Recent posts by TheBSG on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

beauval guessed pretty much what my initial assumption was. The correct answer is slightly different, but the logic is pretty much on track exactly.

E: E 100%
E gets 100%.

DE: D 0% E 100%
If D doesn’t give E 100%, E will throw D overboard.

CDE: C 99% D 1% E 0%
If C gives D 1% (or >0%, something), he will vote in favor of C’s 99% to avoid giving E 100% and having %0.

BCDE: B 97% C 0% D 2% E 1%
If B gives E 1% and D 2%, more than they’d have in a 3 person scenario if B is thrown over, so B collects 97% and C can vote however they want.

ABCDE: A 97% B 0% C 1% D 0% E 2%
If A gives C 1% and E 2%, they’d have more than if A is thrown over.

I apologize that I didn’t use the coins. Googling the problem after not having done it in a while, I find a lot of people use at least 50% for a slightly different answer, and that coins are used as a means of avoiding less than and greater than concepts in the bargaining.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

The eldest pirate is not that stupid.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

I don’t really like the theme of this one because it implies that they all honor the rules they set in place here, but they’re willing to kill eachother. It’s better as a game show, but then you have to have really convoluted rules and there’s no obvious analogies in the gameshow.

So no, they will agree to the split no matter what if they vote over 50% in favor of it, regardless of external strategies.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

OVER 50% of votes is needed to succeed in a plan.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

You’re onto the right thinking, but still not exactly there yet. All of the things you’re both saying are correct but you’re not optimizing for the first person. Figure out what happens at all 5 scenarios to figure out what the 5th should do.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

Why would those two divvy it up with the eldest when they can just throw him over?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

This is one of my all time favorite logic puzzles because I thought I had it and was waaaay wrong the first time I heard it.

5 pirates (all of different ages) discover a great wealth of treasure but are fighting over how to divvy it up. They decide that the eldest will propose a split and then everyone votes on it. If more than 50% of the pirates agree, the pot is split this way. If less than 50% agree, the eldest is thrown overboard and the next eldest is allowed to suggest a method and voting takes place again until an agreeable amount can be had.

Assuming all of the pirates do not want to die, want to have as much money as possible, and are rational and highly intelligent, what will happen?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

Sorry, I figured out the problem all excited late at night and I should’ve checked over my math before I posted. Fixed it, thanks Beau. I still like my creative way of solving the alternate rules.

Originally posted by petesahooligan:

Yeah, that’s the gist of the elevator problem. Rainy days he has an umbrella to poke at the 10th floor button. This puzzle does not account for the fact that he always rides the elevator alone.

The Hat Problem (soon to be named the Beating the Dead Horse Problem)

I’m not sure how you’re not getting 100% success.

The structure of the game is critical to its solution.

• The three prisoners are each wearing a blue or a red hat. They can see each other but cannot speak.
• They are only allowed to raise their hand if they would like to wager a guess as to the color of their own hat.

Important: They raise or do not raise their hands in unison. They guess only AFTER they see whom among them have also raised their hands. The result will be that either one of them raises his hand or all three raise their hands. (This reflects the only two possible scenarios; they are either all wearing the same color hat or one of their hats is different than the other two. There is no other possible outcome.)

• They are 100% assured hat-color accuracy if…

–– The prisoner raises his hand only if the cadre’s hats are the same color.

The prisoners are then asked to declare their own hat’s color. They will be correct if:
- All three prisoner’s hands are up, they choose the color of their cadre’s hats.
- If none of their cadre’s hands are up, they choose the opposite color of their cadre’s hats.

That’s it. 100% success.

The 3 players in the puzzle as originally presented must all speak at the same time, or their votes are written on papers and submitted.

I have 2 of my favorites ready to go at home, I’ll post on Monday. The cooperative death games are fun, but I like the competitive money games, myself.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

My wheelchair raises up and I have reachers to push buttons. I am a cyborg. Don’t get too excited and turn this into a transhumanist thread, Vika :P

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

Aaaaah, essentially they don’t know what the others are guessing, as I can still pass information and get the probability down further if there’s an order and they can hear eachother. This was confusing since the last hat puzzle relied on hearing eachother’s guesses.

The correct answer to beuval’s puzzle, given the participants do not know what the other two are guessing, but can see them:

If you see 2 hats of the same color, guess the opposite color.
If you see 2 opposite hats, do not guess.

Uniform Combinations (Failures):
111, 000

Mixed Combinations (Successes):
100, 110, 101, 001, 011, 010

You will survive 3/4th of the time, not 1/2. (Math fixed)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

Rereading the thread, I made some incorrect declarations and overcomplicated the strategy while I figured out the simplest way to do it, apologies for talking past myself. Normally I’ve solved riddles in these kinds of threads before, so it was cool to solve 2 of them.

By the way, is the actual trick for none of them to guess? That was actually what my initial post said, but then I read your post:

Originally posted by beauval:

OK then, more hats. This one’s actually quite easy if you think about it.

They are then told that they can either make a guess as to the colour of their own hat, or they can forfeit their turn. If one man guesses correctly, and there are no wrong answers, they will all be pardonned and set free. Any wrong guesses will see them all hang.

See the bolded “Guess” and “Forfeit” language, implying that one must actually make a guess in order to win, and that everyone forfeiting would mean no correct guesses.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

A: Okay guys, I’m going to forfeit right away. Then B, if I’m wearing the same color as C, you forfeit too. C, if B doesn’t forfeit, guess what color he’s wearing. If B does forfeit, guess what color I am wearing. Go.

1. A1 B1 C1: A forfeits. B forfeits. C guesses 1.
2. A1 B2 C1: A forfeits. B forfeits. C guesses 1.
3. A2 B2 C1: A forfeits. B waits. C guesses 1.

4. A2 B2 C2: A forfeits. B forfeits. C guesses 2.
5. A2 B1 C2: A forfeits. B forfeits. C guesses 2.
6. A1 B1 C2: A forfeits. B waits. C guesses 2.

As you can see, B’s hat color doesn’t matter, his decision to forfeit does. We can combine 1 & 2, as well as 4 & 5. There are two situations, either A and C are wearing the same hat color, or different hat colors. If they’re wearing the same hat color, B forfeits and then C can simply state the hat color of A as their own. If B does not forfeit, C can state the opposite color as A is wearing, providing for all 4 of the scenarios.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

Originally posted by beauval:

Except that B doesn’t get the opportunity. In the case of three red hats, A sees two red hats and chooses blue for himself (using optimal strategy). He is wrong and loses.

… What are you even saying? A never guesses. A always actively states outloud that they’re forfeiting. B’s hat color doesn’t matter. B acts based on A’s hat color and can encode a binary data point in it to inform C of their hat color. Only one person needs to guess correctly. You’re not even addressing the logic in my post that you clearly don’t understand, you’re just insisting that you’re sure if they all had the same colored hats, it’d be a 50/50 chance.

You might have a correct answer that isn’t mine in mind, but my answer solves the problem as it was presented.

My solvency doesn’t even require a B or a C. If B and C don’t forfeit, either can guess the color the other is wearing.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

Yeah I don’t know how to explain it to you any other way, everyone having the same colored hat would not mean the strategy doesn’t work. If B sees that A and C have the same color, he doesn’t say anything. C then knows that his hat is the same color as A’s. If B forfeits, then C knows his hat color is different than A’s.

B’s hat color doesn’t matter, so there are 2^2 permutations, or 4 possible situations they are in.
B only has 2 options, remain silent or forfeit guessing. Because B and C both know whether A’s hat is one color or the other, B can use that to encode the color of C’s hat in his binary decisions.

A1 C1 = B forfeits. C guesses 1.
A2 C2 = B forfeits. C guesses 2.
A1 C2 = B doesn’t act. C guesses 2.
A2 C1 = B doesn’t act. C guesses 1.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

I think you are incorrect, beauval. C would only need to guess that they are wearing what everyone else is wearing, the color is irrelevant. If they were wearing a different color than A and B, then B would’ve determined that.

By the way, Vika: A does not pass, A simply labels herself the standard by forfeiting immediately. Also, there doesn’t necessarily need to be a concept of passing, since there’s no rule about the order of operations, so the ABC architecture is the only reason we actually need passes to explain it. In practice, the next person to speak would either forfeit or guess that they’re the same color as the other two. Not forfeiting is what passing is, and forfeiting is establishing that the last person must answer opposite the standard, or the second person must establish sameness. The only condition this policy relies on is that they are able to discuss prior, but an intelligent party wouldn’t even need to do that, and passing allows even a non-agreeing party to figure it out.

Actually, it really doesn’t matter what color B’s hat is at all. A simply needs to guess the opposite color as A if B forfeits, or the same color as A if B doesn’t forfeit. When there’s no order, either B or C would simply wait to see if either of them forfeited, and if they didn’t, either of them could simply state what color they’re all wearing.

Adendum two: I slightly overcomplicated it. An even simpler rule is: If you see two of the same color, forfeit politely (wait your turn.) If two people forfeit, you’re wearing the same color as them. If only one person forfeits, you’re wearing the opposite color as the person who did forfeit. Same strategy, but opposite rule that simplifies the order of operations and requires less calculating.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

Originally posted by ImplosionOfDoom:

Eh, a normal sized/ tall person marrying somebody with dwarfism isn’t entirely unheard of. Just don’t think about the other implications of that for too long, though. ;)

…. I have sex with normal sized women and I am 3 feet tall.

Originally posted by beauval:

OK then, more hats. This one’s actually quite easy if you think about it.

Three condemned men enter the death chamber. The executioner then tosses a coin three times and places either a red or a blue hat on each prisoner’s head, according to the result of the toss. Each prisoner can see the colour of the other two men’s hats, but not his own.

They are then told that they can either make a guess as to the colour of their own hat, or they can forfeit their turn. If one man guesses correctly, and there are no wrong answers, they will all be pardonned and set free. Any wrong guesses will see them all hang.

What are their chances of survival if they optimise their strategy?

A forfeits. If A and C are wearing different colors, B forfeits, leaving C to guess the opposite color as A. If A and C are the same, B waits. If B waits, and C sees A and B wearing opposite colors, C forfeits and B guesses the opposite color as A. If C sees A and B wearing the same colors, C would guess they are all wearing the same color.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

That is a cool puzzle. It reminds me of the 3 guys standing in a line wearing hats but it’s harder.

A would know it is wearing a blue hat if both B and C were wearing red.
B would also know it is wearing a blue hat if A and C were wearing red.
B would also know it is wearing a blue hat if C is wearing red, since A would have known its hat color if B were also wearing red.
C would know it is wearing blue if B could not determine the color of its hat after A could not either.

I really like it.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Logic Puzzle

That you have selected a door that cannot be removed by Monty, and this door is more than likely not the desired door. Therefore, 2/3 times he must remove the only other bad option, meaning he had to leave the preferred as the other door. Only when you initially selected correctly would switching be bad, and this scenario only happens 1/3rd of the time.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / 3rd death directly related to cannabis "Consumables" in Colorado

.. You can absolutely overdose on Cannabis… You can take more cannabis than you wanted or was intended. This is all the term OD means. Somehow in popular culture that came to mean dying from a drug overdose, which is, as you can tell, grammatically and descriptively broken.

And Cannabis causing cardiac arrest in patients with heart problems is like saying heavy boxes cause hernias. Well, yeah… but.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / 3rd death directly related to cannabis "Consumables" in Colorado

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / 3rd death directly related to cannabis "Consumables" in Colorado

Those aren’t arguments. People die from shit every day that doesn’t kill most of us. At what number of deaths will you start to take shoelaces seriously? It’s tragic for those people. It’s still not an epidemic or a reason to make laws. When it’s statistically significant, you’ll have my support for making new laws.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / 3rd death directly related to cannabis "Consumables" in Colorado

…. Right, we all know that because we’re not stupid. You can OD on coffee, and several people die every year specifically from ingesting caffeine.

It was written on the package that he didn’t read. He operated a firearm under the influence of a psychoactive drug (which he soberly could’ve removed from the situation.) It is his fault. 3 instances of intoxicated deaths doesn’t warrant an epidemic, or stringent measures. The sheer number of people who purchased and ingested cannabis pills in Colorado means that we’re fine.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Confessions of a Feminist: Why I Hate Animangus, And Why America Should BAN it.

I end up defending against generalizations of hip hop, but not because people are wrong about the violence and sexism, but because they’re not giving the type of music credit for where it came from. Early hip hop was incredibly introspective and self critical. They talked about violence and sexism because that’s the culture they survived in. Only when old white money got involved did caricature gangster rap become popular. There was another push towards realism and honesty in rap in the early 2000s, but commercialization and the risk/reward model for producing music changing so much squashed that movement pretty quickly. While I want to talk about the exceptions, the roots, fugees, common, I acknowledge that they hardly represent the vast majority of rap and hip hop. I have to accept the generalization because it’s rather true when we try to quantify these issues. I like the medium of rap and hip hop, and because of that I want to improve the messages and ideas delivered with that medium through introspection and discussion.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Confessions of a Feminist: Why I Hate Animangus, And Why America Should BAN it.

To illustrate my point: Racism is not a typical problem in anime. Racism was a giant problem in the Tex Avery-era of American cartoons. Comic books don’t really suffer from issues of privilege because most of the authors and artists from the golden era were poor liberals. These aren’t just vague generalizations, I’m talking about actual specific problems in these mediums. Anime, by its influences and the state of Japanese culture, portrays many specific problematic issues related to sexuality. Because of Japanese culture and adherence to standardization, art styles haven’t changed much at all. It might be an opinion what things are problematic, but don’t confuse a redress of a large cultural movement with a baseless generalization to make disliking something easier. I enjoy many anime and manga. I still think the overall culture is starved for introspection and I stand by it.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Confessions of a Feminist: Why I Hate Animangus, And Why America Should BAN it.

3+ Edits, sorry.