Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)AM
Posts
0
Comments
906
Joined
2 yr. ago

rule

Jump
  • I was mostly providing the IPA as a joke. It's just copied from somewhere, I could probably track it back down and you could take it up with them. Certainly nothing in "door" or "hadouken" is anything close to an "oo" no matter how they're all written.

  • rule

    Jump
  • In Japanese the syllable definitely does not rhyme with "too", that's closer to う which is not a vowel (albeit a character) in this word. Either way this is my bad for trying to use English phonetically.

    I should've said "look up a video where it's pronounced by a Japanese person" up front. :p

  • rule

    Jump
  • [hadoːkẽꜜɴ]

    Or if the IPA is not helpful:

    "Ha" as in "hard" but with a shorter vowel, not the æ thing from "had".

    "Door" without the R - the stress is here (hadouken). The important part is avoiding "oh" which sounds extremely thickly Anglo ("chipoohhhtlayyyyyy")

    Ken is ken, I guess.

  • EDIT : Why am i getting down voted this is litterally the no stupid questions sub.

    Because the point is to have a place to ask questions without having them judged as "stupid". It's "we will try to treat questions like they're not stupid" and this comes across as trying very hard to make that impossible.
    On the off chance you're not trolling, be advised it sure as hell looks a lot like you're trolling.

  • That could be reasonable in certain scenarios, but that's technically not the gambler's fallacy anymore; at that point you're talking about the "something specifically made it that way" I mentioned. I was talking about uniform/fair distribution of outcomes (part of the definition of the gambler's fallacy), otherwise it's just "hey, this distribution is lopsided as hell".

  • The important part is "internalizing" that one spin doesn't influence the next. A red won't be more likely after N blacks unless something specifically made it that way. Sequences like "long run of reds/blacks" don't have any actual significance, but "seems like they should" because we're heavily geared towards pattern matching.