<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: donnerdave</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=donnerdave</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 May 2026 22:36:33 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=donnerdave" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by donnerdave in "Are two heads better than one?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>No one commenting on the inaccuracy (or at least imprecision) of the Python output cited in the article??<p>"A:T, B:T - chances -  H  6.0% | T 94.0% | occurs 34.0% of the time"<p>By the simplest of math for unrelated events, the chance of both A & B lying about the coin is 20% of 20%, or .2 * .2 = 0.04, or 4.0% ...<p>The "Let's prove it" section contains the correct analysis, including that our chance of being correct is 80% with two friends.<p>The code output for three players is similarly flawed, and the analysis slight misstates our chance of being correct as 90.0% (correctly: 89.6%).<p>Or am I missing something about the intent or output of the Python simulation?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2026 23:28:05 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46625545</link><dc:creator>donnerdave</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46625545</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46625545</guid></item></channel></rss>