Einstein infamously said, and he said so many times, that god does not play dice. He said this in order to refute indeterminism, and therefore, we cannot say that he was correct: The meaning he intended to communicate was probably wrong (depending on your definition of “god”). However, the most relevant meaning of his statement is self-evidently true: Randomness (indeterminism) is not satisfyingly explained by merely postulating some more mystical randomness (god’s dice).
The modern version of god throwing dice is called “genuine stochastic” behavior or “Genuine Stochasticity” (GS): Dice falling without gods throwing them. Since GS is often presented as if such refutes many-world models, it is very popular even among otherwise relatively rational scientists, although GS explains nothing. GS is usually used in order to desperately retain some sort of naïve realism, although some GS proponents vehemently refuse this charge. Nevertheless, the core problem is usually a misunderstanding of what, for example, modal realism is and entails.
Why is GS nonsense? We want to explain stochastic physical processes, for example the random sequence of results when we play dice or observe simpler quantum systems. For that reason, we want a fundamental theory that models satisfactorily how such random sequences occur in empirical data. Now let us say that the theory needs some sort of god that throws dice, or say, because god is out of fashion, we postulate some fundamental (‘genuine’) dice. The question is not answered at all, because the quest was to explain in a fundamental way why dice behave in such random ways. The task was not to connect just my own dice to some mystical ‘genuine’ or ‘godly’ dice. If I ask about a fundamental description of dice and their randomness, I want all dice and their randomness explained! Throwing more dice at me is not going to cut it.
In modern GS speak: Stochastic behavior is fundamentally “explained” by ‘genuine’ stochastic behavior. They say that your dice behave that way because there are a sort of fundamental dice, namely quantum particles or the quantum universe around you, which ‘genuinely’ behave that way. Not only does the ‘genuine’ stay mysterious (what is that supposed to mean???), but such argumentation amounts to claiming that dice behave like dice because of there being another level where another set of dice is thrown: The “fundamental”, or “godly”, or “genuine” level.
To hide the main question on another ("deeper") level and then claiming to be finished is called “regress without definite termination”. It explains nothing, but the strong influence of evolved emotions onto our thinking and our social endorsement selection mechanisms keeps regress errors like the “flow of time” and “conscious awareness” dominant in the public discourse. Regress thinking is evolutionarily fit.
Even many of those who think in terms of branching many-world models, do still not grasp that all randomness and time is already represented in such models. They instead think that a ‘genuine’ flow, the “flow of time”, carries single souls to branching points, at which then quantum dice are thrown, deciding whether they drift this or that way. However, time has no further ‘genuine’ time that allows it to flow. The flow of time over time is precisely dt/dt = 1 second per second, an empty statement. Similarly, randomness has no further ‘genuine’ stochastic randomness – there is no meta-randomness which ensures the fairness of lower level dice. Randomness is already fully represented by the branching. No g picks branches at random - neither god nor 'genuine'.