Are computers better at picking random numbers than people are?

Answer 1

Depends on what you mean by "random".

Computers do have psuedo-random number generators. When called, they will return random-looking numbers. By some measures, they are random. Assuming a number between 0 and 1 is returned (e.g. 0.3213233 and 0.1944423), the average of the numbers output will be 0.5, and they will be evenly distributed (no bell curve).

However, these are computed from equations and will exhibit a fixed pattern. This is because computers are wholly deterministic. You can't get a random number from a deterministic system like a computer. This characteristic has been used to break the security of wifi networks that use these psuedo-random numbers.

To randomize their output even more, random number generators are seeded with the computer's current time. For most purposes this is good enough, but it is still not truly random.

To get true random numbers, computers need input from a real-life random source - e.g. radioactive decay or some other quantum event. The website cited claims to use atmospheric noise as their source of randomness.

(Edited to add this bit on human generated randomness). As for your comparison, how is the person picking the random number? Flipping a coin can be considered random but it can be argued that it is just chaotic (deterministic but highly sensitive to initial conditions) and not truly random. An argument can be made that only quantum events are truly random (down to the theory), and so only random number generators whose source is quantum in nature, can be considered 100 percent random.

In the end, it depends on the details of your particular application and requirements. I wouldn't depend on a computer to pick a winning lottery number - difficult to audit the program to ensure that there is no cheating, nothing to do with randomness, just real-life complications.

Answer 2

It depends on what you mean by "picking" random numbers.
If you ask a person off the top if their head to pick numbers I think a computer might do a better job. Even though as others have said the computer isn't truly random just a very good imitation of it.
On the other hand, if the person is allowed to use any method they want to pick the number it can be truly random if done right. For instance, you can roll a die to pick the number. Or, put numbers on pieces of paper then draw one. Making sure they are mixed well.

Answer 3

In general yes. People are worse at trying to be repeatedly random than computers. However, if all we are doing is picking one number, then a computer and a person is the same. Who is to say one number is any more random than another? It is when we try to pick a long sequence of numbers that our ability to be random is betrayed.

Several museums have interesting exhibits where they ask you to pick 1 or 0 and a computer algorithm is simultaneously trying to predict what you will pick. They typically predict at 55-60% and even higher which is significantly higher than guessing which would be 50%. This suggests we are incapable of producing truly random sequences.

Answer 4

Computers have much less bias than people, but if kimbo thinks that computers are random then they don't know what they're talking about. Computers have no process for randomness, they are deterministic machines, and as such cannot be said to be random at all. They do have pseudorandom generators, but there have been plenty of such generators that (by poor programming) choose the same set of numbers.

The randomness of a person tends to be as spread out as possible, which is not random since random processes will cluster. People avoid previously chosen numbers, or fall into some sort of pattern, so they tend to be poor at choosing "random" numbers.

Random basically means that we don't understand the process by which the numbers were chosen, and hence have no discernable pattern. For this, computers are better.

Answer 5

definitely because computers are completely random with no bias. People tend to pick a number then pick a number that was not the previous number. So, people picking numbers is biased and computer generated numbers are not. Unbiased method is always best for statistics or any other subjects.

Answer 6

Well if humans would pick random numbers, we have our own tendencies. (Favorite numbers, our birthdays etc...) If you were to pick a series of numbers, to make it look like random you'll probably avoid the ones you already picked... hence the result is not entirely random.

It is actually difficult to generate random numbers. Even computers cannot generate them in their purest form. However, there are algorithms which computers can use to generate "pseudo-random numbers". And there is usually a "seed" used for generating them.

But as for me, i would trust that the algorithms place on computers as they are well thought of, studied and even compared against each other.

Answer 7

no cuz i can take my hand right now put it on the number keys and go 8165947651746157643057104576134501750643
see completely random no bias but as for speaking them aloud or thinking them computers are better