4 ms·
Wait, what? I don’t have a specific cite, but I thought that predicting a random number generator that well is good enough to break common crypto algorithms? I
by SilasX 5y ago
Wait, what? I don’t have a specific cite, but I thought that predicting a random number generator that well is good enough to break common crypto algorithms?
IIRC, doing better than chance by 2^-32 is enough for the randomization system to be thrown out, and marching the output 51% is way better than that.
But yes, I’d agree with a steelmanned version of your point with a much smaller improvement over chance. But then, you would have to do a realllllly long test and it wouldn’t actually look that impressive.
- gs17 5y agoThanks, replace 51% with (50 + small non zero)%, anything more than chance, assuming the RNG has no bias to exploit, is "doing the impossible" but not necessarily feasible to profit off of.
- SilasX 5y agoHence my last paragraph: that would mean that psychic powers aren’t all that impressive and just have effects on the 32nd most significant bit.