Impractical with metal coin.
Talking about the same thing from different perspective is hardly off topicā¦
You claim that a computer simulation is the same thing as real life. Itās not.
Well I can give you that, Its more practical.
and being more practical is at the cost of being realistic.
But it is more realistic to use computer using this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_random_number_generator than people for coin throwing. So there is one for me.
Realism of randomness is not using algorithm anyway.
āComputers are more realistic than humanā.
That a very high level of stupidity you have here.
Computers are NOT realistic. They show whatever you asked them to show. If you give them a program that shows something that never happen, they will show it. Does not mean it is realistic.
Did you even check that wiki link? How is that hardware working? Please, you have not enough what it takes in this discussionā¦
No, because itās off-topic.
You donāt even try to understand what Iām saying, just nitpicking on some terms to be completely off-topic.
Thus you claim things completely stupid.
Just because you are unable to understand what Iām saying, does not mean that I am not in the discussion. You are the one derailing the topic with nitpicking : you take specific words, out of the context, and make claim about those terms as if those claims had any effect on the actual use I made of those terms.
My claim was about a real toss of 100 coins. Your claim about computers is just completely off-topic.
Then whatever you think from there, is stupidity : it just makes no sense in the context of the discussion.
You should check it.
I told you already, you are off topic. So no, I should not go check random BS that you sprout because you realize your posts in that topic are completely stupid.
What can you say about realism tho? How you can think realism of a person throwing coin is any better than using thermal noise for generating throws? Which randomness is more real for you? Yes, randomness, people and thermal noise exists and is real, only degree of realism you are trying to argue about is the unpredictability.
If you donāt know what realism is, I am sorry but I have bad news for you.
here is a link that is actually related to the topic :
part B2
I didnt ask about realism but about randomness, because person coin and thermal noise is real and is in fact happening.
And I told you, if you donāt consider realism you are off topic.
But I did, by all means realistic are all those things you can use to get real randomness.
ārealisticā does not apply to randomness. It applies to something that represents reality with great precision, but is not.
And computer simulations are not realistic representations of coin toss. Because they are over simplification of the reality.
They are designed for small amount of values, but using them for huge amount leads to their error margin being too strong for the result predictions they allow to make.
The way you generate entropy bits is unrelated. You can ask your dog , use pseudo random series generation based on the nanoseconds of boot time, the time between Beta-emission in a set of atoms, itās completely out of topic.
Just to be clear : I know very well that if your program repeatedly pop() 100 bits from the entropy pool, it can happen to pop 100 ā0ā. Itās still not the same thing as tossing 100 times a coin, repeatedly.
ārealisticā does not apply to randomness. It applies to something that represents reality with great precision, but is not.
So how off are those hardware randomness methods from actual person throwing the coin? You stated that it varies, can you prove that?
Who gives a ā ā ā ā ? You are off topic again.
If you have 100 toss and you get 100 tails, the coin is rigged. Period.
But sometimes its not. 