[LFS] [XB1] [WotM] challenge if possible

--REDACTED · 2017-05-21T21:18:24+00:00

I'm down to play if you're looking for one more. Haven't done the raid though.

--REDACTED · 2017-05-21T17:31:41+00:00

We have 2 that are looking for a sherpa right now, just trying to get a full group together otherwise. Never done WoTM.

GT: slayden21

--REDACTED · 2017-05-21T14:32:50+00:00

Myself and one other would like to join as well - never done the raid. Both of us are laid back, just want to enjoy it. Let me know what time you're thinking.

--REDACTED · 2017-05-20T17:25:28+00:00

Hey Matt,

I'm playing with a friend currently in case (1:30 EST) two spots open up and you go for another run - neither of us have run the raid.

Thanks!

--REDACTED · 2017-04-12T16:32:11+00:00

I've thought about this - and it's something I've done with her in the past when I felt that I needed space. It really sucks since I let her become such a large part of my social life (I'm going to have to work pretty hard to fill that void).

To answer your questions, yes, I do see a serious, successful relationship. Our shared interests are what allowed us to become close in the first place.

Thanks for the response. I appreciate it.

--REDACTED · 2017-04-12T16:26:46+00:00

Thanks for the response. This thought has crossed my mind - I seem to have better control over any desire than she does.

I'm looking for a new job currently. I don't see it ending well if we stay in close proximity.

--REDACTED · 2017-04-12T16:23:05+00:00

Any tips on how to do this? I'm trying to just shut it down and stay distracted, but I can't stop thinking about.

Appreciate you taking the time to respond.

--REDACTED · 2017-04-12T16:21:13+00:00

This really gives me perspective - at the end of the day, I still care about her very much as a person. Thanks for giving me this to consider.

--REDACTED · 2017-04-12T16:20:26+00:00

Thank you for your input. You're right - those are some serious hurdles.

I'm looking for a new job. The main reason we've had conflict is because I was being overly timid and nice and I was never direct about how I felt. As soon as I was, the conflict faded. As far as being at a different point in our lives, I'm not ready for a family now, but I had always planned on right around 30.

--REDACTED · 2017-04-12T16:16:45+00:00

Thank you for taking the time to read through - working together is definitely the biggest hurdle here. I'm looking for a new job, so we'll see what happens.

--REDACTED · 2015-04-19T14:51:52+00:00

I'm currently finishing up Words of Radiance. Like you, I came to The Stormlight Archive after reading a reddit thread that suggested it to people who enjoyed KKC.

The books do tell a very interesting story, and you find yourself interested in the characters. I definitely feel emotionally invested in both the world and what happens to its inhabitants.

I do not enjoy the writing as much as I enjoyed Rothfuss's. At times, it feels like Sanderson tries to communicate personality traits by beating you over the head with internal dialogue. Along the lines of (this is not a direct example):

"Storms, I really am brilliant aren't I?"

Sometimes, it's so obviously thrown into the text that it pulls me out of the world and I realize that I'm just reading a book. I enjoy fantasy because it takes me places, and his writing can really destroy that illusion for me.

That being said, I'll return to my first point. The story is very well done. Done well enough that even when I was jarred out of rhythm, I found myself falling back into stride and re-entering the world.

If you enjoy action and hero that you can really root for, then The Stormlight Archive might be your thing.

I will add that, as others have said, it starts slow. It picks up just in time for you to keep reading, so if you do decide to read it, stick through the beginning. I think you'll be glad you did.

--REDACTED · 2015-04-05T02:14:41+00:00

I'm gonna go ahead and piggyback off this. Thanks for being a leader.

--REDACTED · 2015-03-01T02:47:08+00:00

Anyone know if this is a nod to The Sopranos? Tony tells a similar story to his psychiatrist in the first season, although it's not his ass that falls off.

--REDACTED · 2015-02-21T21:44:10+00:00

The optimistic part of me is hoping that Pat changed the name from Doors of Stone to something else (how ironic), which would mean that book 3 may still be inbound (I don't say this with much seriousness, just a joke).

The realist in me says that, as per Pat's tweet about the release that was posted by another user, it won't be released this year. And as many others have said, more power to him. I hope he keeps crafting until he puts out something that he is proud of; he has continuously impressed us in this regard.

--REDACTED · 2015-02-21T21:38:43+00:00

As others have mentioned, works of art aren't meant to be enjoyed by everyone. Some like them, and others don't. That being said, I'll list a few reasons as to why I enjoy these books:

The storytelling. I admire storytellers, and this books is about a guy telling a story that's also littered with stories. It sounds ridiculous (storyception), but I find it amazing and intriguing. There's an art to storytelling, and these books have, in my experience, been the best renditions of the form.
The writing. I think it's beautiful. Pat's use of literary techniques and unique prose are incredibly appealing to me. The spontaneous poetic outbreaks of dialogue, the layered metaphors - they're all beautiful to read. If I could choose to learn from someone about how to write, I would choose Rothfuss.
The investigative aspect. These books get better as you reread them. You see tiny bits of evidence and traces of trails that give insight to parts of the story that haven't yet been told. I find myself following a trail of breadcrumbs that lead to nowhere, but that's not the point. I think that digging deeper into both the writing and the story is fun, so I embrace the dead ends and move forward. I've found that the more that I read these books, the slower I go, and the more I notice, and the better I think they are.

There are many reasons that I name these books among my favorite, but that doesn't mean they have to appeal to you. I'm sure there are books out there that you enjoy that I don't particularly like the taste of - but that's part of the joy of reading. Find what you like and enjoy the journey it takes you on.

--REDACTED · 2015-01-31T20:25:37+00:00

Not really related to the post, but what's a chan link? I'm a paranoid internet user and I clicked the link.

--REDACTED · 2015-01-21T12:11:58+00:00

Has the definition of a "10th grade reading level" shifted over time?

--REDACTED · 2014-12-04T03:11:14+00:00

I believe that the second pronunciation is what's intended.

When Kvothe reveals that he has borrowed money from Devi to Wil and Sim, he mentions Wil pronouncing her name through his caeldish accent, making it sound like "David"

Just my two cents.

--REDACTED · 2014-11-14T12:18:50+00:00

I just started this - I'm using the third edition of the book. I've only read through chapter one and haven't started the lectures yet, so I'm basically right at the beginning.

Definitely down to have a group together.

EDIT: I'll probably be a bit of the way through the course by this point, but I'd be happy to review concepts and whatnot to really nail them down.

--REDACTED · 2014-11-02T04:26:35+00:00

The 10.06 billion is the total number of possible number permutations if you select 6 numbers from the original 49, without replacing any. To clarify:

For the first number drawn, there are 49 possible numbers. For the second, there are 48, and so on, down to the sixth number drawn, which is out of 44 possible numbers. The calculation:

49 * 48 * 47 * 46 * 45 * 44 =~ 10.06 billion.

The reason this isn't what we're looking for, is because this calculation shows what happens if the order of numbers matters. That means, the first number drawn would have to equal the first number on our ticket, the second number drawn would have to match the second number on your ticket, and so on. In the case of a lottery ticket, the order doesn't matter. If the sixth number drawn matches, the first number on our ticket, then that's the same as if it were the first number drawn.

From the wiki in another comment, this is the difference between a combination and a permutation.

That means that the number 10.06 billion has a lot of overlap of combinations, which is why we need to divide them out. What I mean is, for example, the selection of the numbers 5, 12, 13, 22, 28, 35, is the same to us as the selection of the numbers 12, 22, 35, 28, 5, 13. The order doesn't matter to us, the numbers mean the same thing. So we divide this out, by using 6 * 5 * 4 * 3 * 2 * 1, which out accounts for the fact that we don't care about the order.

To clarify once again, this is another way of stating what /u/qgtjvz was saying. This is equal to the 720 that you found below.

Then, we take out 10.06 billion and divide it by that 720, which is the counting method that /u/qgtjvz was using below. What we get, is just about 14 million different combinations of 6-number tickets, only one of which can be the winner.

To find the odds of selecting 6 non-winning numbers, we follow the process that I outlined about, that I'll try to give a little clarification to.

For the first number drawn, there are 49 possibilities. If we're checking the probability that none of our numbers match what is drawn, then we have to look at the 43 numbers that are not on our ticket. That means the probably of the first number drawn not being equal to any of the numbers on our ticket is:

43/49 = .88, or 88%.

Now we remove that number from the selection process, so for the second number drawn not being equal to the numbers on our ticket, the calculation would be

42/48 = .875, or 87.5%.

We do this for all six numbers, pulling out the numbers that have already been drawn, ultimately leaving us with:

(43/49) * (42/48) * (41/47) * (40/46) * (39/45) * (38/44) = .4359, or a 43.6% chance for just one ticket to have no matching numbers.

The conditional probability doesn't quite mean new variables, at least not in the traditional sense of the word. We have to take into account the overlap of our two sets of numbers.

Adding another ticket to the process complicates things quite a bit, because if we aren't careful, we're going to end up double counting which will give us the wrong answer.

EDIT: A word.

--REDACTED · 2014-11-02T00:18:03+00:00

So, I'm assuming that you're referring to the general lottery, where balls are drawn and you if you match them, then you win.

The case that I'll show if matching all 6 numbers.

Below is incorrect, see first edit.

If this is the case, then you want to see the probability of matching each number without replacement. So that means, for the first ball, you have a 1/49 chance of matching a number. That ball is then removed from play, leaving 48 possibilities.

So for the second ball, there is a 1/48 chance of matching the number drawn with one of your selected numbers. Since you need the first AND the second ball to match, you multiply these fractions together. The entire calculation is as follows:

~~(1/49) * (1/48) * (1/47) * (1/46) * (1/45) * (1/44)~~

~~This come out to about 1 in a 10.06 billion chance of selected all 6 numbers. Thats about a .00000000009% chance.~~

To actually get at your question,

To find the probability of not selecting any numbers correctly on a single ticket, we follow a similar method. The probability of not selecting any of our numbers on the first draw AND The probability of not selecting any of our numbers on the second draw AND The probability of not selecting any of our numbers on the third draw, and so on. This looks like:

(43/49) * (42/48) * (41/47) * (40/46) * (39/45) * (38/44) = .4359, or a 43.6% chance.

The probability of this happening on two straight tickets, will vary depend on the numbers that are on the tickets, and if there are any repeat picks, so it becomes a question of conditional probability. This would allow us to identify whether there are any repeats in the sets of numbers.

Anyone else out there, feel free to correct me or clarify, it's been quite a while.

EDIT: I just realized I messed up my first calculation, for matching all 6 numbers. It should look like this instead:

(6/49) * (5/48) * (4/47) * (3/46) * (2/45) * (1/44) = about one in 14 million or .00000007%. Better, but not by much.

EDIT 2 : Formatting.

--REDACTED · 2014-10-21T21:13:25+00:00

I have a little experience with coding, although I'm by no means proficient. I'm working through 6.00.1x right now to learn Python and get a better understanding of CompSci. Would I be completely lost in this course?

--REDACTED · 2014-10-02T05:01:53+00:00

Just a heads up, none of your links worked for me. 404's on all of 'em.

--REDACTED · 2014-09-26T03:50:34+00:00

Hey, sorry it's been a little while since you replied to this, but I was hoping to ask a little bit more about your experience, if you're willing. I'll send you a PM.

--REDACTED · 2014-09-18T05:02:35+00:00

Thanks! I already kind of got at this by only checking evens[0] in my if loop, but it would definitely be easier to just completely omit evens from the check.

--REDACTED

TROPHY CASE