Random block without using random blocks!

[spaceelephant]

I believe physical TPMs can do this, so snap's builtin random number might be truly random, depending on your PC and OS.

[sqoosh]

Based on what Brian said, I could imagine any analog computer would be capable of it.

[bh]

@spaceelephant

TPMs can do this

Could be; I don't know enough about them to know for sure, but you're probably right. If so, it's because they have special circuitry to measure quantum randomness.

@sqoosh

any analog computer would be capable of it

Well, yes and no. Yes, because the voltage levels in an analog circuit are affected by quantum randomness, but in practice the precision with which actually built analog computers could measure those voltages was pretty weak -- much less precise than the ordinary arithmetic of modern digital computers.

[scratchmodification]

I actually discovered something right now:
I'm surprised that this algorithm, for me, generates similar numbers that random.org does:

---

Also @spaceelephant, can you determine if this algorithm can generate good random data?

[spaceelephant]

It isn't really an algorithom, but a program to fetch data from random.org. If random.org is good, which it is, your program will create good random data.

[scratchmodification]

Hmm... I was expecting an answer like this:

@spaceelephant

The test you gave does not do anything. The equal to block cannot differentiate between its inputs, so you will always get 10% true as long as at least one of the inputs is completely random. In fact, special random number is far less random.
In your block,
1 and 10 appear each with a 595/14674 probability,
2 and 9 with 1143/14674,
3 and 8 with 1596/14674,
4 and 7 with 1918/14674,
5 and 6 with 2085/14674.
This means that getting a 5 or a 6 is three times more likely than a 1 or 10, not the uniform distribution of the random number block, or true randomness.
If, for some reason, that block is not random enough, you can either seed an RNG from user input like mouse movement or video, or you can use random.org , which gets their numbers from lava lamps.

Edit: I was referring to my algorithm as well

[mr_owlssssnap2]

i still dont know how you get numbers from lava lamps

[scratchmodification]

I use a website called random.org, which gets their numbers from lava lamps.

[mr_owlssssnap2]

@mr_owlssssnap2

i still dont know how you get numbers from lava lamps

yes but how do you get random numbers from lava lamps??

[scratchmodification]

Lavarand

[mr_owlssssnap2]

thanks!

[mr_owlssssnap2]

interesting
edit: i just posted this how is it a minute old???

[spaceelephant]

Oh, I see, What does new random do though? I don't have the definition.

[scratchmodification]

Here:

@scratchmodification

It generates a list with raw random numbers that can be processed to make anything random.

[spaceelephant]

It seems to always create even numbers. You might want to fix that. Using the date, hour, etc is not helping, because those are derived from time in milliseconds in snap. Time in milliseconds is the total number of milliseconds since 1970, not a number under 1000. I am currently running a test, and so far it seems to be about even. I don't know if that is exact though.

[scratchmodification]

@spaceelephant

It seems to always create even numbers. You might want to fix that

Umm... Not always for me.

@spaceelephant

Using the date, hour, etc is not helping, because those are derived from time in milliseconds in snap.

Yes, I know. I use them because calculating the difference with Unix time will create a small but a good difference, so I can make it more random using operations.

[spaceelephant]

[scratchmodification]

Weird

[spaceelephant]

In any case, it does create evenly distributed pseudorandom numbers, at least if your clock continues to advance.

[scratchmodification]

@spaceelephant

it does create evenly distributed pseudorandom numbers, at least if your clock continues to advance.

Could you explain this better?