• Nailbar@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    18 hours ago

    But you can’t say that it’s fake or broken just because it’s unprobable, unless there’s supposed to be some additional safe guards to prevent the same random value from repeating within a certain distance from itself.

    • kionay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      from a purely mathematical standpoint, yes

      from a practical engineering standpoint, no, it’s impossible

      I’m pedantic as they come, but pedantry has little use in an engineering discipline, software engineering included

      like, if I take a cup of water and pour it into the Pacific Ocean strictly speaking I can say I “single-handed raised the water level of the ocean” and you’d be correct in the most unhelpful way

      for the code in question if the PRNG is working as expected then for all meaningful purposes it can be considered impossible

      edit oh also to fight pedantry with pedantry, technically even a check that would prevent duplicates might not prevent duplicates because you could argue there’s a non-zero chance a random cosmic ray flips just the right bit at just the right moment rendering even that pure chance. anything engineered (and not pure mathematical theory) has to draw the line of plausibility somewhere because we’re engineering inside of a chaotic reality. drawing the line to say that the image above is functionally impossible is just fine.