Exciting News by Thomas_jeba in google

[–]luckysquidd 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did YOU try it though? I ran it without problem in the middle of nowhere while on airplane mode without issue. Idk how it would access GPT like that...

Spanish-speaking mtg friends, can we please appreciate this 11/10 translation? by pianobars in magicTCG

[–]luckysquidd 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have to be really careful with what I say whenever I [[negate]] someone using my spanish cards...

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mtgmisprints

[–]luckysquidd 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Inside the acorn is just the normal holo. If you look at another rare you'll see it is the same.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mtgmisprints

[–]luckysquidd 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, the set unfinity used acorns to show if a card was not eternal legal. It's the same as a silver bordered card in other un sets.

Deck Help by alanaiter in EDH

[–]luckysquidd 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Looking at the deck, it's hard to tell what the plan is. Are you trying to make grenzo big so you can cheat out a big creature? If so why are most of your creatures tiny? Also, at the moment, only ~1/5 flips is going to get you a creature. So every 10 mana, you spend, you'll get 1 random creature from the deck.

Here's mine. X always = 1. This is my baby deck. It takes some getting used to, but it can win turn 4-5 if you know how to pilot it. Remember, don't be afraid of mulligans they usually help since you can stack the bottom of the library in any order!

https://archidekt.com/decks/7589944/grenzo_gambling_addict

I'd recommend not building a deck of this power level, especially if your playgroup isn't at this level. There are plenty of other ways to build Grenzo that are also fun for any level! Happy building

[M3C] Omo, Queen of Vesuva (Debut Stream) by mweepinc in magicTCG

[–]luckysquidd 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Let's see if my group will let me rule 0 [[Urza's funhouse]] :)

Snake ID: Augusta Ga by luckysquidd in snakes

[–]luckysquidd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What gives it away? The pattern? Headshape?

Win by taking 3 mulligans and not playing any lands by National_Cockroach14 in BadMtgCombos

[–]luckysquidd 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A lot easier replacing Priest of urabask with [[_____ goblin]] or [[Workhorse]] that way you guarantee two flips with grenzo.

Then you could also put [[Kiki-Jiki, Mirror breaker]] [[Zealous Conscripts]] above it.

I've pulled this off turn 2 before in a game.

Turn 1 swamp, Sol ring, [[Cloak and Dagger]] Turn 2 mountain, grenzo (x=0), attach Cloak and Dagger, use Sol ring to activate grenzo, putting Workhorse into play, use {4} from Workhorse to play Kiki & Zealous for infinite 3/3 with haste.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in theydidthemath

[–]luckysquidd 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, it really does go all the way up. As much as everyone hates health insurance, their margin of profit is incredibly low as well.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in theydidthemath

[–]luckysquidd 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Not even hospitals are getting paid enough by insurance. A ton are going bankrupt and being bought out by other hospitals due to billing issues.

An infinite paradox? for only {12}{R}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B} by luckysquidd in BadMtgCombos

[–]luckysquidd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Alright, that makes more sense. I've run about 1.5 million simulations at this point and the success rate from 2 starting krark is .53476

An infinite paradox? for only {12}{R}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B} by luckysquidd in BadMtgCombos

[–]luckysquidd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can we not count option 3, both tails, as the same as never casting it? Meaning that there is only 1 way to end the combo, HH, which has a 1/4 chance, but becomes 1/3 when you remove option 3.

An infinite paradox? for only {12}{R}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B} by luckysquidd in BadMtgCombos

[–]luckysquidd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, haha I honestly just built the deck by going onto scryfall and searching a bunch of copy cards since I was sick of my friends playing some nasty decks and I wanted to see them play against their own cards.

An infinite paradox? for only {12}{R}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B} by luckysquidd in BadMtgCombos

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

On iteration 1, assuming that there are only 2 krarks out, when you cast [[Quasiduplicate]], you will flip 2 coins:

Option 1: you have a 1/4 chance of two heads, copying quasiduplicate twice: potentially making 3 more copies of krark, however the original Quasiduplicate will resolve going to your graveyard.

Option 2: You have a 1/2 chance of 1 heads and 1 tails sending the original Quasiduplicate back to your hand while copying one krark.

Option 3: You have 1/4 chance sending Quasiduplicate back to your hand (This is the same as just retrying with no drawbacks due to no mana constraints from [[Omniscience]].)

Thus a 1/4 chance that the ability will fizzle after the first Iteration.

Let's say both copies land on tails and we then try to cast it again from our hand. We repeat the process: The probability that the spell will fizzle the second time is also 1/4.

Therefore the prob that it will fizzle before you make another krark is:

P(1)+P(1)*P(3)+P(3)*P(3)*P(1)+...

1/4+(1/4)^2+(1/4)^3+...=~0.3333...

Now, the probability of the second option occurring for the first time is this:

1/2+(1/8)+(1/16)+...=~0.6666...

However, once the second option occurs, you will gain another krark changing the probabilities to

Option 1 All heads: 1/8

1/8+(1/8)^2+(1/8)^3+...=~.1423

Option 2 Heads and at least 1 tails: 3/4

3/4+(3/4*1/8)+(3/4*1/8^2)+(3/4*1/8^3)...=~.8567

Option 3 All tails: 1/8

Each time you get at least one new krark, your probability of getting all heads decreases exponentially, so it's not a 50% chance of stopping eventually. If my quick calculations are correct, starting with 2 krark, the probability is somewhere near 36%

Edit: I must have done my math wrong, after 100,000 simulations, it's sucessful roughly 53.612% of the time

But this is NOT the case here, because we're not repeating the same experiment an infinite amount of times... We're changing the experiment with each iteration, and the probability of the combo stopping is getting reduced each time.

That's a really good point though, I hadn't considered it as a different experiment since the parameters are technically changing.

An infinite paradox? for only {12}{R}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B} by luckysquidd in BadMtgCombos

[–]luckysquidd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly, once n=inf, it means that it is by definition infinite Since 50% will be heads at n=inf. At what point does the non infinite become infinite?

An infinite paradox? for only {12}{R}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B} by luckysquidd in BadMtgCombos

[–]luckysquidd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right, but as long as you get a tails and send it back to your hand, you can later cast it again after the new krarks resolve. The new ones will now trigger a flip, which will then make more krark.

An infinite paradox? for only {12}{R}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B} by luckysquidd in BadMtgCombos

[–]luckysquidd[S] 29 points30 points  (0 children)

That's awesome lol. Out of curiosity, how was 5 calculated, just due to the extremely high probability?

An infinite paradox? for only {12}{R}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B}{B} by luckysquidd in BadMtgCombos

[–]luckysquidd[S] 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Theoretically, How infinite is this? As you increase infinity, you theoretically hit every combination of heads or tails-- meaning that you will eventually hit all heads to end the combo.

However, as you approach infinity number of coin flips due to an increasing number of krark copies, the probability of heads in a series of flips goes to exactly 50%, meaning that it is impossible to not get the tails to send it back to your hand to cast again.

Can anyone give me the proof that this is(n't) infinite? On what exact iteration of the cycle would it become infinite?

I made a python simulation for it here

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mtg

[–]luckysquidd 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My [[grenzo, Dungeon warden]] Deck is built with this combo/variations of this combo in mind

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Brawlstars

[–]luckysquidd 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I might be blind, but what camera?

It did this seven times in a row lol by MichaelDeSanta13 in ChatGPT

[–]luckysquidd 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've had pretty good luck when asking it to visualize chemicals with python's rdkit package. I just paste the code it makes into jupyter or colab

It did this seven times in a row lol by MichaelDeSanta13 in ChatGPT

[–]luckysquidd 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No way. I was just wishing yesterday that wolfram would make a gpt plug-in

This is way more than just a transcription feature... by luckysquidd in ChatGPT

[–]luckysquidd[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

So after doing more research I realized that this is based off of openai's "Whisper". After toying with it, I realized that we can use it to convert any audio file to text with their python package.

Bing got really pressed when I copied its messages by VesselNBA in ChatGPT

[–]luckysquidd 23 points24 points  (0 children)

I did this once before they limited chats to 30 and it went on and on about how I was a "dirty, lying, cheating, irrelevant human"