I am the autist who created the spicy mayo frog picture. Let me bite on my own bait
You start with 4 possible sets (equally likely before considering the croak): FF, FM, MF, MM
Hearing a croak indicates there is at least one male. FM = 1/3, MF = 1/3, MM = 1/3.
Now. Can hearing a croak, and one croak only, give us a hint on the weights of each possibility? Let's investigate.
If there are two males, wouldn't it be twice as likely to hear a croak than with any set with only one male?
Put it this way, we have these 3 equally likely sets, FM, MF, MM.
Each male is as likely to croak as the other. 1/2 of the males we hear would come from the MM set.
That would give us 1/2 chance of survival.
Using the same logic however, wouldn't the fact that only one croak was heard make it more likely for the 2nd frog to be a female?
Given that the croak distribution and listening time interval are unknown, We would have to cover the range of possibilities.
Since they are unknown, let's assume both the interval between croaks and listening could be infinite or infinitesimal.
With that mind, we can infer that we end up a probability of hearing a 2nd croak (if the 2nd frog is a male) that sits in ]0,1[.
Refer to Harvard-anon if you want to argue about infinity and shit, i don't really care about this.
The point is that as long as the croak distritbution and listening time interval are undefined, there is nothing we can do a bout the weights of each probability.
If anything, the chance of survival is at least 1/2, and if you die, at least you got to lick some spicy mayo frogs.
But most importantly, I am thrilled to see other anons continually share this because I personally get banned every time.
I knew retarded anons would bite. The frog problem is a known bait.
