Riffle seven times and you’ll have a sufficiently random ordering of cards, an ordering that has likely never existed before. In other words, it’s unlikely you’ll ever shuffle two decks the same. //

...what if instead of a standard riffle using a deck roughly split in half, you were to only riffle 1 card at a time?

That is, using a standard deck of 52 cards, in one hand hold 51 cards and in the other hold the remaining single card. Now riffle these together. This is equivalent to taking one card and placing it at random inside of the deck.

So here’s the question:
How many single riffles do you have to do in order to have a completely shuffled deck? //

On average, 236 single card riffles will randomly shuffle a deck of cards. //

Equations are great, but let’s visualize this! Below is the same ordered deck of cards from before, except the K♦ has been highlighted red so we can follow its journey to the top of the deck.

Click the Riffle button to move the top card somewhere else in the deck randomly.

On its initial publication in 1998, John R. Lott’s More Guns, Less Crime drew both lavish praise and heated criticism. More than a decade later, it continues to play a key role in ongoing arguments over gun-control laws: despite all the attacks by gun-control advocates, no one has ever been able to refute Lott’s simple, startling conclusion that more guns mean less crime. Relying on the most rigorously comprehensive data analysis ever conducted on crime statistics and right-to-carry laws, the book directly challenges common perceptions about the relationship of guns, crime, and violence. For this third edition, Lott draws on an additional ten years of data—including provocative analysis of the effects of gun bans in Chicago and Washington, D.C—that brings the book fully up to date and further bolsters its central contention.

It’s become virtually impossible to find reliable data or polling on gun violence these days. A new Kaiser Family Foundation report being shared by virtually every major media outlet this week offers us a good example of why. The headlines report that “1 in 5 adults” in the United States claim that a “family member” has been “killed” by a gun. And, let’s just say, that’s a highly dubious claim.

There are 333 million people living in the United States, and somewhere around 259 million of them are over the age of 18. Twenty percent of those adults equals nearly 52 million people. There were more than 40,000 gun deaths in 2022, and around 20,000 of them were homicides — a slight dip from a Covid-year historic high that followed decades of lows. So, according to Kaiser’s polling, every victim of gun violence in the past few years had hundreds, if not thousands, of “family members.”

Now, to be fair, we can’t really run the numbers because Kaiser doesn’t define its terms or parameters. For example, what constitutes a “family member”? Is your second cousin a family member? Because if so, that creates quite the nexus of people. What about your stepbrother’s second cousin? Or how about your uncle who died in Iraq? Or how about that grandfather you never met who committed suicide in 1968? Kaiser could have asked people about their “immediate” relatives. The opacity is the point.

Then again, you can always spot a misleading firearms study by checking if the authors conflate suicides and murders. Kaiser does. //

What Kaiser doesn’t mention in its press-friendly “key findings” — and no media piece I’ve read mentions — is that 82 percent of those polled feel “very” or “somewhat safe” from gun violence in their own neighborhoods. Only 18 percent of Americans say they worry about gun violence on a daily or almost daily basis, while 43 percent say they worry about it “rarely” or “never.” So, you’re telling me, half of American adults have personally experienced gun violence themselves or toward someone in their family, but less than 20 percent worry about it often?

We report a retrospective case series of exposures to iocane powder, a deadly, odorless, tasteless, and absolutely fictional poison [1]. A 10-year review of an imaginary Sicilian Poison Center database revealed 32 exposures, coincidentally all ingestions from wine goblets. There were 29 (90.6 %) patients with no clinical effects, 2 (6.3 %) with minor effects, 1 (3.1 %) with a moderate effect and 0 with major effects. No deaths occurred and no patient suffered permanent sequelae. These data show that iocane exposure is not universally fatal, as previously thought. Given the apparent relative safety, with less than 10 % of patients experiencing clinical effects, poison centers may choose to allow asymptomatic exposed patients to be observed at home.