Moderator: Community Team
Random.org wrote:What's this fuss about true randomness?
Perhaps you have wondered how predictable machines like computers can generate randomness. In reality, most random numbers used in computer programs are pseudo-random, which means they are a generated in a predictable fashion using a mathematical formula. This is fine for many purposes, but it may not be random in the way you expect if you're used to dice rolls and lottery drawings.
RANDOM.ORG offers true random numbers to anyone on the Internet. The randomness comes from atmospheric noise, which for many purposes is better than the pseudo-random number algorithms typically used in computer programs. People use RANDOM.ORG for holding drawings, lotteries and sweepstakes, to drive games and gambling sites, for scientific applications and for art and music. The service has existed since 1998 and was built and is being operated by Mads Haahr of the School of Computer Science and Statistics at Trinity College, Dublin in Ireland.
As of today, RANDOM.ORG has generated 924.6 billion random bits for the Internet community.

MNDuke wrote:That is not true. You are correct they still come from Random.org, but how they are pulled has changed and with it CC. They are far streakier. I never argued the randomness. I'm sure they balance out in the long wrong, but in between the balancing act they are skewed. If I start a game and my dice suck and then become great at the end when the game is over, what does it matter if they are random and become balanced? This is what I have been experiencing and its a fucking pathetic joke. You'd think after enough outcry about the dice being noticeably different, something would be done already. However, a few ignorant morons have their heads so far up their asses and would rather pretend nothing is wrong and stroke their egos.
Perhaps CC could take my $25 and put it towards hiring an INDEPENDENT AUDITOR to look over the programming and coding and very that everything is legit. Not a volunteer or some tech geek that has a bias. Furthermore, I will start recording my CC dice and actually roll RL dice and prove the difference of how fucked up this site is between what is and what should be.
- not some asshole pretending its funny or cool to call himself the black jesus
TheForgivenOne wrote:MNDuke wrote:That is not true. You are correct they still come from Random.org, but how they are pulled has changed and with it CC. They are far streakier. I never argued the randomness. I'm sure they balance out in the long run, but in between the balancing act they are skewed. If I start a game and my dice suck and then become great at the end when the game is over, what does it matter if they are random and become balanced? This is what I have been experiencing and its a fucking pathetic joke. You'd think after enough outcry about the dice being noticeably different, something would be done already. However, a few ignorant morons have their heads so far up their asses and would rather pretend nothing is wrong and stroke their egos.
Perhaps CC could take my $25 and put it towards hiring an INDEPENDENT AUDITOR to look over the programming and coding and very that everything is legit. Not a volunteer or some tech geek that has a bias. Furthermore, I will start recording my CC dice and actually roll RL dice and prove the difference of how fucked up this site is between what is and what should be.
- not some asshole pretending its funny or cool to call himself the black jesus
And what happens if this Independent Auditor looks over the dice and says they are truly random?
I doubt you'll believe him and ask for a second/third/fourth/etc opinion until someone finally says they aren't random, then you'll say "LISTEN TO HIM, HE'S RIGHT"
Personally, I haven't noticed a major change in the dice, if anything they got better. If I wasn't looking in the forums when the dice changed, i wouldn't have noticed a thing.
MNDuke wrote:That is not true. You are correct they still come from Random.org, but how they are pulled has changed and with it CC. They are far streakier. I never argued the randomness. I'm sure they balance out in the long wrong, but in between the balancing act they are skewed.
MNDuke wrote:- not some asshole pretending its funny or cool to call himself the black jesus

MNDuke wrote:Since the change over to this ridiculous bogus system it has become completely dice dependent. Gone are the days of strategy and here are the days of luck.
trestain wrote:please stand up, please stand up
TheForgivenOne wrote:trestain wrote:please stand up, please stand up
That popped into my head as well.
Also, Dice in real life can get streaky too. I've seen it before, Considering I rolled a 6, 6, 6, 5, 6, 6, 5, 4, 5 against my cousin 2 years back in a game of Risk.
(ALSO, I don't have pics, so don't ask)
TheForgivenOne wrote:trestain wrote:please stand up, please stand up
That popped into my head as well.
Also, Dice in real life can get streaky too. I've seen it before, Considering I rolled a 6, 6, 6, 5, 6, 6, 5, 4, 5 against my cousin 2 years back in a game of Risk.
(ALSO, I don't have pics, so don't ask)


InsomniaRed wrote:TheForgivenOne wrote:trestain wrote:please stand up, please stand up
That popped into my head as well.
Also, Dice in real life can get streaky too. I've seen it before, Considering I rolled a 6, 6, 6, 5, 6, 6, 5, 4, 5 against my cousin 2 years back in a game of Risk.
(ALSO, I don't have pics, so don't ask)
