MiceWithYaffle

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by MiceWithYaffle 9y ago

   Yeah, it's not for crypto. But I think it's for more than simulation and rendering. It's meant as a general purpose PRNG. It's just as good for randomized algorithms like picking the pivot in quicksort, or playing ga
2. 2.▲
   by MiceWithYaffle 9y ago

   > But I'll confess to not really understanding what all the fuss is about insecure generators. Based on things she's said on her site and in comments on John D. Cook's blog, it's all about algorithmic complexity attac
3. 3.▲
   by MiceWithYaffle 9y ago

   I think Vigna's claim is that if you ignore the PractRand tests that fail, it passes. (Really!) O'Neill has instructions on how to test with PractRand and with TestU01 on her blog ( http://www.pcg-random.org/blog&#
4. 4.▲
   by MiceWithYaffle 9y ago

   O'Neill recently mentioned the crypto aspects of PCG in an comment on another post by John D. Cook. I'll just quote it below. But it looks to me like she thought that any analysis she did on the prediction difficulty of PCG woul