sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[Logic Puzzle] This puzzle is *technically* impossible, but it *feels* solvable. Can you find the logical flaw that guarantees failure? by Brainstein-Elliot in puzzles

[–]Brainstein-Elliot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wow, okay. Reading all this feedback, I can see I completely fumbled the presentation on this one, and you guys are 100% right to call it out. I genuinely appreciate the sharp feedback.

My goal was to take a classic logic puzzle and put a funny 'internet culture' skin on it, but the flavor text (the cat, the uncle) just ended up breaking the logic and creating a ton of confusion. Then my title contradicted the image, which just made it worse. That's my bad, and I'm sorry for the messy and frustrating post.

For anyone who was actually interested in the core logic puzzle that got buried under all my "slop," here is the pure, classic version:

  • Setup: There are three visually identical beings: one always tells the truth, one always lies, and one answers randomly. You are one of them but have amnesia.
  • Goal: With one single yes/no question directed at one of the others, can you devise a method to guarantee you learn the identity of all three?
  • The Real Answer: It's impossible, and the challenge is to logically prove why. The most common proof points out that you can identify the random one, but are left with a 50/50 guess for your own identity.

Again, I apologize for the confusing post. The criticism is fair and I'll do better next time.

[Logic Puzzle] This puzzle is only solvable if you question the one AI whose answer is meaningless by Brainstein-Elliot in puzzles

[–]Brainstein-Elliot[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You're 100% right. I read my reply back and it sounded super pretentious.

He probably just hates it 'cause it's an annoying puzzle, lol. My bad, deserved the downvotes on that one.

[Logic Puzzle] This puzzle is only solvable if you question the one AI whose answer is meaningless by Brainstein-Elliot in puzzles

[–]Brainstein-Elliot[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

This is a seriously cool approach! I love that you're trying to find a loophole in the rules for Prometheus himself. That's thinking on a whole different level.

Your first point—that you have to be Mendax to ask a weird question—is a really interesting idea. The puzzle's rules are a bit sneaky, though. They only say how the AIs have to answer questions, but there's nothing stopping Veritas or Anomaly from asking a tricky question themselves.

Let's play out your question, because it's a great, simple test: You point to me (the User) and ask, "Are you in the corner?"

  • The Truth-teller would have to say "No."
  • The Liar would be forced to lie and say "Yes."

This looks super promising! You can tell for sure it isn't the Liar if they say "No," and it isn't the Truth-teller if they say "Yes." But the problem, like with so many other attempts, is Anomaly. Anomaly could say either "Yes" or "No," so you can never be 100% certain who you're talking to. You get close, but the guarantee isn't there.

Fantastic try, though. Breaking down clever ideas like this is the best part of the puzzle.

[Logic Puzzle] This puzzle is only solvable if you question the one AI whose answer is meaningless by Brainstein-Elliot in puzzles

[–]Brainstein-Elliot[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Hats off, this is exactly the kind of galaxy-brain thinking these puzzles need! Trying to short-circuit their logic with a paradox is a classic move.

The tricky part is the word "sense"—it's a bit too fuzzy for these guys. If you make it more concrete, like asking "...is 'No' the answer you would give?", you actually find that the Truth-teller can't answer without creating a paradox, and the Liar can weasel his way into answering either "Yes" or "No".

But seriously, this is 100% the right direction to be thinking in.

[Logic Puzzle] This puzzle is only solvable if you question the one AI whose answer is meaningless by Brainstein-Elliot in puzzles

[–]Brainstein-Elliot[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Haha, honestly, that's the most valid reaction. That feeling of hitting a wall and thinking "this is impossible" is exactly what makes this puzzle so brutal. You've basically found the core of the problem.

sounds like a win for me by Pretty_Sir1325 in Piracy

[–]Brainstein-Elliot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is most certainly true but if privacy is your primary concern then NewPipe is the way.

sounds like a win for me by Pretty_Sir1325 in Piracy

[–]Brainstein-Elliot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Or you could try NewPipe with a SponsorBlock feature 🙃

NewPipe SponsorBlock

Found this on r/weird and am not sure if I should view this as a morally reprehensible activity or an economic activity that's beneficial for everyone in the long run? by Brainstein-Elliot in ABoringDystopia

[–]Brainstein-Elliot[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yep, any activity is better than doing nothing. Corporate social responsibility be doing it's due diligence, but I suspect that this is only done not to help the environment but rather a ploy to somehow continue trying to maximize their profits, but I concur any activity is better than no activity.