Interesting response; I think you'd learn a bit about yourself if you found the answer.

I find it impratical to think like that when dealing with minute probabilities, particulary when in situations that involve questions one's premises. There's only so much processing power a brain has.

This is why some people think you are a pompous prick. Your post stood up just fine without adding the last sentence. Sometimes less is more.

It is, at times, difficult to be intelligent and humble.

Intelligent compared to what? And I do assume you are defining it comparatively?

Its not semantics though, fighting over semantics is stupid and should have its own thread. Fighting over the origins of language and sound though is awesome.


No they are justifiedish, but so are you.

this i agree with completely

This is really biased coming from a poker teacher, theorist, player, etc. How can you make me know thats not biased?

I agree you didn't mean to offend.

ya with some of the **** ive said I agree with you here a little.


I think because we are here we can act pompous in order to not have to constantly say, this is my opinion or I may or may be correct etc.

See this would be part of a Fabric:What can we use to compare intelligence?

And this: What is a Fabric?

I don't believe people who claim to have no beliefs.



PairTheBoard

I've found 2....Jiddhu krishnamurti and Bruce lee...keep in mind Lee inherited this later as a result of trying to master hand to hand combat. But Krishna can convince you he had zero beliefs. He referred to himself as 'k' or 'the speaker' etc.

It would be hard for me to believe a guy trying to convince me of something he doesn't believe.

PairTheBoard

An assumption, in propability terms, is setting p=1 to simplify the rest of the calculations.

For instance, in your books, you don't muddy the waters by considering the small possibility that the cards might like or dislike you on some certain Tuesday evening. You set the odds that they behave randomly at 1.

More importantly, given that the equations of normal day-to-day stuff are quite complex, making assumptions (setting p=1) is a useful tool.

I completely agree with you and stand by my claim about him

Thread is getting fun :-)