Perhaps this should be better written as "Nothing needs gigabit rates of _cryptographically strong_ random numbers."
Yes that's what I meant to say. I probably didn't realize the discussion had widened to include insecure number generation.
>Using a megabit rates of cryptographically strong random numbers to seed a PRNG would be fine for most purposes.
And that's exactly what the hardware described in the article does for you.
True. Although the new Intel system is not cryptographically secure.
Gigabit true random numbers could be used to modulate a jam-resistant radar signal. That makes it difficult for an opponent to use active electronics to cloak their target, even in principle. However actual systems would use dedicated hardware, not an Intel chip.
The profoundly paranoid could interleave true random bits with their data bits before encrypting (discard them on receipt). Pattern analysis would become much more difficult.
Using a megabit rates of cryptographically strong random numbers to seed a PRNG would be fine for most purposes.
Can anyone think of a reason why you would want/use gigabit rates of truly random numbers instead of using a slower rate to see a PRNG?