For a passing grade - the easy way to calculate it is by calculating the chance of failing and then subtracting it from 1. To fail, you need to get the first two questions wrong (3/4 times 3/4) and then get them both wrong again on the second try (2/3 times 2/3 since you are choosing from the remaining 3 choices for each). So 3/4 x 3/4 x 2/3 x 2/3 = 1/4 or 25%, so you have a 75% chance of passing.
The simple version of the answer is: each question has a 1/4 chance of getting right, and since they’re independent and you can mark two answers you have 2/4 or 1/2 of getting each correct, which gives you a combined chance of 25% for the entire test. The correct analysis is the combination of chances of:
First time you picked a wrong answer on both (3/4 * 3/4) and second time you eliminated one answer from each and picked the correct one (1/3 * 1/3): 6.25%
First time you picked both right, so didn’t need the second time: 6.25%
First time you picked the first one right, but the second one wrong (1/4 * 3/4) and second time you picked the correct one on the second one (1/3): 6.25%
Same as above but for the second question: 6.25%
Which is also 25% btw, the other analysis is also correct, it’s just an alternate problem with the same chances as this one.
Edit: sorry, didn’t read the part about getting one question right would be a passing grade, so that’s easier, to get a non passing grade you need to mark wrong both questions the first time (3/4 * 3/4) and mark both wrong the second time around (2/3 * 2/3) any other combination provides at least one correct answer, this has a 25% chance, so you have a 75% chance of getting at least one question right.
Yes, I took that into consideration, those are my scenarios 1 (0% on the first try), and 3 and 4 (both with 50% on the first try). Scenario 2 has 100% in the first try, thus accounting for all the possible ways to get to 100% in up to two tries.
An unknown factor is if you even get to make a second try at getting 100% if you already passed with 50% on the first test. If it is possible to redo a passed test, I still find it unlikely that anyone would do so given that they know that they don’t know the answers.
Including the edit that you’re not told which one was right in the first attempt with a 50% score, it makes a lot more sense to accept the first 50% pass. Choosing different answers for the second try would only give the maximum score of 50% again, while choosing completely random answers again would only give the same chance as the first attempt, in which 0% is still more likely than 100%
Similarly, if you do get 100% on the first attempt, why’d you want to try again… a lot of the answers here calculate the overall statistics when using both attempts regardless.
Killing a billionaire would reduce carbon emissions more than anything else I could personally do, so let’s start there and see how it goes. We can talk about me giving things up when those efforts won’t be undone by some asshole flying to Chamonix for the weekend or whatever those fucks are doing.
Yeah the old lie that we are all in it together and should try our best was, yeah, a lie, and some just took all our efforts.
There shouldn’t be billionaires, it’s a morally wrong concept. Money is not meant for hoarding.
We could just confiscate everything over 100 millions and they’d probably wouldn’t even notice. An upper limit of 10 millions seems fair, until no one starves on the planet, have access to health care, education.
And no heritages. Get your money as everybody else.
An upper limit of 10 millions seems fair, until no one starves on the planet, have access to health care, education.
I actually really like this idea. They all seem to have some sort of God complex, so let’s put them to the test. You provide clean drinking water to everyone, you unlock another 50 Mil to your cap. Feed the world, you unlock more to your cap. You get the idea.
I’d additionally like to propose a change to corporate tax code. Any full-time employees at your company that are on food stamps or other financial hardship support programs have 2x the cost that the government pays for those benefits added directly to the company’s overall tax bill as a final adjustment. The adjustments will not be deferrable or offset by any other portion of tax code. If your company cannot pay those adjustments, your company now belongs to the government.
I am very fucking sick of companies socializing their losses to the rest of the country and keeping all the profit for themselves.
IIRC from my one stats class almost a decade ago, the math is pretty simple. If it’s truly a random guess then you have a 25% chance to get each question right, all you have to do is multiply them. (0.25)(0.25)=0.0625, you have a 6.25% of getting a 100. The other option to get a 50 is (0.25)(0.75)=0.1875, 18.75%. So there is a 75% chance of failing both.
If you get a second chance and can remember your two wrong answers, each problem now has only three options. To get each right, (0.33)(0.33)=0.1089, 10.89% chance. To get one right, (0.33)(0.67)=0.2211, 22.11% chance. 67% chance of failing both a second time.
Something is amiss with my logic/math here but I’m too tired and am going to sleep now. With this logic, failing both the first time would be (0.75)(0.75)=0.5625 56.25%, the %s don’t add up to 100% so someone please correct me lol
Edit 2: thanks for the corrections everyone, I forgot that the order does matter in this equation
Your calculations to get 100% are right but you are off for the 50% and. You are only considering one specific outcome. But it doesn't matter if the first question is wrong or the second so the chance is 0.250.75+0.750.25 which is 37.5 or double your answer. We can double check it by looking at it from the other direction.
The chance of failure is 0.75*0.75= 56.25%.
So there is a 43.75% of passing the first go around. Split between a 6.25% to get 100 and 37.5% to get 50.
Same mistake for the second calculations. 44.22% is the chance to get 50%
There are a couple of errors, that I could spot, but I just woke up so my math might also be wrong hahaha.
(0.25)(0.25)=0.0625, you have a 6.25% of getting a 100.
Correct
The other option to get a 50 is (0.25)(0.75)=0.1875, 18.75%.
Almost, that’s only true if the first one is the one you get right, but you can also get the second one right (3/4 * 1/4), meaning that it’s double your answer, or 37.5% chance of getting at least one right.
So there is a 75% chance of failing both.~
56.25% as per above
~If you get a second chance and can remember your two wrong answers, each problem now has only three options. To get each right, (0.33)(0.33)=0.1089, 10.89% chance.
That assumes you got both wrong the first time around.
To get one right, (0.33)(0.67)=0.2211, 22.11% chance. 67% chance of failing both a second time.~
Same as above, also same as getting the second one right.
Yes. I did it myself, configurable duration. Three sets of parallel color values…
I’ve almost posted on Lemmy before, but the script is too long (the variable RGBs drive the length)… It is absolutely possible. Starts white, moves gold, peach, pink, red, then blue. Brightness subsides with time and sun’s position.
I use home assistant to make it happen. The software is free and an RPi4B+ doesn’t break most banks.
Before you ask your boss anything, figure out where do you want to go? And I don’t just mean in your career.
Then from that figure out, what does your ideal career trajectory look like in the next few years?
Do you want to be an L2? a sysadmin? DevOps? Do you want to keep working for an MSP, or maybe into a company with a dedicated IT team. Also consider if your tech career progression isn’t the most important thing, maybe it’s family, maybe it more time for a hobby, that’s ok too.
When you have a clear picture of what you want to do, communicate that and ask what you can do for the company that also helps move you toward that goal.
They probably won’t be moving you into your target role immediately, but any decent manager will help you move towards your goals, with training, mentoring, or other opportunities for skill building.
Some bosses are shitty and will try to keep you in roles that are the best for them, These bosses usually respond with a focus on your flaws, they will tell you why you’re not ready for whatever the next step is and offer no support or guidance to help you change whatever they cite. If you have a boss like that, start looking for another job.
Keep in mind the company has their own goals, you need to be prepared to be flexible they’re not going to move you into a role they don’t need. But as long as your manager isn’t a total dick, they’ll move you as close towards your goal as they can within the limits of the company’s goals.
Especially in this field it’s pretty common to need to move to another company to keep moving towards your goals. If you haven’t progressed to a new level within a year or two start applying for L2 role (or whatever else you want) at other companies.
Groceries were still doing this into the early ‘90s, but it wasn’t free anymore. It was just earning a discount on an encyclopedia volume every week.
They also used to give away silverware sets a piece at a time. You could also get dishrags or drinking glasses in boxes of powdered detergent. And then there were S&H green stamps.
We have similar freebies now, but it’s “join our loyalty points program and earn” or credit card points. Kohls cash, gas discounts, etc.
I got a complete set of dishes, settin for six, from grocery rewards as recently as the early 2000’s. It was from Safeway I think. Not long after that they did cookware, and I got a few pieces before they stopped the program.
I eventually gave away the dishes, but still have the cookware. It’s pretty good stuff.
At first I thought I was reading AI hallucinations talk. Are you saying people used to get whole encyclopedias through rewards programs? And it wasn’t a scam??
It wasn’t a scam at all! They also had specials where you could get dishes and silverware sometimes! My mom still has an entire set of blue willow that came from the grocery store in the 80s lol
That sounds really nice. I sometimes wish I could’ve experienced that 80s-90s glow. Where things really seemed beneficial rather than some big ploy for money. I guess it’s always been about the money, we just stopped hiding the fact at one point. I also don’t mean to simplify things, the past has been unkind to many people.
I remember grandmas house had character, everything in it meant something. Everything in my house is from Amazon.
THE QUESTION in so many ways IMO. But also, for me at least, it misses the point.
For me, so much is about the social. Like, I would have a hard time sacrificing a lot to save humanity from the climate crisis if I knew humanity wouldn’t know that they were saved (they don’t have to know it was me) but just figured the climate problem simply disappeared without learning to manage their problems.
Otherwise, personally, the basic sacrifice that is a no-brainer is to lead a simple, unassuming and arguably (from a materialistic standpoint) boring life. Regarding the climate crisis I’d say I’ve done that most of my life, which I don’t say with pride honestly as it’s about the only thing I’ve done.
Beyond that, if there’s some social buy-in from many to the relevant values etc, I think I’d certainly be willing to risk or end my life for the greater good.
Not that much if I’m being completely honest. I’ve got bills to pay so I’m going to keep driving my truck to work, consuming stuff and buying meat. I’m more than happy to take part in the collective effort however so when the government sets new laws and regulations to fight climate change I just go with it even if it inconveniences me. Up to a point obviously. I just don’t think that my actions as an individual makes any real difference. I’m not going to live more sub-optimal life than what I’m already living only so that I can feel good about being on the moral highground despite knowing it made no difference. I applaud everyone who does but that’s just not me.
The only people who need to sacrifice anything and could solve all of our climate and economic problems by doing so are the billionaires hoarding their wealth and making things worse for everyone else so that they can become even more unfathomably rich every fiscal quarter.
There is nothing that the average person can give up that will do anything to improve things, besides our time, security, safety and potentially our freedom to go out and protest. We use disposable plastic products with wasteful packaging because that’s what companies offer us. And even if you can afford to buy products that are more sustainable, you’re still not putting a dent in the problem and are just funneling even more money to the rich so you can feel better about yourself.
We could have all of our modern conveniences and more while also protecting the planet and treating everyone fairly if it weren’t for the absolute evil of billionaires.
I’ll sacrifice enough of my time to help build the guillotines we’ll need to deal with the root cause of these problems.
In case it’s not apparent already none of these problems are things that can be solved by personal sacrifices of average individual citizens. We need sweeping government and economic reforms if we’re going to do anything except kick the can down the road for another generation or three while the wealthy continue to loot the planet for their own benefit. If anyone needs to make sacrifices right now it’s the 0.01% sitting on top of enough money and influence to solve all of these problems.
asklemmy
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.