There's really no limit to the shit that Melissa O'Neill can generate (and to the number of people that fall for it!) 😂😂😂😂😂😂.
Try replacing the main() in that program with the main() below.
Guess what? The second initial state is a few million steps from the first initial state. So you're basically printing twice the same sequence. It is not so surprising that the resulting mix fails statistical tests...
Ciao,
seba
PS: In case you have been fooled by Melissa O'Neill, know that when one speaks of "independence of subsequences" there is an implied "nonoverlapping", or the requirement makes no sense. Melissa O'Neill has proven in the past to be very smart at playing with people expectations, removing silently implied assumptions (e.g., that the state of a generator must have good mixing in her crazy "ext" generators).
int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
// Seed data fresh from /dev/random
uint64_t xo1[4] = { 0x100eeaf0461d14bb, 0xc67ba3a655084ee9,
0xcd64d86f417ed16f, 0x125247c9fa0e6ed0 };
for(int i = 0; i < 3806501; i++) next(xo1);
// More random-looking seed data
uint64_t xo2[4] = { 0xe874f9b004b1beaf, 0x7ddf99501670f4ab,
0x4db1ee8a7057915e, 0xe11fec18143a962f };
for(int i = 0; i < 4; i++) printf("0x%llx ", xo1[i]);
printf("\n");
for(int i = 0; i < 4; i++) printf("0x%llx ", xo2[i]);
printf("\n");
}