From: Michael M. Butler (mmb@xocolatl.com)
Date: Thu Jun 12 2003 - 13:05:05 MDT
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003 11:10:36 -0700, Hal Finney <hal@finney.org> wrote:
> The problem is that for his paradox to work, the games have to be set
> up so that the payoff depends on your cash balance. No real games work
> that way, so the paradox is artificial. In my posting above I came up
> with a trivial example which demonstrates that.
Haven't reviewed your posting, but the Parrondo effect seemed to me to
resemble a kind of accumulations-of-beneficial-roundings process. Does that
square with your interpretation, Hal?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 12 2003 - 13:14:39 MDT