> CSRNGs make good general-purpose-use guarantees, because those who don't demand much of their RNG will enjoy "living in ignorance" of RNG trade-off I totally

> CSRNGs make good general-purpose-use guarantees, because those who don't demand much of their RNG will enjoy "living in ignorance" of RNG trade-off I totally agree! Very few applications will notice if the random number generation takes 100 times more/less time. My point wasn't that CSPRNGs shouldn't be the default, it was that there definitely exist real situations where CSPRNGs are both not fast enough, and don't maximize the right kind of (domain-specific) quality. The more vexing aspect is that many default random number generators are both slower and much, much worse than some really simple (we're talking 10 lines of C) PRNGs that out score them in every measure of quality. This is a choice that makes absolutely zero sense.