| ??? 04/11/11 14:04 Read: times |
#181811 - Missing the point! Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Jason Arkwright said:
It has long been established that ring counter type psuedo number generators work suffuciently well They work sufficienly well for some applications. But the problem is that they are not random; they are entirely predictable & repeatable - the same sequence is produced every time from the same seed. See Erik's example. The point of the idea is to give a truly random seed for your pseudo-random generator. But, as others have noted, even that is still not sufficient for those applications where your need a truly random sequence... |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Truly Random Number Generator | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Latency Time Problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| this is bad | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Don't think 1:1 mapping | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| understanding | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Doesn't matter | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yeah, yeah!! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Way more than 3 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| baloney | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| So easy to make assumptions and crash and burn | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Missing the point! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Its just soooo wrong | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Randomness - NOT | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The key point is | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Johnson noise versus zener noise... | 01/01/70 00:00 |