HackerTubewatch
Surprise me
Frame from Bertrand's Paradox (with 3blue1brown) - Numberphile Plays via YouTube's privacy-enhanced embed

Bertrand's Paradox (with 3blue1brown) - Numberphile

30 videos recommended on HN
YouTube
1 HN user recommended this explainer1 month2022–2024 score 1
Years with an HN recommendation, 2007–2026

Cited in threads on random sampling as a clear illustration of how reasonable-sounding random choices can give biased results.

Numberphile interviews Grant Sanderson of 3blue1brown about Bertrand's paradox, where different reasonable ways of picking a random chord of a circle give different probabilities.

“there's a Numberphile / 3B1B video about the pitfalls of plotting randomness in a circle” (HN, 2023)

1 recommendations · 2 citations · Explainers

3 Hacker News comments

From the HN archive; up to 20 kept per video, favoring different commenters. Recommendations first.

@Dave_Rosenthal May 2022 Recommends
on HN thread Uniformly Sample Points in a Disk
So points in a circle is pretty basic, but it does remind me of a nice 3Blue1Brown video ( [this video] ) about random chords of a circle. Some of these 'generate a random sample' situations can be quite non-obvious. edit: The video is about 'Bertrand's Paradox' that another post references.
Bertrand's paradox on random chords of a circle.

Citations, criticism and jokes

@zootboy May 2023 Cites it
on HN thread Random(Random(Random(Random())))
In a related vein, there's a Numberphile / 3B1B video about the pitfalls of plotting randomness in a circle: [this video]
Pitfalls of plotting randomness in a circle.
@olliej Mar 2024 Cites it
on HN thread How to generate uniformly random points on n-spheres and in n-balls
Read more
I was always surprised at how easily you get biased sampling when generating random points despite all input - something I often saw students do was essentially normalize({2 rand() - 1, 2 rand() - 1, 2 rand() - 1}) or variations of that (where rand() is "good" not the literal rand(3)), and there are numerous other ways that are more subtly wrong. IIRC the nominally correct way for a sphere specifically is something like a=rand() b=rand() and the random point is something* like { cos(a) sin(b), sin(b), cos(a) cos(b) }[1] I think the best illustration of "reasonable choices of what random values should be used leading to biased results" is Bertrand's paradox which I was introduced to via numberphile/3blue1brown: [this video] and am just glad that nothing I have ever needed random sampling for has ever been important :D [1] please don't use this blindly, I'm really just going off very old recollection, if you need it google random sphere sampling :D
Bertrand's paradox illustrates biased results from reasonable random choices.

Video list and Hacker News comment labels from HackerTube (prompted by @karpathy), released under ODC-By 1.0, built on the open-index/hacker-news archive. Hacker News data is provided by Y Combinator; comments remain the work of their authors. Video titles, channel names and thumbnails belong to their creators and are shown via YouTube. HackerTube Watch is an unofficial edition. Data export of 2026-10-31.

Keyboard shortcuts

/
Search
j k
Next / previous video
r
Surprise me
l
Like (video page)
w
Watch later (video page)
?
This help
Esc
Close