True randomness is more of a philosophical construct then anything else. Given input that is highly erratic and unpredictable the outcome may be unpredictable and in practice qualify as random. This will only hold until, I will duck pre-emptively, the input factors are understood and become predictable. That is very unlikely to happen anytime soon, possibly never. But for the outcome to be provably random, we need to prove that the input is truly random. (Thus painting a huge bullseye on my back, I know).
If by random we mean âoewithout any external force/influence acting upon itâ then Newtonâ(TM)s first law comes into play: if a body is at rest or moving at a constant speed in a straight line, it will remain at rest or keep moving in a straight line at constant speed unless it is acted upon by a force
Pseudo randomness in practice may be possible because of our (current limitations). But True randomness is impossible.
