Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Well, if your score is .4, a computer could predict you with .6 accuracy just by predicting what you will press and then guessing the opposite :)


but how does it know to use the opposite for him and not for other guesses? I make a similar mistake when I try to remember something by noting "it's not the choice I'm naturally inclined to choose, it's the other one". After I get used to using that heuristic, the correct choice becomes the one I'm naturally inclined to do, but then I have trouble remembering "is it the choice I'm inclined to do or the opposite". I've since ditched that heuristic when I realize I'm doing it because it is quite detrimental.


That's the trouble with game theory-like heuristics. To a layman like me it's unclear how many times do you want to recursively apply it.

The 2/3 of the average guess game is an interesting illustration where if you take the game theory approach and recursively apply it you'll end up with 0 all the time: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guess_2/3_of_the_average


I think this more just highlights the problem of trying to predict behavior when there are only two options.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: