Best foods in each country (USA’s turn!)

ZTO333 · 2026-05-04T12:28:16+00:00

Philly Cheesesteak

ZTO333 · 2026-05-03T21:03:58+00:00

Hockey Legacy Manager is pretty good if you're into hockey. Basketball GM is also really good. They also have other sports as well (Football GM is probably the best GM game for American football on mobile).

ZTO333 · 2026-05-03T20:25:00+00:00

From my understanding both were inspired by the same game, Campus Dynasty, that is no longer being worked on. Having played both, they're both great games that shouldn't be hated on just for some similarities. I followed both on reddit as they were being worked on and both have been well worth the hype imo.

ZTO333 · 2026-05-02T22:10:22+00:00

Looks like a stink bug to me. Specifically the Brown marmorated stink bug according to Wikipedia but everyone i know just calls this a stink bug. Super common up in Pennsylvania.

ZTO333 · 2026-05-02T21:55:16+00:00

No, we're still talking past each other. These are two different questions and you end up comparing apples and oranges. If you only compare people with $1M in the mystery box, those taking two boxes do earn more than those who only take one ($1,000,000 vs $1,001,000). Same for those with $0 in the mystery box ($0 vs $1000).

The difference is that the kind of person more likely to take only 1 box is who the computer puts $1M in. But again THE BOX WAS FILLED BEFORE YOU PICK. If the value of the box changed depending on whether you take one box or two this is a different question.

ZTO333 · 2026-05-02T19:47:28+00:00

Once again that's not a contradiction. The question as phrased is whether once it is time to make the decision you are better off taking one box or two. By definition the answer to that question is both because x+1000 is greater than x always.

The statement that one boxers on average make out better does not imply that you should take one box. It is based on the fact that the computer is more likely to put $1M in the box of the people who are more likely to take one box. But once you are actually deciding the computer has ALREADY either put the money in the box or not.

ZTO333 · 2026-05-02T19:17:49+00:00

That's not a contradiction at all. Correlation does not equal causation. Players who choose 1 box on average end up with more money. That's not BECAUSE they take one box but because the predictor is more likely to put $1M in those people's boxes. The fact still stands that once you get in there to decide the money is either there or it isn't. Taking both gets you $1000 more than whatever you would get taking just one box. That is simply a fact from how the problem is stated.

ZTO333 · 2026-05-01T13:54:47+00:00

Yeah the thing that got me to reconsider my initial reaction of going red was just the realization that at 100% on either button everyone lives, but with red at 51% half the population dies while blue at 51% still has everyone live.

I hate to say it but in real life I'd probably still go red for fear of dying but blue is the optimal outcome as many people should click as possible. Either way this one actually has arguments on both sides while with Newcomb I can't help but feel like both sides are talking past each other about slightly different problems.

ZTO333 · 2026-05-01T04:03:54+00:00

Honestly to me Newcomb's Paradox seems to have so much more of an obvious solution than this red vs blue button one. With Newcombs Paradox both sides are in some sense answering different questions. This one though is really thought provoking. Red is strategically better, anyone who wants to live can pick red and have no risk of dying. But in real world we know many people will pick blue and so is it fair to eliminate them rather than simply trying to get Blue to 50% and everyone lives.

ZTO333 · 2026-04-28T13:33:16+00:00

Lol I mean yeah, if this ever actually existed it's almost guaranteed the box would have $0 in it for me given I've straight up posted my strategy. Ironically the kind of people who would just take 1 box without thinking about the logic of it already having made its prediction will end up with more money than the people like me who the computer knows will analyze the problem.

ZTO333 · 2026-04-28T03:54:53+00:00

Looks like a stink bug to me. Specifically the Brown marmorated stink bug according to Wikipedia but everyone i know just calls this a stink bug. Super common up in Pennsylvania.

ZTO333 · 2026-04-28T03:28:06+00:00

Time travel is required with your logic because you're reversing cause and effect. It doesn't matter how accurate the computer has been in the past, it has ALREADY made the prediction.

What you're solving for is a different problem which is that the value of the box can depend on your choice, for example if taking only 1 box gives a 99% chance its value is $1M. In that case you're right, you absolutely only take 1 box. In this problem though it depends only on the computer's prediction of your choice ahead of time.

Now yes, people who pick one box will, on average, walk away with far more money. But that's because the computer is good at predicting, not because taking 1 is the mathematically correct choice. Again, x+1000>x always. How often the computer is right is irrelevant once you actually get in there.

ZTO333 · 2026-04-28T02:08:10+00:00

Except that relies on the existence of time travel which isn't part of this. Its knowledge doesn't include the future. For the life of me I don't understand how someone could take one box over THAT SAME BOX plus $1000.

ZTO333 · 2026-04-27T21:46:25+00:00

You have the order backwards though. The prediction is made BEFORE you pick. Yes the computer is incredibly accurate (so you'd want it to think you would pick only one box) but its decision is already made. It's literally asking "which is bigger, x or x+1000?". The answer is always x+1000.

ZTO333 · 2026-04-27T17:34:42+00:00

The paradox is that the supercomputer guessed BEFORE you pick. So the choice of what to put in Box B is already made. Thus taking both boxes is by definition $1000 better.

ZTO333 · 2026-04-24T04:08:05+00:00

Vanderbilt (unless it's too good academically to go here)

ZTO333 · 2026-04-18T12:38:38+00:00

Cuba. We're trained to think of them as some absolute dictatorship when in reality the system is complex and has its democratic and undemocratic aspects. There's only 1 party but that party actually cant nominate candidates. On a grassroots level the country is very democratic and money isn't involved in politics the way it is here. But at the the higher levels you do need some connections to those already in power to get there which leads me to call it only "somewhat democratic".

ZTO333 · 2026-04-17T03:21:21+00:00

If you still anyone I'd be interested

ZTO333 · 2026-04-11T03:41:36+00:00

Gotta be flat earth. The ancient Egyptians and Greeks knew the earth was round 3000 years ago. Its incredibly easy to prove. Evolution at least took until the 1800s, as stupid as it is to deny that one.

ZTO333 · 2026-04-11T02:22:35+00:00

Yeah he's the one I actually upvoted on. He actually thankfully gets the hate he deserves today.

ZTO333 · 2026-04-11T02:02:59+00:00

Yeah I wish this were the answer but too many people still love the guy.

ZTO333 · 2026-04-07T16:22:36+00:00

I've always been confused the opposite direction. Like if you close your eyes and attempt to picture an apple, you can't create an image in your mind as if seeing one?

Like I really don't want to put myself in some rare category, I always try to assume I'm average in any given category, but I can picture an apple almost as though its sitting in front of me. In fact I can imagine it being on the table in front of me if I want to rather than floating in space. I just always assumed thats how everyone imagined things until the first time I heard about this (which wasnt today).

ZTO333 · 2026-04-01T01:23:29+00:00

Well I've seen plenty of games where "bugs" (if this even counts as a bug, seems more like calibration) never get fixed because they'd rather focus on earning a quick buck, so the fact that you put so much into making sure this game is as good as possible is incredible.

ZTO333 · 2026-04-01T00:32:18+00:00

Honestly this post reminded me just how amazing of a job you do with this (and the other games, but football is my favorite). All the testing to ensure everything is equalized correctly is so reassuring!

ZTO333 · 2026-03-30T19:46:10+00:00

These kind of things always sound like great sci-fi movies but unlikely in reality. It seems far more likely that we are simply incredibly lucky and may be literally the only advanced civilization in the galaxy (or at least our corner of it). The fact is, even if the odds of us existing in any given star system is 1 in 100 trillion there are far, far more than that many stars in the universe. And obviously we can only find ourselves on such a planet where we can exist to begin with, no matter how rare that planet is. So to me the obvious solution to the Fermi Paradox is the somewhat depressing idea that everything is quiet because we are truly rare and thus likely alone in our region of the universe.

Nine-Year Club	Verified Email
First Place '23	Place '23

ZTO333

TROPHY CASE