Well, to address your viewership question, studies have shown that people want the drawings shown on live TV, even if they don't watch them. They want to know they're there, because then they know it's true and fair. That should totally clarify that point.
But why would a TV station air the draws if no one is going to watch them? TV stations make money by selling their time. You are saying that the lottery should be paying for something that no one watches, regardless of how the numbers are generated. It reminds me of the Flintstones episode where Fred and Barney start a restaurant and have to order a ton of parsley for the patrons to throw away.
As for why they mimic a draw machine in the animation (which is not a computerized draw, btw, as they use animation of ball draws in some places as well) is because that is what the Lottery's marketing department thought would look good. I have seen demonstrations of all kinds of different animation processes. Basically, the animator uses CGI and superimposes the draw results, which can come from any source. But I wax technical again.
I must admit this is a fascinating topic. I just read in another post that someone actually wants the balls because they are unfair. The statement was:
With more state lottery games switching to faking draws in a computer [we] cannot recommend playing such lottery games except for fun. You simply cannot predict winning numbers drawn in a computer random number generator setup to insure total randomness in drawings.
And after all the work I did to eliminate bias in the systems . Honestly, I never knew this was a factor, but given this is the desire, doesn't that now make what happened in California and what might be happening in Indiana a good thing? I read in a news article about California that players were already aware of the glitch there and using it to their advantage. If Indiana has a problem, shouldn't it make it more interesting to be looking for it?
When I first read your comment "it has nothing at all to do with technology", I thought, "then why all the technological arguments?" However, I think I am starting to understand your point. You actually want a chance at the unfairness of the ball draws. Since no one knows exactly where the bias is, the game still appears fair, but with lots of hard work, you can find the subtle fluctuations and potentially take advantage of them.
I hope that doesn't sound sarcastic, because I do not mean it to be. For over 20 years I have been involved with gaming, primarily as a programmer, but also as a mathematician who reviews games to insure they meet specific criteria regarding fairness and liability issues. There has always been an acceptance that some bias might be present in ball draws, but whenever the bias was measurable, even if only theoretically, the balls would be retired and a new set installed. That is why when computerized draws were proposed, they were designed to meet the strictest possible standards of fairness.
Todd, I really do want to understand this topic from a player's perspective. I am enjoying the forums very much and kudos for what must be a lot of hard work.
Thanks!