rigging of games,
Дата: 29.08.2021 19:36:44
Clutch_Shot_007, on Aug 29 2021 - 17:27, said: This type of "it can't be true if nobody has proven it is
true" kind of argument always seems to come up in discussions about
rigging. It's a double edged sword though, because one could
equally ask for proof that the game isn't rigged. I
don't think we'll ever see a proof that it's rigged or not rigged,
because, AFAIK, the only party with access to *all* of the data is
WG. Could it be proven one way or the other without
access to *all* of the data? Well, yes, if the rigging was
stupidly blatant (e.g. it was common for people to have 1000 losses
in a row), but we're clearly not seeing that. So, if it's not
blindingly obvious, then does that prove it doesn't exist?
No, that's not a proof either. I agree that looking for proof
is a sensible place to start, but if it turns out we can't even say
how a real but sophisticated rigging could be detected with
certainty, with the information available, then wouldn't you
agree that demanding proof, one way or the other, is an impossibly
high burden? DeviouslyCursed: No, because only idiots ask for the negative to be proven in
the situations where it is impossible to prove. For example: Prove
fairies don't exist. Go ahead... I'm waiting. Fact is the
complete absence of evidence for fairies is the proof you need to
decide fairies don't exist, and to live your life accordingly. If
the situation changes, then you change your mind and believe they
exist. But do you know what does that? Not some reject saying "but
you can't prove fairies don't exist!" No, what changes your mind is
actual proof of the positive claim, that a fairies exist. I
guess I better spell it out. What that means is unless the
"it's rigged" crowd can present some actual evidence other than
"it's obvious" then the only intelligent position to take is it's
not rigged until proven otherwise. Because "it's obvious" most of
the "it's rigged" crowd are missing a few marbles.
rigging of games,