flame about random numbers

Article View: ont.micro

Article #66

#66

From: anthony
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 1985 19:29

17 lines
1252 bytes

	I recently did some statistical tests on the random numbers
produced by an IBM PC, Apple II+, and a Commodore 64. I had each
machine generate 1,000,000 random numbers which where then transformed
to the digits 0 through 9 (inclusive). The statistical tests that
followed indicate that the Commodore 64 and Apple are horrible when
producing supposedly (pseudo) random numbers. The C64 was worse than
the Apple. The numbers produced by the PC where almost too good to be
true.
	I guess any games that rely on random number generation (and
other software for modelling, simulation etc.) are not as unique each
time as one may be led to think.

	Any comments by hackers out there ???

-- 
Anthony Ayiomamitis   {ihnp4|decvax|utzoo|utcsrgv}!utcs!utzoo!utcsstat!anthony

Technical Details

Message-ID: <2151@utcsstat.UUCP>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utcsrgv!utcsstat!anthony

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site utcsstat.UUCP
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utcsrgv!utcsstat!anthony
From: anthony@utcsstat.UUCP
Newsgroups: ont.micro
Subject: flame about random numbers
Message-ID: <2151@utcsstat.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 4-Jan-85 14:29:46 EST
Article-I.D.: utcsstat.2151
Posted: Fri Jan  4 14:29:46 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 4-Jan-85 14:42:56 EST
Organization: U. of Toronto, Canada
Lines: 17