Why do some people feel computerized drawings are not random?

Reply #20

benmas — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:49:42 GMT

THats excatly the point...You said it best..OBSCURED (RNG) vs VISUAL (BALLS

Reply #19

time*treat — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:15:33 GMT

Whenever there is a choice of outcomes, there will also be a benefit to someone of having one outcome versus another.

When the mechanism of making that choice is obscured then it becomes possible to manipulate the final result.

Computers make manipulating the final result easy whether they are inside a lottery machine or a voting machine.

Reply #18

Guru101 — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 05:07:59 GMT

Well, I think computers can generate numbers to the point where the numbers chosen at random would be considered just as good as numbers in say a ball drawing from the perspective of human observation. It all depends on how you determine the seed to be used and how often you reeinitialize the RNG with a different seed.

Reply #17

BobP — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 06:55:32 GMT

Load * , 8, 1 [Return] The first lotto program I ever bought was Hooked On Lottery for the Commodore C-64 only to find loading it erased the help files to make room for draw history. I was supposed to print them first. I had a poster made of silver mylar with William Shatner adertising the 64 on it. Good times. BobP

Reply #16

Todd — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 02:14:21 GMT

I always love talking about Commodore computers, because my first computers -- used and owned -- were Commodores. The first PC I ever used was a Commodore PET (2001 series), and the first one I ever owned was a VIC-20. I also later owned a C-64 and a C-128. Those were fabulous computers

Reply #15

pacattack05 — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 23:47:44 GMT

That's amazing Todd. It's Japanese to me...lol

The only program I ever copied was a few games from a computer magazine back in 1988 on my father's commodore 128...lol

Go to, then next, go to step 3, repeat line 4...and so on...lol

They never did work right after I spent an hour writing the program. Either there was a mistake in there, or my dad would shut the computer off because he insisted I mow the lawn, Man was I infuriated. I told him that I just spent over an hour writing this pro... [ More ]

Reply #14

Todd — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 18:10:50 GMT

A computer is not capable of coming up with a number out of the blue. Computers are not creative they only do what they are told.

Therefore, there is no computer which generates a truly random number. The only true random numbers come from nature such as frequencies put out by radioactive decay.

A computer RNG works as follows:

It starts with a number called a seed. YOU supply this number to the RNG, normally by passing it a tick count of your computer's internal clock. (Specifically,... [ More ]

Reply #13

nanolike — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:47:30 GMT

Todd hello, good day.

What does the sequence and the seed value mean? And would you give a small example for the laymen. Thanks Todd.

Is it even possible to know the sequence and the seed value? Who would know something like this?

Is it possible for me to find out? I dont know anything about excel and have never used excel or any program really. Thanks Todd.

Reply #12

BobP — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:15:18 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by BobP on February 12, 2008

If authors like Tom Clancy actually do their research, it is possible to piggy back undetectable code on a cd or dvd used to load a computer with a program. Millions of dollars can be a very real incentive to learn more about programming when given the chance to program a random number generator for a lottery. BobP

Ability, opportunity and will must come together in one package.

When you do a scheme like this properly no one wil... [ More ]

Reply #11

guesser — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 05:36:09 GMT

But if this is the case, don't you think it would have been done LONG ago ? We've had a few 200+ million dollar jackpots...

Reply #10

ThatScaryChick — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:52:27 GMT

I just don't see a computer being random enough. I just don't trust them. I trust ball drawings. I still play RNG games because in my state they are all computerized except Powerball and I like to play Hot Lotto and Wild Card 2.

Reply #9

guesser — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 18:22:42 GMT

Random computerized drawing.

It's only random if I can look at the code to see how the 'randomness' is generated.

If it's just a 'random' generator, it's not random.

But if it's a 'random generator' that takes into effect/into the algorythym the State, Date and Time down to the millionth of a second you generate the 'random' number, it would be pretty hard to crack. But that is not counting someone sharp enough to hack their system to run in-place of the legitimate generator.

Another... [ More ]

Reply #8

Newb — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:17:54 GMT

There's website where you can enter a random sequence of integers and it will try to find an algorithm that will produce a similar set of integers.

Reply #7

justxploring — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:11:03 GMT

Reply #6

benmas — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 07:57:03 GMT

I personally beleive that people like to SEE the ACTION (meaning balls bouncing around) vs a comp or any other nonvisual method that spits out numbers at random even if that random is true without fraud.

The KEY is VISUAL methods because our BRAINS absorb it better for whatever psychological reason...

Einstein once said that it is better to conduct experiments that employ visual methods and he recommended theories with visualizable results....

Reply #5

KY Floyd — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 07:29:15 GMT

From what I've read here, BobP's answer sums it up. It's not so much that people think it's so hard to create a decent RNG, it's that people are sure there will be some conspiracy to manipulate the RNG. The conspiracy may take any of a few forms. One is that the lottery will manipulate the RNG to select numbers that maximize their profit. Another is that the programmer(s) who write the RNG code, and/or the people who guard the computers, and/or the people who execute the drawings will manipulate... [ More ]

Reply #4

dalotterybandit — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 04:07:32 GMT

It can't get no better than that...I'm with ya cha all the way

Reply #3

BobP — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 03:44:30 GMT

If authors like Tom Clancy actually do their research, it is possible to piggy back undetectable code on a cd or dvd used to load a computer with a program. Millions of dollars can be a very real incentive to learn more about programming when given the chance to program a random number generator for a lottery. BobP

Reply #2

Todd — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 03:26:19 GMT

Actually, you can't make a random number generator on Excel that is random. When you generate random numbers in Excel, you're actually just spitting out a pre-determined sequence of numbers that starts at whatever seed value you supply. If you don't supply a seed value, most common RNGs use the computer's internal clock. If you know the sequence and the seed value, you can accurately predict all the numbers that will come out.

Search is in the Forums menu.

Reply #1

Pogo — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 03:10:05 GMT

I guess the simple answer is... People made the computer the software and because it didn't come from nature it can't be random. Everything the computer is based on is solely the internal clock, it saves files based on the clock, it runs programs based on the clock, it issues commands receives commands and so much more all based on the clock... Long story short, Excel uses the clock to make you a random number, it may seem random, it may look random, it may feel random, but really all it is - is... [ More ]

Why do some people feel computerized drawings are not random?

JWBlue — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 02:57:58 GMT

I am new to this board and have been reading some old threads. I can make a random number generator on my excel spreadsheet that I am 99% certain is random. Why can't a person with basic programming skills make a random number generator that does as is programmed? I don't understand why people say that these computerized generators have some sort of memory. What does that exactly mean?

Also, how do I do a search of these forums? I don't see a search button.