Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 2, 2016, 11:40 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

New member, breaking ice!

Topic closed. 18 replies. Last post 4 years ago by helpmewin.

Page 2 of 2
51
PrintE-mailLink

United States
Member #128790
June 2, 2012
5431 Posts
Offline
Posted: July 21, 2012, 12:00 am - IP Logged

random events may be independant of each othe such as in the lottery, but i could easily make a lot of money tonight alone, betting with friends on things I know for sure will not show in tomorrow's drawings. I would make a killing.

didn't say it was easy to win with that knowledge in regular wins in the real world, but explaining how random events could be advantageous despite what the universities teach.

    AlgorithmGuru's avatar - avatar
    Pittsburgh, PA
    United States
    Member #130598
    July 20, 2012
    37 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: July 21, 2012, 2:21 am - IP Logged

    Welcome  AlgorithmGuru, glad to have another programmer around. Especially one with a lottery picker. I hope your lottery picker is better than the last programmer with a lottery picker, because his lottery picker never picked anything "better" than 4+1 playing 175,000 lines per draw. It was more like a "how to lose clinic" lottery picker. Just sayin, I how hope your lottery picker is "better" than his lottery picker. Lets see what you got. We are all waiting with great anticipation.

    LOL..  I'm not sure yet how to read this... I almost grasp a hint of sarcasm, but I'm not sure as I don't know anyone yet.  From some of the forums I read,  many people seem to have a grasp of at least one basic programming language, or the concepts behind it.  So "another" programmer, may not be so great a thing, (as seen by the abundant wins the lottery has been complaining about.... *hint - THAT was sarcasm. ;)*).  However, I also noticed in my digging a lot of people seem to be working on big jackpot based lottery games.  I on the other hand have no grandiose schemes.  As a matter of fact I'm focused solely on the daily pick 3 (called the daily number) for my state(PA).  The reason of course boiling down to simplicity.  I don't expect the lottery to make me a millionaire (although I wouldn't compalin ;)).  I would like to be able to find a deterministic way of boiling down non-deterministic events in such a way as that is creative and could lead to lucrative work in real world fields that have problems in these areas... (Think logistics and encryption).  For me it goes back to the science of quantam particles.  We may not be able to determine with accuracy exactly where a specific particle will hit a "target", but if we can make the target as small as possible then we are getting somewhere.  My goal is to get the "target" of the lottery down from a 100squared box (or a thousand potential "marks") to a target say of a size .... of 25 square.  Considering the payout's vs the monetary investment, if that were possible then it would be profitable.  Such a big "if".  Even if I can't reduce the target size down that far, the act of playing with algorithms is enough of a distraction for me and a learning tool.  In the end, it's an experiment whose results are of no consequence in and of themselves.  (Unless it works extraordinarily well in which case.... $$)  But the exercise has its own rewards.  That being said, I'm far away from finding the algorithm none the less programming it.  I have a program half built, but I've hit a few road blocks so I'm scrapping it and starting over.  It may be a while before I have anything to submit.  But I'll let ya know!  :)  Thanx for all the warm welcomes.  I look forward to agreeing to disagree with many people and agreeing and disagreeing in kind.  Cheers, ciao and good luck!

      rdgrnr's avatar - walt
      Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
      United States
      Member #73904
      April 28, 2009
      14903 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: July 21, 2012, 3:17 am - IP Logged

      Welcome  AlgorithmGuru, glad to have another programmer around. Especially one with a lottery picker. I hope your lottery picker is better than the last programmer with a lottery picker, because his lottery picker never picked anything "better" than 4+1 playing 175,000 lines per draw. It was more like a "how to lose clinic" lottery picker. Just sayin, I how hope your lottery picker is "better" than his lottery picker. Lets see what you got. We are all waiting with great anticipation.

          Big Grin Wink Yes Nod Thumbs Up

        helpmewin's avatar - dandy
        u$a
        United States
        Member #106665
        February 22, 2011
        19727 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: July 21, 2012, 4:49 am - IP Logged

        LOL..  I'm not sure yet how to read this... I almost grasp a hint of sarcasm, but I'm not sure as I don't know anyone yet.  From some of the forums I read,  many people seem to have a grasp of at least one basic programming language, or the concepts behind it.  So "another" programmer, may not be so great a thing, (as seen by the abundant wins the lottery has been complaining about.... *hint - THAT was sarcasm. ;)*).  However, I also noticed in my digging a lot of people seem to be working on big jackpot based lottery games.  I on the other hand have no grandiose schemes.  As a matter of fact I'm focused solely on the daily pick 3 (called the daily number) for my state(PA).  The reason of course boiling down to simplicity.  I don't expect the lottery to make me a millionaire (although I wouldn't compalin ;)).  I would like to be able to find a deterministic way of boiling down non-deterministic events in such a way as that is creative and could lead to lucrative work in real world fields that have problems in these areas... (Think logistics and encryption).  For me it goes back to the science of quantam particles.  We may not be able to determine with accuracy exactly where a specific particle will hit a "target", but if we can make the target as small as possible then we are getting somewhere.  My goal is to get the "target" of the lottery down from a 100squared box (or a thousand potential "marks") to a target say of a size .... of 25 square.  Considering the payout's vs the monetary investment, if that were possible then it would be profitable.  Such a big "if".  Even if I can't reduce the target size down that far, the act of playing with algorithms is enough of a distraction for me and a learning tool.  In the end, it's an experiment whose results are of no consequence in and of themselves.  (Unless it works extraordinarily well in which case.... $$)  But the exercise has its own rewards.  That being said, I'm far away from finding the algorithm none the less programming it.  I have a program half built, but I've hit a few road blocks so I'm scrapping it and starting over.  It may be a while before I have anything to submit.  But I'll let ya know!  :)  Thanx for all the warm welcomes.  I look forward to agreeing to disagree with many people and agreeing and disagreeing in kind.  Cheers, ciao and good luck!

        welcome  See Ya! AlgorithmGuru.

        Let it Snow Snowman