army1987 comments on Horrible LHC Inconsistency - Less Wrong

17 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 22 September 2008 03:12AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (32)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: [deleted] 10 May 2012 07:51:46PM 1 point [-]

But if you asked me whether I could make one million statements of authority equal to "The Large Hadron Collider will not destroy the world", and be wrong, on average, around once, then I would have to say no.

That's not terribly hard: 1) the first twenty bits in http://www.random.org/files/2012/2012-05-10.bin are not 1011 1001 0011 1011 0100; 2) the 21st to 40th bit in http://www.random.org/files/2012/2012-05-10.bin are not 0110 0100 1001 1110 0101; 3) the 41st to 60th bit in http://www.random.org/files/2012/2012-05-10.bin are not 1101 0010 1010 0110 1111; etc. :-)

Comment author: Dolores1984 10 May 2012 08:04:55PM 1 point [-]

If you tried to spell that out, the odds you'd make a mistake wouldn't be incredibly low.

Comment author: [deleted] 11 May 2012 08:09:32AM 0 points [-]

Right -- though most of the mistakes I can think of would make the statement they're in more likely to be correct (with the exception of omitting the word “not”).