It’s a small part on the German border which we got as compensation for WWI. It has a population of roughly 80.000 people, less than 1% of the Belgian population. The two main languages are Dutch (60ish %) and French (40ish %), but German is technically a national language.

I suspect that people in Flanders encounter way more Germans than German-speaking Belgians.

Can’t speak for the Netherlands, but here in Belgium the first thing anyone thinks of when you speak German is the war. I know I’m not supposed to mention it…

That being said, German usually sounds like angry Dutch to us, so I guess we both agree on where we are on the funny-angry spectrum.

Also, most of your examples are more common in the Netherlands, which are definitely further along the funny axis.

No, I agree that independence is necessary, not just because of “always”, but because if, as a crude example, your odds of hitting B halve each time you hit A, an infinite number of tries isn’t guaranteed to give you Shakespeare, even if the odds aren’t technically 0. My problem was that what you originally described wasn’t independence, it’s uniformity, which isn’t a prerequisite. And it’s up to 9 upvotes now so I don’t know what’s going on.

What? That’s not what independence means. They need to be independent, yes, because otherwise you might get into weird corner cases where the probably doesn’t converge to 1, but they don’t have to be equally likely. In fact, weighing the odds based on how often letters are used by Shakespeare should lower the expected timeframe. Heck, Shakespeare doesn’t use “J”, why would that key even be relevant? Where in the world do normal distributions even come into this? How does this comment have 4 upvotes? What am I missing here?