I personally believe that there is a very strong case in favor of true randomness in QM but not being a physicist I would like to know from experts if there is a consensus about this.
@John Rennie: this question is different because it specifically asks about the consensus of the true randomness, not about the true randomness itself.
There is a consensus that the Copenhagen Interpretation of QM implies that some measurements have true randomness in them.
The actual mathematics of QM has no randomness at all. However, it is difficult to tie QM into the reality we intuitively believe we perceive (classical mechanics). The interpretations are the step which links the non-random mathematics of QM to the real world experimental results. The Copenhagen Interpretation does include true randomness. However, there are other interpretations, such as the Many Worlds Interpretation and the Bohem-deBroglie Pilot Wave interpretation, which are purely deterministic.
