On 2015-04-03 00:13, Greg Stein wrote:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote:
...
- Set the random seed to actually be random now. Setting it to 0 is just
bad juju and can be reverse engineered to place candidates in such a way
that a tie will always favor candidate X.
I disagree with this change. This now means you/me could run the report and
get different results. That is even worse than the extreme likelihood
somebody could rig the vote.
See r1671014 as a compromise - that way the seed stays the same no
matter how many times you tally, but cannot be determined beforehand.
With regards,
Daniel.
You could simply look at the result as: the algorithm chose it that way. It
happens to use a pseudorandom sequence to make the choice. That decision is
*part* of how the algorithm operates, rather than using a true random
number.
...
Cheers,
-g
