"Four out of five times, it’s green; the other time, the red light flashes. But the exact sequence is kept random."
"Stranger still, humans persist in this behavior even when researchers tell them the flashing lights are random."
So I'm a bit confused about what they told the humans. Given that the light can only be red or green, but its rigged to be 80% green, how is this random? Sure the sequence is random. Out of 10, you might have 8 greens in a row and then 2 red to keep the 80% green ratio. But if someone told me something was random which only had two outcomes, I would assume it should be 50/50, like a coin toss. Therefore, I would assume that even though each individual outcome is random, after too many of one in a row, given that it should be 50/50, the other is long over due, or rather, this sequence of too many of one is quite rare. Of course it doesn't mean that the next one or the one after that will be different, but the chances of something that is random with a 50/50 outcome being 10 of the same in a row is highly highly improbable, although it can of course happen. Or better put, 2 of the same in a row is likely, 3 of the same is likely, 4 happens sometimes, 5 can also happen, 6 is getting quite rare, etc... until you hit 10 which you would almost never expect but of course have to plan for.
Anyway, so I'm just wondering what I'm misunderstanding. If they meant that the next light to come up is random, then I get it, meaning they don't have the sequence of how the lights come up written down in advance. But to say its random even though its programmed to flash 80% green is I don't think accurate in the sense of what random means given only two outcomes.
