Marcus, what a nifty idea! (http://tinyurl.com/ys388b) Most of
computing does not need to be exact .. a slight error generally is
not terrible and for imaging, audio, and so on simply is not
observable by a human.
And there are lots of solutions for making inaccuracy less
observable. A
Owen Densmore wrote:
Most of computing does not need to be exact .. a slight error
generally is not terrible and for imaging, audio, and so on simply is
not observable by a human.
And if what you need is a *lot* of random numbers [1], why do dozens of
cycles of exact arithmetic and memory
On Apr 25, 2009, at 6:02 PM, Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
Owen Densmore wrote:
Most of computing does not need to be exact .. a slight error
generally is not terrible and for imaging, audio, and so on simply
is not observable by a human.
And if what you need is a *lot* of random numbers [1],
Owen,
What leads you to suspect that the CPU I/O noise is random? The noise
generated by such comes from a chipset that operates at a given frequency,
which is powered by an AC source running at another frequency, filtered
through a power supply with capacitors, resistors, etc. with their own
Douglas Roberts wrote:
What leads you to suspect that the CPU I/O noise is random? The noise
generated by such comes from a chipset that operates at a given
frequency, which is powered by an AC source running at another
frequency, filtered through a power supply with capacitors, resistors,
/
[Original Message]
From: Marcus G. Daniels mar...@snoutfarm.com
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group friam@redfish.com
Date: 4/25/2009 7:56:18 PM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] random vs pseudo-random
Douglas Roberts wrote:
What leads you to suspect that the CPU I/O noise
On Apr 25, 2009, at 6:30 PM, Douglas Roberts wrote:
What leads you to suspect that the CPU I/O noise is random? The
noise generated by such comes from a chipset that operates at a
given frequency, which is powered by an AC source running at another
frequency, filtered through a power
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:37:35AM -0700, Robert Howard wrote:
I suppose Dennett is implying that the linear congruential generator below
would take at least the number of bits in variables a, b, m, and x[0]. If
those are 1-byte integers, then the bit count is at least 32 bits. Theres
...@redfish.com] On Behalf
Of russell standish
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 11:34 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] random vs pseudo-random
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:37:35AM -0700, Robert Howard wrote:
I suppose Dennett is implying that the linear
Hi, everybody,
Now that the recent burst of metaphysics is completed, I was curious about your
take on the following quote, which is from a footnote in Dennett's Real
Patterns:
More precisely: 'A series of numbers is random if the smallest algorithm
capable of specifying it to a computer
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 1:05 AM, Nicholas Thompson
nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote:
Can anybody help me understand this. (Please try to say something more
helpful than the well-deserved, Well, why do you THINK they call it
pseudo-random, you dummy?)What DOES a pseudo randomizing program
There are two conflicting definitions of randomness being used here.
The purpose of a pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) on a computer
is to provide a sequence of numbers that is statistically
indistinguishable from random noise. Good PRNG cover their range
completely and do not show
must have less information?
_
From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf
Of Roger Critchlow
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 12:37 AM
To: nickthomp...@earthlink.net; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee
Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] random vs pseudo
Possibly of interest..
http://www.cs.rice.edu/~kvp1
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb2005/tc2005024_2426_tc024.htm
http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?ch=specialsectionssc=emerging08id=20246
FRIAM
14 matches
Mail list logo
