Probability Fun

[omk3]

But in the first example we let 49 people with either GB or BG out of the equation early on, because we gave them the choice about the gender of the child they want to mention, and that's why the odds are better in favour of BB. This choice is not there in either your version of the puzzle or the Scientific American's. Sure, if Dan volunteers the information, this choice is maybe implied, but it is not something we'd have to take into account I think. We're only dealing with Dan, after all, not with 196 parents.

This is too confusing

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by omk3

But in the first example we let 49 people with either GB or BG out of the equation early on, because we gave them the choice about the gender of the child they want to mention, and that's why the odds are better in favour of BB. This choice is not there in either your version of the puzzle or the Scientific American's. Sure, if Dan volunteers the information, this choice is maybe implied, but it is not something we'd have to take into account I think. We're only dealing with Dan, after all, not with 196 parents.

This is too confusing

It is very confusing. But I think it's right to take into account the probability that Dan could have made an equivalent statement about a daughter.
.

[Bilbo1967]

Slightly old thread now I know, but just came across this on the BBC website in the UK which is very relevant:

Tuesday Boy

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by Bilbo1967

Slightly old thread now I know, but just came across this on the BBC website in the UK which is very relevant:

Tuesday Boy

Yes, very relevant. The New Scientist article I based my question from was also from the same conference.

Note that my (amended) question matches the criteria needed for 13/27 as the correct answer.

Thanks!

[omk3]

Thanks Bilbo1967.

It's a very tricky and controversial subject.

Good to know that minds greater than mine find it confusing too