I had to go to the mall today to get my kid some new sneakers. So IÂ’m standing there in the sneaker store waiting to be helped when the screaming started.

I looked over and saw a guy, looked to be about forty years old, raising his voice to a young woman who worked there. I didnÂ’t think much of it at first, but got louder and louder and I walked over to see exactly what was going on. I have a nose for this kind of thingÂ…I generally know when violence is about to occur. And I could tell by the sound of this guyÂ’s voice that he was pretty close.

I walked up and saw that the guy was pointing his finger in the womanÂ’s face and screaming, in an absolute rage, about the return policy. I looked around and saw two other employees, both high school age, and both looked terrified. I looked back to the guy, who was screaming even louder at this point, and I didnÂ’t see any bulges, but he still could have had a gun. By now the woman was really scared. I have some experience in these things and I knew this guy was not in control of himself. It was a blind rage.

I have rules about getting involved in other people’s business. I generally don’t. This had nothing to do with me. If I got involved and things got physical there could be problems—like a lawsuit. But the overriding factor for me was the fact that this asshole was threatening a woman and she was scared shitless. I simply can’t tolerate that.

The woman walked behind the sales counter to put some distance between her and the nutcase and when the guy started following her around the counter and I knew what was coming next. I closed the gap instantly so I was right behind him. The woman looked at me pleadingly and I mimicked holding a telephone and mouthed, “Security.”

She went for the phone and the guy went for her. I was literally twelve inched behind him and he had no idea.

“That’s far enough, Chief.”

He turned and found me standing on his heels and went pale. He was off balance and I had several choices, although the most appealing was swinging my elbow across his jaw so it would have to be wired for six weeks or so. I had a second to decide to strike or not. I used restraint.

“The lady asked you to leave.”

He just stared at me.

“One way or another, you’re going out the door. Choose now.”

He left without saying a word. I realized at that point that there was zero tension in my body. I was completely relaxed, which isnÂ’t always the case in an adrenaline type situation. From experience I can tell you that in a relaxed state during a physical altercation you can do some amazing things. That guy will probably never know how close he came to the worst day of his life.

I really donÂ’t like violence. In fact I abhor violence, but if my kid wasnÂ’t there heÂ’d still be in the emergency room.

I havenÂ’t been in a situation like that in many years. I was taught that if all someone understands is violence, then give them violence. And beat them so severely that they never bother another peaceful living soul again.

And I thought about that, because just like on TV I flashed back to my teacher explaining that philosophy to me. It was twenty years ago, but in an instant I there again. The scene was so vivid I could smell the cup of tea he was always sipping from. And in another instant I was back standing there in the store with the asshole standing in front of me. It was like time travel.

The rest of the day was uneventful.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 07:21 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 656 words, total size 4 kb.

The Monty Hall Problem

This problem originated when it was sent in to Parade Magazine and was published in the column of Marilyn vos Savant on September 9, 1990.

Savant was touted as the person with the highest I.Q. in Guinness Book of World Records, and while the actual value of her I.Q. is in dispute (as are all I.Q. values), I think we can stipulate that this broadÂ’s pretty goddamned smart.

The question is based on the old game show, LetÂ’s Make A Deal, whose host was named Monty Hall. It goes like this:

Suppose you're on a game show, and you're given the choice of three doors: Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say No. 1, and the host, who knows what's behind the doors, opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat. He then says to you, "Do you want to pick door No. 2?" Is it to your advantage to switch your choice?

So basically, youÂ’re given a choice between three doors. Two goats and one car. The host opens a door you did not pick and shows you a goat. There are two doors left, the one you picked and the one you didnÂ’t. One has a goat behind it, the other has a car. The host then asks if you want to change your pick. What do you think?

ItÂ’s a 50%-50% chance right?

Actually, it’s not. If you change your pick you actually improve your odds of winning from ½ to 2/3.

Savant got a shitload of letters from professors all over the place claiming she was an idiot. Of course, in the end, she was right.

You cannot ignore the past here like you can with a coin flip. You originally had a 1/3 chance of winning, but by switching your choice you improve to 2/3 chance to win.

The contestant should choose to switch to the remaining door. The chance of winning the car is doubled when the player switches to another door rather than sticking with the original choice. The reason for this is that to win the car by sticking with the original choice, the player must choose the door with the car first, and the probability of initially choosing the car is one in three. Whereas, to win the car by switching, the player must originally choose a door with a goat first, and the probability of choosing a goat door first is two in three.

If youÂ’re still confused, and it took a while for it to sink in for me, the solutions and aids to understanding can be found here.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 05:29 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 452 words, total size 3 kb.