Exactly. The same old debate between statistical truth and deterministic uncertainty. What bothers me is that, meanwhile, the many people who have tried to get funding for years or even generations to study deep, complex mechanisms involved in DNA replication (on histones for example) didn't get much. Of course replication will eventually, on large numbers, begin to fail. Microprocessors do too. But would we say that when instructions get contaminated it's bad luck?

Possibly the difference between knowing something is random and not knowing anything.

Of course 'random' is a fairly complex topic in itself but it makes sense to consider it relative to the problem domain.