Your characterization that people are the weak point is true, but your scenario for "making it work" for lottery drawings still has problems that prevent RNGs from being a good drawing method.
For one, the lotteries (or any organization trying to protect the integrity of its RNG) would never provide a running stream of the output, for fear that a vulnerability could possibly be discovered. Secondly, it still doesn't provide protection against a hacker. The lotteries today do use hardware-based RNGs, but there are always software-based components that take the random numbers and record them, display them, etc. There are always points of weakness.
So in reality, the only way to avoid the problems of computerized drawings is not to use them.
That being said, there are some situations in which computers are the only viable alternative, such as "Quick Draw" style games, with drawings every few minutes, and raffles, in which thousands of winning numbers are drawn in a very short period of time. These are common-sense things. But there is no reason a once-daily drawing needs to be conducted with a computer. That's the bad stuff.
Lastly, to address all the conspiracy theorists. You all are welcome to suspect the lotteries of wrong-doing — it is your human right to have that suspicion. However, I will just say that I strongly disagree with you, because the mountain of evidence does not support some massive conspiracy theory.
To say that lottery personnel actually force drawings to produce numbers that nobody has played is to say that hundreds or thousands of lottery personnel throughout the US are willing to go to their job every day and willingly commit crimes that would lock them up in prison for years.
Who do you think the people working at lotteries are? Maybe you need to visit your state lottery and meet some of them. The lotteries employ people like you and me who go to work every day and just do whatever job they have been hired for. Believe it or not, they don't hire technology people whose job it is to fix lottery drawings. They do, however, hire people to ensure that the drawings are secure.
Importantly, in the case of people hired to secure computerized drawings, they have a literally impossible job. Because as I have written about extensively, there is not any possible way to witness what goes on inside a computer. These people do whatever they can to try to limit exposure of their systems to hacking, but as Eddie Tipton showed us, an inside bad actor can find a way to defeat security measures.
Now that's an important point: an inside bad actor. What does an inside bad actor do? They try to enrich themselves. They don't, however, try to ensure that the lottery drawing produces NO winners. They want ONE winner — themselves.
It's incredibly crazy to imagine a bad guy going to great lengths — and great personal risk — to defeat security procedures just to make sure no lottery players win. Or crazier still, to imagine that person try to make a lottery ticket from a certain state win. So that they could go to jail for a decade in order to make someone from California win the lottery?
I always try to focus my criticisms on the true problems, and by having laser focus, it becomes possible to affect change. When people start throwing out conspiracy theories that don't make sense on the face of them, it is very unhelpful to the cause. We all agree that computerized drawings are bad; let's be smart about explaining our reasons why that is.