News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The Scientific Case for P≠NP. Parent comment

Re:The Scientific Case for P≠NP by throwanem on Sunday October 29, 2017 @09:07AM (#15579163)
Both, but mostly on the null hypothesis, and on its converse I think I must insist the payout be in gold.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Scientific Case for P≠NP by richardwhiuk on Sunday October 29, 2017 @10:24AM (#15579423)
There is no relevant null hypothesis here.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Scientific Case for P≠NP by throwanem on Sunday October 29, 2017 @10:40AM (#15579473)
Sloppy use of language. The by far most probable case given all the priors available. And, in the same spirit of clarity, I'd throw a small bet on P/=NP precisely because of the very long odds, and insist on being paid in gold because in the case of a constructive proof I wouldn't expect to find anything in my bank account for long. Or anyone's.
[ Parent | on HN ]