Topic: Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it - page 258. (Read 244044 times)

Yep, and it's not so far fetched either when searching with less power .. i remember someone solving an ethereum block with a very tiny mining rig .. solo

That's what I do.... that's exactly how I work.. I'm not a newbie in this matter.... But better with 600 MKeys/s than not looking for it at all... ^^

No disagreement. But if i could offer any advice, with only 600 mil/s , it's better after dividing the big range into smaller ones, to search within those subranges "randomly". That's the advice i would tell anyone including myself. Going through subranges of 66 bits sequentially is gonna take longer to reach target address than it would take quantum computers to reach 10 million Qubits.. Meaning you'll most likely still not find anything before a teen with a tiny knowledge of Python rents a cloud quantum computer in the future and still finds it before you do

yes, we are looking for a logarithm, a clue.. a system in the structure...
but the hash is so sophisticated that the patterns like 13zb1hQ... don't repeat themselves regularly... but you can still scan for system... divide the entire range into smaller areas and based on the addresses already found, a certain start/end point enclose. Of course, this should also be enjoyed with caution... ^^
"The route is the goal"...

I scan with more than 600 MKeys/s and, as I said, I divided the range into smaller areas... it's still a matter of luck... because I can't scan the entire area, the computing power is far from sufficient for that... .

Nonetheless, good luck!

Yes and No ..

Yes, it does inspire to find solutions. After all, that's how humans evolved. Being Incredibly curious is what gave us the competitive advantage over all other creatures. However, it's very important to know what you're dealing with before raising hopes high. Puzzle #66 is 36+ million trillion private keys.. and this means you're gonna encounter tons and tons of prefixes and only one of them is the right one. Trying to make a statistical analysis out of these is like trying to find a similar pattern across the whole universe. You are looking for only one Earth among too many Goldilock zone Earths in the Cosmos. There will be no pattern leading you to it. You just have to brute force your way through planets until you find that exact one Earth. No mathematical formula will get you there. Sure it can lead you to many Earth-like planets, but it doesn't find your exact desired Earth.

That being said, we don't even have to find a pattern in order to reach the private key, we only have to keep searching long enough until we find it, just like #64 got solved by keeping at it. In fact, it blew me away that within the exact month i thought we were never gonna solve it, someone solves it and proves me wrong. Nothing is impossible when it comes to luck and randomness. But then again, Luck and randomness do not get predicted, and that's why they're the only way to beat huge numbers. I'm so grateful they exist

Thanks for the detail... but the people who program themselves and work with hashes know that.. But that's not the content of the "statement"..
It only represents the difficulty of the search for the target address.. seen in this way, the difficulty is the incentive.. it inspires, it brings new ideas to the programming, new ways to solve the problem...

And the main feature of sha256 hex pvt key that makes it secure in the first place is, once you change even one letter in (input) string, the entire hex output changes! This works both way, if you change the output (the sha256 32 byte) , the input will be hugely different. And to make things even harder, that's just one hash function, now let's continue the process of generating the address: we're doing ripemd of the sha256 of the resulting pub key to get the address .. By design, this means that whatever comes out as an address will change significantly after all that hashing we went through. This means that you can have trillions and trillions of addresses starting with 13zb1hQ.... Spread around the entire 256 bit range leaving you with the fact that none of them is the exact address you're looking for. Someone then might ask then why would we search by prefix instead of addresses?! The answer is simple: it's way faster to look for part of the address. That's the only advantage. But It doesn't say anything about determining the range.

It's not just about the beginning of the address... There are tons of those... more about the similarities between the beginning and the end of the address..

13zb1hQbwfhhEryPWBrAioLY5tiFLrhs5o

[2022-10-01.14:26:29] [Info] Address     : 13zb1hQbWMzfvBudo1G28SjrDjwpcY8PA9
                             Private key : 319AFC93A46A34462
                             Compressed  : yes
                             Public key  : 03BA713FDDD4D0E475A60D3057F2E33B18A50B40827EF3728B4EE9E86C444D23C5

If you look at how many addresses start with "13zb1hQ..", that's to despair!
There are areas where there are significantly more... that makes it difficult to narrow down the range..

A good example of this was the 64-bit range, which was assumed to be in the middle of this range... unfortunately it was totally wrong ^^

my guess. it should be above this one,
00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000319AFC9E3FF391B01

KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3q > ZsnspiitMKGTKUxzXus


KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3q > (a) something

ripemd -- 20D45A6A76AEB187FB6E669463E929D7072AB330


13zb1hQbwfhhEryPWBrAioLY5tiFLrhs5o

Puzzle 66... ( 13zb1hQbWVsc2S7ZTZnP2G4undNNpdh5so )


That's a mockery ....!    

13zb1hQbwfhhEryPWBrAioLY5tiFLrhs5o - 0x319AFC9E3FF391B01

Thanks to this reply, the quoted message made it easy to find the single post of the creator of this puzzle transaction.
Link to the post: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.18765941

He seems legit because of the fact that #161~256 were indeed spent after a few months since that reply.

Hello there I remember that the creator of the puzzle said: "There is no pattern.  It is just consecutive keys from a deterministic wallet (masked with leading 000...0001 to set difficulty)."

 

what tools do you use? how can you not detect it, is there no notification ?

clbitcrack behaves weird on old and low gig cards .. best case scenario is it's gonna search but not find anything when testing a known key in a known range (i.e fail test)
Here is test results:

Rx 5xxx XT - work and pass test
Rx 570 8G - search but fail test
Rx 580 8G - search but fail test
Anything less - do not search

In the NVIDIA family i found anything less than 1xxx 8G to not work or behave weirdly ( yes you can use your NVIDIA card with clbitcrack .. in my case cuda has a config problem that im not so fond of spending time on fixing right now)


Your results may vary.

and how do you run VanitySearch for the intented operation that you did with bitcrack before?

VanitySearch

which one ?

Thanks, I have switched to another tool