I feel like the pick random reporter isn’t truly random. I’ve gotten the same option 6 times in a row out of a pick random 1-6. Similar things happen all the time, which is statistically almost impossible
Random number generators in programming are never truly random. You chose a small set of numbers, which means you’re more likely to get the same number many times. You just got unlucky.
I thought so too, but this is a common occurrence for me, even across projects.
Hmm… When I generate a list of a Million random numbers from 0-9 and then look at distribution of its bi-grams, it seems pretty evenly spread out, with occurrences ranging from a minimum of 12114 to a maximum of 12606. Similar frequency distributions occur for larger subchains. Dunno if this is a good way to examine a RNG, but I find it pretty convincing:
If it were less random I’d expect more of a bell curve, or at least some distinct peaks. But I’m not seeing any.
The word is: pseudorandom.
Did you mean: lucky?
unlucky also makes sense, because they wanted random and they were so unlucky it did not seem random.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.