Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Subject: Re: Testing random
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2015 00:09:18 +0200
Organization: PointedEars Software (PES)
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <4021290.WxLfFvsQIG@PointedEars.de>
References: <87oaksowwg.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> <1451048.pW9z17ilMA@PointedEars.de> <mailman.242.1433677915.13271.python-list@python.org> <3158703.Lr4HFMbMOd@PointedEars.de> <mailman.257.1433694323.13271.python-list@python.org> <1656356.OjxBvjpJ5d@PointedEars.de> <mailman.259.1433695485.13271.python-list@python.org> <5515034.V7dcXEWAvK@PointedEars.de> <lf5sia3bakh.fsf@ling.helsinki.fi> <1583276.2lplL8rY5W@PointedEars.de> <lf5r3pmejgh.fsf@ling.helsinki.fi> <16299015.icEhCTIHP8@PointedEars.de> <mailman.354.1433959416.13271.python-list@python.org> <1481051.eNy53rHVEB@PointedEars.de> <mailman.442.1434146468.13271.python-list@python.org>
Reply-To: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <usenet@PointedEars.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit
X-Trace: solani.org 1434147135 28661 eJwFwYEBwDAEBMCVCE+Nk3j2H6F3sNDo9EA4Fju32aUHNbpJ8ilMnljRvFys4Wf2o9wMT/4rAhEu (12 Jun 2015 22:12:15 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@news.solani.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 22:12:15 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: KNode/4.14.2
X-User-ID: eJwNyMEBwEAEBMCWcFYo57Lov4RknoMTGnw8EI7FOpMiUDY32SJ9RUdHaH7GodmBjWvG3NICJ/st88l/r35fdxXk
Cancel-Lock: sha1:s/Snsia1A8oJ7T0ObwfyxwbTRng=
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: eJwNyMkBwCAMA7CVQrFNGIcj3n8EqqfY1XQGRIGm81Q18Ip3r6W5dnjD2aAaOZCOwET+AfPrDyjcELM=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:92559

Ian Kelly wrote:

> […] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn […] wrote:
>> Ian Kelly wrote:
>>> The probability of 123456789 and 111111111 are equal. The probability
>>> of a sequence containing all nine numbers and a sequence containing
>>> only 1s are *not* equal.d
>> There is a contradiction in that statement.  Can you find it?
> 
> Yes. I phrased my statement as if I were addressing a rational
> individual, in clear contradiction of the current evidence.
> 
> Seriously, if you reject even the statement I made above, in spite of
> all the arguments that have been advanced in this thread, in spite of
> the fact that this is very easy to demonstrate empirically, then I
> don't think there's any fertile ground for discussion here.

/Ad hominem/ when out of arguments.  How typical.

Do you deny that “123456789” *is* “a sequence containing all nine numbers” 
(digits, really), and that “111111111” *is* “a sequence containing only 1s”?

Do you deny that therefore your second sentence contradicts the first one?

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.