@Nosho said in PRNG experiment going on right now?:
@aardvarkpepper Please provide evidence that PRNG dice are significantly deviating from random results. Until then, anecdotal “evidence” should indeed be dismissed as standard human biaises in the face of randomness.
Since you are the one dismissing others’ claims, I find it reasonable that you provide evidence that PRNG dice are not significantly deviating from random results.
No?
. . . because it’s not your job?
So it would be the developers’ job then?
And if it is the developers’ job - should we take the harsh attitude that the developers ought to have foreseen the issue and taken preventative measures against every conceivable issue in the first place? Or should we extend the benefit of the doubt and say that the developers couldn’t reasonably foresee every issue? Then wouldn’t it be reasonable that players should report perceived issues? And perhaps even that the developers take reports seriously?
The burden of proof should be on the reporting player? Do you really find it reasonable that every player that does report issues should be held responsible for amassing and writing up thousands of hours of work worth of data collection and analysis - or - taking 1942 Online apart and inserting bits of code, not only on their own system, but thousands of users’ systems? Because that’s the only way you’re going to get the data that you need. That sounds like a proper job to me. The sort of job you get paid for.
But if you really find it reasonable that others put in loads of unpaid work, I think it’s reasonable that we can expect you to put in loads of unpaid work. So let’s start with your defining the nature of the issue and listing specific steps as to how that issue may be addressed.
And let’s not use “human bias”, yes? You need mathematics and real analysis to address the issue. If you simply dismiss opinions you disagree with as “standard human bias” absent any real evidence, that is itself bias, and you negate your own argument.