@mjsurette
With the important note:

Notice that random devices may not always be available to produce random numbers (and in some systems, they may even never be available). This is signaled by throwing an exception derived from the standard exception on construction or when a number is requested with operator().
Unless the program really requires a stochastic process to generate random numbers, a portable program is encouraged to use an alternate pseudo-random number generator engine instead, or at least provide a recovery method for such exceptions.

Windows will not provide real random numbers (at least to my knowledge), and in Linux this is implementation dependent. Even if /dev/random is advertised to produce real random numbers, the truthfulness of such a statement is debatable. Often enough the random device just generates a pseudo-random sequence. That's why you get the above note on portability.

Kind regards.

@ealione said:

I agree, he was quite dedicated.

I remember receiving notifications, and I'd be happy believing that someone had replied to my post, only to see his usual message.

At some point even I was tempted to talk to him/her.

Ha ha... I share this because he replied to several of my questions and like you I was like .... yeah I got a reply!!! only to find out (in his/her opinion) how many Bazillions of dollars Qt was making and stealing from everyone.

I have to admit I read his/her first post to one of my questions fully and was trying to figure out what had set him/her off. At some point he/she moved from the dollars to like world hunger or something and was kind of inferring that Qt was responsible for that!

As far as reasoning with him, I used to dabble in Ham radio many years ago and we all learned that the best thing to do when a jammer came on the freq was to ignore him/her. The more attention you give them, the more it fuels there need to be destructive.