The most layman explanation of skill in poker I've heard is this.
Everyone agrees chess is a game of skill. If 2 players played 1,000 games of chess where the winner of each match wins $1. In the end the most skilled player would have the most money.
Take that same scenario except after every 10 matches the players flip a coin and the winner of the coin flip gets $10. Over the long stretch the more skilled player will still end up with the most money. However in the short term it's possible for the less skill player to be ahead because of a few lucky coin flips.
Over simplification I know. However I've used it to try to point out the relevance of skill and luck in poker to people who have no concept of it.
If you read 'Characteristics of Games'[1] or watch some talks[2] by Richard Garfield he elaborates quite a bit on this topic. He uses the example of rando-chess, which is very similar to your example.
Quoting #2 below:
"The toy game example of rando chess is an elegant means of constructing a game with customizable levels of chance. Garfield uses it here to illustrate how skill and chance are not opposites. Rando chess is exactly the same as chess, except that, after play has finished, the winner is reversed with probability 1/6. Rando chess, with any probability (<0.5) of reversal, would universally be agreed upon to involve more chance than chess, but would involve the exact same strategic considerations as regular chess and hence the exact same amount of skill. Every skill and every strategic concept in chess applies equally to rando chess, and, perhaps modulo tilt control, the best chess players in the world will also be the best rando chess players in the world... it just might take a longer period of play to determine this ranking. If, somehow, chess could only be played as rando chess, what would society think of it? What probability of reversal would make rando chess a game where neither skill nor chance predominates over the other?"
It's hard to use a chess analogy with poker, because poker has a lot more decision points. Winning in poker is about drawing the right money into the pot at the right time through use of deception (and knowing the odds lets you know when the right time is at hand). A game of chess is a discrete unit with a winner and a loser (well, unless it's a draw), but most hands of poker have a single winner and no losers. Folding in poker is more of a strategic withdrawal; if the cards aren't there, the cards aren't there.
That's true also chess is a game where all variables are known, poker is not. So I agree they don't line up well in comparison. Again this was just an oversimplification that just because luck is a part of a game it doesn't mean that skill doesn't play a factor.
I have to agree. I've been using it a while and really like it as well. I agree with what others have said I wish it was open source. I haven't found anything that works as well as it does.
I use SpiderOak for all my cloud backups. I've been using BTSync to keep my cell phone photos backed up to my desktop and then that folder gets backed up to SpiderOak. So far it has been working well.
First impressions are good. Looks clean, I like auto complete. I also like the autocomplete for shortcuts (!).
I've set it as my home page (was already using ddg for my main search).
Is there a way to turn off the links at the bottom under the search? Set as homepage, etc? I keep mousing over them and the popups are distracting. I understand why they need to be there for new users.
I'm familiar with proof of work and how it works within a blockchain to secure blocks.
I keep hearing about prof of stake. I'm very interested in it, however I haven't found an explanation that clearly explains to me how it works. I've looked at the Wiki article and read a little about Peercoin. Do you know of any article, video or source that may help explain exactly how proof of stake works?
If you haven't read the peercoin whitepaper[1], it may get you a bit closer to an understanding. That being said, I still don't have a solid grasp of exactly how coins destroyed results in solving blocks...
Thank you! I can't believe I missed it and didn't think to check for a white paper for this. Especially since that's what really cleared up bitcoin's proof of work blockchain to me.
I completely agree. I emailed Amazon a while back because there was an add on item I really needed but could not buy. I understand they can't ship it free. That's fine, but like you said there was literally no way for me to purchase it and pay shipping. That's insane. They should make sure there's always a way for the customer to purchase something.
I also feel the SmartPost shipping is a broken promise. SmartPost almost always turns out to be 3 day shipping. 2 days from Amazon to the post office, then 1 day from post office to me.
I'm glad to see he's transferring to hover.com. I moved my domains there a little over a year ago and couldn't be happier. I didn't have issues with NS but had a lot of issues with Register.com doing shady things like this.
Hover.com is about first domain registrar I've used that didn't feel shady as far as milking every last dollar they could out of me. Trying to up sell, etc.
I agree. The few domains I have there, I'm really happy about. I love how it really focuses on domains first.
However, with the email service, google apps, and web forwarding, I'm a little concerned they'll start up-selling ssl, hosting, seo, website builders, etc, etc, etc, etc.
I think it would be hard NOT to do this as a domain registrar given how it probably feels like you're just leaving money on the table by not selling all these other related services.
I liked Namecheap, but have had major issues with their DNS service. you can't switch off of them without downtime. So don't use their dns, otherwise you are locked in. which is kinda shitty.
> I liked Namecheap, but have had major issues with their DNS service. you can't switch off of them without downtime.
That doesn't make any sense. As long as you set up the proper records in your new DNS provider prior to switching nameservers, there'll be no interruption.
It sounds like you switched nameservers first, assuming the records would just transfer over?
Namecheap controls both the domain name settings and the dns (if you use theirs). The moment you switch the nameservers for the domain, they immediately purge the records from their DNS.
So, when you point to new nameservers, anyone pointing to namecheap's dns during propagation will get SERVFAIL.
It sounds absurd... but I've gone back and forth with support about it, with no solution.
Interesting tip. I'm taking away the fact that I should transfer the nameservers away immediately after buying/transferring a domain (for Cloudfront, I presume?). Other than that, and ColdFusion hacks aside, my experience with them has also been fantastic.
Seconded. They are a bit more expensive, but to me it's worth it. On the negative side their control panel is subpar, but there are tutorials to side-step that.
I'll jump on the Gandi bandwagon. Great customer service, communications when things go down, support for IPv6 and DNSSEC, an easy-to-understand API, reasonable prices. I am really happy with them. Just transferred the last of my domains from GoDaddy last month, and I'll be off Dotster before the end of this month. (I left Network Solutions a long time ago, and good riddance.)
That is certainly true and one major facet to the problem.