this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2025
190 points (99.0% liked)

Not The Onion

18591 readers
2446 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The highest number of attempts at the practical test before passing last year was 21

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tal@lemmy.today 62 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

the passing grade is 43/50,

They might just be randomly guessing and hoping that they'll eventually get it, and thinking that their chances are better than they are.

I think that that'd be...let's see. Say there are four possible answers for each question. So he's got a 75% chance of failing any individual question.

$ maxima -q
(%i1) load("distrib")$
(%i2) cdf_binomial(7, 50, .75);
(%o2)                       1.8188415357867314E-19

That should give the probability of failing at most 7 answers out of 50 if there's a 75% chance of failing any one.

So he's got something like a 0.000000000000000018188% chance of passing the test by randomly guessing.

His chance of failing a single instance of that test:

(%i3) 1-cdf_binomial(7, 50, .75);

(%o3)                                 1.0

Ah. He has such a ludicrously small chance of passing that Maxima can't represent it with the current floating point precision.

kagis a bit to figure out how to do this

Okay, apparently Maxima has bigfloats, but they default to only 16 digits of precision; not enough for this. This should give us 200 digits of floating point precision with bigfloats.

(%i4) fpprec:200;

(%o4)                                 200
(%i5) 1-bfloat(cdf_binomial(7, 50, .75));

(%o5) 9.999999999999999998181158464213268688894671703526026636336767389444876177016785501194817697978578507900238037109375b-1

Okay, so now chance of failing 128 tests in a row by randomly guessing:

(%i6) (1-bfloat(cdf_binomial(7, 50, .75)))^128;

(%o6) 9.9999999999999997671882834192983948674103659072385593201782461674117226992783470289641501110105148249790638571335177402867593272110042747272666144926576839664587182158166580514670324207313719393913737b-1

So then his chance of managing to get at least one success out of 128 tests in a row by randomly guessing:

(%i7) 1-(1-bfloat(cdf_binomial(7, 50, .75)))^128;

(%o7) 2.328117165807016051325896340927614406798217538325882773007216529710358498889894851750209361428664822597132406727889957252727333855073423160335412817841833419485329675792686280606086263120236298536839b-17

So he's got about a 0.0000000000000023% chance of passing at least once in a 128 random-guess-based series of test attempts (assuming, again, that each question has four multiple choice answers). That is, he could keep doing this for the rest of his life and he's virtually certain not to pass.

[–] edwardbear@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago

thank you for doing the math. my brain is satisfied

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You didn't need to do all that math out to explain that mental health issues cause people to act irrationally.

[–] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 18 points 1 day ago

Oddballs who dive into absurdly lengthy calculations of something trivial do it out of a bizarre, joyful compulsion, rather than necessity.

(Source: I'm one of those oddballs)