Pineapple Express: Someone Is Wrong on the Internet?

Well, now. But, I grew up in the NYC/Tri-State area.
1740182728396.gif
 

log in or register to remove this ad


It is interesting how much one sees gambler's fallacy in discussions, I mean no matter how many times something is rolled, the odds are the same. Probabilty is just a thing, such as a 1 in 5 chance can happen five times in a row.
Nah, that's why we by cheap dice from from the big discount bin. It isn't just about variety of colors and styles, it is the imperfections that give dice character. You can call me out regarding gambler's fallacy when I'm playing on a VTT with digital rolls or when I use my unreasonably expensive precision dice, but I've still got cheap crayoned-in number dice from the 80's basic set that are well worn and at least one dog chewed. They are still random enough to occasionally need some time on the dice dunce chair, but I know these dice better than you.
 

Nah, that's why we by cheap dice from from the big discount bin. It isn't just about variety of colors and styles, it is the imperfections that give dice character. You can call me out regarding gambler's fallacy when I'm playing on a VTT with digital rolls or when I use my unreasonably expensive precision dice, but I've still got cheap crayoned-in number dice from the 80's basic set that are well worn and at least one dog chewed. They are still random enough to occasionally need some time on the dice dunce chair, but I know these dice better than you.
Ah, yes. The "roll forever" 20 sided.
 

Nah, that's why we by cheap dice from from the big discount bin. It isn't just about variety of colors and styles, it is the imperfections that give dice character. You can call me out regarding gambler's fallacy when I'm playing on a VTT with digital rolls or when I use my unreasonably expensive precision dice, but I've still got cheap crayoned-in number dice from the 80's basic set that are well worn and at least one dog chewed. They are still random enough to occasionally need some time on the dice dunce chair, but I know these dice better than you.
I read a psychology paper where they think we might have the cognitive bias towards thinking things are "lucky."
 
Last edited:

I read a psyche paper where they think we might have the cognitive bias towards thinking things are "lucky."
Yeah, I can see that. I'd be interested if there has been research in why that is? I'm sure it is just part of broader beliefs in luck, but why did that evolve? Is there any evolutionary advantage? It is just a side effect of other cognitive developments? I mean, I can see how certain superstitions, stereotypes, phobias, attractions and taboos have developed. But why "I feel lucky"? Is it just a facet of risk taking? We need mechanism where at least a segment of the population will be willing to take risks. A sense of feeling lucky could facilitate that I suppose.
 


Yeah, I can see that. I'd be interested if there has been research in why that is? I'm sure it is just part of broader beliefs in luck, but why did that evolve? Is there any evolutionary advantage? It is just a side effect of other cognitive developments? I mean, I can see how certain superstitions, stereotypes, phobias, attractions and taboos have developed. But why "I feel lucky"? Is it just a facet of risk taking? We need mechanism where at least a segment of the population will be willing to take risks. A sense of feeling lucky could facilitate that I suppose.
If we did something successful, that it would be lucky (good) to do it again. Sort of like our ancestors that imagined a noise was a tiger in the dark, and ran, were reinforced by that, because if there was an actual tiger, it didn't get them. The ones that didn't imagine the tiger might be there, it got them eventually.
 



Remove ads

Top