Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Because the trick Knuth pulls is to express this intuition without appealing to the definition of probability. It's quite clever.


What's the sketch of the trick? I can define randomness by appealing to some of the same basic theory used to develop probability, but it's not really independent despite looking that way from the outside. Does Knuth do this uniquely?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: