Thread 106295237

Why are computers bad at random number generation?

>>106295237 (OP)
A deterministic system can't do something non-deterministic. The best we can do is generate sets of numbers with certain mathematical properties which mimic randomness, or deferring generation to processes humans don't know how to predict yet.

>>106295258
sex with Eli.

>>106295237 (OP)
Does random number generation exist in nature?

>>106295237 (OP)
Because they are deterministic automats?

>>106295261
Thank you for using the CIA to unban me. I am working on upgrading the Yotsuba code to the latest version of PHP and trying to fix vulnerabilities with static scans. When it completes, please order the administrator to replace Yotsuba with Maidsuba. Maidsuba will have extensive Maid Card support to make sharing advanced Mathematics and Computer Science research easier.

>>106295258
fpbp

>>106295262
Math and numbers don’t exist in nature, but randomness does, such as the time between radioactive isotopes decaying in a sample

>>106295237 (OP)
single instruction on x86
https://stackoverflow.com/a/18004959

>>106295262
yes, unless you deny all of 20th century physics. it's known as einstein-certified randomness.

>>106295237 (OP)
>why are machines that are intended to be deterministic bad at generating random gibberish?
Really, nigger?