|
On July 31 2009 06:48 Daigomi wrote:
10. Surprising to me. In fact, I don't get how it works... If the earth's diameter is roughly 12,000km (wiki), then surely you can't get a place that's deeper than 6,000km? Supposedly this place is 11,000km deep, so I don't really get it.
It's 11,000 m, not km 
edit: ninja'd 
|
Im surprised at how many people got 0's.. I imagined most people getting at least half =p
I guess i'm overconfident about other ppl's abilities
|
On July 31 2009 07:14 Exteray wrote:
Im surprised at how many people got 0's.. I imagined most people getting at least half =p
I guess i'm overconfident about other ppl's abilities
I think many of the 0:s are people who didn't read op and tried to guess the exact values.
|
These are like Trivia questions anyway.
|
On July 31 2009 07:03 SonuvBob wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2009 06:50 Dazed_Spy wrote:On July 31 2009 06:02 Daigomi wrote:On July 31 2009 05:23 Dazed_Spy wrote:On July 31 2009 05:15 Djabanete wrote:On July 31 2009 04:44 travis wrote:
This was easy because I am not stupid and put gigantic ranges for everything that I didn't know. That means you are hugely underconfident. You might want to consider some self-help books, this can be a real impediment to leading a normal life. Best of luck. Also, read the first page? lol how is this even an issue of confidence? Its an issue of being a blind little twat or seeing reality for what it is. These questions arent taught anywhere. They arent going to be found anywhere in daily life. Almost every single person here should be able to immediately go "hm never bothered to read into this EVER, therefore my chance of answering it correctly is statistically non existent". If you think you can get the answer right despite knowing nothing on the subject, thats not being overly confident, its called a self induced delusion. I'm confident in my ability to reason, thus I answered as Travis did, in a logical rational manner. So the logical rational manner of being 90% sure is choosing an absurd number? How old was MLK when he died... if you're only 90% sure that he was between 1 and 200 years old, then you are underconfident. I wasn't aware that we were allowed to pick a range of his age, I thought we had to pick a specific answer and give a rate of our confidence for it. I.E: My answers [on all] were im 90% sure that I dont know what the answer was. I was right everytime! You're clearly overconfident in your instruction-following abilities. Well...then the test worked out and gave me a good answer anyways, did it not? Just through alternative means! :D
|
On July 31 2009 06:48 Daigomi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2009 06:36 VIB wrote:
I'm amazed at the amount of people taking this test seriously O.O
Oh less than 1% of the people cannot calculate precisely off the top of their head what 90% off something I don't know exactly is. That is sooo shocking. I definitely proved something new and important there. ¬¬ If you didn't look at my profile, and I asked you to guess my age, but provide a minimum and maximum age, would you be able to come up with a range that you'd be 90% sure about? No I wouldn't, no human being possibly would. That is what you're missing. I have no way to calculate if I could be 90% sure of. There are many missing variables. I would have to guess what 90% is. And a guess is just that. A guess. Nothing else. You're trying to read too much into it. If you think you have any slightest idea of what the 90% of something you don't know is then you're over-confident already. And that I'm 100% sure of
Roll a 6-sided dice 10 times and the chance of guessing it right 9 out of 10 times is still less than 1%. This is what the test is accomplishing. The only difference is that the dice size varies randomly from one person to another. I could tell you the results would be less than 1% before anyone did that test, it's not shocking nor surpring nor new nor important nor anything other than a bunch of people being unlucky.
|
Korea (South)17174 Posts
I'm not overconfident. I just know EVERYTHING.
|
lol
this has nothing to do with overconfidence...
these are just random facts to show people they dont know everything
|
I cheated and opened up the answers right away, because I'm not really interested in your confidence intervals, but rather the factual data of the answers 
|
On July 31 2009 05:03 jtan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2009 04:44 travis wrote:
This was easy because I am not stupid and put gigantic ranges for everything that I didn't know. fixed. Read the op again.
On July 31 2009 05:15 Djabanete wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2009 04:44 travis wrote:
This was easy because I am not stupid and put gigantic ranges for everything that I didn't know. That means you are hugely underconfident. You might want to consider some self-help books, this can be a real impediment to leading a normal life. Best of luck. Also, read the first page?
I read the first page.
"you should be confident enough in your interval that you would take a 9:1 bet that the actual number is between the range you give"
... so that's the goal... right?
so i answered correctly(gave a correct range) on every question
so how am i stupid and why do you guys say I didn't read the first page.
I was playing by the rules of the game, and I scored perfectly. How does that say anything about my confidence.
Basically, the lesson being taught in the OP is a lesson I already know very well. It's called "don't be a retarded fag who thinks he knows everything".
|
Or wait.... is the OP asking us to answer the questions so that we are right 90% of the time?
If so... thats both worded poorly and is so weird and confusing how could you blame anyone for answering this incorrectly. And what would that have to do with confidence at all.
|
are you trolling? If you'd included the rest of the very sentence you quoted you might have understood.
You should be equally willing to take a 1 : 9 bet that the actual number is outside your interval.
|
I knew OPEC has 13 countries... go me?
|
On July 31 2009 08:48 jtan wrote:are you trolling? If you'd included the rest of the very sentence you quoted you might have understood. You should be equally willing to take a 1  bet that the actual number is outside your interval.
so then wtf does this have to do with overconfidence
it's just about how well u know the answers.. nothing about confidence
|
On July 31 2009 08:53 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2009 08:48 jtan wrote:are you trolling? If you'd included the rest of the very sentence you quoted you might have understood. You should be equally willing to take a 1 bet that the actual number is outside your interval. so then wtf does this have to do with overconfidence
Ok. The point that the test tries to make is that when people are asked to make intervals of 90% certainty they make the intervals too narrow. If people actually made 90% intervals the most common result would be 9/10 on this test. The average being lower indicates people's intervals actually has lower confidence - they are overconfident.
That's the idea of the test anyway.
|
The 4 questions I got right were the ones I had a 90% certainty I got right. The ones I got wrong was a 100% certainty I got wrong.
|
Who the fuck cares about trivia? That's all these questions are. I think the real problem is people think they are more intelligent than they really are. That does not mean knowing when a certain president was born or how deep a certain part of the ocean is. It means being able to solve certain problems and form opinions based on critical thinking rather than biased instinct.
|
10.
was pretty easy, just used wikipedia for most of em.
|
Aww, I didn't want to be too greedy so I only chose 50% confidence and some I just didn't know. I got 4.
|
I wasn't confident in any of those questions -- what does that mean?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
