On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 04:40:50PM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote: > Instead, it could be adjusted to: > > 4. Perform a count cut. Look at the bottom card. Convert it into a number > from 1 through 53. Count down from the top card that number. Perform a cut > on the deck after the card you counted down to, placing the cut above the > bottom joker. > > In other words, by taking the "count down cut" and placing them between the > jokers, the distance between the jokers changes randomly on each round, but it > also decreases our probability that the output card will be the same as the > previous output card, if the top card is the same after two successive rounds.
Ah, a simple oversight: if both jokers are in the count down cut, then what? I see the problem here, and that explains some oddities I was seeing with my Python script. Back to the drawing board. -- . o . o . o . . o o . . . o . . . o . o o o . o . o o . . o o o o . o . . o o o o . o o o
pgpsAlP2m3YBv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list [email protected] http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
