

And it’s not like the books changed. Just the people reading them.
And it’s not like the books changed. Just the people reading them.
Is there anything about how they originated upon this method?
I haven’t seen anything about this method specifically, but Marsaglia was a mathematician who studied randomness his entire career, so I assume it came about from that.
The George Marsaglia mental pseudorandom number generator method:
If you chart the results using a spreadsheet you can see a weak pattern emerge but it’s not easily human-predictable, which is what makes it useful to me.
It’s the ratio.
People will swim in the sea, even though it has corpses in it. They won’t swim in a swimming pool if it has corpses in it. It’s the corpse/water ratio that makes the difference. In your case it looks like a seagull/seaside-proximity ratio.
Hey, I just realised that if Brownian motion carries all the water molecules away together, I won’t need a towel after my shower.
Sorry, what? Your point? I suppose not.
But is IA a real thing, or just an implicit bias towards dualistic thinking? What if not everything has its opposite?
Getting every group to do one thing together is harder than you think.
Are you an AI? Operating from some kind of faulty code base? Is that why you take the question seriously?
Would I know if I was?
No. It encourages people to game the system instead of honestly engaging.
How many people go days without drinking tap water?