Random numbers (emphasis on seeding the number)
-
Slacker007 wrote:
For all I know, the image is of someone passed out on the floor and was uploaded by a horny teenager. who knows, it's completely random.
That is someone the point. You have no control over it. That however does not make it random. Take the traditionally used seed, the clock. Certainly not random. However it makes for a great seed to generate psuedo randomness. To crack it is easy of course. As it is based off a known cyclical behavior, is are most random generators. They are not random in their source but actually how they sample. Your source is by no means random. Think of it this way, most people of specific age groups use the internet at their convenient times. Has to do with how each age group lives their lives etc. It is by no means random though. For example in your time zone at 2AM the probability of finding a person of age 50 online is lower than finding someone of age 22. (I am just assuming this but hopefully you see the point). The same is true for types of people. A person at 2AM will be accessing one image where as someone at 2PM will likely access a different type of image. I am not saying I know the pattern. I am saying there is deffinately one there, you just don't see it right now. A computer however will find it, eventually.
Slacker007 wrote:
My understanding of the meaning of random is that it happens naturally. I have no control over what value I grab at any given second of the day.
It does not happen naturally. It simply does not happen. We live in a world of cause and effect. If something 'appears' to be random, you are missing some data points.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
if an apple falls from the tree in spot a versus spot b, is that random? I view random as an act that happens where you have no control what is going to happen. In my case, I know I'm going to grab an image right this second but I have no idea what image I'm going to get. How is that not random? Even if you slipped me the image, I'm grabbing it at random. A computer can't find this pattern because the pattern does not exist. If you reach into a hat full of coins and you pull out one coin, wasn't finding that coin random? Was there a pattern there. I don't think so but who knows.
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
If something 'appears' to be random, you are missing some data points.
I don't believe this. Even though I love the Matrix movie.
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) -
if an apple falls from the tree in spot a versus spot b, is that random? I view random as an act that happens where you have no control what is going to happen. In my case, I know I'm going to grab an image right this second but I have no idea what image I'm going to get. How is that not random? Even if you slipped me the image, I'm grabbing it at random. A computer can't find this pattern because the pattern does not exist. If you reach into a hat full of coins and you pull out one coin, wasn't finding that coin random? Was there a pattern there. I don't think so but who knows.
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
If something 'appears' to be random, you are missing some data points.
I don't believe this. Even though I love the Matrix movie.
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)Slacker007 wrote:
if an apple falls from the tree in spot a versus spot b, is that random?
Not at all. There were many variables that make it difficult to predict. But we humans can even make a decent prediction. If the apple is on the north side it is unlikely it will land on the south side. To predict exactly where you need all variables. However you get closer and closer by simply adding more. The apple stem strenth, which is the product of billions of other variables (food, weather, genetics etc etc). The active weather such as wind and rain. The height of the apple and of course the actually ground material and lay out. These are just some (obviously) of the billions and billions of variables. I of course can not calculate exactly where it will land. But if it were possible to monitor all of these inputs one could predict the exact location. But as I said, one need only monitor enough to predict and they will statistically get it right.
Slacker007 wrote:
I view random as an act that happens where you have no control what is going to happen. In my case, I know I'm going to grab an image right this second but I have no idea what image I'm going to get. How is that not random? Even if you slipped me the image, I'm grabbing it at random.
Actually random is quite the opposite. It is requiring full control. By having full control you can create psuedo randomness. If you do not have full control, then your randomness is merely a miss-conception. You could have completely biased results and be non the wiser.
Slacker007 wrote:
A computer can't find this pattern because the pattern does not exist. If you reach into a hat full of coins and you pull out one coin, wasn't finding that coin random? Was there a pattern there. I don't think so but who knows.
But a pattern does exist, again you just are unaware of it. If the hat had all nickels in it there was no randomness to you picking a nickel vs a dime. If the hat had even the exact same amount of nickels as dimes there is still a higher probability of picking a nickel, as a nickel is bigger. It is therefore not random. Then most importantly, because you reliquished control it is possible that the hat has only one coin.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are ab
-
Slacker007 wrote:
if an apple falls from the tree in spot a versus spot b, is that random?
Not at all. There were many variables that make it difficult to predict. But we humans can even make a decent prediction. If the apple is on the north side it is unlikely it will land on the south side. To predict exactly where you need all variables. However you get closer and closer by simply adding more. The apple stem strenth, which is the product of billions of other variables (food, weather, genetics etc etc). The active weather such as wind and rain. The height of the apple and of course the actually ground material and lay out. These are just some (obviously) of the billions and billions of variables. I of course can not calculate exactly where it will land. But if it were possible to monitor all of these inputs one could predict the exact location. But as I said, one need only monitor enough to predict and they will statistically get it right.
Slacker007 wrote:
I view random as an act that happens where you have no control what is going to happen. In my case, I know I'm going to grab an image right this second but I have no idea what image I'm going to get. How is that not random? Even if you slipped me the image, I'm grabbing it at random.
Actually random is quite the opposite. It is requiring full control. By having full control you can create psuedo randomness. If you do not have full control, then your randomness is merely a miss-conception. You could have completely biased results and be non the wiser.
Slacker007 wrote:
A computer can't find this pattern because the pattern does not exist. If you reach into a hat full of coins and you pull out one coin, wasn't finding that coin random? Was there a pattern there. I don't think so but who knows.
But a pattern does exist, again you just are unaware of it. If the hat had all nickels in it there was no randomness to you picking a nickel vs a dime. If the hat had even the exact same amount of nickels as dimes there is still a higher probability of picking a nickel, as a nickel is bigger. It is therefore not random. Then most importantly, because you reliquished control it is possible that the hat has only one coin.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are ab
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
But a pattern does exist, again you just are unaware of it.
I know where you are going with this...I think. However, if your theory is correct then we could predict precisely when each of us die and when someone kills...based on patterns of course.
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) -
A thought came to me today about random seed generation. I googlied a bit but found nothing (using image data)...still could be there. You have a series of images. you count the pixels and use that as your random seed. Delete the image. The images are constantly being replenished by new images of all shapes and sizes and formats from the internet or scanned in or whatever. I would "think", that if the images were gathered...at random...with no care at all, the seed value would be random and not predictable. I am not a crypto guru so you can laugh all you want. :)
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)You already started your project with VB.Net didn't you?
-
You already started your project with VB.Net didn't you?
I love it. That was damn funny. :laugh: I am going insane. You are so right.
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) -
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
But a pattern does exist, again you just are unaware of it.
I know where you are going with this...I think. However, if your theory is correct then we could predict precisely when each of us die and when someone kills...based on patterns of course.
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)Given enough information yes. For example, a person that chooses to drink and drive has a statistically higher probability of dieing in a car crash. Not only that, but people living in the community around them do as well. Someone that excersizes every day reduces their chance of having a heart attack, while someone that eats fast food regularily increases it. If you had all of the information of everyones lives you could have running statistics on probabilities of them dieing in all manners, at any given moment. In addition you could extrapolate there death in the future as you would also be able to predict their future actions based on current and past actions. We in fact already do this, but since it the information is quite lacking it is not always accurate. A doctor diagnoses you with some illness and predicts you have so long to live. Police profile people that kill animals etc. and predict they will kill a person in X years. Police profile stalkers and predict they will rape in X months etc. etc.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
-
yeah but there are so many warnings and tags for this article that question it's origins, purpose, and authenticity that I have to suspect it completely.
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)You could also search for "random accumulator" or "entropy accumulator".
FILETIME to time_t
| FoldWithUs! | sighist | WhoIncludes - Analyzing C++ include file hierarchy -
Isn't
rand(42);
random enough for you. :cool:
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra] posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]
-
A thought came to me today about random seed generation. I googlied a bit but found nothing (using image data)...still could be there. You have a series of images. you count the pixels and use that as your random seed. Delete the image. The images are constantly being replenished by new images of all shapes and sizes and formats from the internet or scanned in or whatever. I would "think", that if the images were gathered...at random...with no care at all, the seed value would be random and not predictable. I am not a crypto guru so you can laugh all you want. :)
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)How about...
public static Int32 random(Int32 lowerBound, Int32 upperBound) { Int32 range = (upperBound++) - lowerBound; byte[] seed = Guid.NewGuid().ToByteArray(); RNGCryptoServiceProvider rng = new RNGCryptoServiceProvider(seed); byte[] sequence = new byte[1]; rng.GetBytes(sequence); return (Int32)(sequence[0] % range) + lowerBound; }Kevin Rucker, Application Programmer QSS Group, Inc. United States Coast Guard OSC Kevin.D.Rucker@uscg.mil "Programming is an art form that fights back." -- Chad Hower
-
How about...
public static Int32 random(Int32 lowerBound, Int32 upperBound) { Int32 range = (upperBound++) - lowerBound; byte[] seed = Guid.NewGuid().ToByteArray(); RNGCryptoServiceProvider rng = new RNGCryptoServiceProvider(seed); byte[] sequence = new byte[1]; rng.GetBytes(sequence); return (Int32)(sequence[0] % range) + lowerBound; }Kevin Rucker, Application Programmer QSS Group, Inc. United States Coast Guard OSC Kevin.D.Rucker@uscg.mil "Programming is an art form that fights back." -- Chad Hower
There is no perfect Random generator. All I was doing was getting community feedback on an idea I was toying with on "seeding" RNG's. The whole idea being that you cannot generate the seed. The seed has to be random. Well, how do you get random? My idea was to use some sort of random "image/picture" grab from the net and use the pixel count of that image as your seed. I'm sure color count or something similar could be used as well...as long as you are not in monochrome format or the like. Thanks for the suggestion.
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) -
jschell wrote:
Do you see any circles there?
do you because I don't. The images are random by nature. I don't create the randomness in that, the internet does. I use that natural randomness of the images to seed my random number. The only thing I am creating is the final random number.
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)You seem to assume that the randomness of the content of pictures from the internet in general makes your specific pick somehow random. It doesn't! Unless you use some kind of random element, you will pick a very specific picture from a very specific URL, and every other person doing the same will get exactly the same image if following that algorithm. The only random element here is the point in time that you choose to select and download that picture (and even that will only make a difference if you're talking about some image feed channel like you mentioned). So, in the end, you've based your random number on the current time, just like everyone else! :)
-
You seem to assume that the randomness of the content of pictures from the internet in general makes your specific pick somehow random. It doesn't! Unless you use some kind of random element, you will pick a very specific picture from a very specific URL, and every other person doing the same will get exactly the same image if following that algorithm. The only random element here is the point in time that you choose to select and download that picture (and even that will only make a difference if you're talking about some image feed channel like you mentioned). So, in the end, you've based your random number on the current time, just like everyone else! :)
Actually, no. If you have ever been on 4Chan then you would understand what I am talking about. You also need to know that there is no way for you to grab the image at the same time I am because you have no idea when I'm grabbing it. Images on 4Chan come and go (get moved or deleted) every second. If you don't know when I am going to grab that image, then you have no idea what my seed value was or is.
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) -
A thought came to me today about random seed generation. I googlied a bit but found nothing (using image data)...still could be there. You have a series of images. you count the pixels and use that as your random seed. Delete the image. The images are constantly being replenished by new images of all shapes and sizes and formats from the internet or scanned in or whatever. I would "think", that if the images were gathered...at random...with no care at all, the seed value would be random and not predictable. I am not a crypto guru so you can laugh all you want. :)
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)If you want true randomness, use hardware-based random number generators[^]. :) The RNG in this article is based on thermal noise on your personal hardware, so anyone trying to duplicate your sequence of random numbers will need to have physical access to your hardware. P.S.: you could probably build something like this yourself if you can read the temperature from certain hardware components, such as your graphics core - I know there is software that can display such values, so it must be possible to read them.
-
If you want true randomness, use hardware-based random number generators[^]. :) The RNG in this article is based on thermal noise on your personal hardware, so anyone trying to duplicate your sequence of random numbers will need to have physical access to your hardware. P.S.: you could probably build something like this yourself if you can read the temperature from certain hardware components, such as your graphics core - I know there is software that can display such values, so it must be possible to read them.
This is what I am talking about. Thanks for the link. My belief as well as others is that, you have to get your seed from a random occurring event. You can't create the seed, it has to be created for you. This really was my argument, I just don't put down my thoughts very well sometimes. Again, thanks for the link. :thumbsup:
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) -
-
A thought came to me today about random seed generation. I googlied a bit but found nothing (using image data)...still could be there. You have a series of images. you count the pixels and use that as your random seed. Delete the image. The images are constantly being replenished by new images of all shapes and sizes and formats from the internet or scanned in or whatever. I would "think", that if the images were gathered...at random...with no care at all, the seed value would be random and not predictable. I am not a crypto guru so you can laugh all you want. :)
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)You could put a microphone on your local sewer dump, record the random crap splash sounds and from there seed your random crap number generator. :laugh: That basic need can be unpleasantly random.
"To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems" - Homer Simpson
-
You could put a microphone on your local sewer dump, record the random crap splash sounds and from there seed your random crap number generator. :laugh: That basic need can be unpleasantly random.
"To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems" - Homer Simpson
Although your post was geared to be funny, and it was, it proves my point. Using digital output from anything around us in the physical world and the digital world would work.
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) -
The capacity is limited to only three numbers (2,3 and 6). How's that random? ;P
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra] posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]
-
Although your post was geared to be funny, and it was, it proves my point. Using digital output from anything around us in the physical world and the digital world would work.
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)I guess you're right. Random it will be. And I tend to believe that nothing is more random than nature (if it is at all), in your case, pictures taken and uploaded by people (nature). I'd just use another method, instead of dimensions, I'd get a few pixels from the pictures and with some sort of algorithm, create the seed. If security is not a concearn, than both our methods would work. The difference is, your are not so nasty.
"To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems" - Homer Simpson
-
A thought came to me today about random seed generation. I googlied a bit but found nothing (using image data)...still could be there. You have a series of images. you count the pixels and use that as your random seed. Delete the image. The images are constantly being replenished by new images of all shapes and sizes and formats from the internet or scanned in or whatever. I would "think", that if the images were gathered...at random...with no care at all, the seed value would be random and not predictable. I am not a crypto guru so you can laugh all you want. :)
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)