at1with0 wrote:humphreys wrote:Yes but that's not the point!
Whether it can be predicted or not has nothing to do with recognizing randomness.
Actually, being able to predict it would disprove its randomness.
Well we know for a fact it ISN'T actually random, that's why it's called a pseudo-random number generator. What I mean is, the fact I cannot tell a set of pseudo-random numbers apart from a set of truly random numbers, says nothing of the predictability of the pseudo-random number generator.
The pseudo-random number generator may generate numbers that are completely indistinguishable from a truly random set, yet the pseduo-random generator is still inferior to true randomness because it is predictable, once we learn the algorithm.
The fact there is an algorithm at all should tell us it is inferior right off the bat. There is no known algorithm on the decay of an atom, and hence no chance at predicting the outcome, making it completely uncrackable.