I have a friend at school (we will call him Miko for his privacy) and he believes that humans are more random than computers. I have created this website to prove him wrong! Press the buttons as randomly as humanly possible. Repeat that 10 or more times. Thank you if you did it! Go to statistics to view that my argument (computers are more random than humans) holds true!

Homework

I've been learning about the other 3 trigonometric functions: cosecant, secant, and cotangent. What is the point of these functions?

Help

Miko claims humans are more random because their "algorithm" for generating random number always changes. When the human is feeling silly, he might respond with 69 (nice) and if he is feeling mathematical, he might respond with 3.14159265358979323846264338 (pi) or 2.71828182845904523536028747135266967 (e). Please comment below with counter-arguments!

Closing

Thank you if you did the experiment and be sure to do the homework set up for you and the help as well!

Vote up if you liked this fun experiment!

Thanks a lot for messing up my data lol

Next time please fork and get your own endpoint at jsonstore.io. Thanks! Happy hacking! What did I just say? (to whoever messed up my data again)

By his argument computers are equally random (or even more random) because they can produce different results with a prng based just on the time of day, but in the same sense computers are way less random, because the random numbers are still following an exact pattern, no matter how obscure(it’s called a prng for a reason, right?). The thing is though I know it’s possible to get purely random numbers, because in c++11 they have a class called random_device that is listed as a 'true' rng. Also I’m pretty sure ranlux(the algo) is supposed to have been proven to have no connection / correlation / whatever-you-call-it between numbers.

@Highwaymanc++'s random_device is a true random number generator only if you instruct it to use the RDSEED assembly instruction. depending on how you compile it (i am unsure of the defaults), it can fallback to /dev/urandom and dev/random, or RDRAND, which are cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generators (CSPRNG), or to mersenne twister for regular pseudo random number generation.

ARE COMPUTERS MORE RANDOM THAN HUMANS?I have a friend at school (we will call him Miko for his privacy) and he believes that

humansare more random than computers. I have created this website to prove him wrong! Press the buttons as randomly as humanly possible. Repeat that 10 or more times. Thank you if you did it! Go to statistics to view that my argument (computersare more random than humans) holds true!## Homework

I've been learning about the other 3 trigonometric functions: cosecant, secant, and cotangent. What is the point of these functions?

## Help

Miko claims humans are more random because their "algorithm" for generating random number always changes. When the human is feeling silly, he might respond with 69 (nice) and if he is feeling mathematical, he might respond with 3.14159265358979323846264338 (pi) or 2.71828182845904523536028747135266967 (e). Please comment below with counter-arguments!

ClosingThank you if you did the experiment and be sure to do the homework set up for you and the help as well!

Vote up if you liked this fun experiment!Thanks a lot for messing up my data lolNext time please fork and get your own endpoint at jsonstore.io. Thanks! Happy hacking!

What did I just say?(to whoever messed up my dataagain)By his argument computers are equally random (or even more random) because they can produce different results with a prng based just on the time of day, but in the same sense computers are way less random, because the random numbers are still following an exact pattern, no matter how obscure(it’s called a

prng for a reason, right?). The thing is though I know it’s possible to get purely random numbers, because in c++11 they have a class called random_device that is listed as a 'true' rng. Also I’m pretty sure ranlux(the algo) is supposed to have been proven to have no connection / correlation / whatever-you-call-it between numbers.Very true. @Highwayman

Yes! I'll. Tell him that! @CodeABC123

@Coder100 might want to be careful and study up first though lol.

@Highwayman c++'s

`random_device`

is a true random number generator only if you instruct it to use the RDSEED assembly instruction. depending on how you compile it (i am unsure of the defaults), it can fallback to`/dev/urandom`

and`dev/random`

, or RDRAND, which are cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generators (CSPRNG), or to mersenne twister for regular pseudo random number generation.@eankeen very good to know actually! I’ve been looking for a csprng actually.