Like you mentioned, so-called "pseudorandom" number
sequences are also identical for the same initial seed.
I felt that "somewhat random" was less strong of a
statement than "pseudorandom", but I can see where
others would disagree. So I probably should have just
stuck with "pseudorandom".
For what it's worth, I find "disordered" and "lacking
pattern" worse (the bits have a definite pattern and
This reminds me that I forgot to mention that the bit
stream from a single LFSR has been studied to the point
that a small subseries of bits is enough to predict the
entire series. However, two carefully chosen LFSRs where
each bit from one is used to determine whether the next
bit from the other will be output or thrown away has been
analyzed and found to be cryptographically strong.
(but my friends call me "Tye")