Re: psychoceramics: Random numbers and OJ Simpson -Reply

[Samantha Fleming <s.fleming @ elsevier.co.uk>]

>>> Eugene Leitl <Eugene.L--@l--.uni-muenchen.de> 05/07/97 :2202 
True random, or pseudorandom? See no way how this could have happened to 
the latter. It would screw up lots of physical processes for the former.
Either way, damn unlikely.
This be a double-blind, or whatt?

- It was a TV documentary and he wasn't going into much detail. No faraday cage
around the RNG, no scale on the graph he used to demonstrate the increase in
order, certainly no mention of how the calculation was done

This is magickal thinking. Would be truly great fun, if only it would work :(
- Someone is *paying* this bloke to do this research, and has been doing so for
seven years. It makes me wonder what he's doing to convince them he's getting
somewhere...

 Rev.hippy