I don't know how to respond to this. I feel like I have addressed all of these points elsewhere in the comments.
A summary:
It seems to be a problem with ownership. If this sense of ownership is based on a heuristic meant to detect cheaters or suspicious situations... okay, I can buy that. But why would someone who knows all of the probabilities involved refuse to admit that cutting the deck doesn't matter? Pride?
One more thing of note: They argued against the abstract scenario. This scenario assumed no cheating and no funny business. They still thought it mattered.
Personally, I think this is a larger issue than catching cheaters. People seemed somewhat attached to the anti-cheating heuristic. Would it be worth me typing up an addendum addressing that point in full?
People seemed somewhat attached to the anti-cheating heuristic. Would it be worth me typing up an addendum addressing that point in full?
Depends, of course, on what exactly you would say and how much unpleasant the writing is for you.
My reputation matters in the sense that they know wasn't trying to cheat. As such, when pestered for an answer they are not secretly thinking, "Cheater." This should imply that they are avoiding the cheater-heuristic or are unaware that they are using the cheater-heuristic.
I would say that they impement the ru...
We've had these for a year, I'm sure we all know what to do by now.
This thread is for the discussion of Less Wrong topics that have not appeared in recent posts. If a discussion gets unwieldy, celebrate by turning it into a top-level post.