Fair enough. Probably not worth risking my job over then. I didn’t know if it was possible to verify receipts like that. But if it’s a possibility, then nah.

I would consider it mid-sized. Internal accounting department, not outsourced.

Would the size matter? So bigger companies reconcile every receipt with the company that provided the receipt?

TSA is moving away from ion mobility detection to mass spec detection. Mass specs are great at detecting it.

Trump is Wonder Woman

Right back at ya… obviously.

It can be, but it isn’t.

The theorem is only true if monkeys are random. But monkeys are not random, and therefore this cannot be proved true using monkeys.

Yeah I get that, what I’m arguing is that monkey input != random input. Therefore the probably is not 1.

And the Monty Hall problem is really cool, and yes, I’ve seen it before, but it doesn’t have anything to do with this one.

No, I’m saying it’s not just improbable (if it were improbable, then yes, it would happen), I’m saying it’s impossible because of behavior.

As a small example, let’s say you wanted to type the ABC’s. However, every time you typed, your finger slid to press the key next to it as well. Then, no matter how many times you tried, you would never be able to type the ABC’s. That’s an exaggerated example of what I believe the monkeys would do. They simply would not be able to type letters at random. The way they work, they would be forced to mush buttons that do not allow for whole words.

If there was another scenario where there were about 30 boxes (one for each letter and any punctuation needed), and the monkey had to get a banana from one of the boxes, and that is what ‘typed’ the script, then yes, an infinite number of monkeys would be able to type Shakespeare. But because it’s a typewriter, I don’t think even an infinite amount would be able to.