In no way, shape, or form can complex programs or works of Shakespeare EVER be demonstrated to appear out of randomness no matter how much finite time you have, no matter how much computing power you throw at it, no matter what you do.
The MATH says that even after BILLIONS of years of non-repeating randomness (a generous condition), that it is still less likely for the first sentence of Hamlet to appear naturally than for 17 16 2 61 45 6 to win the lottery tomorrow.
Read the link in Post #310. It debunks your wild-eyed folklore with facts, charts, and verifiable calculations (i.e., with math).
It's over. You lost. The PROOF is in the link in Post #310.
Your claims of "trivial" have already been diminished to the weak-kneed "possible", but even there you don't have 17 BILLION YEARS for a demonstration.
This has got to hurt. You were running around claiming that "math" would save you, not realizing that you were quoting FOLKLORE! Now you've been debunked with, of all things, math!
I love it! This is rich! You have been shot down in flames.
You are so busted!
I would point out that only a dumb ass would actually use monkies and typewriters to prove this point. Even a current computing cluster is vastly faster and would do the same job in a tiny fraction of the time. Throw in quantum computing, which will be commercial in ten years at the outside, and you can sift it in linear time (read: in a fraction of a second) due to the nature of the problem (not all exponential time problems translate to linear time problems on quantum computers, though this one does).
Add a little algorithm that picks letter sequences as they appear to match dictionary entries, checks all combinations formed out of these words, selects only for grammatically correct phrases of those combinations, filter and match it to the existing text of Shakespeare's work, reuse any word or phrase as needed and you could get one monkey and a computer to do the job for you in about the time it would take the monkey to type enough letters to fill the book. The difference is that you have added selection to the random process.
Probability arguments that do not include selection have zero relevance to the real world where selection operates continuously.