Jeff7
Lifer
- Jan 4, 2001
- 41,596
- 20
- 81
Yeah, because it forces me to look away from my phone back at the road again, and what I see then is usually alarming.When a browser window crashes are you scared to drive your car?
:awe:
(no, not serious)
Yeah, because it forces me to look away from my phone back at the road again, and what I see then is usually alarming.When a browser window crashes are you scared to drive your car?
How good is it? I've seen things out there like this that can command well over $1000.
Is it just the throughput of random bits that makes an expensive generator more desirable?
Ah. Nifty. :thumbsup:The intel RNG is believed to be excellent, it passes all mathematical tests of randomness, with no detectable bias or correlation over billions of bits.
The design, while not quantum, is very robust and well thought through. Unlike a true quantum RNG, it could theoretically be susceptible to perturbation - but considerable care has been made (e.g. 2 neighboring resistors on the die are used as the sensor element, and the two signals are subtracted, so as to minimize any manufacturing bias, or effect of external interference on the analog sensor circuit).
Ok, that explains that then.The limitation of the intel RNG is that it is relatively slow - about 70 kbps (due to the physical processes used for the randomness source, and because of the need for careful processing to remove biases). For some purposes, this isn't fast enough, and alternative (and usually more complex) processes are needed, and as these are niche products, they can often command high prices.
