The question is both self-aware and mutated. We have to burn it with fire before it learns to replicate.
if you were to pick randomly, the correct answer would change something you didnt pick.
meaning the chances of a random selection picking the correct answer is zero.
since your answer is not a random selection, you can input the answer as C.
My response when I saw this again a week or two ago was “the answer is 0%, but only if you don’t pick it.”
NULL
A. I’ll go with A. Huh, that was easy.
Wrong. Correct answer is D.
Any answer is correct as long as you don’t pick it at random
Math with no rules is a pattern. Math with rules is useful. Bouncing back and forth might refine the process?
Mathmatical riddles. Kinda like turds that taste like skittles. News flash the people in charge don’t know what they are doing.
The question really is… are all questions really worth solving and what good is math if you are not solving problems. Self awarness is the pursuit of understanding the world we live in and math is a tool to do just that. Maybe the output is just misunderstood… maybe there is no answer to some problems. The answer is 2
FINE! Post modernism in the chat like bla bla bla but greed is good and we were born in its shaddow. The answer is 100%
Truth is a popularity contest created in a poorly written language. Garbage in garbage out. The answer is 666,666,666 X 10^(3000/3) or all the above
I’m writing in
e) All or none of the above.
or 100%
wHaTs tHe DaTa tYpe? 😤
🤔… with poorly written rules it might seem proper to just make up sum shit and your color outside the lines moment might just be the one. Yet IRL rockets explode dams just burst…thermal run away yada yada soooo
Godel showed that self-referential problems like this are impossible to resolve. He proved that the existence of these types of problems mean that math can never completely describe reality as outlined in his incompleteness theorems -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel’s_incompleteness_theorems
This is one of the drivers of post-modernist thinking. Douglas Hofstadter talks a lot about this and the nature of consciousness in his famous book Gödel, Escher, Bach -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel%2C_Escher%2C_Bach
as far as i understand, godel’s incompleteness doesn’t touch reality or ability for math to describe reality. math is very vast and we only need a fraction of it to describe reality right now. whether this description is correct is debatable but not part of godel’s proof, which to me only means math can’t be “summarized” into a set of “universal” rules. i may be wrong tho, godel’s work is a lot to take in
Yes, I described it badly and that description is inaccurate. It is technically about completeness which has a very specific definition. The implication that no formal logic system could describe even itself fully and that was a major blow to modernist “clock-maker’s universe” view of the reality.
The struggle is real
Help, my mind is caught in a paradoxical loop!
have you tried turning it off and on again?
I try not to day drink
It’s always nighttime somewhere
I’ve had a bit of a tumble.
Its askimg for a subscription now…
Cave Johnson prevails again!
Ah fuck, there goes my right to vote in Jim Crow South.
Going with D. It’d be 25% for a normal question, but since it’s the second 25% this provides some evidence that I read all the answers.
2 out of 4 answers are the same, and if we say that 25% is correct then you actually have a much higher chance of selecting the correct one. I’m sure there’s some statistics crap to say it’s not 50%, but if half your random choices are correct then that seems right to me. So now 50% is correct, but it’s only 1 in 4 and the odds go back to 25%. So now it’s 0%, except that that’s ALSO on there so now the correct answer is 25% again. The problem is that ever single time 25% becomes the correct answer you now have a 50% chance to get it right if chosen randomly and it’s wrong all over again.
Yep, that’s definitely the thought process the question-asker intended. I’m sidestepping that slightly: if an answer is chosen completely at random then one should be able to completely ignore the text of the question and answer, and roll a four-sided die, leading to 25%. I agree that strategy assumes that there’s a single correct answer. And the typical expectation of a multiple choice question is to only have a single correct answer. The question itself says “the answer” not “answer(s)”, that’s perhaps a partial support of the expectation of a single correct answer. But yes, my assumption that there’s only a single correct answer, while reasonable in general, could be considered flawed considering the nature of the question itself.
The text says “the answer” and 25% having two ways to get to it does not mean there are two answers. You can’t just say you’re avoiding assumptions and then make more assumptions that are even more outlandish.
Ultimately, you can’t really side-step how impossible it is to answer it correctly. The answer is to write in “e) fuck off”
