Steve Ballmer's incorrect binary search interview question

Re:Steve Ballmer's incorrect binary search interview question by layer8 on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @12:15PM (#41436406)

If Ballmer is being adversarial, he won’t pick the number at the start, and always win.

Of course you can set up the game such that Ballmer has to commit on a number at the start of the game (by sealing it in an envelope or whatever), but that wasn’t specified.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Steve Ballmer's incorrect binary search interview question by whimsicalism on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @12:19PM (#41436449)

they’re being adversarial within the framed rules of the game, not breaking the rules of the game?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Steve Ballmer's incorrect binary search interview question by patal on Thursday September 05, 2024 @02:31AM (#41454118)

Without writing the number down, it's up to Ballmer to decide that aspect, because you cannot look into his brain, or prove that he didn't commit to a prior number. Therefore, it's fair game.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Steve Ballmer's incorrect binary search interview question by jefftk on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @12:41PM (#41436649)

Ballmer opens with "I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 100". If he uses your strategy instead that's a different scenario.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Steve Ballmer's incorrect binary search interview question by layer8 on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @02:39PM (#41437758)

That’s only if you’re willing to trust Ballmer to do what he claims, which I wouldn’t.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Steve Ballmer's incorrect binary search interview question by jefftk on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @03:34PM (#41438344)

Do you trust Ballmer to give you $1 in the cases where he's said he's going to give you $1? If not the EV calculation looks pretty bad...

[ Parent | on HN ]