In article <1igppyz.vdss3k1yjx0fmN%per@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
per@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Per Rønne) wrote:
> Helpful Harry <helpful_harry@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > In article <1igpliq.xs2cpop6w02sN%per@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
per@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > (Per Rønne) wrote:
> >
> > > Helpful Harry <helpful_harry@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yep. It's physically and logically impossible to get a TRUELY
random
> > > > number on a computer. Everything you try to do is based on
mathematical
> > > > manipulation of some static source that can easily be replicated
(which
> > > > in some cases is of course handy).
> > >
> > > I just don't see why. After all the clock changes all the time and
if
> > > you take the last 10 or 100 digits of such a clock, it should be
random
> > > because you simply cannot begin at exactly the same microsecond in a
> > > cycle.
> >
> > The clock can be reset, therefore numbers generated via the clock can
> > never be truely random.
>
> So you include the risk of cheating in your argument?
It's not "cheating" as such. If you base a "random" number generator on
a simple clock (for example), and then starting the process at the same
time every day produces the same string of numbers, therefore it's not
really random at all.
> > Computers can only ever generate psuedo-random
> > numbers in a sequence that is easy to replicate, and therefore not
> > truely random.
>
> Unless data is taken from something outside the computer.
>
> Like a sensor or a clock that there isn't cheated with.
>
> And please do remember that on a computer with lots of processes and
> lots of users, it is unpredictable exactly /when/ a certain process
> reaches a certain point.
They still are not truely random numbers - they're being based on some
form of linear process, which makes then NOT random at all.
> > True randomness cannot be duplicated a second time.
>
> And since we can never be sure that a person isn't cheating, true
> randomness can never be ascertained in experiments or observations.
That's the point. TRUE randomness can't be "cheated" in any way.
Therefore any form a "randomness" that can be "cheated" is really just
psuedo-random at best.
Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hard****ps ;o)
|
