The Nature Of Randomness

[gizmotron]

Well, the experiment is over. VLS is no better than GG.

[Herb]

The above is pointless.  What you observe as patterns or trends are nothing more than disconnected links.

[potatochips]

Question four you.  If we record in a small book one spin at a time but you change table frequently.  Let's say you record one spin here, one spin there etc.  would you be able to anticipate just as well or play the same way?

[VLSroulette]

Yes! The mechanism that the data comes from does not matter.

This is very important remark yet I want to add something. If you are dealing with true random events, then as long as the source has the same "degree of randomness" it should be valid.

What it would not be aviceable is to extrapolate for several sources with different fiability. For instance, bulid linear data by merging results from a true RNG (I.e. from random.org) with those from a pseudo-random computer-generated program.

At least it would not be adviceable under my opinion as it is accepted their inner "randomness generation" level and fiability is different.

I see okay to use different sources at the same level. I.e. merging true random numbers from several sources (as long as they are certified true generators, I.e. hardware-based ones), with no data from pseudo-random number generators at that stream.

What are your thoughts regarding this Mark? Is it the right way to go when thinking of merging data streams in your opinion. Or is it okay to build that linear tracking using Pseudo-random number generators merged with true random ones?

Regards.
Victor

[rouletteplay]

Gizmotron can you please explain the series of I and X on the right hand side of the table?

Many thanks

[bombus]

Wow, I actually didn't start this thread. Victor assigned me the moderator job for this study group.

You are the obvious best choice Gizmo, providing you are willing to moderate it.

[Spike]

Roulette by it's very nature is a machine that produces random spins.>>>

All a roulette wheel is, is a random number generator like any other RNG. Thats ALL it is, thats all it was designed to be. Its not mysterious, its not occult, its not a puzzle, its only job is to spit out random numbers.

Get a grip people. Your job should be to find a way to read the random, not continually come up with progression systems that you think will 'trick' the mysterious wheel into letting you win more than you lose.

[Herb]

Gizmo,

Save yourself the trouble of chasing a dead end.  People far wiser and more experienced have already traveled this path and found it to be a complete waste of time.  You should already know the game is a game of independent trials.  Why does this escape you?

[Spike]

People far wiser and more experienced have already traveled this path>>

Herb, could you explain in detail what the path consists of? Gizmo and I are on that path, I'd like to know if we're on the same page. If you just have a bunch of generalities, I will assume you don't know what you're talking about. I want to know what you know about these people who are smarter than we are found out. Because I don't think you know squat, Herb. I think you're grasping at straws and preconceived ideas are all you have.

Prove me wrong. Tell me what these really smart people found out. In detail.

[potatochips]

Herb, could you explain in detail what the path consists of? Gizmo and I are on that path, I'd like to know if we're on the same page. If you just have a bunch of generalities, I will assume you don't know what you're talking about

It's curious you ask for such clarification as neither Gizmo nor you have been able to "explain in detail" what randomness is or how to tackle it. I would even go so far as to affirm neither you nor Gizmo know what you mean when you speak about randomness. In fact, you are both on different paths but you are unaware of the situation. You think you speak about the same concepts while neither of you know exactly what the other is talking about. Finally, both of you can only speak about some vague generalities as you don't master your subject and it shows.

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull."

[Spike]

neither Gizmo nor you have been able to "explain in detail" >>>

All the more strange, then, that Herb would proclaim that people far smarter have done same thing, when he has no idea what the 'same thing' is. Still waiting, Herb..

[potatochips]

you for being the sacrificial pig. You are the one under the microscope. You are the reason I'm sharing this. I'm just showing you off.

Just to be sure i speak with an adult, how old are you?

[potatochips]

It's simple. I see an opportunity and I attack it by logical strategic advantage

I accept you can see an opportunity and that you use a strategy but it does not mean you get an advantage. Most of your ideas are unclear and badly expressed. You don't know your topic very well, that's why you are so confused when someone ask you a question. You prefer to show an attitude of scornful or jaded negativity as you have nothing to present except maybe a vague concept about randomness.

[Spike]

He knows nothing about randomness.>>>

LOL! Actually, Gizmo knows more than he'll ever let on. His problem is, he's trying to wise-up the chumps (that would be you guys) without getting into actual step by step details of how its done. He's trying to get you to do the work and he's realizing you never will because all you really want is the short cut version of everything. Never wise up a chump and never give a sucker an even break. There is nothing in it for anybody but the chump, let him wise his own self up..

[gizmotron]

He knows nothing about randomness.>>>

LOL! Actually, Gizmo knows more than he'll ever let on.

So we have opinionated people that generally can't explain randomness, never tried to, and can't see the value in understanding it anyway. Then we have the curious that never experienced an interest in finding out if it is even possible. I have never seen anyone work hard at understanding Roulette other than Spike, myself, and perhaps Turbo. There are a few here working hard but they are still not getting the message that their is a deeper level of understanding regarding systems & methods. There are also the people that use math as a basis for understanding it. They can work until hell freezes over and get exactly where they are now. They are working hard and getting nothing. I consider myself lucky to have worked for the greater understanding. Those that make false claims about me are their own bad karma fulfilling it's own kind of justice.

[gizmotron]

-