What I Learned from the Dice Problem Thread

[redietz]

Well, I'm going to be serious here at first, and then ease into snarkiness. That thread taught me some valuable lessons.

1) Online, people can really draw the conclusion they are intellectually superior to other people based on one problem, one interaction, one event. I had never actually considered this before. And ironically, what they are doing is drawing a conclusion based on minimal data from one math problem, which is itself antithetical to the entire notion of probability. The people who do this are entwined in a kind of paradox, which I find cute, funny, and absurd.

2) I have gone 57 years under-appreciating the importance of tense when discussing real life events and the math associated with them. When people change tenses in "person-of-interest" interviews, it is a red flag signaling obfuscation. I have known that for years, but needed to be reminded of it by a law enforcement friend. I had not considered that changing tenses in writing may also be purposeful and a tool to create confusion. Now I am alert for it.

3) The ubiquity of anonymity in online forums continues to baffle me. If the trend is for Facebook and Twitter and such to personalize interactions, why would anyone seek out anonymous interactions? Academic journals don't publish anonymous papers. Would some of the WoVers really be as obnoxious in person as when online? I have a hard time believing that.

4) I realize that many civilians (as one WoVer said in reference to the regulars here) are math-blind to some extent. I had never realized how language-blind some of the math club people appear. It is startling to see people not accept that a question often misinterpreted is a bad question. It doesn't matter how clear and concise it seems to YOU. If many or most people misinterpet it, it is by definition a bad question. There is a math-blind aspect to this that is interesting. The fact that YOU get it is anecdotal evidence that the question is okay. The fact others do not get it should hold more weight in your mind if you're truly probability-oriented.

Anyway, I seem to have left out anything snarky, but I'll work on that. This has been a valuable exercise and experience.

[Alan Mendelson]

Thanks redietz. I considered the idea of making everyone post using their real name. But then I realized hardly anyone would post.

[Rob.Singer]

The purpose of the WoV forum is to bounce around gambling theory after gambling theory, discuss then until either the cows come home or the admins have to start suspending posters for the usual namecalling or vulgarity born out of frustration, and then count how many posters claimed to have won. By definition, people cannot use their real names. Case in point: Had mickeycrimm used his real name, he'd be in jail now (wait....he probably is anyway!)

[Alan Mendelson]

Were you serious when you said "people cannot use their real names"? I used mine.

[jbjb]

the usual namecalling or vulgarity born out of frustration, and then count how many posters claimed to have won.

Sounds just like you asshole!! BTW, I'm not from WoV.

NOTE FROM MODERATOR: jbjb has been banned for 7 days for vulgarity.

[Alan Mendelson]

On the subject of real names: a few years ago I am at Caesars playing craps. It was the afternoon and the casino was relatively quiet. I am at a table with two young guys and I was shooting. While I am shooting one of the young guys says to his dealer "is that Alan Mendelson?" I overheard it and after that roll while the payoffs were being made I stepped over to him and put out my hand to shake and said "Hi, I'm Alan."

The young man says "you're not Alan Mendelson."

"Yes, I am," I said smiling.

"No you're not," he said firmly.

So I reached into my wallet, took out a business card and handed it to him.

The young man looks at it for a moment and then says to me, "how did you get his card?"

[Rob.Singer]

I can't recall anyone else besides you Alan who uses his real name there. Probably a couple more.

Everything has a reason. For instance, I just looked, and someone started a thread talking about how many trillions of years it would take to shuffle a deck of cards before it repeats itself--or something similar anyway. Would YOU want your real name associated with something like that??

[redietz]

Everyone needs a hobby. I prefer Japanese love dolls to duplicate shuffling estimates, but that's just me.

[OneHitWonder]

Years ago, I posted regularly on a baccarat forum. On a popular "competing" forum was a known scammer, Ellis Davis, of note at http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/nbj.htm .

One day on a lark, I went over to his forum. Couldn't believe that anyone would believe that stuff, but they ate it up in droves. The guy could beat your wallet silly, and you'd likely still find a reason to love him for it.

So, I challenged him on some of the easy stuff. Things got heated. By a week later, the forum I regularly posted at was under some sort of spam/hacker attack. It took a week for the owner to clear the porn and other abuse, and to set up a bunch more security.

The thing I learned from partaking in the gambling forums is to make sure you get your own work done first. There just is no convincing anyone of anything on the gambling forums. You could even place a bet for someone else to demonstrate a concept, and they would still not want a part of it.

As for the anonymity: The winners get talked about but say little; the losers go unmentioned but keep right on talking.

[redietz]

I didn't know humidity was an issue in blackjack. Every table should have a hygrometer.

I read some summaries of Hoover and Ferguson (Snyder and Wong) having gone to court years ago and testifying under oath as expert witnesses for casinos, so they aren't my favorite people. At the time, they were selling books and systems on one hand, and testifying for casinos versus players (under their real names) on the other. So when their pseudonyms criticize systems ripoffs, I kind of roll my eyes.

[OneHitWonder]

I read some summaries of Hoover and Ferguson (Snyder and Wong) having gone to court years ago and testifying under oath as expert witnesses for casinos, so they aren't my favorite people.

They thereby abuse any accreditation to mathematics as well. It's not enough that they profit by selling "blanks" or relatively useless and hyped info to both sides, they often do it also in the name of math. Independent professional mathematicians and engineers don't do such stuff. Not ever. In specific, you won't find any professionals who would put the simulation first. Unheard of.

As unheard of as any showing up at the Wizard's to endorse Mike. I can't imagine what happened to one-time mathematics professor Jacobson to land him at the Wizard's with a few scattered ad hoc posts nobody really enjoys, and a $50 manuscript of his blog on Amazon (which went reduced for $40 a week later because of slow sales.) Sad. Especially given the public education subsidies for persons of higher education. What a waste.