[rbanffy]

Not sure I’d call it analog. Mechanical it is, but all the computation control is digital. A mechanical one would probably have a camshaft for storing the program and use gears to make measurements and computations.

Would probably need a large engine to power it as well, with careful control because the resisting force would vary along the machine cycles (this could be used as a side channel attack vector to figure out internal state from resisting force).

[AJTSheppard]

It's certainly the case that the coin/dice shaking is purely mechanical because before I built the control box, I operated the machine by simply connecting the motor to a bench power supply and applying the necessary voltage (which I would vary) for an amount of time (which I could vary) in a chosen rotational direction (which I could change). I could read the 1's and 0's just by looking at the coins and dice through the transparent dome.

The control box was a convenience and made the process fully programmable by the user. Which makes the machine far more flexible and useful.

I call it analog randomness because that's what I expect from the real world. For thousands of years, humans have used coins and dice to generate uncertain outcomes. And the fact that they typically generate only one of N outcomes (N=2 for coins, N=6 for common dice) is why humans use them. It is also why the Satoshi9000 uses them, and because its a kind of randomness that humans have an intuitive recognition of.

[rbanffy]

It's quite a respectable accomplishment, don't get me wrong.

Now I'm thinking of a random number generator that uses a mechanical calculator printer (but I don't think there are any hex-capable ones easily available) or a typewriter to write password suggestions. The mechanical part would be tricky, because the hammers require some force to be actuated (and I would find it criminal to destroy a vintage typewriter for that).