A Million Random Digits with 100,000 Normal Deviates is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive. | ||||||||||
|
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Damnit, I accidently blanked the page. Does anyone have a backup copy? Edit: thanks Malo -SB
I thought this article was longer. It used to mention the copyright arguemnet, didn't it? TaylorSAllen 02:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
It seems a shame not to mention the enthusiastic and creative reviews this book has attracted on Amazon... -- 144.53.251.2 ( talk) 04:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I once heard that the IRS has an algorithm that catches tax cheats that just make up numbers off the top of their head when filling out tax forms. People tend to use the same numbers or combination of numbers apparently. I wonder if any one has ever used a random number generator or this book and just moved the decimal point to a suitable order of magnitude! I wonder if they can detect uncommon randomness too... whats the average entropy of the average Americans economic life? 75.170.64.238 ( talk) 19:20, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
From memory, the introduction included something along the lines of : "A sample of pages has been fully proof-read, without error; the rest have just been looked at. One layout error was seen. It has been estimated that, of the possible electro-mechanical errors, about half would affect the value of a digit and about half would affect the layout. Therefore, of the one million random digits, probably one is incorrect." That seems worth including in the article, but as a direct quote of the original. 94.30.84.71 ( talk) 15:48, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
I just came here randomly while on a WikiWalk (hard to be quite serious about this subject – I initially titled this section "Random comment"). I just thought it's a cute coincidence that this book was published by an institution called RAND, despite that acronym having no connection to the word "random". The caption of the sample in the article is cute, too – one might wonder how the sample was chosen. :-)
On a more serious note, is there a copyright on the contents of the book? Or is the content inherently uncopyrightable? The description at rand.org does suggest it is copyrighted. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 20:57, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on A Million Random Digits with 100,000 Normal Deviates. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:58, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Just letting anyone here who doesn't read XKCD know that this book is mentioned in a recent strip, so this page is going to get a lot of new traffic and possibly vandalism because of that. Tolstoyan at Heart ( talk) 17:11, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
What is a normal deviate, and why does the book include them, rather than another 200 pages of 'plain' random numbers? -- StarChaser Tyger ( talk) 08:20, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
A Million Random Digits with 100,000 Normal Deviates is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive. | ||||||||||
|
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Damnit, I accidently blanked the page. Does anyone have a backup copy? Edit: thanks Malo -SB
I thought this article was longer. It used to mention the copyright arguemnet, didn't it? TaylorSAllen 02:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
It seems a shame not to mention the enthusiastic and creative reviews this book has attracted on Amazon... -- 144.53.251.2 ( talk) 04:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I once heard that the IRS has an algorithm that catches tax cheats that just make up numbers off the top of their head when filling out tax forms. People tend to use the same numbers or combination of numbers apparently. I wonder if any one has ever used a random number generator or this book and just moved the decimal point to a suitable order of magnitude! I wonder if they can detect uncommon randomness too... whats the average entropy of the average Americans economic life? 75.170.64.238 ( talk) 19:20, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
From memory, the introduction included something along the lines of : "A sample of pages has been fully proof-read, without error; the rest have just been looked at. One layout error was seen. It has been estimated that, of the possible electro-mechanical errors, about half would affect the value of a digit and about half would affect the layout. Therefore, of the one million random digits, probably one is incorrect." That seems worth including in the article, but as a direct quote of the original. 94.30.84.71 ( talk) 15:48, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
I just came here randomly while on a WikiWalk (hard to be quite serious about this subject – I initially titled this section "Random comment"). I just thought it's a cute coincidence that this book was published by an institution called RAND, despite that acronym having no connection to the word "random". The caption of the sample in the article is cute, too – one might wonder how the sample was chosen. :-)
On a more serious note, is there a copyright on the contents of the book? Or is the content inherently uncopyrightable? The description at rand.org does suggest it is copyrighted. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 20:57, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on A Million Random Digits with 100,000 Normal Deviates. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:58, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Just letting anyone here who doesn't read XKCD know that this book is mentioned in a recent strip, so this page is going to get a lot of new traffic and possibly vandalism because of that. Tolstoyan at Heart ( talk) 17:11, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
What is a normal deviate, and why does the book include them, rather than another 200 pages of 'plain' random numbers? -- StarChaser Tyger ( talk) 08:20, 14 December 2017 (UTC)