| >Your ucsb link describes an unfair coin flipping protocol, and not the fair protocol commonly used in practice. It ALSO does describe this, yes. However, the way you phrased your comment makes it seem like that contradicts what I said whereas it doesn't seem to, as the post I linked also outlines innate issues with fair coin flip protocols: >Let's assume the coin is fabricated perfectly, down to the last vigintillionth of a yoctometer. And, since it's possible to train one's thumb to flip a coin such that it comes up heads or tails a huge percentage of the time, let's assume the person flipping the coin isn't a magician or a prestidigitator. In other words, let's assume both a perfect coin and an honest toss, such as the kind you might make with a friend to decide who pays for lunch. > >In that case there's an absolute right and wrong answer to the age-old question... > > Heads or tails? > >...because the two outcomes of a typical coin flip are not equally likely. > >The 50-50 proposition is actually more of a 51-49 proposition, if not worse. The sacred coin flip exhibits (at minimum) a whopping 1% bias, and possibly much more. 1% may not sound like a lot, but it's more than the typical casino edge in a game of blackjack or slots. The comments there then further discuss this. |