Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

JasonHise comments on Worse Than Random - Less Wrong

25 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 11 November 2008 07:01PM

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

Comments (99)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: JasonHise 29 April 2015 07:13:34AM 0 points [-]

Cheap locks (like those used for middle school/high school lockers) have about as much variance as Eliezer claims. As horrifying as that may be.

Comment author: Good_Burning_Plastic 29 April 2015 07:18:16AM 0 points [-]

The point is that the two sentences quoted above contradict each other.

Comment author: JasonHise 29 April 2015 10:42:07AM *  0 points [-]

I disagree, a tolerance of 2 in either direction directly implies that starting from the solution you can round all the numbers up by two or round them down by two and the lock will still open.

Edit: To follow up, the original claim in the article was: "20-45-35 will open a lock set to 22-44-33", or in other words, a combination off by "-2, +1, +2" will open the lock.

Comment author: Good_Burning_Plastic 29 April 2015 12:03:22PM 1 point [-]

the original claim in the article was: "20-45-35 will open a lock set to 22-44-33"

Not as Aaron3 quoted it. (I guess EY has edited it since.)

Comment author: JasonHise 06 May 2015 06:27:59AM 0 points [-]

I somehow missed the 33-44 transpose in the quote. That would indeed be a wide variance.