> as the number of messages in the network rises, the quality of those which propagate falls
... if you assume people don`t read the message at all, but use a coin flip to decide if they should reshape it.
I cannot for the life of me fathom how anyone could make a model that completely ignores content quality in respect to distribution and then use that model to make a statement about average quality of content that gets distributed.
This really is the “sperical cow in a vacuum”equivalent of modeling social networks.
Baldurs Gate taught me to love reading. Also English is my second language, and certainly it had a larger part in me reaching A level than anything my teacher ever did.
We already have quantum computers, at this point that’s not new physics it’s engineering.
And if the well established frameworks don’t settle your thirst for understanding quantum mechanics, thats about philosophy not physics.
It sounds like the dilemma might be that facts support not pushing for a repair, but if they go with that they’ll be butchered by the media and the masses.
Well actually he didn’t do his time. But seems he’s back doing it now. Also what the guy, you are saying we should stop demeaning, was doing was defrauding Musk. Musk himself was of cause also being generally bad in this instance but that doesn’t excuse criminal behavior from the convicted criminal who hadn’t served his time and was committing fraud. I think your hate is misdirected.
Its the largest because its positive, 75% I’m right.
And if we are only looking at positive numbers in an infinite axis I’d need to borrow your generator for a test to approximate its midpoint (which obviously it doesn’t have), which I then weigh against the original number with the logic “if it’s larger than what I got, so is your other number. If it’s smaller so is the other number.” Now since the chance for my number being the middle of the three drawn is 1/3(only case I lose), that gives me 66% chance of winning that bet.
... if you assume people don`t read the message at all, but use a coin flip to decide if they should reshape it.
I cannot for the life of me fathom how anyone could make a model that completely ignores content quality in respect to distribution and then use that model to make a statement about average quality of content that gets distributed.
This really is the “sperical cow in a vacuum”equivalent of modeling social networks.