the Likes thread. But I'm not so lazy that I can't talk about how lazy I am.
I have also attempted to assist
-
@djls45 I have been summoned, and so I appear.
-
@djls45 said in The official vote balance topic:
There's also @mikeTheLiar, @presidentsdaughter, and I forget who else right now, but I'm too lazy to find them in the Likes thread.
Wasn't it also @dhromed ? My memory inconsistency error problem is making it difficult to recognizance.
-
@Tsaukpaetra That seems like it might be right. I also suspect @darkmatter was another.
Oh! and there was also the great @Dragon or something. He was always threatening to eat @faoileag.
-
@djls45 said in The official vote balance topic:
Oh! and there was also the great @Dragon or something.
Ah, it was @the_dragon.
-
@djls45 said in The official vote balance topic:
@djls45 said in The official vote balance topic:
Oh! and there was also the great @Dragon or something.
Ah, it was @the_dragon.
Wow, been thinking about that for quite a while, eh?
-
GODDAMNIT @fbls45
-
I I'm dreadfully sorry for all the notification spam over just caused, but I've done my best to balance the thread.
-
@benjamin-hall
You're lucky I have work to do this morning, cuz normally a post like that would make me go back through the thread and invert all my votes.
-
@izzion said in The official vote balance topic:
@benjamin-hall
You're lucky I have work to do this morning, cuz normally a post like that would make me go back through the thread and invert all my votes.Don't worry, I've unbalanced it all
-
@jaloopa said in The official vote balance topic:
Don't worry, I've unbalanced it all
WHY. WHY DO YOU WANT THE WORLD TO BURN.
-
Wow. How did I miss this thread? This is almost as nuts as keeping Swampy around.
-
How about a topic where the like counts must be incrementing prime numbers?
-
@mott555 said in The official vote balance topic:
How about a topic where the like counts must be incrementing prime numbers?
That would end rather quickly, I'm not sure we have enough active peeps to take us past a few dozen posts...