Martin EscardoMar 26
I have a calculator that is correct 80% of the time. But don't worry, every time I use it, I check the results myself.
Show threadMartin Escardo

I wished somebody else said this in this thread. So I say it myself.

Of course, we use a calculator because we don't know the result in advance.

A calculator is useless if once we get the result we have to check it.

Apr 12 at 6:28pmWeb
Show threadJulia Himmel1d ago
@MartinEscardo This is only true if checking the result is just as hard as computing it. For an NP-hard problem, a calculator that gives a correct witness for 80% of 'yes' instances could be an extremely useful tool.
Show threadMr. ZER021h ago
@juhi @MartinEscardo
I believe he was specific when he said it's useless, it wasn't a general claim. In the usage case where one checks the results every time, you might as well not use it, since it's extra labor. Like most things, it depends. That said, in regards to a 80% calculator, one could use the calculator multiple times or spam it, then see the results and take the mean result to be the correct result if using the calculator is faster than "checking the results myself".
Show threadMr. ZER021h ago
@juhi @MartinEscardo
But in that case, there is a certain level of uncertainty in the result, even though it could be negligible. You don't have that absolute certainty that the result is correct until you check the result, its like you said, in cases of NP-hard problems and perhaps where bruteforce work is needed and one could afford ("to fail") or ("a level of uncertainity") then it would be useful. Tbh, it's usefulness is mostly economics: "cost of usage" vs "cost of checking".