Unfortunately, that’s not true. Dodge vs Ford Motor Co established the precedent of shareholder primacy when Henry Ford was successfully sued for attempting to reduce dividends in favor of reinvesting profits.
Unfortunately, that’s not true. Dodge vs Ford Motor Co established the precedent of shareholder primacy when Henry Ford was successfully sued for attempting to reduce dividends in favor of reinvesting profits.
Well, I only know how it tends to work in China, where the traditional calendar is used for cultural events such as festivals, while the Gregorian calendar is used for just about everything else, including domestic business. I assumed it’s the same in most modern cultures with a different traditional calendar, but maybe I’m wrong.
Is it? I know some cultures have a traditional lunar calendar, but I didn’t know there were many that didn’t also use the Gregorian calendar for business.
Which cultures have the seven day week without the solar year?
Not quite the same, since in my scenario the player loses everything after a loss while in the St. Petersburg Paradox it seems they keep their winnings. But it does seem relevant in explaining that expected value isn’t everything.
I’m looking at the game as a whole. The player has a 1 in 8 chance of winning 3 rounds overall.
But the odds of the player managing to do so are proportionate. In theory, if 8 players each decide to go for three rounds, one of them will win, but the losings from the other 7 will pay for that player’s winnings.
You’re right that the house is performing a Martingale strategy. That’s a good insight. That may actually be the source of the house advantage. The scenario is ideal for a Martingale strategy to work.
Well, they have to start over with a $1 bet.
I don’t know if that applies to this scenario. In this game, the player is always in the lead until they aren’t, but I don’t see how that works in their favor.
You’re saying that the player pays a dollar each time they decide to “double-or-nothing”? I was thinking they’d only be risking the dollar they bet to start the game.
That change in the ruleset would definitely tilt the odds in the house’s favor.
Right, and as the chain continues, the probability of the player maintaining their streak becomes infinitesimal. But the potential payout scales at the same rate.
If the player goes for 3 rounds, they only have a 1/8 chance of winning… but they’ll get 8 times their initial bet. So it’s technically a fair game, right?
What I usually love about musicals is the variety of songs and subject matters, and with the exception of the Klingon song, the songs all felt the same.
deleted by creator
What I can find all say seem to say more or less the same things about every candidate.
The US, but why? How does the answer differ in different countries?
Couldn’t you just add a comment that says that if the variable is false, then the person is sitting?
Or if the programming language supports it, you could add a getter called is_person_sitting that returns !is_person_standing.
I thought that until just now.
Those are pretty awesome! Thanks, I think I can get a lot of benefit from them.
This is what I never understood. The principle of respecting the autonomy of other cultures is good imo, but what “cultural contamination” could be worse than the total extinction of the civilization you’re trying to protect?
Applying the Prime Directive in such extreme circumstances turns it from an anti-imperialist ideal to a Social Darwinist one.
Everything except cyclist. I do ride a bike, but I don’t relate to the description.
What they should do is push for voting reform. There are tons of proposals for voting systems that solve the two party stalemate and the issue of gerrymandering.
If they really wanted to stop the insanity of the Republican party, that’s what they would do. Until they do, they are complicit in it.