Netbook-Run Dice Robot Can Rack Up 1.3 Million Rolls a Day

stevel writes "The owner of games site GamesByEmail.com created Dice-O-Matic, 'a machine that can belch a continuous river of dice down a spiraling ramp, then elevate, photograph, process and upload almost a million and a half rolls to the server a day. ... The Dice-O-Matic is 7 feet tall, 18 inches wide and 18 inches deep. It has an aluminum frame covered with Plexiglas panels. A 6x4 inch square Plexiglas tube runs vertically up the middle almost the entire height. Inside this tube a bucket elevator carries dice from a hopper at the bottom, past a camera, and tosses them onto a ramp at the top. The ramp spirals down between the tube and the outer walls. The camera and synchronizing disk are near the top, the computer, relay board, elevator motor and power supplies are at the bottom.' While not called out in the article, the pictures clearly show a Dell Mini 9 running the show (and performing the optical recognition of the dice values.) No, it's not running Linux."

Comments

More Like Color Recognition

[eldavojohn]

While not called out in the article, the pictures clearly show a Dell Mini 9 running the show (and performing the optical recognition of the dice values.)

Yes but there's not a lot of "optical recognition" going on. From the article:

The dice are "Michigan Red Eyes", which have different colored pips for each value. The different colors make it pretty easy to count rolls. For example, if 6 yellow dots are found in the image, there were three 2s rolled, no need to worry about determining the proper grouping or orientation of pips.

If you control the background as being black or shades of grey (which is what it appears on that dirty dirty Windows XP screen) then your task is a lot easier and less error prone. Well done on the designer's part but surely reduces the computational work load.

Re:More Like Color Recognition

[SQLGuru]

In the "good old days," we called that a clever hack. Solving a problem is about simplifying the problem space in any and every way possible. I've made similar "OCR" hacks when everything was going to be in a known font and size.

Re:More Like Color Recognition

[Patch86]

Why bother with numerical "dots" at all?

If it can do colour recognition (obviously it can) why not just have a single coloured circle on each side of the dice. When it's a blue circle, it's a "1". A yellow circle, it's a "2". Two yellows and three blues, 7 total.

Surely the need for a symbolic representation of the number is only necessary for us feeble humans, with our tendency to forget abstractions. For a computer, which need never forget that green means "6", actually drawing a picture or making a pattern seems pointless.

Re:More Like Color Recognition

[cecille]

That's actually a clever idea. The only real problem I can see with it is that real dice are correctly balanced so that every side has an equal chance of coming up (or they are supposed to be - real ones are). Well balanced generic cubes without the dots or with single colour dots are probably pretty hard to find, and probably more expensive given the relative cheapness of generic dice.

Excellent...

[ben0207]

Finally a sensible way to play a 3000 pt Imperial Guard list!

Need more stats

[Junior J. Junior III]

What's its AC and THAC0? :)

Re:Need more stats

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the 21st century sir.

Your roll of Wis vs Fort is a failure. You suffer 50pts of Necrotic damage; save ends.

Re:Need more stats

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a gazebo Eric! A gazebo!

Re:Need more stats

[the unbeliever]

THAC0 is deprecated as of the latest release. Please upgrade your packages.

Re:Need more stats

[bughunter]

Sorry - those are all six-sided dice. Clearly, this machine plays GURPS.

Or maybe Traveller.

(We need a percentile version of one of these bots for our Rolemaster/Spacemaster games.)

Re:Need more stats

[Bigbutt]

It has 200 dice. Clearly it's made for Shadowrun. :)

[John]

A good first step

[Drakkenmensch]

Now that we've built a dice-rolling gambling robot, we just need to create a leg-breaking loanshark bookie-bot and we'll be all set to fully automize Vegas!

Re:A good first step

[SQLGuru]

Are you sure it wasn't the two girls one cup game?

Re:A good first step

[sheetsda]

fully automize Vegas!

Someone already tried this. The machine took your debit card number, and generated a random number: if (N <= 45) { card->cash *= 2; } else { card->cash *= 0.5; }. The end result was the same, but for some reason it just didn't have the same appeal. My theory is it has something to do with the tangible dice.

Re:A good first step

[clintp]

Ahhh, forget the casino!

Re:A good first step

[LandDolphin]

They are socially unpopular because yo uare betting against everyone. Craps, unlike poker, you are all on the same if. If one win, you al lwin type situation. You all want the roller to keep rolling and winning. When someone comes and bets the rolelr will lose, he is at odds with the interests of everyone else at the table.

That beign said, I love craps. It's a lot of fun. Do I play to win money? No, but it is nice when it happens. I play for the entertainment value. The excitement of when the dice hit my number, the cheering and yelling. What other game at the casino can I stand around with complete strangers (and friends) and yell and scream and generally make an ass of myself? Sure, you get the occational noise from a winnign group at another game, but if you spend any time in a casino you will soon find out that all the noise is coming from the craps table.

Also, if you bet wise and dont get carried away its pretty easy to play for a long while and break even. But its hard not to get swept up in the game and start betting all crazy. Dont win big if you dont bet big.

And as for "throwing money into a hole", most entertainment is just that. You spend money on thigns that are enjoyable: A meal, a concert, camping, hookers coke and craps. At the end of each you've lost your money and gained entertment (and possibly a rash)

Why?

[Publikwerks]

Why would you need this? And how is this better than a RNG?

Re:Why?

[Domint]

Because any developer worth their weight in salt will tell you that RNGs are not truly random.

Re:Why?

[gnick]

Trust.

People who know better will trust a good RNG just as well (as long as it's open source) - They're not perfectly random, but probably just as random as the dice roll. But if you're dropping $$ on the roll of a couple of dice (especially if you're remote), people will put more faith in a couple of pieces of bouncing plastic than they will a computer telling you that you just lost your $100 with no explanation.

Of course, that's purely speculation - Why RTFA when you can just glean through the comments.

Re:Why?

[CheddarHead]

From TFA:

"To generate the dice rolls, I have used Math.random, Random.org and other sources, but have always received numerous complaints that the dice are not random enough. Some players have put more effort into statistical analysis of the rolls than they put into their doctoral dissertation."

So, basically it was to quiet complaints about the randomness of the computer generated dice rolls. I question whether it's really better, but the players think it's better and in this context I guess that's all that matters.

Re:Why?

[gnick]

That's true RNGs are not truly random. But, then again, neither is anything else. Just sufficiently random to be indistinguishable from an actual random event.

Re:Why?

[eldavojohn]

Because any developer worth their weight in salt will tell you that RNGs are not truly random.

No, they are not truly random. Nor is his dice machine, as the dice are possibly imperfect and subject to gravity or the way it reloads them into the hopper. Influences could be anywhere.

I would be interested in seeing him run this machine for 30 days and then compute the Shannon entropy on the results and then compare this to popular RNGs out there.

Although I would expect the RNGs (however flawed) to perform better, it would be interesting nonetheless.

Re:Why?

[aurb]

...neither is anything else. (random), ...an actual random event..

It's a good thing I have my paradox absorbing crumple zones installed...

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

And yet, there is probably some bias in the way that the dice are thrown. This project is cool, but as a source of random numbers it is quite silly.

If this does not qualify as random, what does?

A dicerolling machine external to and slightly more complex than the universe itself?

I normally don't mind the arguments or objections that this or that is psuedo-random rather than truly random, especially when it comes to computer generated numbers designed to do X or Y.

But really these are physical dice. If this doesn't cut it for you, what will?

Re:Why?

[Domint]

True. I'd like to see someone put this machine up against a currently accepted RNG routines and see which one produces more 'believably random' results.

Re:Why?

[AlecC]

The developer says that his users have complained that his software RNGs were not random enough. His aim in building this is to build a machine that is as random as if users were throwing their own dice. At the end, he promises (light-heartedly, I presume) to punish the dice if a user shows that they are not random.

Re:Why?

[wjousts]

That's true RNGs are not truly random. But, then again, neither is anything else. Just sufficiently random to be indistinguishable from an actual random event.

You fail at Quantum Mechanics.

Hardware random number generators

Re:Why?

[rbarreira]

But really these are physical dice. If this doesn't cut it for you, what will?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_random_number_generator

Re:Why?

[rsmith]

If this does not qualify as random, what does?

It depends on the dice being not biased, and the mechanics not exerting any influence.

One should test it by letting the machine rip for a couple of days, and then analyse the produced numbers for randomness, e.g. with the diehard test suite.

Re:Why?

[asdf7890]

Why would you need this? And how is this better than a RNG?

Erm, it is an RNG. A proper one at that, not a PRNG.

OK so there might be a little bias somewhere in the system (a slight manufacturing defect in some of the dice making the chance of getting a six 1 in 5.99999999 instead of 1 in 6, or perhaps some oddity in the optical processing code that makes it fail to recognise the colour representing four more often that it fails to recognise threes) but only a perfect RNG would not have a little bias like this and there is no such thing as a completely perfect RNG. There are statistical analysis and filtering techniques designed to detect and filter/reduce such bias in systems.

And on the subject of "why would you need something like this?": sometimes wanting something is enough. Sometimes the fun of creating something and the joy of a successful project completed are the whole point.

Re:Why?

[Khashishi]

Shannon entropy isn't the same thing as randomness. It's a measure of balance of the distribution. You could have a high entropy generator that is very unrandom, say, one that basically alternates between outputs. Or you could have a truly random distribution that favors some outputs over others, but completely unpredictably.

Jumping to conclusions

[Dan East]

"No, it's not running Linux"

I hate it when people to conclusions. Obviously, it is running linux, just with an XP-themed window manager.

Re:Not running Linux?

[ratbag]

A Linux user might also completely fail to read the article and discover that some of his users weren't happy with the results of various electronic and noise-based generators that he's used in the past.

Rob (a not-PC user, in a snarky mood for some reason)

Accuracy

[wangerx]

Very cool device! It does lack in accuracy. Pitted dice are off balance and the 1 will land on the bottom more often than not. That is why Vegas does not use that type of die. There is error in the machine; look closely at the video where the dice get stuck at the top.

From TFA

[neoflame]

"To generate the dice rolls, I have used Math.random, Random.org and other sources, but have always received numerous complaints that the dice are not random enough." Math.random is an LCG and so therefore of dubious quality. Random.org, though, is a true RNG (not a PRNG). If random.org is not random enough, either they're doing something quite horribly wrong or (far more likely) players don't actually understand what random means.

Re:What a waste,

[goodmanj]

it can only roll D6s.

No problem. You can generate any die roll you like from D6's, just do a little math.

For a D8, just roll two D6's, add them together, and then take the result modulo 8 and add 1. Poof! A random number between 1 and 8!
.
.
.
.
(If you're furious with nerd rage right now: I'm kidding. If you're not furious: don't try this at home.)

1.3 million rolls a day! ...

[tbi]

...Imagine a beowulf cluster of those...

Re:What a waste,

[oldspewey]

You know, I never thought there would be a story on /. that could earn the "1500000d6" tag, and then this came along.

how long do the dice last?

[Dan Ost]

The article mentioned that the dice get beat up pretty bad at the bottom of the machine. I have three questions:

1. how long do the dice last before needing to be pulled out of the machine and replaced?

2. how are damaged dice identified to be removed?

3. does the software recognize when damaged dice are causing errors (for example, when the paint from a pip has been completely chipped off)?

Re:No random, no paradox

[JustOK]

I have random thoughts like that all the time.

All your dice suck - Testable!

[braindrainbahrain]

Now finally, we have the technology to experimentally verify the claims made by a certain dice manufacturer!

Why? Because revenge is possible

[Actually, I do RTFA]

if you donate to the site and are unhappy about the rolls, let me know and I will pull a die out of the machine, melt it flat and mail it to you, as an object lesson to the other dice.

'nuff said

Re:What a waste,

[shliddle]

Please don't use this method. You are not creating an evenly distributed d8. From all 36 possible outcomes of 2d6, your "mod" d8 comes out like this: 1 - 5 times; 2 thru 6 - 4 times each; 7 - 5 times; 8 - 6 times. You COULD use some kind of conversion table, but even then you would need to throw away 4 of the 36 combinations to make it work.

Re:Practical randomness

[drinkypoo]

Or alternatively just grab that Brownian motion detector.

If only it would just hold still for a sec...

Re:What a waste,

[shliddle]

I got so furious with nerd rage, I didn't even read the last line of your post! :-)

Re:How do you know QM is random?

[mrsurb]

It's been a decade since I looked at QM...

Bell's theorem loosely states: No physical theory of local hidden variables can ever reproduce all of the predictions of quantum mechanics.

Quantum mechanics is inherently statistical and non-deterministic in nature. If Bell's theorem holds (and experiments have so far gone its way), then the only way to retrieve your deterministic universe from the clutches of quantum mechanics is to allow non-local effects - which brings in problems of instantaneous travel, faster-than-light communication etc...

Sorry Einstein, it looks like God DOES play dice with the universe.

Who wants to bet

[Bruiser80]

that the programming required to make this machine worked required at least one random function :-)

Ig Nobel prize!

[Megane]

This guy deserves to be nominated for an Ig Nobel prize in statistics!

Re:What a waste,

[goodmanj]

Wow. Fishing for nerds is so damned easy, they take the bait even when you put a sign on it saying "WARNING: CONTAINS FISHHOOKS".

For a good nerd time, try working out the probability distribution table for Mod8(D6+D6)+1. I suggested it as a joke, but it's less horrible thank you might think.

Re:What's so clever?

[Culture20]

Why not use traditional white dice with black dots on a white background. Then it is as simple as

visgrep <CameraImage.png> <DotImage.pat> -t 10? | wc -l

Calculating the full image is far more work than necessary. This also easily allows for an arbitrary number of dice to be used, assuming the don't start piling on top of each other.

Because if you count 36 dots, was that six dice with six rolled on each, or twelve threes, or ...
Even if you can count exactly how many dice you rolled, was the total of six dots from four dice three ones and a three, or was it one plus two plus two plus one?
I'm guessing that knowing the exact number of dice rolled and what each die rolled is important.