ROBERT R. PROVINE
Psychologist and Neuroscientist, University of Maryland; Author, Laughter

Human Behavior is Unconsciously Controlled.

Until proven otherwise, why not assume that consciousness does not play a role in human behavior? Although it may seem radical on first hearing, this is actually the conservative position that makes the fewest assumptions. The null position is an antidote to philosopher's disease, the inappropriate attribution of rational, conscious control over processes that may be irrational and unconscious. The argument here is not that we lack consciousness, but that we over-estimate the conscious control of behavior. I believe this statement to be true. But proving it is a challenge because it's difficult to think about consciousness. We are misled by an inner voice that generates a reasonable but often fallacious narrative and explanation of our actions. That the beam of conscious awareness that illuminates our actions is on only part of the time further complicates the task. Since we are not conscious of our state of unconsciousness, we vastly overestimate the amount of time that we are aware of our own actions, whatever their cause.

http://www.psyc.bbk.ac.uk/people/academic/usher_m/jm...

‏¹http://www.edge.org/q2005/q05_print.html

IHG0056D STORAGE OVERFLOW HAS OCCURRED IN WHOAMI () FUNCTION

assuming the price offered is normally distributed, use n-9 samples to get a good estimation of the first 2 moments (mean and variance), and then take the first offer which is more then a sigma below the mean. (since a third are, 9 samples will get you there with high probability).

if n is big enough, use n-k (k>9), and demand more then a sigma as your threshold.

or simply take the first one - you'll get the mean price, and you don't have to waist any more time.

no no, the others are piegons - very smart consumers publishing comperative reaserch on the web etc. I'm the only hawk.