I disagree. The serious answer is you have to be the one person that gets lucky.
Take 1024 people each with $1000. They all play roulette and go all in every round, half on black half on red. After 10 rounds, 1023 people have lost all their money, and one has won a million dollars.
The person who “made it” didn’t do anything different, or play a +EV game. He just got lucky.
Roulette is not a positive sum game, though. If you keep playing, eventually you will lose everything to the house.
A positive sum game is where repeated plays will average out to a net gain. The secret is having enough initial capital to keep you alive if your initial gambles don’t pan out. People living paycheck to paycheck don’t have that
You’re correct, but you’re also being a bit pedantic and ignoring the point OP is trying to make. It still illustrates the point just fine at 47.4% instead of 50%. Odds of winning 10 in a row go from 1:1,024 to 1:1,746.
Not unless you do it outside a golden palace that abstracts your money into vouchers and chips.
But generally wealthy people make more gambles in business, partnership, accountability, other people's lives and social welfare, and the general stability of the world.
Like say becoming an arms dealer then paying the cost of a F-150 economy package to a couple senators and having them spend their endless war chests with no audits or oversight on some missiles to kill some goat farmers or something.
Or creating a pesticide with the upside of remaining active in soil for 4 or 5 centuries (and recycling in the human liver for up to a year after exposure) and having it produced in an impoverished southern town and then exported to French Polynesia so they can continue to grow cloned banana trees.
Or like taking doctors on nice yacht lunches and golf trips and telling them yes you really have developed a non addictive opioid.
For me it was The Boy Who Loved Trolls, The Boy Who Could Fly, Flight of the Navigator and the Rainbow Brite episode/movie that contained this song: youtu.be/zPRWuegS8l8?si=OYJ3x4vSSyWg2eNO
My brother is autistic and this is the type of autistic person who is hated by other autistic people. This is why autistic people hate mentioning it, because they get lumped in with these people.
Wait, this is getting even more interesting. Who is the kind of autistic person that is hated by other autistic people: (a) people that try to be nice about enforcing a no masterbation announcement rule or (b) people that announce they are going to go masterbate? Also, does your brother fall under a, b, or something else?
Autistic people who announce when they’re going to masturbate make all other autistic people cringe for being so incredibly unaware and making the rest of them look weird.
I don’t think anyone was assuming these people were autistic. It’s possible you have a skewed view because you are around an autistic person more that most people.
It’s almost definitely B. Most people on the spectrum would not say “im gonna go masturbate” and those who are would use autism as an excuse for why they behave that way, which is just not valid. Autism can make it harder to behave in a way that is socially acceptable, but not like this, hence why others on the spectrum dont like people like this. They use autism as a sort of sheild to allow them to behave in ways that are just not right. The best example of this i can think of off hand is Chris-Chan, but they are an extreme case of this. Anyways, people like this make it harder to be upfront on the fact that you are on the spectrum, because the first thing that comes to mind will be people like that.
lemmyshitpost
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.