News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on “True” Randomness vs. “Pseudo” Randomness. Parent comment

Re:“True” Randomness vs. “Pseudo” Randomness by pwython on Sunday April 02, 2023 @01:47PM (#35413152)
This is one of the craziest, most convoluted approaches to randomness I've ever heard of. I love it. Personally, I would've just had a third-party roll a die to establish the order. If there's a tie, roll again. More than 6 siblings? Two dice. Fun for the whole family! (and would take just a few minutes)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“True” Randomness vs. “Pseudo” Randomness by oconnor663 on Sunday April 02, 2023 @02:35PM (#35413684)
Keybase supports provably fair coin flips :)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“True” Randomness vs. “Pseudo” Randomness by thrashh on Sunday April 02, 2023 @06:49PM (#35416112)
I don’t think the issue was the randomness.

I think it was avoiding trusting a third party.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“True” Randomness vs. “Pseudo” Randomness by 11thEarlOfMar on Sunday April 02, 2023 @07:41PM (#35416628)
Yes, thanks for prompting my memory. We needed an approach that put all five of the siblings on the same footing. Even a third party chosen by one of the five may not be trusted since the others may not know the party.

It was goofy, but satisfied them all without dissent. And it worked!

[ Parent | on HN ]