

Programming error voided Green Card lottery results - hasanove
http://www.dvlottery.state.gov

======
smackfu
A bit more detail on the non-randomness:

But when the numbers were drawn, it turned about that 90 percent of the
winners came from applications that were submitted on just the first two days
of a 30-day registration period.

~~~
ay
This brings up a question: is the time of the submission a random variable ?
If yes - assuming the submitters did not have the prior knowledge - then I
think the results should be random even if we were just to select X
consecutive entries at some day ?

------
smackfu
Wow, that is terrible if you won in the original draw.

~~~
bluehex
Yeah I feel terrible for all the people that were told they won just to have
their dreams yanked out from under them. I wish the government could do
something to make it up to them. Once they notify people that they've won they
should have to make good on it. If it were up to me all the people that won by
error would be allowed their visas, and another draw would be made for the
remaining entrants. Then the remaining candidates would have a better chance
than the original draw. Sure we'd have double the lottery immigrants coming
over this year but this seems like the closest thing to fair to me considering
the mistake that's already been made.

~~~
glhaynes
My initial thought is to agree. But what would we do in the situation where a
computer error caused it to be weighted toward something other than date of
application? What if it were 90% people with last names that start with "R"?
Or 90% males?

~~~
nitrogen
Sure, "What if XYZ?" But that's not what happened. If the algorithm
demonstrated a bias for or against a protected class (nationality, gender,
etc.), then one could argue against honoring results. Otherwise, be fair to
the people who "won." In most cases, I would argue that revoking visas that
have already been awarded would cause an unacceptable amount of human
suffering. The course of action with the least harm to applicants in specific
and society in general is running a second lottery.

------
jemfinch
I'd really like to see an NTSB/FAA-style post-mortem analysis of bugs like
these, along with suggested process improvements that will prevent such errors
from occurring in the future.

Our industry could really benefit from a body of analysis on programming bugs
that rivaled the body of analysis we have on plane crashes.

------
waqf
They should (in advance) post the exact algorithm by which they choose the
pseudorandom results, and (on lottery day) post a truly-random seed selected
by a process performed in public or verified by independent observers. Then
anyone would be able to verify the lottery results after the fact.

------
xorglorb
> U.S. law requires that Diversity Immigrant visas be made available through a
> strictly random process. A computer programming error resulted in a
> selection that was not truly random.

Computer generated numbers are never truly random. At what point is it "random
enough"?

~~~
SpikeGronim
Many computers have physical entropy sources, so they can create truly random
numbers. <http://www.cryptography.com/public/pdf/IntelRNG.pdf>

~~~
hugh3
I don't think it's really necessary to use true quantum randomness. A good-
enough-for-government-work definition of a random drawing is that every
applicant has an equal chance (to _N_ decimal places) of being chosen at the
time they submit their application.

For this, pseudorandom is good enough. Sure, it's completely deterministic
which applications will get chosen once you've chosen your algorithm and seed.
But how do you choose your seed? Probably from the clock at the time you run
the program. And what determines the precise time you run the program? Why, a
bunch of neural signals going around in the head of the dude whose job it is
to press "enter" on the greencard lottery program.

There are some purposes for which random is better than pseudorandom, this
ain't one of 'em.

------
terzza
Weirdly, this seems to be on the front page twice for me:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2545331>

------
rycs
so it seems no one has posted the required xkcd joke in this cases, so here it
is: <http://xkcd.com/221/>

------
chancecarroll
Yeah, that would be a truly horrible feeling.

