Re: [math-fun] random generators

For cryptosecure, I don't see how you can do better than a physical noise or quantum source.  Why do computer science people so disdain physical RNG's; it is because they don't involve fun things like algorithm analysis?  This annoys me so much that I've made it into a litmus test.  When I pick up a book that discusses random number generation, I immediately look to see if physical RNG's are discussed, not necessarily praised, and if not, I ignore the entire book. Now, there is a place for pseudo-RNG's, and that is if the same sequence of random numbers must be generated again since then the initial seed can represent the entire lengthy sequence.   --  Gene