Quote from: bibilgin on Today at 04:15:14 PM

Quote from: kTimesG on Today at 03:47:19 PM

The fact that 57% of the range was scanned shows that probabilistic strategies are total BS. For any kind of simplification of a problem, there will always be a counter-part complication, which isn't mentioned just to get some BS headline title.

If there would be any kind of breakthrough on that end, it would mean that, if I think of some random number, there would be some magical way for somebody to guess my number in a faster way than simple guessing, simply by using all sorts of dark science of bit statistics and "deep probabilities", which is outside of the realm of reasonable logic. A random number is a random number.

Again without reading well BLA BLA..

PROBABILITY scanned 57% of the range they determined. This shows how effective the PROBABILITY event is. lol

I have zero interest whether you read or understand my posts. Why are you replying to them, what good does it do to you, or anyone? You have ZERO merit after well a hundred posts, which indicates that if there was a downvote button, your merit would be a triple digit, but with a big minus in front of it. So what are you trying to do, nobody cares about your prefixes, methods, or anything. Well, maybe mcdouglas, but hopefully I already proved to him in a very empirical and practical way what his fallacy was, in trying to somehow ackonwledge your ideas.

Also your last statement makes zero sense. You do realize that brute force / guessing means that after you scan 50% of some range you go above more chances of success than not, right? Actually, I don't need you to respond, so please don't bother.