Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(KHQ Spokane)   Not News: Man buys lottery ticket, using Quick Pick. News: Machine prints out two tickets. Fark: Numbers on both lines are identical. Back to Not News: Still doesn't win anything   (khq.com) divider line
    More: Unlikely  
•       •       •

1512 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Mar 2019 at 1:06 AM (10 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



35 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2019-03-13 08:09:23 PM  
There are some suspicious maths in that article.
 
2019-03-13 08:27:39 PM  
The numbers are printed from highest to lowest, so order doesn't count. How is the odds of 6 random non-duplicate numbers from 1 to X coming up in the lottery different than 6 random non-duplicate numbers from 1 to X coming up as the 2nd number on the ticket?
 
2019-03-13 10:43:40 PM  
How about the Australian man who won big on a scratchcard after a serious accident, heart attack and coma, and when local news asked him to reenact buying the scratchcard for the camera he won a quarter of a million dollars on that scratchcard?
Bill Morgan - $250000 winner via scratch card while filming in australia
Youtube Se8VM0j5B6A

Warning, sound a bit iffy at the start.
 
2019-03-14 12:52:20 AM  
The odds of getting two quick picks that match should be the same as the odds of a single ticket winning the lottery. It's the exact same thing.

But wait! If your quick picks don't match, you get two tickets to win the lottery. So that's twice as likely.  So the other is half as likely. Or something. So confused.
 
2019-03-14 01:14:35 AM  
Slow news day apparently.

/ any computer science folks can tell you there is no such thing as a random number generator
 
2019-03-14 01:18:31 AM  
There is some advantage.

If the numbers won and another person also picked them, the guy with two tickets would get 2/3 of the money instead of half.
 
2019-03-14 01:20:59 AM  

gunsmack: Slow news day apparently.

/ any computer science folks can tell you there is no such thing as a random number generator


The odds of the code having a bug are far higher than this happening randomly.  Like they called into their crypto-quality random number source twice to fill the same buffer and the second time it shat itself without changing the buffer contents.
 
2019-03-14 01:21:34 AM  
First two numbers...
9 & 11.

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2019-03-14 01:32:55 AM  

zang: gunsmack: Slow news day apparently.

/ any computer science folks can tell you there is no such thing as a random number generator

The odds of the code having a bug are far higher than this happening randomly.  Like they called into their crypto-quality random number source twice to fill the same buffer and the second time it shat itself without changing the buffer contents.


Don't act like it's impossible for this to have happened by chance. Of course it's possible. The odds are right there in the article. The odds are similar to the odds of actually winning the lottery. Which happens all the time.
 
2019-03-14 01:37:24 AM  

gunsmack: Slow news day apparently.

/ any computer science folks can tell you there is no such thing as a random number generator


I use this, yea nothing may be trulyrandom, but this is as about as random as you can get.

Random.org
 
2019-03-14 01:43:13 AM  

gunsmack: Slow news day apparently.

/ any computer science folks can tell you there is no such thing as a random number generator


No such thing as one implemented purely in software. Once you interact with real-world hardware you can get true randomness.
 
2019-03-14 01:51:26 AM  

Ivo Shandor: gunsmack: Slow news day apparently.

/ any computer science folks can tell you there is no such thing as a random number generator

No such thing as one implemented purely in software. Once you interact with real-world hardware you can get true randomness.


CSB;  I know a really smart egghead at IBM who works in quantum physics.  One day, I thought I'd share my really cool idea about a physical random number generator using a small amount of a radioisotope positioned on the tip of a high RPM spindle.  Two sensors positioned 180 degrees apart would provide either a zero or a one, and the polarity of which sensor provides the zeros and ones would be flipped periodically to eliminate any detection bias.

Anyway, in a very polite and roundabout way, he was like "good idea, we've been doing much more advanced versions of that for decades"
 
2019-03-14 01:54:14 AM  

gunsmack: Slow news day apparently.

/ any computer science folks can tell you there is no such thing as a random number generator


We have pseudo random number generators of high enough quality that you'd have to play the lottery a million times a second until the billionth heat death of the universe to even remotely come close to finding a pattern. The problem here is that they simply didn't code for the rare chance of the RNG spitting out the same picks twice in a row and chucking that result.
 
2019-03-14 02:02:30 AM  

Russ1642: gunsmack: Slow news day apparently.

/ any computer science folks can tell you there is no such thing as a random number generator

We have pseudo random number generators of high enough quality that you'd have to play the lottery a million times a second until the billionth heat death of the universe to even remotely come close to finding a pattern. The problem here is that they simply didn't code for the rare chance of the RNG spitting out the same picks twice in a row and chucking that result.


mv /dev/random /dev/null

*universe implodes*
 
2019-03-14 02:04:48 AM  

Ivo Shandor: No such thing as one implemented purely in software. Once you interact with real-world hardware you can get true randomness.


This. No deterministic algorithm will be truly random, but they can interact with devices that give them random data, thus creating a real random number generator.

I assume the lottery kiosks do that. Hell, most CPUs today have them (assuming no NSA backdoor).
 
2019-03-14 02:10:06 AM  

zang: gunsmack: Slow news day apparently.

/ any computer science folks can tell you there is no such thing as a random number generator

The odds of the code having a bug are far higher than this happening randomly.  Like they called into their crypto-quality random number source twice to fill the same buffer and the second time it shat itself without changing the buffer contents.


Actually, I'd say that the odds that this is a bug but somehow manifests itself only about as often as hitting the lottery is less likely than it being purely by chance.
 
2019-03-14 02:10:24 AM  

Russ1642: gunsmack: Slow news day apparently.

/ any computer science folks can tell you there is no such thing as a random number generator

We have pseudo random number generators of high enough quality that you'd have to play the lottery a million times a second until the billionth heat death of the universe to even remotely come close to finding a pattern. The problem here is that they simply didn't code for the rare chance of the RNG spitting out the same picks twice in a row and chucking that result.


There was a Keno machine once which used one of those fancy PRNGs. Unfortunately it seeded itself to the same value every morning when it was switched on. A gambler eventually noticed.

https://www.americancasinoguide.com/g​a​mbling-stories/costly-casino-mistakes-​the-keno-mix-up.html
 
2019-03-14 02:19:32 AM  
He paid a dollar for one set of numbers and got 2 sets of numbers that were identical.
I'm betting on printer error, not 13M:1 odds.

/what would be really great is if those numbers paid $1000, and then see the lottery officials lottsplain why he only gets $1000 instead of $2000
 
2019-03-14 02:25:37 AM  

derpes_simplex: Ivo Shandor: gunsmack: Slow news day apparently.

/ any computer science folks can tell you there is no such thing as a random number generator

No such thing as one implemented purely in software. Once you interact with real-world hardware you can get true randomness.

CSB;  I know a really smart egghead at IBM who works in quantum physics.  One day, I thought I'd share my really cool idea about a physical random number generator using a small amount of a radioisotope positioned on the tip of a high RPM spindle.  Two sensors positioned 180 degrees apart would provide either a zero or a one, and the polarity of which sensor provides the zeros and ones would be flipped periodically to eliminate any detection bias.

Anyway, in a very polite and roundabout way, he was like "good idea, we've been doing much more advanced versions of that for decades"


https://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/ uses radioactivity but not the spinning thingy.

https://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/hard​w​are.html
 
2019-03-14 02:28:31 AM  
If the odds of winning are 1 in 6.99 million, then the odds of getting a duplicated ticket are 1 in 6.99 million. The odds of getting that SPECIFIC duplicate ticket would be double.

farking Math how does it work?
 
2019-03-14 02:36:32 AM  

Alunan: If the odds of winning are 1 in 6.99 million, then the odds of getting a duplicated ticket are 1 in 6.99 million. The odds of getting that SPECIFIC duplicate ticket would be double.

farking Math how does it work?


The odds of getting that specific ticket doubled should be squared.  Roughly 1 in 45 trillion.

I don't know why they say odds of winning are better than odds of a duplicate draw better unless there's another way to win than an exact hit.  (Do they draw seven balls? Is there a wildcard?)
 
2019-03-14 02:39:46 AM  

Banned on the Run: He paid a dollar for one set of numbers and got 2 sets of numbers that were identical.
I'm betting on printer error, not 13M:1 odds.


Article didn't say that he only paid for one set of numbers, that was just some embellishment from smitty.
 
2019-03-14 02:51:55 AM  

aerojockey: (Do they draw seven balls? Is there a wildcard?)


Ahh! That might be it.
 
2019-03-14 03:00:42 AM  

aerojockey: Banned on the Run: He paid a dollar for one set of numbers and got 2 sets of numbers that were identical.
I'm betting on printer error, not 13M:1 odds.

Article didn't say that he only paid for one set of numbers, that was just some embellishment from smitty.


bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.comView Full Size


Price $1.00
 
2019-03-14 04:18:33 AM  

Banned on the Run: aerojockey: Banned on the Run: He paid a dollar for one set of numbers and got 2 sets of numbers that were identical.
I'm betting on printer error, not 13M:1 odds.

Article didn't say that he only paid for one set of numbers, that was just some embellishment from smitty.

[bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com image 300x169]

Price $1.00


steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.netView Full Size
 
2019-03-14 04:44:08 AM  

Banned on the Run: aerojockey: Banned on the Run: He paid a dollar for one set of numbers and got 2 sets of numbers that were identical.
I'm betting on printer error, not 13M:1 odds.

Article didn't say that he only paid for one set of numbers, that was just some embellishment from smitty.

[bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com image 300x169]

Price $1.00


The ticket is $1 for two picks.  (Usually you get two different picks for your $1, but I guess not always.)

Now that I think about it, that probably explains why they said the odds of winning the jackpot are twice as high as getting a duplicate number.
 
2019-03-14 04:57:10 AM  

aerojockey: Banned on the Run: aerojockey: Banned on the Run: He paid a dollar for one set of numbers and got 2 sets of numbers that were identical.
I'm betting on printer error, not 13M:1 odds.

Article didn't say that he only paid for one set of numbers, that was just some embellishment from smitty.

[bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com image 300x169]

Price $1.00

The ticket is $1 for two picks.  (Usually you get two different picks for your $1, but I guess not always.)

Now that I think about it, that probably explains why they said the odds of winning the jackpot are twice as high as getting a duplicate number.


I didn't think any state had a $0.50 play
 
2019-03-14 05:47:56 AM  
This story... is pretty much Spokane, in a nutshell.
 
2019-03-14 06:52:22 AM  
I am guessing its a glitch in their software and should be audited as the number didn't change but stayed in the memory and became the B pick even if it wasn't registered and paid for as an official pick. That is assuming someone didn't photoshop the pick of the ticket.
 
2019-03-14 07:04:52 AM  
Buying two identical Quick Pick and you don't win? That's the universe telling you to stop buying Lotto tickets.
 
2019-03-14 08:04:16 AM  
impaler: "The numbers are printed from highest to lowest,"

Well, yeah, if you read right to left
 
2019-03-14 10:17:06 AM  
It uses the time as a seed to produce the numbers, so they could just add a delay to keep this from happening. No surprises.
 
2019-03-14 11:32:53 AM  

dryknife: impaler: "The numbers are printed from highest to lowest,"

Well, yeah, if you read right to left


Are we not doing big endian?
 
2019-03-14 02:07:51 PM  

Wizzywig: It uses the time as a seed to produce the numbers, so they could just add a delay to keep this from happening. No surprises.


If they reseed the generator with each pick, then they are probably reducing randomness.

If what you described was the case, everyone who ever bought 2 tickets would say "yeah, that is what they do" rather than "hmm, that's weird".

/He didn't win because he used up his allotment of statistical outliers for the year
 
2019-03-14 11:29:57 PM  

DerAppie: Wizzywig: It uses the time as a seed to produce the numbers, so they could just add a delay to keep this from happening. No surprises.

If they reseed the generator with each pick, then they are probably reducing randomness.

If what you described was the case, everyone who ever bought 2 tickets would say "yeah, that is what they do" rather than "hmm, that's weird".

/He didn't win because he used up his allotment of statistical outliers for the year


The secure RNGs I've seen in major programming languages never take a single seed as an input. Any seed you give it is always combined with its current state.
 
Displayed 35 of 35 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report