I found your content searching for blockchain info, now I'm amazed by every single video in your channel. Thanks for sharing this awesome stuff with us!
another way you can test randomness is through compression, compression software will look for patterns and use it to compress randomness should not have patterns at the very least so if the compression program doesn't decrease the size significantly then you know it's good. In fact some compression systems might increase the size because of the header information being added
To anyone lecturing as to the validity of what is presented in this video: This device implements known techniques for using random processes in integrated circuits. Please read RFC 4086 (www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4086.txt): Is there any hope for true, strong, portable randomness in the future? There might be. All that's needed is a physical source of unpredictable numbers. Thermal noise (sometimes called Johnson noise in integrated circuits) or a radioactive decay source and a fast, free-running oscillator would do the trick directly [GIFFORD]. This is a trivial amount of hardware, and it could easily be included as a standard part of a computer system's architecture. Most audio (or video) input devices are usable [TURBID]. Furthermore, any system with a spinning disk or ring oscillator and a stable (crystal) time source or the like has an adequate source of randomness ([DAVIS] and Section 3.3). All that's needed is the common perception among computer vendors that this small additional hardware and the software to access it is necessary and useful.
Sorry, I don't have good suggestions for this. I learned a very long time ago and not from books so even if I had a suggestion, it would likely be extremely outdated. Sorry!
Its a true RNG in the sense that it harvests noise from various sensors and washes them through SHA256 to ensure a statistically balanced 0s and 1s. It is "true" in the sense that it uses sources that are very hard to sense externally. (ie: you can't directly read it nor can you practically narrow the search space) But no, it doesn't use quantum electron tunneling.
@@anders94 So "seeds" after all? There is perhaps a reason why "PEAR" (Princeton) does not use such seeds. Decades ago, scientists like Helmut Schmidt only used radioactive decay, it seems. I don't know if there have been any successful experiments on influencing a random number generator like this. "Interference" here means e.g. such experiments with a clear result: atheistnexus.org/group/pantheismnaturalisticspirituality/forum/topics/rene-peoch-telekinesis That was the dissertation of Dr. Dr. Dr. (Medicine, Biology, Antropology) René Peoc'h. translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.deepandwide.at%2Fblog-interessantes%2Fweisses-rauschen-experiment A Chickling may possibly affect the FST-01, but may be less good.
@@Ano-Nymos Thanks for the thoughtful response. I'm very interested in this so its great to apply some rigor. If the FST-01 is based on "seeds", then if you can read the seeds, there is a deterministic way for the output to be predictable. I would argue radioactive decay is the same thing. If you can read the decay, you can predict the output. It all comes down to the practicality of reading the input. In the case of radioactive decay, unless you have perfect knowledge - your detector is in exactly the same place (which of course it can't be) - then you can predict. In the case of the FST-01, we have the same physical limit. As long as you ensure you don't leak the initial information, you are fine. Said another way, the "randomness" stems from the impracticality of reading the physical world. That's classical physics. However, in quantum physics, there is seemingly a necessary incompleteness in the description of a physics system. Experiments show that there is a disconnect between the physical state of a system (even if you have 100% knowledge) and quantum randomness. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_indeterminacy The question is: "How does one harvest quantum randomness?" The answer to that might be to do something like this: aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.3597793 Basically, you create a vacuum and then you measure the electromagnetic field within the vacuum. See these guys who are actually ding this: qrng.anu.edu.au On PEAR and the experiments you cited, unfortunately the scientific community isn't in agreement as to the efficacy of that work.
@@anders94 I am not a physicist, but as far as I know, it is absolutely impossible to predict deterministically how an atom decays. This USB stick is said to use quantum electron tunneling.: ubld.it/truerng_v3 (Roger Nelson (Princeton) claimed this in an email) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling Quantum Mechanics Could Solve Cryptography’s Random Number Problem: www.wired.com/story/quantum-mechanics-could-solve-cryptographys-random-number-problem/ Quantum random number generation: www.nature.com/articles/npjqi201621 Quote: "On PEAR and the experiments you cited, unfortunately the scientific community isn't in agreement as to the efficacy of that work." Which scientists? Serious open scientists, or "skeptics" in cults like CSICOP? See the experiments by Dr. Dr. Dr. Renè Peoc'h: atheistnexus.org/group/pantheismnaturalisticspirituality/forum/topics/rene-peoch-telekinesis 1200 attempts, clear results. Mind over matter: www.wired.com/1995/04/pear/ I can't find an English video. Here is a video from a broadcaster (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arte): th-cam.com/video/4dEget9UD7A/w-d-xo.html
Ummm... a temperature sensor is not a source of true randomness. Oh.. and piping it through sha doesnt make it more random. It just makes it APPEAR more random to humans, it might even reduce the randomness.
If the device focuses on the small fluctuations and throws away the large magnitude digits a reasonably sensitive temp sensor will do quite well. You are correct about sha if that was used to "add randomness" but looking at the diagram that's just how the final random value is "locked in" so it's usable as an encryption value (not correctly described in the video). The high res data sample has to hit digital granularity at some point after all.
You barely know what you are talking about. I notice this often with IT people. There is a mystique that this knowledge is somehow special and therefore valuable. Really, all you know is how to operate a terminal.
lol I've seen alot of videos where people clearly don't understanding what they're talking about, but this guy is providing valuable information and not just reading off of a wikipedia article. why u mad? :(
I found your content searching for blockchain info, now I'm amazed by every single video in your channel. Thanks for sharing this awesome stuff with us!
Quantization Error is not a quantum effect. Two totally unrelated subject areas.
And, btw, Anders, thank you for creating such excellent content (blockchain videos included).
another way you can test randomness is through compression, compression software will look for patterns and use it to compress randomness should not have patterns at the very least so if the compression program doesn't decrease the size significantly then you know it's good. In fact some compression systems might increase the size because of the header information being added
i've probably said this before but the name of this series immediately makes me want to be your friend
Ha! Glad to have you aboard.
Thank you. Very informative. FYI - The links to hardware page returns access denied.
I wonder if this can be done again, without the three different companies of proprietary hardware and maybe even on a windows machine.
To anyone lecturing as to the validity of what is presented in this video: This device implements known techniques for using random processes in integrated circuits. Please read RFC 4086 (www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4086.txt):
Is there any hope for true, strong, portable randomness in the
future? There might be. All that's needed is a physical source of
unpredictable numbers.
Thermal noise (sometimes called Johnson noise in integrated circuits)
or a radioactive decay source and a fast, free-running oscillator
would do the trick directly [GIFFORD]. This is a trivial amount of
hardware, and it could easily be included as a standard part of a
computer system's architecture. Most audio (or video) input devices
are usable [TURBID]. Furthermore, any system with a spinning disk or
ring oscillator and a stable (crystal) time source or the like has an
adequate source of randomness ([DAVIS] and Section 3.3). All that's
needed is the common perception among computer vendors that this
small additional hardware and the software to access it is necessary
and useful.
Any book you'd recommend to get a nice grounding knowledge of Unix. You seem to feel very comfortable in that area.
Sorry, I don't have good suggestions for this. I learned a very long time ago and not from books so even if I had a suggestion, it would likely be extremely outdated. Sorry!
The Unix and Linux System Administration Handbook 5th Edition is good.
Is this really a True RNG without seeds and without a algorithm? Comparable to a quantum electron tunneling RNG (without seeds)?
Its a true RNG in the sense that it harvests noise from various sensors and washes them through SHA256 to ensure a statistically balanced 0s and 1s. It is "true" in the sense that it uses sources that are very hard to sense externally. (ie: you can't directly read it nor can you practically narrow the search space) But no, it doesn't use quantum electron tunneling.
@@anders94
So "seeds" after all?
There is perhaps a reason why "PEAR" (Princeton) does not use such seeds. Decades ago, scientists like Helmut Schmidt only used radioactive decay, it seems.
I don't know if there have been any successful experiments on influencing a random number generator like this.
"Interference" here means e.g. such experiments with a clear result:
atheistnexus.org/group/pantheismnaturalisticspirituality/forum/topics/rene-peoch-telekinesis
That was the dissertation of Dr. Dr. Dr. (Medicine, Biology, Antropology) René Peoc'h.
translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.deepandwide.at%2Fblog-interessantes%2Fweisses-rauschen-experiment
A Chickling may possibly affect the FST-01, but may be less good.
@@Ano-Nymos Thanks for the thoughtful response. I'm very interested in this so its great to apply some rigor. If the FST-01 is based on "seeds", then if you can read the seeds, there is a deterministic way for the output to be predictable. I would argue radioactive decay is the same thing. If you can read the decay, you can predict the output. It all comes down to the practicality of reading the input. In the case of radioactive decay, unless you have perfect knowledge - your detector is in exactly the same place (which of course it can't be) - then you can predict. In the case of the FST-01, we have the same physical limit. As long as you ensure you don't leak the initial information, you are fine. Said another way, the "randomness" stems from the impracticality of reading the physical world.
That's classical physics. However, in quantum physics, there is seemingly a necessary incompleteness in the description of a physics system. Experiments show that there is a disconnect between the physical state of a system (even if you have 100% knowledge) and quantum randomness.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_indeterminacy
The question is: "How does one harvest quantum randomness?" The answer to that might be to do something like this:
aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.3597793
Basically, you create a vacuum and then you measure the electromagnetic field within the vacuum. See these guys who are actually ding this: qrng.anu.edu.au
On PEAR and the experiments you cited, unfortunately the scientific community isn't in agreement as to the efficacy of that work.
@@anders94
I am not a physicist, but as far as I know, it is absolutely impossible to predict deterministically how an atom decays.
This USB stick is said to use quantum electron tunneling.: ubld.it/truerng_v3 (Roger Nelson (Princeton) claimed this in an email)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling
Quantum Mechanics Could Solve Cryptography’s Random Number Problem:
www.wired.com/story/quantum-mechanics-could-solve-cryptographys-random-number-problem/
Quantum random number generation:
www.nature.com/articles/npjqi201621
Quote:
"On PEAR and the experiments you cited, unfortunately the scientific community isn't in agreement as to the efficacy of that work."
Which scientists?
Serious open scientists, or "skeptics" in cults like CSICOP?
See the experiments by Dr. Dr. Dr. Renè Peoc'h:
atheistnexus.org/group/pantheismnaturalisticspirituality/forum/topics/rene-peoch-telekinesis
1200 attempts, clear results.
Mind over matter:
www.wired.com/1995/04/pear/
I can't find an English video.
Here is a video from a broadcaster (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arte):
th-cam.com/video/4dEget9UD7A/w-d-xo.html
Will this work on any STM32F103, or does this stick have something special on it?
Yeah, that should work - nothing unusual about it as far as I'm aware.
i think i could do this but would there be any point?
Ummm... a temperature sensor is not a source of true randomness. Oh.. and piping it through sha doesnt make it more random. It just makes it APPEAR more random to humans, it might even reduce the randomness.
If the device focuses on the small fluctuations and throws away the large magnitude digits a reasonably sensitive temp sensor will do quite well. You are correct about sha if that was used to "add randomness" but looking at the diagram that's just how the final random value is "locked in" so it's usable as an encryption value (not correctly described in the video). The high res data sample has to hit digital granularity at some point after all.
10:00 There's no way (for nonspecialists) telling *true* randomness from *pseudo* randomness - right?
Correct. True of anyone really. Only way to know is to know how the entropy was collected.
@@anders94 Thanks, Anders.
Or you could use the spin of silver atoms through an inhomogeneous magnetic field. To each his own.
That scroll clicking tho
much has changed since 2014. ;)
Beats using dice!
Can you help me to generate 3 numbers out 18 numbers pattern
not sure what you mean by that
I can explain in detail through email, if you would contact me asreafkaudeer@gmail.com, it will be very much appreciated
@@kaudeerashraf4290 DM me on Twitter - @anders94
hey I need help with a project can you show how to build a auto Dialler gsm but instead of calling a phone it's texted insted plz respond
no such thing as well or not well tx, or temperx
DR Charles Goui
You barely know what you are talking about. I notice this often with IT people. There is a mystique that this knowledge is somehow special and therefore valuable. Really, all you know is how to operate a terminal.
add something to the discussion
This is stupid
lol I've seen alot of videos where people clearly don't understanding what they're talking about, but this guy is providing valuable information and not just reading off of a wikipedia article. why u mad? :(