Mining unobtainium is hard work. The rare mineral appears

in only 1% of rocks in the mine. But your friend Tricky Joe

has something up his sleeve. The unobtainium detector he’s been

perfecting for months is finally ready. The device never fails

to detect unobtainium if any is present. Otherwise, it’s still highly reliable, returning accurate

readings 90% of the time. On his first day trying

it out in the field, the device goes off, and

Joe happily places the rock in his cart. As the two of you head back to camp

where the ore can be examined, Joe makes you an offer: he’ll sell you the ore for just $200. You know that a piece of unobtanium

that size would easily be worth $1000, but any other minerals

would be effectively worthless. Should you make the trade? Pause here if you want

to figure it out for yourself. Answer in: 3 Answer in: 2 Answer in: 1 Intuitively, it seems like a good deal. Since the detector

is correct most of the time, shouldn’t you be able

to trust its reading? Unfortunately, no. Here’s why. Imagine the mine

has exactly 1,000 pieces of ore. An unobtainium rarity of 1% means that there are only 10 rocks

with the precious mineral inside. All 10 would set off the detector. But what about the other 990

rocks without unobtainium? Well, 90% of them,

891 rocks, to be exact, won’t set off anything. But 10%, or 99 rocks,

will set off the detector despite not having unobtanium, a result known as a false positive. Why does that matter? Because it means that all in all, 109 rocks will have

triggered the detector. And Joe’s rock could be any one of them, from the 10 that contain the mineral to the 99 that don’t, which means the chances of it containing

unobtainium are 10 out of 109 – about 9%. And paying $200 for a 9%

chance of getting $1000 isn’t great odds. So why is this result so unexpected, and why did Joe’s rock seem

like such a sure bet? The key is something called

the base rate fallacy. While we’re focused on the relatively

high accuracy of the detector, our intuition makes us forget to account for how rare the unobtanium

was in the first place. But because the device’s error rate of 10% is still higher than

the mineral’s overall occurrence, any time it goes off is still more likely

to be a false positive than a real finding. This problem is an example

of conditional probability. The answer lies neither in the overall

chance of finding unobtainium, nor the overall chance

of receiving a false positive reading. This kind of background information

that we’re given before anything happens is known as unconditional,

or prior probability. What we’re looking for, though,

is the chance of finding unobtainium once we know that the device did

return a positive reading. This is known as the conditional,

or posterior probability, determined once the possibilities have

been narrowed down through observation. Many people are confused

by the false positive paradox because we have a bias

for focusing on specific information over the more general, especially when immediate decisions

come into play. And while in many cases

it’s better to be safe than sorry, false positives can have

real negative consequences. False positives in medical testing

are preferable to false negatives, but they can still lead to stress or

unnecessary treatment. And false positives in mass surveillance can cause innocent people to be

wrongfully arrested, jailed, or worse. As for this case, the one thing

you can be positive about is that Tricky Joe is trying

to take you for a ride.

Sign up for free at https://brilliant.org/TedEd/, and Brilliant will email you the solution to the bonus riddle! Also, the first 833 of you who sign up for a PREMIUM subscription will get 20% off the annual fee. Riddle on, friends!

Can't you check the rock like, twice?

or joe could scan t multiple times and if it goes off all of those times it's really unobtanium

Here’s another example of this type of riddle.

You are an Aircraft mechanic in WW2, and the Air Force needs you to reenforce the plane, however, you can only chose one place to reenforce the plane, otherwise the weight will be off and it won’t fly as well. You look and most of them have bullet holes in the tail / rudder, a few have bullet holes in the wings, some have holes at the body, and almost none have holes in the engine. Where do you reenforce the plane? (Answer will be in my reply)

I wouldn’t do any trade with a guy named ‘Tricky Joe’

You never mentioned a 10% error rate in the beginning!

I don't know much about math, but intuitively I knew these were not good odds. My logic is if the machine can misfire 10% of the time and there's a 1% chance to find unobtanium; it will misfire more than be accurate. If it was 10% and 10% the odds would be better.

Senerio 1

finally the first ted ed problem i was able to solve! i used simple conditional probability

In scenario 1 you have one possible pair more than scenario 2

But what if he sold it for 100… Then I personally would buy it, because I have about 1 in 10 chance to get the rock that is worht 1000 (100 x 10). You don't find odds that high anywhere.

The whole time I’m just thinking shoot the rock 10 times then

The real prize is the toxicity you got rid of during the expedition. You don’t need a person like tricky joe you’re better than that

Tricky Joe?

I met him in the

gangFirst riddle I solve

Is brillant Australian ?

I would tell him Id buy it for twice the price if he'd scan the rock 10 more times and the result is the same every 10 times.

Question : Should you buy the Unobtanium?

More like : Should your start thingking like a Crime Investigator and start solving random math and percentages

no bc yes makes sence.

EDIT: new it! 😀

for the bonus, it's quite a riddle, but one thing is certain, there are two queens, a five, and another card if there is the same amount of each card in both scenarios. in scenario 1, they have two queens, and you have a five, the fourth card is what is the problem, it's either a queen, a five, or another overall, making chances about 1/3. in scenario 2, they have the queen and the five, meaning you have one queen, and the extra card is a queen, a five, or another entirely, again making it about 1/3! it doesn't matter which scenario you have, just don't bet stuff because your chances are slim either way

Yay, finally a riddle i solved xD

"Nah thanks, I'm a grinder."

Say no, because that name alone is a sign that you can’t trust him

Lol this is the first riddle I solved on my own:)

For the bonus riddle, it's Scenario 1 where it's more likely for you to get a pair. Since there are 26 pairs that you can get from the deck (getting each card only once), removing 1 pair only will still leave you with 25 pairs to get (which is Scenario 1), while for Scenario 2, getting 2 different cards will leave only 24 pairs (2 cards won't have a pair).

0:06

That's because it's called UNOBTAINium

Q 5

Me:notice that the ore is actually plutonium

Me:accept trade

Me:become a trillionare

Woah, i actually solved a riddle right

I would just buy his machine and copy the materials to make my own machine and shoot the rocks myself x10 times so I can verify. Solved.

Ted ed: Yes, but actually no

no! his name is "Tricky Joe"! duh of course he's deceiving you

What if it is 100% gold

Yeah I did the correct guess

Nah, lets just mine normally, like a human

Sir this is a McDonalds

Answer for the bonus riddle:

a pack cards has 13 different cards of 4 shapes each = 52 cards. So u can make 6 pairs with each number card. For ex: with 4 queens u can make 6 pairs (spade&heart, spade&clubs, spade&diamond, heart&clubs, heart&diamond, clubs&diamond). Thus in total there is a probability of 1/78 (6pairs * 13 cards= 78). ur opponent already has 2 queens which means there are only 2 queens left in the remaining deck eliminating 5 pairs of queens above said. that will increase the probability to 1/73 (78-5). In the next scenario ur opponent has 1Queen, 1five. So the number of pairs u can make with remaining cards is 72 pairs (78-3-3). So the probability of getting a pair is better in second scenario which is 1/72 (As we all know that 1/72 is better than 1/73). Like if anyone understand this

People have a habit of looking over specific things, oh you mean the fact that he’s tricky joe or we couldn’t of scanned this twenty time(or maybe it mistakes cause… it gives off a certain pulse or something), or how I’m a poor miner and I don’t have 200% or…. ummmm…. math

LOL as I work in the Department of Epidemiology, I immediately thought of this as the positive predictive value and gave the instant result :))

Tricky joe: —>

trys it for the first time<—90% correctThat dude: oh Im not gonna buy that, it’s fake

My thinking was the only 90% accuracy, coupled with the low price would be a scam.

OH MY GOD I ACTUALLY SOLVED SOMETHING!! The first scenario would be the better chance I’m assuming because that only takes away one possible pair out of the deck, the Queens. But with the second scenario, it takes away two possible pairs, queen and a 5 since she has one of each.

Or you could shoot the device 2 or 3 more times at the rock and there is a SUPER small chance then that you're getting a bad deal, because it ALWAYS detects actual Unobtanium.

Want some 90% real water

wouldn't you still be checking 90% less rocks? so instead of unobtanium being 1 percent of the rocks you carry its about 9%, isn't it a reusable tool? it would still greatly increase the chances of you finding unobtanium.

Jo mama

This was the easiest

"And paying $200 for a 9% chancr of getting $1000 isnt great odds"

You boys ever heard of the lottery?

Who’s joe

I did the math and ther is a higher chance o get a double if you’r friend has two queens

If Ik the ore is in 10% or rocks and the size of the rock if it was pure would be $1,000 at best odds that’s still only $100 of ore plus the cost of labor on me! That alone is enough to sway me away, plus given the ore could have been picked up from another sample I would have him retest it a few times outside to make the probability that it is in there higher. if positive best I would give him is $50

Soooo, ya sayin’ diamonds, obsidian, emerald, sapphire, aquamarine, opal and all the other precious rocks are worthless???

Joe mama

i thought unobtainium was fake…

Who’s joe

Scenario 1

Shoot it with the gun again

Alright good riddle but who is joe?

This is kinda like a more expensive lottery

1

What if you press the first one thrice?

Simple, use Bayes

In the first time I watched the video, i didn't understand that tricky joe sell the ore to me. You should say that

I hope Tricky Joe isn't a nickname

So gold would be effectively worthless.

Another probability equation disguised as a riddle. Do something different for once.

This is the only riddle I could solve 🙂

your friend “tricky joe”you know who taught joe how to be tricky?

joe mamaYay a riddle I finally got right

Him: so why did joes rock seem such a great bet

Him: about to explain stuff

Me: it because they eat too many dum dum’s

This is honestly easier than the passcode riddle. Its so intuitive. I didnt even need to think to solve this, and i got it right.

It's weird, because my immediate mathematics tells me "it's only worth it if it's a $20 price tag", and I can't remember what those mathematics are after seeing the video.

This make no sense you said the laser gun could find unobtanium without failure but then you said it would have a nine percent chance of it finding it

Amy is not my friend

This is my first time getting a riddle right since watching this channel

Can you-

NO I CANT OK

but I’ll still watch

Just use it on the rock again

Only put it in cart if it returned a positive reading four consecutive times — that increases the accuracy from 90% to 99.99%

It’s called unobtainium or however you spell it, you can’t obtain it.

Nooooooooooooooooo!

Who's Joe?

2:26 , because I'm not good in English

I ACTUALLY SOLVED THIS ONE

(after watching about 30 of the other ones)

Just use the detector 2 times

then it turns out it is unobtainian

Tricky joe we're not friends anymore

Everytime I hear “fallacy” I think of the word “phallus”

You could just use the detector multiple times on the same ore.

I would automatically know it's not worth it cuz the guy's name is literally tricky Joe. Major clue u-u

woah- this is so genius im just- wOah.

Bayes thereom ladies and gentlemen

Just scan the rocks twice

Tricky joe- you know who i am?

Me-no,who are you?

Tricky joe- i am joe

Me-wait,who is joe?

Tricky joe- JOE ROCK

brought to you by: joe mama jokes co.

HOWEVER…. joe was offering 200$ when its supposed to be worth 1000$

as logic would indicate joe is possibly scamming you because he knows that the rock is worthless.

I wouldn’t be friends with trickery joe but…

Plot twist: tricky joe was right and is now a millionare

Would joes rock technically not be worth 800 cuz youre paying 200 dollars for something possibly worth 1000

This is the exact reason that urine tests are so unreliable. When they say that it is accurate 97% of the time, they do not take into account the false positives and the false negatives in their tests.

I,s so bom!