Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co....card_confusion

Using negative numbers on lottery cards creates mass confusion. A tax on those bad at math?

[ QUOTE ]

"I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[00:45] <eviljeff> they should have done the Cool Cash Cards in Kelvin

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

I am more confused by the poll on the side of the website asking if booze prices should be doubled. Is their some type of government price control of booze over there?

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

I think it's probably an error on the website's part. A Google news search suggests what's on the table is a 10% hike in the excise tax on alcohol:

story from the Guardian

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[ QUOTE ]
I am more confused by the poll on the side of the website asking if booze prices should be doubled. Is their some type of government price control of booze over there?

[/ QUOTE ]
yes, it's called taxation.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

My dad teaches a weekend college class for mainly older people and its algebra 1 and 2, he tells me stories all the time about people who just can't grasp the concept of negative numbers.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

My Uncle works for the Indiana Lottory and when they first introduced Texas Hold Em scratch cards they had by far the highest number of unclaimed prizes of any scratch card they had ever produced, presumably because people couldn't discern winning hands.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

this story tilts me way more than i think it should.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

My girlfriend is in teacher's college. She told me that ~60% of her class of university graduates who want to be grade school teachers failed a grade 6 math test. That put me on tilt. How the hell can kids learn math if their teachers can't do grade 6 math?

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[ QUOTE ]
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co....card_confusion

Using negative numbers on lottery cards creates mass confusion. A tax on those bad at math?

[ QUOTE ]

"I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it.


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

that quote is so awesome, like Camelot are tweaking the laws of physics to avoid paying out or something.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

I couldn't believe that someone would give their name to a newspaper and give a quote like that. Who's proud of being that dumb? It annoys me a lot more than it should, I was on the verge of messaging people with that name & location on facebook until I realised how insane that was...

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[ QUOTE ]
My Uncle works for the Indiana Lottory and when they first introduced Texas Hold Em scratch cards they had by far the highest number of unclaimed prizes of any scratch card they had ever produced, presumably because people couldn't discern winning hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

funny thing is even if they were too dumb to figure out the winning hand

lotto tickets have 2letters that if they match it means you win, so its easy to see if you won

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[ QUOTE ]
I couldn't believe that someone would give their name to a newspaper and give a quote like that. Who's proud of being that dumb? It annoys me a lot more than it should, I was on the verge of messaging people with that name & location on facebook until I realised how insane that was...

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually science has proved that if you’re just a little bit dim you know it and keep your mouth closed, but if you’re truly stupid you’re less likely to work out that you’re functioning at a lower level then the rest of society so are unashamed to go right ahead and express your retarded views.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

"More than 15m adults in Britain have poor numeracy - the equivalent of a G or below at GCSE maths "

heh wildddddd stat, i don't really believe it for a second.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My Uncle works for the Indiana Lottory and when they first introduced Texas Hold Em scratch cards they had by far the highest number of unclaimed prizes of any scratch card they had ever produced, presumably because people couldn't discern winning hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

funny thing is even if they were too dumb to figure out the winning hand

lotto tickets have 2letters that if they match it means you win, so its easy to see if you won

[/ QUOTE ]

To be fair to the idiot, she probably knew that. She was complaining that the card was being treated as a loser, even though it should have been a winner (because she believes -8 > -6).

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[ QUOTE ]
"More than 15m adults in Britain have poor numeracy - the equivalent of a G or below at GCSE maths "

heh wildddddd stat, i don't really believe it for a second.

[/ QUOTE ]
That'd be 1/3 adults, I find it pretty hard to believe too

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

I think the lottery company was begging for this mess to happen with the "higher/lower number" wording rather than "higher/lower temperature". Assuming that people who buy scratch cards are competent of doing even the most basic math is not clever. If they were good at math, they probably wouldn't play the lottery in the first place.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[ QUOTE ]
If they were good at math, they probably wouldn't play the lottery in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

ugh

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[ QUOTE ]
If they were good at math, they probably wouldn't play the lottery in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't like this assumption. I play the lottery (on rollovers) even though it has poor EV. If I win, £10m is a lot of money. If I lose, £5 is an irrelevant amount of money. The utility of winning is high whilst the cost is essentially zero, so why not enter? It also ensures some money goes to charity and that you get to harbour the fantasy of winning.

I do like the idea that the odds of you winning the lottery are essentially the same whether you enter it or not though.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[ QUOTE ]
"More than 15m adults in Britain have poor numeracy - the equivalent of a G or below at GCSE maths "

heh wildddddd stat, i don't really believe it for a second.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you translate this to American? It sounds bad but I don't know what they're saying.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

numeracy = dental hygiene

the equivalent of a G or below at GCSE = they have some nasty

maths = teeth

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

there are 60 mil people in the uk

can't be bothered to look up how many are under 18, but like sci said, probably a quarter?

so 1 in 3 adults can't get a G at GCSE (exams you take at 16). i can't attempt to quantify what you would need to know to get a G, but i'm pretty sure i could have got higher than that when i was 6 years old.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

^^ Hey you got your modship back. Congrats.

I'm teaching this kid some math for the GRE. We came to a problem of essentially sorting negative numbers. He got it wrong, I wanted to shoot myself in the face.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My Uncle works for the Indiana Lottory and when they first introduced Texas Hold Em scratch cards they had by far the highest number of unclaimed prizes of any scratch card they had ever produced, presumably because people couldn't discern winning hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

funny thing is even if they were too dumb to figure out the winning hand

lotto tickets have 2letters that if they match it means you win, so its easy to see if you won

[/ QUOTE ]
Indiana's have three. T-E-N means you win $10, etc.

Whenever I saw a scratched-off Hold'em game laying on the ground or whatever, I always checked it just in case someone overlooked that they had a straight flush or something.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[ QUOTE ]
"More than 15m adults in Britain have poor numeracy - the equivalent of a G or below at GCSE maths "

heh wildddddd stat, i don't really believe it for a second.

[/ QUOTE ]

No way - thats 1 in 4 people .... .Impossible !


Edit : Just seen a few others quote this as well...

What a piece of tripe, where do they get that sort of information from......(Mind you consider the location of the paper)

* Meanwhile, This Londoner runs for cover*

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

They definitely should have used hotter, colder. Even the retarded chick with the quote must realize -8 is colder than -6.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

heh

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If they were good at math, they probably wouldn't play the lottery in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't like this assumption. I play the lottery (on rollovers) even though it has poor EV. If I win, £10m is a lot of money. If I lose, £5 is an irrelevant amount of money. The utility of winning is high whilst the cost is essentially zero, so why not enter? It also ensures some money goes to charity and that you get to harbour the fantasy of winning.

I do like the idea that the odds of you winning the lottery are essentially the same whether you enter it or not though.

[/ QUOTE ] That's why I said probably. I realize there are some people like you, but I don't think you are in the main target group nor are you one of the customers that spend a lot on lotteries.

I don't think people that are bad at math generally think lotteries are +EV of course. But I definitely think they are overrepresented among people who accept these heavy -EV gambles, where the house keeps about 50%.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

[ QUOTE ]
numeracy = dental hygiene

the equivalent of a G or below at GCSE = they have some nasty

maths = teeth

[/ QUOTE ]
hahaha

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

But how can you have "negative numbers"? I can only have 0 or more lotto tickets. I can't have negative lotto tickets!

I'm taking this back to debate back to -100 A.D.

Re: Negative Numbers are Confusing
 

Loaning were not invented in 100 A.D.?