From: klee@unibwm.de   
      
   On 27.11.2023 16:50, Tom Del Rosso wrote:   
   > Herbert Kleebauer wrote:   
   >>   
   >> Then you have the same problem: the first %random% isn't   
   >> random. So better insert a "dummy=%random% at the start of   
   >> the batch.   
   >   
   > In an earlier version it saved a log with a graph output to show the   
   > pattern. It revealed that the second number wasn't very random either.   
      
   It is a pseudo random generator, the second value depends on   
   the first value.   
      
   @echo off   
   for /l %%i in (1,1,20) do (   
     cmd /c echo %%random%% %%random%% %%random%% %%random%%   
     timeout /t 1 >nul)   
      
   But the second value of %random% at least looks much more   
   random than the first one:   
      
   29515 13600 11704 18330   
   29518 24348 29568 9626   
   29521 2328 14664 921   
   29525 13077 32529 24984   
   29528 23825 17625 16280   
   29531 1806 2721 7575   
   29534 12554 20585 31638   
   29538 23302 5681 22934   
   29541 1283 23545 14229   
   29544 12031 8642 5524   
   29548 22780 26506 29588   
   29551 760 11602 20883   
   29554 11508 29466 12178   
   29557 22257 14562 3473   
   29561 237 32426 27537   
   29564 10986 17523 18832   
   29567 21734 2619 10127   
   29570 32483 20483 1423   
   29574 10463 5579 25486   
   29577 21211 23443 16781   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)