If you read a daily digest of global lottery results, yes!

This might not be in the news because it's so rare. It might just be a slow news day.

...or "crazygringo's" 1000 per day guess could be way, way off, and anybody, like "mrb," accepting it blindly as a basis for their own calculations is guilty (of failing to think critically) by association

There is no 64%. It's hypothetical if there were 1000 draws per day. If you want to proof their math wrong please do more than calling it flawed.

He states a conclusion -- "So this South African draw is kinda expected" -- referring to THIS DRAW, not a hypothetical example.

>probability of some event happening each year, don't you think in your lifetime you'd have seen..

No. This is not particularly newsworthy. But for most HN users and this event the answer is: no, but I did see it on HN and it will probably get re posted cyclicaly ;)

If you have the time,would you mind expanding on this with the detail that you mentioned?

Why is the maths wrong?

Maybe he is referring to the fact that not all of the lotteries have the same structure? Idk it still seems like a good estimate to me

64% likelihood seems like a good estimate to you? Just take a second and consider whether you'd take the following bet: Your $1000 against my $5000 that anywhere in the world in 2021, a state-run lottery (with at least 5 balls out of at least 50, and a sixth out of at least 20) will have a perfectly sequential result.

You're being offered 5 to 1 odds on a probability that you just estimated to be significantly better than a coin flip. Are you in? Or does your gut tell you that 6 perfectly sequential numbers is crazy unlikely?

It’s crazy unlikely for any particular lottery but there are a ton of draws and a ton of lotteries, and it only needs to happen once in a year. I probably would take that bet if it were feasible but then again I like to gamble.

Terrific, the same comment I replied to konjin applies to you as well. I'll absolutely make this bet if there's a trustable platform.

Just curious, if a random HN commenter said, there's about a 64% chance that at least one human being will grow to 12 feet tall in 2021, would you take that wager also? I mean, there are a ton of people on the planet, and it only needs to happen once.

The difference is it’s biophysically infeasible for any human to mature and live as a 12 foot tall adult, considering there is a very small number of 7 feet tall people in 2020. Whereas there is no such constraint for any given sequence of numbers if the lottery allows for them to be drawn. I would rather wager on whether you will continue being an annoying pedant. I prefer my odds there.

Sure, how do you want to do that bet?

I'm 100% serious about making this wager, I've sought out the wisdom of HN for help with a "smart contract" to guarantee trust.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25306489

At the same time, I'm not a thief -- to be entirely certain that you want to make this bet, have you read the entire thread, where alternate probabilities (far less than 64%) are proposed? You're aware that the original assumption of 1000 lottery draws per day was a guess from thin air with no research nor basis in fact? You're aware that mrb's calculations overstated the number of possible conforming sequences and undercounted the total number of potential outcomes? If you acknowledge that you're aware of all of this and still want to proceed, let's do it, no joke, I'm 100% in.

It starts with the literal first sentence of the comment -- "They draw 6 balls out of 50." No, they don't.

thats... not math.

calculating C(50, 6) is, as is everything that follows.