Topic: Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it - page 28. (Read 230601 times)

Actions the creator should take if he really wants to test the strength of Bitcoin:

Reveal the puzzles already claimed.

This would reduce uncertainty and speculation.

Reveal the public keys (pubkeys) from 110 to 160.

This way, we will know how far he has advanced in the cracking methods. As far as we know, puzzles 130 and 125
could have been just a matter of luck. If he reveals these keys, when the others start to be found, we will know
precisely the progress, and it will also encourage research.

Encourage developers with donations.

He can make sporadic donations to active developers with the best tools. This way, new ideas will be revealed.
Currently, very few want to share their best ideas for fear that a big miner will take them without even thanking them.

Otherwise, this topic will die over time, and the desire to innovate will too.

It is simply a crude measuring instrument, of the cracking strength of the community.

Finally, I wish to express appreciation of the efforts of all developers of new cracking tools and technology.  The "large bitcoin collider" is especially innovative and interesting!

From my post on another thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.64561048


 

You might be thinking it was a bot. Was the bot programmed to only withdraw 90%, leaving behind 10% of  such a large amount for free? Or was it trained to withdraw 100% so the thief could have all the money at once in their address? Think about it before answering. Who could it possible be ?

As for your other questions (again I'm no expert, just an observer):
1. Maybe key finder was a newb and tried to sweep all funds which failed
2. Maybe the replacement transaction was a bot, choosing to only spend 66's largest input with a much higher fee to increase chances it would be accepted into the mempool and be mined
3. Maybe the key finder was an expert, and in a clever and methodical way, intentionally broadcasted the first sweep transaction as well as the replacement transaction of just the largest input, to increase the chances they would at least get the 5.9BTC, and this (may have??) had the effect of causing the mempool to reject any more replacement transaction attempts until the next block was mined and
4. Maybe there were no bots, or if there was, they either weren't running at the time, were not configured properly/not fast enough to get a replacement transaction broadcast to the mempool or the transactions were simply just rejected because of the then-pending existing replacement transaction
5. Maybe the number of possible scenario's that could have played out is as big as the bitcoin keyspace itself, I doubt we will ever really know who/what/when/where/how it happened.

Basically zero. You can easily create properly formatted addresses, only the few last positions is a hash.

Basically zero. You can easily create properly formatted addresses, only the few last positions is a hash.

I am looking for a security method when finding a puzzle for a transfer to another Bitcoin wallet!

How to Claim your BTC Reward?

1. Which Electrum version should you use?
1.1 With RBF Off, should it be safe right?

2. Should you sign the transaction?
2.1 How high should you set the salt for the transfer?

3. How can you bypass Mempool the transfer there not appear that the bots do not crack the public key and use a big salt?

Thank you
I look forward to further suggestions!

Holy shit, I didn't even think about this.

Can someone tell me how much computing power would be needed for someone to hit the  28-characters "AndCausingCLimateChange6666" in address ?

With Tools like Vanitygen or VanitySearch.

That is an enormous number of possible combinations, roughly equal to 7.5 × 10^48.

To generate a 28-characters in address, it could take trillions of years on a single consumer-grade GPU.  

Yes, I too believe that the creators of this puzzle is someone who created BTC, big exchange or something like this and this is a marketing strategy to promote Bitcoin. Have you noticed that after the prize was increased to 1000 BTC, the number of newcomers on Bitcoin Talk also increased? Yes, this puzzle is meant to measure what can be cracked at the current time and is also a marketing or advertisement strategy. The creators /developers likely knew that after a certain breakpoint or threshold, such as puzzle 66 or puzzle 130, most participants—those without knowledge of ECDSA or secp256k1—who are trying to solve the puzzles using random numbers or common libraries like ECDSA, would eventually fail after spending thousands of hours.

As a result, they would come to trust the security of Bitcoin. After gaining that trust, they might start investing in Bitcoin, which would increase the supply chain and the price of Bitcoin. Now, this puzzle is no longer for common participants; it’s for people who have access to thousands of GPUs and can invest the time, money, and energy required to solve it. In the end, it's the creators/developers who are profiting, while we are merely puppets wasting our time and resources. Yes, the truth is hard to hear because it’s bitter: despite the effort and money spent by solvers, the real beneficiaries are those behind the puzzle.