Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.programming > #7132

Re: Dice: mechanical vs electrical

From bartekltg <bartekltg@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c, comp.lang.clipper, comp.lang.ada, comp.programming, alt.comp.freeware, alt.conspiracy
Subject Re: Dice: mechanical vs electrical
Date 2016-12-12 20:17 +0100
Organization ATMAN - ATM S.A.
Message-ID <o2mt3h$er6$1@node1.news.atman.pl> (permalink)
References <o2jiap$oo0$1@dont-email.me> <o2ksv5$dlp$1@node1.news.atman.pl> <o2mded$kjs$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 6 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


On 12.12.2016 15:51, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:

>
> Maybe we should forget about true randomness from digital, electronic
> dice. Then stop calling them "random number", not even "digital random
> number"!!!!!  :)
>

There is a name for it. Pseudo-random numbers.

We still can talk about true random numbers. Random, that mean
there is no way to predict it. Hardware generators gives numbers
that is random, (unless you are a philosopher and believe in some
strange deterministic QM interpretation ;-)


If you do not believe in CPU's hardware generators, you can buy
a hardware generator that bases on quantum mechanics
(simpler, based on reflection of a photon, and more advance,
essential a laser but pumped by vacuum fluctuation).

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1411.4512v2.pdf
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1107.4438v1.pdf

You can download a short sample 1GB) of numbers generated that way.

http://qrng.anu.edu.au/

And we can't forgot about true randomness. OK, games
or even very serious monte carlo simulation works very well
without it, but cryptography _need_ an unpredictable random numbers.

bartekltg

Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-11 20:56 +0800
  Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-12-11 08:48 -0600
    Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 00:00 +0800
      Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-12-11 16:42 -0600
        Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 22:11 +0800
          Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? FromTheRafters <erratic@nomail.afraid.org> - 2016-12-12 10:00 -0500
            Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 23:03 +0800
              Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-12-12 07:08 -0800
              Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? FromTheRafters <erratic@nomail.afraid.org> - 2016-12-12 10:17 -0500
                Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 23:30 +0800
                Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? FromTheRafters <erratic@nomail.afraid.org> - 2016-12-12 10:57 -0500
        Re: The real and fair DIce of Solomon? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 22:13 +0800
  Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 00:05 +0800
  Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 00:46 +0800
    Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-12 01:44 +0100
  Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? bartekltg <bartekltg@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 02:02 +0100
    Re: Dice: mechanical vs electrical "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 22:51 +0800
      Re: Dice: mechanical vs electrical bartekltg <bartekltg@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 20:17 +0100
  Re: Fake randomness is still random? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 22:15 +0800
    Re: Fake randomness is still random? Johan Nel <johan.nel@xsinet.co.za> - 2016-12-12 16:46 +0200
      Re: Fake randomness is still random? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 22:49 +0800
        Re: Fake randomness is still random? Adam Jensen <hanzer@riseup.net> - 2016-12-12 10:35 -0500
          Re: Fake randomness is still random? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-12-12 07:56 -0800
    Re: Fake randomness is still random? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-12 16:41 +0000
      Re: Fake randomness is still random? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 17:45 +0100
      Re: Fake randomness is still random? root <NoEMail@home.org> - 2016-12-12 16:51 +0000
        Re: Fake randomness is still random? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 18:10 +0100
          Re: Randomness and Taro "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 02:28 +0800
        Re: From randomness to astrology "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 02:28 +0800
  Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2016-12-13 14:35 -0500
    Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-12-13 12:38 -0700
      Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2016-12-14 14:45 -0500
    Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 21:02 +0000
    Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? Jan van den Broek <fortytwo@xs4all.nl> - 2016-12-15 22:08 +0100

csiph-web