If I'm the opponent demanding the proof of expertise of one of the two areas, I would start asking questions from *one* of the lists, offering 1 (or n) answers if requested by the player, up until they reach the quota.
If the player completes the first 1000 questions, they win.
If the player ever provides an incorrect answer, the round ends.
Next round, I start asking questions from the second list, continuting the quota of freebies from before. Same rules.
If the player completes the second 1000 questions, they win.
If the player ever provides an incorrect answer, the game ends.
I don't see a way to conclude the game without asking 2000 questions, or the player failing early. I'm curious 🙂
Okay reading nostr:nprofile1qqsyzrawlu9t7hta0sszkn6zuvqndgcwm49wk6eckxtjk6lhgtyly6cppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qyfhwumn8ghj7mmxve3ksctfdch8qatz9uq3samnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwvd6hyun9de6zuenedyhs4xywes think it through, I suppose an encoding of the answers (full knowledge) could be formed by the expert. I'm not sure how the encoding scheme would be communicated between the player & the challenger, because it's outside of the game
Simpler answer, I guess I keep coming up with variations :
2 lists : multiple choice for each question.
The catch is that the sequence of good answers is the same in the two lists : like a,c,d,d,b.....
The expert just returns 2 sequences of 1000 letters.
If he is an expert, one of those two are correct, if not he's craig wright ?
Yeah basically variants on 'the two answer sets can be 'encoded' and are chosen to have an identical encoding'.
But can you find a way to do it that doesn't require answering a thousand questions? Based on the concept that, if one were challenged to answer one specific question randomly, one is guaranteed to succeed based on knowing all the answers?
The word 'random' makes me think "no"
We'd have to preindex the set of questions, which necessitates evaluating all of them.
"I have a 5000 word dictionary, and insert 5 of the words into a database. Can I then randomly query the database for any of the 5000 words, and be guaranteed a result?"
No. Your odds are literally one in a thousand 😉
I keep thinking, but best I can do is probalisitically get there.
I don't see how I can be convinced he's an expert UNLESS he answers all the questions correctly. I can be more and more sure that he is, but never convinced.
I'm probably missing something.
Gotcha, so yeah, the player will need to evaluate & answer at least 1000 questions, the set that they know, to combine them into a unified result. After that, sounds like a matter of privacy for the player as they consider how to combine their knowledge into a single value. Is that a single play, or can the opponent react at each step?
Cool problem!
Oddbean new post about login | logout