Yeah, but you originally made that choice on a 30% chance.
The argument goes that you are statistically more likely to win if you switch, because you're now dealing with a 50% versus the original 30%

Which is all shit as they have studied this. Most people switch, most people lose.
( Kroney, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 15:53, 2 replies, latest was 13 years ago)

no...

(PsychoChomp, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 15:54, Reply)

Oh, I don't know, then

( Kroney, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 15:56, Reply)

He'll never solve the Kobayashi Maru at this rate

( Light In Chains maker of the ikea sofa, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 15:56, Reply)

Nah, I just need to cheat

( Kroney, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 15:57, Reply)

the real answer is fuck 'em i'll leave them there

( Light In Chains maker of the ikea sofa, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 15:59, Reply)

I'd haxx the programme to give my photon torpedoes a 500% increase in yield
Then wade into the Klingon ships with a scarf wrapped around my eyes with a cardboard tube poking out chanting "I AM THE GREATEST I AM THE GREATEST I AM THE GREATEST" as I popped each ship with one torpedo.

Then when the examiner asked me wtf I thought I was doing cheating so blatantly, I'd reply with

"No, YOU'RE beautiful".
( Kroney, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 17:14, Reply)

"Kirk unit will disclose the information."

(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 16:00, Reply)

Pick a box, you have 1/3 chance of getting the car 2/3 of not getting it.
They then eliminate 1 of the options so, you have a 1/3 chance of your box being right and a 2/3 of the other being right.
(PsychoChomp, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 15:59, Reply)

I can't see how the original choice is relevant

( Naked Ape call me Caitlyn, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 16:00, Reply)

Imagine you pick box 1
That means you don't pick box 2 or 3, think about 2&3 as "not box 1"
An incorrect box say 2 is then removed.
So your choice is box 1 or box 3, but it's better to think about it as box 1 or "not box 1" which givs you the 1/3rd chance of it being box 1 and a 2/3rd chance of being "not box 1" which is box 3
(PsychoChomp, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 16:05, Reply)

Or think of it as box 1 or 3
and your have a 50/50 chance
( Naked Ape call me Caitlyn, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 16:07, Reply)

Well you can think of it like that but you'll be wrong.

(PsychoChomp, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 16:07, Reply)

i can se the logic to your solution
however it feels like clever maths rather than actual real world fact
( Naked Ape call me Caitlyn, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 16:11, Reply)

It's a real world fact that has been proven by repeately opening boxes.

(PsychoChomp, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 16:12, Reply)

I AGREE WITH CHOMPY

( Peej, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 16:21, Reply)

no, statistically it's entirely correct
the problem is that it only works if you assume that the questionmaster didn't know there would be goats behind door 2. Once you accept that if it were a real world problem there would be knowledge on the part of the questionmaster then the odds are meaningless
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 16:24, Reply)

It works because at the point you chose your box you had a 2/3 chance of being wrong
when they remove one of the wrong boxes you still have the same chance of being wrong but because they have removed an incorrect box you have a 2/3 chance that the other box is right.

You see?
( Peej, Wed 20 Jun 2012, 16:26, Reply)