sees_all1

And you're bound to win the lottery if you keep buying tickets, right? Well if you bought billions of tickets the odds are pretty good. Sure, but you'd be out billions of dollars. The probabilities of events like this occurring are so astronomically small they approach zero, so that nothing is "bound to happen". If the probability was any larger I'd expect to see evidence of another intelligent species on earth, another planet supporting life, aliens or what not. It doesn't boil down to just the position of the earth and the size of our sun, it also comes down to physical constants such as the speed of light, the charge of an electron, the gravitational pull between two objects. If any of those were slightly different, the entire universe would have been a different outcome.

And you're bound to win the lottery if you keep buying tickets, right?

how many times did you run dungeons with them?

Last night I killed 129 rev imps. 82 dropped nothing, 47 dropped coins (averaging less than 100 coins per drop).

$7.95 for a 30 day card at walmart. Can buy with cash, no credit card required.

I've never seen a corrupt dragon drop from a high level rev, only 2 from low levels so far (witnessed about 200-300 kills, 70% were low level (75 or less) though).

The name calling isn't necessary. Oh sorry Mr. Safety Patrol, are you going to tell the teacher on me? If someone wasn't to "be called a name" then they don't need to be jerks themselves. Plenty of people care we can only stake 40k on f2p, and just because he's not one of them doesn't give him an excuse to be all pissy. You're allowed to trade an unlimited amount outside of staking, so I don't see why an arbitrary 40k limit matters to you there. There's also this great place called the wilderness, where you get everything your opponent risks when they die. You're also allowed to compare inventories, so if they're taking a teleport you don't have to fight them. That allows way more than 40K, and if you can't be creative enough to get around it then maybe you should just pay the $8/month and buy membership? Remember, staking for F2P was only introduced AFTER the wilderness was shut down, so you're actually better off now than you were back then.

Not all of us have 1+ million rc tokens. :wink:

Seems that the probability of a good drop is the same regardless of the level of the rev. One in the clan got a CD Battleaxe from a lvl 22 goblin, I got a CD spear from a level 30 something... Also looks like the probability for a corrupt drop is 1:100, and 1:50ish for a statuette.

Purdue shut down today, which is funny because we only got about a couple inches last night. The heavy schtuff comes in about six hours (well after the school day has ended), expecting another ten inches.

Thoughts? Who cares. Can anyone confirm that green dragons are P2P only? Seems last time they introduced a wilderness area, a few P2P monsters (hellhounds) became F2P too.

Eh?

Social networking happened. There was a protest organized on Facebook, I believe everything was peaceful until their internet plug was pulled. Egypt has been an ally to the US for a while now, its unclear if this dictatorship topples if the new system will be friendly or not. I think the US (er, and Israel) right now is damned if they intervene, damned if they don't.

I can't believe how hard you're trolling right now. Because of what I think will happen. You can test it in a very simple way, and you know that.

The difference between my assumption and your assumption is one is impossible to test, the other isn't. When an assumption can't be tested, its beyond the realm of math or science, and becomes philosophy or religion.

If God did not allow Adam and Eve to chose something other than Him, there wouldn't be free will. I don't think that answers your question though, so let me try something different: At the start of the day, you have a choice of what pants to wear, what shirt to wear, and what hat to wear. You can chose to wear red, blue, or green in each of those garments. The final outcome is what you look like for today. You have 27 possibilities of outfits, red pants, red shirt, red hat; red pants, red shirt, blue hat; red pants, red shirt, green hat; (etc). You chose some set of pants, shirt, and hat. You go about your day, and your day is influenced by what you're wearing. At the end of the day, you know how your day went (good or bad, somewhere in between). God already knew the choice you were going to make at the beginning, and how your day was going to because of that. What God also knew was the outcome of your day had you have chose any other of the 26 possible sets, something that is difficult to comprehend or even imagine. Whats even more mind boggling is that not only did God know the outcomes for you, He knew the outcomes for everyone since the beginning of time, in a massive decision tree. God knows the answer to every possible "what if" The important thing to take away from this is that even though God knows everything about everything simultaneously, and everything about all what ifs, God didn't chose any of them. God may know if we truly desire Him and if we'll be with Him in the end, but He doesn't make our decision, and since we don't know the outcomes of our actions it is enough.

What makes you assume that I'm the only special case for your gunshot hypothesis? Because you want me to disprove your hypothesis? Troll harder next time. What do you mean what MAKES me assume it? It is a fundamental belief of mine. What makes a mathematician believe that 0!=1? Nothing. It is an assumption we make to build upon the system. So since my shooting hypothesis and the field of mathematics both boil down to fundamental assumptions, they are both equally respectable. Everyone! Hear this! According to wep, I can't be killed by a gunshot wound to the head! Don't I feel special.

What makes you assume that I'm the only special case for your gunshot hypothesis? Because you want me to disprove your hypothesis? Troll harder next time.

Who are you to call it stupid? It makes sense to me. I know in my heart that that prediction is the truth. You can't disprove me and therefore our ideas should be treated with equal warrant. Alright, so let me point a gun to your head and shoot you. No objections? This is YOUR head we are talking about. It is my belief that a gun pointed to YOUR head will not fire and kill you but instead cause you to finally find your true love. Don't bring my head into it, my head is completely different from yours. Because your beliefs only apply to one specific person, and not the entire population? That makes sense. :rolleyes: You asked me why I don't want a gun pointed to my head, I answered. You still can't prove or disprove the axiom of non-triviality, but you assume it to be correct all the same. Oh by the way, this axiom directly contradicts the idea of a big bang (making the idea much more relevant than your crazy gun hypothesis).

Who are you to call it stupid? It makes sense to me. I know in my heart that that prediction is the truth. You can't disprove me and therefore our ideas should be treated with equal warrant. Alright, so let me point a gun to your head and shoot you. No objections?

Yes it does, assumptions I cannot prove. But I believe them to be correct. I don't believe anyone has ever made the assumption that a magical force in the universe will always keep them alive. Its a stupid assumption, because millions of people die every day. Even in religion, death is certain.

You're wrong though. I can assign a weight assignment, statistically speaking the probability that each of the events are going to occur, and sum them. If you hold a gun up to my head, and pull the trigger, one of several things may happen: Case 1 - There is no bullet in the gun. Case 2 - There is a bullet in the gun. In Case 1, there is some percentage that you forgot or just didn't put a bullet in the chamber. This outcome is negative, no positive. If you pulled the trigger, I'd be freaked out and jumpy, emotionally distraught with good reason. Even if I had no emotion this case at best is neutral. In Case 2, there are two more cases. Case 2.1 - The bullet is a dud, Case 2.2 - The bullet goes off. I can find the probability that the bullet is a dud through repeat testing, in fact most bullets are rated this way. 2.1 is slim to none. The outcome in 2.1 is the same though as in 1, and I'd be freaked out. Negative outcome, neutral at best. In Case 2.2, there are several more cases. 2.2.1 - Your aim sucks, and you miss. 2.2.2 - You shoot me. What's the probability you miss? Don't know, but the outcome is the same as 2.1, and its Negative, neutral at best. In 2.2.2, there are even more cases. Case 2.2.2.1 - I survive with half my face being blown off Case 2.2.2.2 - I die. Both of those to me are negative, in the extreme. You argue that there might be more cases, some of which are "positive," for some people. If you ask those people if they want to be shot in the head, they may say yes, but they'll have different reasons (like they're tripping on acid). When you sum up the probabilities multiplied by their expected results (positive or negative), the expected result is grossly negative. You don't even have to make a guess at the probabilities for any one of those outcomes, all the expected results for each probability are negative. There is absolutely no positive for me to be shot in the head, which is why without having ANY certainty in the matter at all, I can tell you I don't want you to hold a gun to my head and shoot. I don't see how that example, with a thousand or more variables, is the same saying there is no proof for the axiom against triviality. Why does it upset you that math, at it's very core, is a set of large assumptions?

That mean public, private, and clan are turned off? I generally hide public, and don't respond to anyone in my immediate surroundings. So much fun when someone thinks you're AFK, only to find out that you hit 350+

I see that statement as, "We don't have a better explanation, but when we get one we'll believe it." Alright, that's fine as it is, but I see far too many atheists that are condescending to people who already have a belief, especially the atheists with a view that is more or less "You're wrong until you can prove it with absolute certainty." They hold that latter view on religion, but hold the ideas and theories from math and science above all else. As I've shown, there are aspects of math (and by extension science) that cannot be proved or disproved, which make them very similar to religion.

Ohaithere. Only if your stats are near max. The biggest difference between a rev. and a pker is one will respond when you call them a safer, the other won't.