"hard to truely say what is random or what is a as yet unknown pattern."
No, it's just saying that it's much easier to get pseudorandomness out of a computer than true randomness.
"This is why many have taken the approach of not having a single source of random numbers but use many and average out from there. There again is that random as the chances with such an approach of getting a high or low value would be biased out."
Technically speaking you wouldn't average you'd add them together and take the decimal portion (modulo 1). That can negate bias as long as one of the sources is good even if you don't know which one.
Of course you can remove bias from a single source by Von Neumann's method although this might be computationally harder than the above:
Comments
"hard to truely say what is random or what is a as yet unknown pattern."
No, it's just saying that it's much easier to get pseudorandomness out of a computer than true randomness.
"This is why many have taken the approach of not having a single source of random numbers but use many and average out from there. There again is that random as the chances with such an approach of getting a high or low value would be biased out."
Technically speaking you wouldn't average you'd add them together and take the decimal portion (modulo 1). That can negate bias as long as one of the sources is good even if you don't know which one.
Of course you can remove bias from a single source by Von Neumann's method although this might be computationally harder than the above:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_coin#Fair_results_from_a_b...