Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c, comp.programming |
| Subject | Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? |
| Date | 2016-12-14 14:45 -0500 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <o2s7dv$q4e$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <o2jiap$oo0$1@dont-email.me> <o2piel$adq$6@dont-email.me> <1ba8bzvcv4.fsf@pfeifferfamily.net> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
On 12/13/2016 2:38 PM, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> writes:
>
>> On 12/11/2016 7:56 AM, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
>>>
>>> How to determine whether a random number generator is fake?
>>>
>>> How to determine whether a random number generator is cheating?
>> [...]
>>
>> I would think that, since a "true" random number generator can
>> generate any sequence of numbers (even the same number multiple times
>> in a row), I'm not sure you could prove "badness" here.
>>
>> Reminds me of this:
>>
>> http://xkcd.com/221/
>
> Not "prove". But as the numbers get farther and farther away from the
> expected distribution your eyebrows raise progressively higher.
Won't this show a perfect distribution over time?
:-)
=====
#include <limits.h>
int myPRNG(void)
{
static int next = 0;
if ( next == INT_MAX )
next = 0;
else
next++;
return(next);
}
=====
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-12-11 05:33 -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? "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? 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 00:46 +0800
Re: Fake random numbers? Bad programmers? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-12-11 10:45 -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? 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: Fake randomness is still random? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-12-12 11:22 -0600
Re: Fake randomness is still random? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-12-12 11:17 -0800
Re: Fake randomness is still random? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-12-12 14:49 -0600
Re: Fake randomness is still random? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-12-12 13:33 -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