Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 1 Apr 2015 16:33:55 +0100
From:      Mark R V Murray <mark@grondar.org>
To:        Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>, src-committers@freebsd.org, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r280955 - in head/sys: modules/notrandom dev/notrandom
Message-ID:  <5A609CED-56E6-4459-8505-58930048AA0D@grondar.org>
In-Reply-To: <551C0B2A.9060006@freebsd.org>
References:  <20150401113628.GA16649@dft-labs.eu> <20150401114313.GZ64665@FreeBSD.org> <20150401115204.GB16649@dft-labs.eu> <1427897897.82583.62.camel@freebsd.org> <551C0A92.8070507@freebsd.org> <551C0B2A.9060006@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

> On 1 Apr 2015, at 16:13, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> wrote:
>=20
> On 4/1/15 11:11 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
>> On 4/1/15 10:18 PM, Ian Lepore wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2015-04-01 at 13:52 +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
>>>> As a side note I'm surprised with the choice of 7.
>>>>=20
>>>> I would expect 3, no more, no less. 3 would be the number returned,
>>>> and the number readers receive would be 3.
>>> 5 would be right out.
>>=20
>> there is prior art for 7...  I remember seeing it once.. 7, 7, 7, 7, =
7 ...
>> that's the trouble with randomness, you can't really tell..
>> I remember a part of a paper on the topic by Adams S,  et al.
>> I think it was towards the end of the paper.
>=20
> I stand corrected...  the number selected in the paper was 9

Well spotted!

Before someone makes a terrible mistake, I should point out that 4 is =
confirmed random, as cited here: https://xkcd.com/221/

M
--=20
Mark R V Murray




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5A609CED-56E6-4459-8505-58930048AA0D>