Next scheduled rescrape ... never
Version 2
Last scraped
Scraped on 21/04/2025, 00:19:38 UTC
At this point, I invite everyone to test it with as many simulations as they wish and to publish it, for a neutral environment.
OK. They did, and the results indicate your prefix method wins in 55.2% of cases, sequential in 40.6%, and ties for the rest.
Now do you understand where your error is? Or do you consider all of these identical results as a valid proof of your theory?
I'll give you a hint: you're running all tests on the same distribution, so obviously you'll get the same results.
You might as well pre-map all the values to their keys and do a lookup to get a 100% to 0% winning method. That's like, the ultimate efficiency for multiple simulations.
Try again?
Version 1
Scraped on 20/04/2025, 23:54:28 UTC
At this point, I invite everyone to test it with as many simulations as they wish and to publish it, for a neutral environment.
OK. They did, and the results indicate your prefix method wins in 55.
Now do you understand where your error is? Or do you consider all of these identical results as a valid proof of your theory?
I'll give you a hint: you're running all tests on the same distribution, so obviously you'll get the same results.
Try again?
Original archived Re: Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it
Scraped on 20/04/2025, 23:49:28 UTC
At this point, I invite everyone to test it with as many simulations as they wish and to publish it, for a neutral environment.
OK. They did, and the results indicate your prefix method wins in 55.6% of cases, sequential in 40%, and ties for the rest.
Now do you understand where your error is? Or do you consider all of these identical results as a valid proof of your theory?
I'll give you a hint: you're running all tests on the same distribution, so obviously you'll get the same results.
Try again?