This is G o o g l e's cache of http://sixteenvolts.blogspot.com/2006/02/tv-party-tonight.html as retrieved on 9 Sep 2006 23:00:59 GMT.
G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.
The page may have changed since that time. Click here for the current page without highlighting.
This cached page may reference images which are no longer available. Click here for the cached text only.
To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:IaiSz_Su_8cJ:sixteenvolts.blogspot.com/2006/02/tv-party-tonight.html+site:sixteenvolts.blogspot.com&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=123


Google is neither affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.

Send As SMS

« Home | Don't mess with the missionary man » | What dating is really about » | Dis-se-mi-na-ting know-led-ge » | To cut a long story short » | Advice for youth » | A million little pieces of chocolate » | Naughty or nice? » | Working hard, or hardly working » | On the nature of writing » | The real reason why moral dilemmas are popular »

TV party tonight

Now that the Olympics are over, I noticed that the show "Deal or No Deal" has started again. I happened to watch tonight's episode and had to wonder how such a simple show can be so interesting. And you can even pretend to play online. It won't last, of course, and will probably be cancelled in about a year, but for a while it will be fun.

I am sure that one could somehow deduce the utility curve algorithm that the producers use to calculate the offer, but it is clear that there are other variables in play than just trying to minimize the player's loot. The show must be interesting to watch, and for this reason, the first four offers or so are on purpose so lowball that no player will ever accept them. It would be interesting to see an episode where the initial offers were so high that the players really had to think about whether they are going to accept them, but of course this would not be interesting for most viewers.

I would also like to see a reverse version of the game in which the player makes the offer for the amount that he would agree to make the deal for, and the banker would then accept or reject it. Such a tricky game probably would not be as interesting for the general audience, but they could try it as a one-shot.

But Jesus Christ, that tonight's episode. It featured a black woman contestant who was backed up by her church group, with the gospel choir and everything. Initially she was doing quite well, and the church crowd happily kept telling her to keep playing, which was quite reasonable. She eventually got to the point where the four remaining amounts were $1, $5, $300K and $750K, for which she received an offer of $172K. Now, for any imaginable utility curve of money that a person like her could possibly have there is no question whatsoever that she should have taken that offer, and for a while she actually looked like she was going to take it, but the church crowd unanimously told her to keep playing.

Well, the $750K came up in the next suitcase, leaving only $1, $5 and $300K. The next offer was therefore significantly smaller than $172K, but it was still quite reasonable and again there was no dobut that she should take it. However, the church crowd again unanimously told her to keep playing. The whole thing was a truly surreal sight to observe. I can only guess that these people thought that if they laugh and wave and sing and pray really hard, God himself will shower them with money. The irrationality of the contestant was made even more evident by the fact that she chose the next suitcase based on numerology. Of course, each suitcase is equally likely to hold any of the remaining amounts so it doesn't really matter which process you use to select the suitcase, but the fact that she used numerology is further evidence for a more general lack of rational thought.

To cut the the rest of the story short, I swear that I have never yelled "YES!" as loud for anything on TV when the $300K came up in the next suitcase, leaving her with the cases that had $1 and $5. Thank you, Jesus! There is still apparently some justice in the world.

Of course, the fact that it went this way is pretty sad for her. There will not be a single day in the rest of her life that she doesn't think of the $172K, her salary of about five years, that she lost gambling. Very few people every do anything that stupid in their lives. At least usually people who lose that much gambling are considered to have a problem. But hopefully many viewers learned a very important lesson about the nature of risk-taking, which will perhaps even save somebody who is on the margin from ruin.

Comments

Links to this post

Create a Link

Contact

ilkka.kokkarinen@gmail.com

Buttons

Site Meter
Subscribe to this blog's feed
[What is this?]