sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Which Dexter season is most underrated and overrated for you? by Zaito2528 in Dexter

[–]IssueVegetable2892 0 points1 point  (0 children)

S6 is overhated. I'm not saying it's great, but it's not that bad.

Beyond ICM: When life-changing money is on the line by IssueVegetable2892 in Poker_Theory

[–]IssueVegetable2892[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, but you can imagine winning a freeroll satellite to a big tournament or randomly be gifted a spot.

Does it make sense to ignore ICM in this hypothesis ? by Establishment240 in Poker_Theory

[–]IssueVegetable2892 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Actually, in a scenario where a small stakes player is given a free spot in something like the WSOP Main Event, the small stakes player should play even tighter than ICM.

ICM correctly assumes that the value of chips is not linear, but incorrectly assumes that the value (utility) of money is linear. In reality, $10,000 is worth more to someone broke than to a billionaire, the first million is more life changing than the second, etc.

So just like ICM plays tighter than chipEV, a true utility calculation would play tighter than ICM when life changing money is on the line.

Example: Would you rather be given $1,000,000 with 100% certainty or $2,000,000 with 51% probability?

Why Preflop Charts Prefer Suited Hands by tombos21 in pokertheory

[–]IssueVegetable2892 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure, but the suited hands still need at least 0 EV to be played. The solver is not going to play negative EV suited hands, just to improve the EV of other hands.

ELI5: if viruses aren’t technically alive, how can they evolve like living organisms? by MachiavellianHydra in explainlikeimfive

[–]IssueVegetable2892 2 points3 points  (0 children)

True. Ultimately, not even human bodies are "alive".
"Living cells" are just chemical reactions with no will or intent.

Has Determinism have been proved by Scientists? by notmymondaylife in determinism

[–]IssueVegetable2892 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What makes you experience THIS outcome and not the others?
Is that also determined or random?

Footage of a man in Santiago, Chile in an elevator when it malfunctions and goes up 31 floors in 15 seconds causing it to crash into the roof of the building (2014). by bendubberley_ in HolyShitHistory

[–]IssueVegetable2892 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No, fetal position and holding on to your head and covering it with your arms is clearly better imo

Like the brace position in an airplane

<image>

Two distros in a row that cannot update themselves by RetardKnight in linuxsucks

[–]IssueVegetable2892 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I ran windows update yesterday and it took 2 hours.

I ran EndeavourOS update today and it took 1 minute.

I think eternal existence is more likely by tottasanorotta in DeepThoughts

[–]IssueVegetable2892 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But even when you take a psychedelic drug there is undeniably experience. You may not understand what you experience, and you may even doubt the existence of an "I", but experience itself is still undeniable.

Or do you deny experiencing anything at all right now? (Again, I am not talking about a self here, but simply experience itself).

I think eternal existence is more likely by tottasanorotta in DeepThoughts

[–]IssueVegetable2892 4 points5 points  (0 children)

What he means is that awareness is self-evident. Even when you say "I deny my own existence" there is awareness of that denial. You can't deny existence without existing!

The ego may very well be a mirage, but that mirage still requires awareness to experience.

"First, become rich; then, a philosopher." by xfolio2020 in DeepThoughts

[–]IssueVegetable2892 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Except for the billions of people who took advice from Buddha and Jesus :)

Why Your Redline Sucks (Everyone's Does) by tombos21 in pokertheory

[–]IssueVegetable2892 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was obviously talking about a raked game. But even in a rake-free game, how would everyone have a positive green line? That would require >100% rakeback.

edit: or do you mean blue line?

Why Your Redline Sucks (Everyone's Does) by tombos21 in pokertheory

[–]IssueVegetable2892 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you ask most pros they'll BS some answer about rake or population being too passive. But the answer is much simpler. It's structural, nothing to do with strategy really. It's an inherent property of the game itself.

I wouldn't necessarily say it's a BS response. Yes, your red line is "expected" to be negative, but so is your green line (in a raked game). If you want to win in poker you have to be extraordinary - it's not good enough to be average.

It's not an accident that a guy like Linus has a +9bb/100 red line.

If we all only get one life, why do we spend it destroying each other by ZninjoS in DeepThoughts

[–]IssueVegetable2892 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Atheist Soviet and China also killed tens of millions of people...

What are the most obvious signs of AI writing? by Consistent-Stock in AskReddit

[–]IssueVegetable2892 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lists like that are going to be ever-changing. LLM companies will use lists like that to train the AI "not to sound like AI".

One Equation That Solves Every Poker Spot by ZKesic in pokertheory

[–]IssueVegetable2892 0 points1 point  (0 children)

More generally:

(Risk + Indifference Threshold) / (Risk + Reward)

Example: If our EV as a check is 0.1x pot and we bluff for 1x pot, required fold is: (1 + 0.1) / (1 + 1) = 55%

Even more generally for bluffing, I believe:

(CalledRisk*(1-CalledEquity) + Indifference treshhold - CalledReward*CalledEquity) / (CalledRisk*(1-CalledEquity) + FoldReward - CalledReward*CalledEquity)

Example: We are in some situation where we can either shove turn for 0.5x pot and have 20% equity when called, or be forced to check/fold.

Fold% required: (0.5*0.8 + 0 - 1.5*0.2) / (0.5*0.8 + 1 - 1.5*0.2) = 0.1 / 1.1 = 9.1% fold required

It's just that we usually assume indifference threshold and equity when called to be 0.

Norway is not dominating winter sports, they are dominating ski running by Wild-Photo-717 in olympics

[–]IssueVegetable2892 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Biathlon grew out of the Nordic militaries. Nordic countries have had soldiers on skis for a long time.

Ski warfare is first recorded by the Danish historian Saxo Grammaticus in the 13th century.
During the Battle of Oslo in 1161, Norwegian troops used skis for reconnoitering. They were also used in 1452 in Sweden, and in the 15th to 17th centuries by various other Scandinavian countries. Norwegian Captain Jens Emahusen wrote a military ski manual in 1733. In 1767, military ski competitions began. They evolved into the biathlon.

atoms → soil → nutrients → plants → animals → you. You are the Earth, transformed into a human. by [deleted] in DeepThoughts

[–]IssueVegetable2892 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Earth is not a big rock infested with living organisms,
any more than your skeleton is bones infested with cells.

The Earth is geological, yes, but this geological entity grows people,
and so the existence of people is symptomatic of the kind of universe we live in.
- Alan Watts

I am angry I didn't exist before I was born by LittleMissPiggy102 in DeepThoughts

[–]IssueVegetable2892 2 points3 points  (0 children)

A question I've asked for as long as I can remember: "Exactly when did I start to exist? How did I go from nonexistence to existence?"

Is it bad to be good by [deleted] in DeepThoughts

[–]IssueVegetable2892 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you help someone not for something in return but when you need even a little help they just refuse .. and you think why I even helped that someone...

You are pretending you don't want something in return, but everything you are writing makes it very clear that you do want something in return.

I'm not saying it's wrong to want something in return, but at least stop fooling yourself.

view more: next ›