This is completely incorrect. The probabilities are exactly the same. There is no way to judge whether the number exhibits a random distribution with such a small sample. What you can do is take a very large set of randomly generated numbers can calculate if the distribution is unlikely. So, you should ask him to give you 100,000 more numbers to test his randomness.

As far as I know this is the legal view at this time, but it makes it no less ridiculous. I cannot wait for the day when remembering what you have read is a violation of a books copyright! The law should be fixed where: Selling bootleg DVD's on the street = illegal; Sharing a MP3 with one friend = legal; Sharing a MP3 with 100 people on an p2p system = illegal;

Of course the implications could be much higher quality search results.

Is there evidence that there is an epidemic of cancer? We all have to die of something, and with longer lives, I would expect more cancer. Also, when did cancer diagnosis become the norm, as opposed calling it a normal death?