/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.19983505]

How did she do it?

[Anonymous No.19983547]

look into the fabrication process of the scratch offs

[Anonymous No.19983612]

>>19983505
Easy she's a PhD in Stats. I mean devote yourself as she did and you can win even more times if you play your odds right ;)

[Anonymous No.19983628]

>>19983505
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T USE YOUR BRAIN TO WIN, THAT'S HECKIN FRAUD! WHAT ABOUT MY BASED SMOOTHBRAIN CONSOOMERINOS?

[Anonymous No.19983752]

>>19983628
Americans are allowed spend every cent they make on lottery tickets but to protect them from losing money on the most potentially profitable investments you need to be a millionaire to be classified as an ((((acredited investor))))

[Anonymous No.19984152]

>>19983505
If she knew about crypto and risk reward I bet she would be all inning on EPIC right now

[Anonymous No.19984201]

>>19983505
#1 people don't understand statistics so its more possible than "journalists" will have you believe
1 in 18 zeptillion? In every draw, every line that people buy will give exactly the same odds, previous conditions of having won before or not has zero influence on the outcome.

[Anonymous No.19984276]

>>19983505
If its scratch offs, they probably figured out a way to replicate the cheeto dust covering the numbers, scratched them all off, noted the winners then sold all the rest. Someone might have even been dumb enough to throw out or sell the equipment that does it.

[Anonymous No.19984547]

>>19983505
>because have vagina is life on easy mode

[Anonymous No.19984583]

>>19984547
I bet you a male professor gave her the tip

[Anonymous No.19984599]

>>19983505
there are possibilities every ticket is numbered to check if it's a winner you can either compile a huge database or make the figures deterministically generated from the ticket serial. in which case anyone that figured your algo out can basically scan a huge amount of tickets to find and cherry pick the winner.

however a smart person wouldn't go for the jackpot but instead simply make sure they win 100 or thousand times their investment overall without hitting the news.

maybe having a collaborator at the press that installed a camera is also possible.

an other possibility is figuring out a way to actually scan the tickets via x-ray or magnetic resonance or something.

a statistics phd wouldn't buy tickets unless he or she has an edge.

[Anonymous No.19984646]

>>19984583
Tip? The whole shaft right down to my ballbag

[Anonymous No.19984665]

>>19984646

[Anonymous No.19985666]

>>19984201
>1 in 18 zeptillion? In every draw, every line that people buy will give exactly the same odds, previous conditions of having won before or not has zero influence on the outcome.
How can you be this fucking retarded, it's 1 in 18 septillion that it would happen x number of times before happening once.
If the chance of me being hit by lightning is 1:100,000, then being hit by lightning twice is 1:1,000,000, what you're thinking of (the gamblers fallacy) is if I've already been hit by lightning ONCE, my odds are now 1:100,000 because the first hurdle has been fulfilled so it doesn't affect future odds. If you take a million people the odds of one of them being hit by lightning 100 times is effectively 0, because the chances of an event with a 1:100,000 happening 100x is one in gazillions.

[Anonymous No.19985751]

>>19984599
Lotteries are legally required to reveal your odds of winning the various prizes (typically on the back of the scratch off). The math is relatively simple to do, assuming for 1000 tickets that you will have various amounts of winners based on the prize odds. Given the cost of the tickets, and the average amount of prize money, there is a break even point, past which the odds are in your favor to win.

Simplified: If you buy enough tickets, the odds of winning a prize which is greater than the cost of the tickets becomes statistically likely. Most people lose because they don't buy enough tickets. Basic algebra will tell you that number of tickets.

TLDR: It takes money to make money.

[Anonymous No.19985774]

>>19984583
Cope more incel, women can be smart

[Anonymous No.19985853]

>>19985774
... and an ape can write the entirety of work of Shakespeare on a typewriter

[Anonymous No.19985985]

>>19983505
Seriously though, how?

[Anonymous No.19986135]

>>19985853
but you cant.

[Anonymous No.19986708]

>>19985751
thee is no way you can have an expected return higher than zero from buying tickets blindly. there have been lotteries where they fucked up before of course but those don't last long.

no this was not done by statistical analysis. this was an exploit.

[Anonymous No.19986728]

>>19985751
>Simplified: If you buy enough tickets, the odds of winning a prize which is greater than the cost of the tickets becomes statistically likely. Most people lose because they don't buy enough tickets. Basic algebra will tell you that number of tickets.
jesus fucking christ... your expected returns are always negative no matter how many tickets you buy.
>TLDR: It takes money to make money.
just don't ever gamble with that stupid attitude. house always wins because the math works out for the house. if you win they know you are cheating.

[Anonymous No.19986764]

>>19985666
Faggot that would be 1:10,000,000,000

[Anonymous No.19986774]

>>19985985
read >>19984599
they probably figured out a way to scan the tickets if it was done locally. either that or the cracking of the generator algo (which may have been done by statistical analysis of some sort if it was not cryptographically secure).

you have to understand that most people dealing with security are dumb as fuck. do you know how easy and trivial would it be to make a car remote not to be replayable by criminals? yet most cars out of the factory come with central locks that can be replayed from sometimes capturing a single sequence.

[Anonymous No.19986816]

>>19983752

[Anonymous No.19986942]

>>19983612
Lol how many people are PhD in statistics?
There are tons and only one won like this.
This is just luck

[Anonymous No.19986953]

>>19983628
That’s what every casino tell you if you count cards

[Anonymous No.19986976]

>>19983505
how is that cheating
>nooo youre not allowed to the outsmart lottery

i always thought about how the real lottery is drawn, there is certainly some flaw but as you dont have a cheap oracle to confirm its impossible, or very expensive to find it

[Anonymous No.19987038]

>>19985751
>Simplified: If you buy enough tickets, the odds of winning a prize which is greater than the cost of the tickets becomes statistically likely. Most people lose because they don't buy enough tickets. Basic algebra will tell you that number of tickets.

I once chatted with a dude who worked at an investment firm when I was in uni. This is exactly what some investment firms do, they buy out some 80% or whatever amount of tickets there are to guarantee their odds while taking a comfy profit. People don't rely on luck when it comes to money at that scale.

[Anonymous No.19987582]

>>19987038
wtf man it would cost you more to buy 80% of the tickets than all the winnings you get together.

[Anonymous No.19987648]

>>19987582
It's ridiculous, if they don't recover all the money with 80% of the tickets then it wouldn't be profitable and lottery wouldn't exist.

[Anonymous No.19987704]

>>19984547
Except that it bleeds everywhere once a month making you uncontrollably angry, hungry and emotional which isn’t even as bad as the horrific cramps that cause so much pain you vomit in the bathroom during your shift at work.

Yeah a vagina sure is a “free pass”. You got me.

[Anonymous No.19987731]

>>19986942

What I want to know is why someone with a PhD in statistics would be playing the lottery in the first place? I mean, isn’t that the first thing they teach you in statistics?

[Anonymous No.19987742]

>>19987704
You don't understand how lucky you are that men decided to give you the vote, and we can take it back.

[Anonymous No.19987777]

>>19987704
Post vagina.
Also, https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/cracking-scratch-lottery-code/story?id=12833519
Different story from a while back, but the way this guy did it was by using information that was visible on the $3 "game" scratch offs to figure out which ones were winners before buying them.

[Anonymous No.19987937]

This thread was moved to >>>/b/830981251