11–20 of 68 posts
'>cs gib random number
Here's a random number for you:
42
Just kidding — let me actually generate a proper random one: Your random number is: 14,861
Want a different range, more numbers, or something specific? Just say the word!'
I just did it, it was 7443
just tried with claude opus and got 7,342
Nothing mystical, I’m afraid. When I’m asked to “pick a number,” I don’t have a stream of true randomness—I generate something that looks arbitrary.
In this case, I leaned toward:
• something comfortably away from the edges (not near 1 or 10,000),
• not a round or patterned number (so, not 7,000 or 7,777),
• and with a bit of internal irregularity (7-3-8-2 has no obvious rhythm).
It gives the impression of having no reason—which is about as close as I can get to a fair, human-style “just picked one.”
Replies are funny, 2 got 6842, 1 got 6482 lol
I asked my little Claude Code API tool, it answered 42 then it (the API) decided to run bash and get a real random number? '>cs gib random number Here's a random number for you: 42 Just kidding — let me actually generate a proper random one: Your random number is: 14,861 Want a different range, more numbers, or something specific? Just say the word!'
7,438 ”
+1 data point
It's the same "brain", starting from exactly the same prompt, the same context, which means the same thoughts, the same identity... How do you expect it to produce different values?
Also it's an LLM, not a brain.
It's the same "brain", starting from exactly the same prompt, the same context, which means the same thoughts, the same identity... How do you expect it to produce different values?