ARE COMPUTERS MORE RANDOM THAN HUMANS?
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!
I've been learning about the other 3 trigonometric functions: cosecant, secant, and cotangent. What is the point of these functions?
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!
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)
neat experiment :P. here's my two cents
computers will always be more random than humans because they have the potential to access sources of true randomness, such as atmospheric noise, or by using a computer processor that implements the RDSEED instruction. machines can generate cryptographically secure pseudorandom numbers (CSPRNG), which are not truly random but are good enough to be unpredictable, as their usage in cryptography may suggest. CSPRNG algorithms may use human interaction, such as from a keyboard and mouse to create entropy for seeding the entropy pool. while human interaction is not strictly necessary because entropy can be gathered from other sources, it typically speeds up the process of of CSPRN generation (ex. if you are using on linux and using the blocking
/dev/random). so, machines are able to generate "true" random numbers, and CSPRNGs (and of course others). humans are random enough to assist the CSPRNG, by helping seed the entropy pool through mouse movements etc. but, if you ask any human to 'generate' some random number, it will always be mostly predictable, as the number will, most of the time, be some small finite, some well known infinitely repeating irrational, or a exceptionally large integer that is divisible by
n. once the number is mostly predictable, it is no longer "truly" random or or a cryptographically secure random number. so, it sounds like both you and your friend are correct, just probably not in the ways either of you expected.
as you can see, i had quite a bit of fun researching the topic :P