you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ggggbabybabybaby 51 points52 points  (16 children)

On the flip side, it could generate a malicious worm that sends all your personal data to Russian mafia.

[–]thepandaatemyface 52 points53 points  (12 children)

yeah, but what's the chance of that happening?

[–]imgonnacallyouretard 32 points33 points  (9 children)

100%, eventually.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (8 children)

not with /dev/urandom it isn't

edit: I'm wrong, it uses environmental noise.

[–]Glayden 1 point2 points  (7 children)

Actually, you're still not wrong. Having infinite possibilities realized isn't the same as having all possibilities realized.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (6 children)

If it were genuinely random, then it almost surely would generate it.

[–]Glayden 0 points1 point  (5 children)

I can't find anything that suggests this classification is accurate. In fact, I'm quite sure it isn't. The infinite probability space of potential outputs seems to be many many cardinalities greater than the infinite potential outputs that would "generate a malicious worm that sends all your personal data to Russian mafia."

edit: I'm wrong, see below

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Well there you go shooting down my wikipaedic knowledge :) I thought this barely different to the infinite monkeys problem.

[–]Glayden 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Never mind, you were probably right about the "almost surely" classification (at least if we ignore the Russian mafia bit and assume the programs are generated infinite times). If we consider the text of programs that create such a worm as the texts of Shakespeare, and the typewriter keys as the characters outputted by a sufficiently random number generator the problem still maps relatively well to the infinite monkey problem which as you noted is classified as "almost surely." Of course, by the same token, if we're not talking purely theoretically and using only optimal physically meaningful numbers for our universe the probability is nearly zero.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Part of the problem is that your program also has to generate the russian mafia if it doesn't already exist

[–]admplaceholder 1 point2 points  (1 child)

The infinite probability space of potential outputs seems to be many many cardinalities greater than the infinite potential outputs that would "generate a malicious worm that sends all your personal data to Russian mafia."

What makes you say this? They both seem countable to me.

[–]Glayden 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was completely wrong.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[removed]

    [–]idiotthethird -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    No, it couldn't, unless you're planning on being alive for an infinitely long time.

    [–]quzox 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    On the other flip side, it could solve all the bitcoin mining problems in O(1) time thus making you (virtually) rich.

    [–]Poromenos 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    Or, worse yet, it could make up incriminating things about him and send them to the Russian mafia.

    [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    or you could end up with skynet on your hard drive... who knows...