Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bilow who wrote (548)	12/8/2000 2:42:52 PM
From: Ahda	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

Heuristic ALgorithmic. You just blew it.

To: Bilow who wrote (548)	12/8/2000 3:14:00 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24758

(a) Please define the difference that you would like to find there,i.e., between "odds" and "probabilities". (b) You also neglected to take into consideration the possibility that the 263 to 1 odds were only an approximation of the actual calculated odds. The space of calculation is a finite integer space, so the "odds" which you can't define are exact. (c) You further neglected to mention the likelihood that Clark used a restricted set of possible names, rather than the set of all possible letter combinations. I elaborated on what 'Griff calculated, not on what you are trying to say to give yourself credibility. You already lost that with the 1/2 malarkey. Further, if Clark did use such a restriction, like the "AL" combo, you have refuted your own claim. A natural set would be the ones showing up in the dictionary. Surely there are a lot of different counts for 3-letter words, (likely depending on how many the counter has need of). What is this gibberish?