puzzle for the brain boxes

[Mich the Tester]

You could tie your shoelace around the string to hold it in place; that way you're not actually making a knot in the string, but in your shoelace.

[chef]

what a complete utter sh!te "brainteaser" that was..

even wilmslow could have solved that in less than 1 hr !!

[EternalOptimist]

what a complete utter sh!te "brainteaser" that was..

even wilmslow could have solved that in less than 1 hr !!

you'll be using it, next night out with the lads.

[Drewster]

you'll be using it, next night out with the lads.

..... if you want it to be your last!

[TimberWolf]

FFS, can we burn the wood now?

[DaveB]

Correct.

The bigD wins the last mars bar.


THE POINT.

what this thought experiment proves is this. The human brain will always try to utilise all of the resources available in order to solve a problem, even if there is a slicker and quicker answer. Even guys who are trained to look for simple solutions to problems (e.g. us lot) fall into the trap.

time to make two sandals - 4 minutes
time to make one sandal - 2 minutes
time to drag'n'jump - 30 seconds

Not really, what it shows is that we are extremely risk averse. There is far more chance of failure due to failing and touching the floor with the 3rd solution than the second, which is riskier than the first. Since the first option presents the greatest chance of success we choose that one in the absence of other contraints such as time since there is no incentive for us to utilise a riskier solution.

If we had been time limited it would have produced a different result since although there is a greater chance of failure with solutions 2 and three failure is guarenteed if we do not stay within the time limit.

[Mich the Tester]

Not really, what it shows is that we are extremely risk averse. There is far more chance of failure due to failing and touching the floor with the 3rd solution than the second, which is riskier than the first. Since the first option presents the greatest chance of success we choose that one in the absence of other contraints such as time since there is no incentive for us to utilise a riskier solution.

If we had been time limited it would have produced a different result since although there is a greater chance of failure with solutions 2 and three failure is guarenteed if we do not stay within the time limit.

You're assuming that the majority of people will want to complete the (unspecified) challenge. I think there's a large rump of the population who'll just say 'sod that, I'm going down the pub/shooting some heroin/dogging/watching daytime TV'.

[EternalOptimist]

Not really, what it shows is that we are extremely risk averse. There is far more chance of failure due to failing and touching the floor with the 3rd solution than the second, which is riskier than the first. Since the first option presents the greatest chance of success we choose that one in the absence of other contraints such as time since there is no incentive for us to utilise a riskier solution.

If we had been time limited it would have produced a different result since although there is a greater chance of failure with solutions 2 and three failure is guarenteed if we do not stay within the time limit.

rationalising ad nauseum will not get you a coveted mars bar dave

[DaveB]

Touch the floor, get out, go to the pub.

You're assuming that the majority of people will want to complete the (unspecified) challenge. I think there's a large rump of the population who'll just say 'sod that, I'm going down the pub/shooting some heroin/dogging/watching daytime TV'.

See the answer I gave previously

[sasguru]

I just wasted about 2 minutes of my life reading this thread. FFS.