[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
Any given particle has both a location and a velocity. As the uncertainty principle states, we cannot measure these precisely, but the particle still has a location and velocity whether or not humans can map them.

[/ QUOTE ]

ZJ, I'm not any kind of an expert in any of this, but according to some of books I have read, normal "probabilistic" interpretations of QM imply that the statement "any given particle has both a location and a velocity" (simultaneously) is not true. It is not just a matter of not being able to know or measure those parameters, but an absolutely essential characteristic of things. Of course this might be extremely confusing and non-intuitive (at least as for our "classical physics intuition"), but it's possible to "get used to it", IMO.

With regard to your OP: randomness is a word, in the language we use. This word is very useful in some aspects, and this doesn't necessarily have to do with the question of "is there a thing in _reality_ that this word points at?", since it's a very tricky word (BTW, there are certainly people who will say the same things about the words "god", "free-will", "evil", "time", and many others). In other words, until you come up with a definitive definition of the word "randomness", this discussion will be a philosophic/metaphysical/linguistic one. (For instance, you can say that there could be a god that for him "any given particle does have both a location and a velocity", and therefore, from his perspective, there's no meaning to "Free-will". Well, OK, but then we are not discussing science any more.)

BTW, In a book I've read (unfortunately I don't remember where), someone defined "random" simply as "we don't know". If you use this definition, this could bring an interesting (philosophical) twist to your original question.