Topic: Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it - page 323. (Read 228623 times)
I would think the best way would be to modify (ocl)vanitygen according to BurtW's suggestion
The first 20 addresses were spent in the same block with the puzzle transaction, surely by the author. Would the author be a miner? This also raises the question whether someone else rather than the author did cash out
i have tried to pick some of private key you mention, but i cannot import that private key. I tried importing the private key on the blockchain.info site and
it keeps bring me to the homepage of website when i recover the private key. What wallet did you use to importing its private key ?
it keeps bring me to the homepage of website when i recover the private key. What wallet did you use to importing its private key ?
Nobody admitted the find, so private key is unknown.
rico claims that he knows the key, but doesn't tell, not updates his cewl site. Once again showing his shitty attitude towards all LBC crowd.
rico claims that he knows the key, but doesn't tell, not updates his cewl site. Once again showing his shitty attitude towards all LBC crowd.
Somebody just drained address #55 1LzhS3k3e9Ub8i2W1V8xQFdB8n2MYCHPCa
https://blockchain.info/address/1LzhS3k3e9Ub8i2W1V8xQFdB8n2MYCHPCa
https://blockchain.info/address/1LzhS3k3e9Ub8i2W1V8xQFdB8n2MYCHPCa
decimal number ? privkey ?
Bitcoin is one of the systems that uses the $ 260k1 curve instead of the 260k1 curve used by almost everyone. This is a very wise decision given the recent leakage of NSAs and their fraudulent practices with respect to the cryptography they produce or help produce many bitcoins. 
Yeah, and judging by LBC discord, that's NOT LBC 
Somebody just drained address #55 1LzhS3k3e9Ub8i2W1V8xQFdB8n2MYCHPCa
https://blockchain.info/address/1LzhS3k3e9Ub8i2W1V8xQFdB8n2MYCHPCa
https://blockchain.info/address/1LzhS3k3e9Ub8i2W1V8xQFdB8n2MYCHPCa
LBC is down ??
LBC is deprecated
>Because the gift is very large 32 bitcoin it is a very big gift
Even if there is no scam or trolling and bounty55 is in 2^55 range, bounty56 is in 2^56 range and so on you have no chances to find something above bounty 60. So, it is about 2-3BTC at stake, not 32.
And huge amount of work is required.
I do not understand all this, If I'm smart enough to do this, it would be nice to do it. Because the gift is very large 32 bitcoin it is a very big gift, we can buy anything by having 32 bitcoin.
LBC is down ??
Partially done!
I've payed my $500 to the programmer who modified oclvanitygen for searching 32BTC bounty (or any other address actually)
...delete
Moving here https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/faster-and-autonomous-large-bitcoin-collider-fork-3102823
I've payed my $500 to the programmer who modified oclvanitygen for searching 32BTC bounty (or any other address actually)
...delete
Moving here https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/faster-and-autonomous-large-bitcoin-collider-fork-3102823
.
For those interested:
Cool. So, LBC is going through first 160 bits of 256? But Rico says it is not.
https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/stats
actually 134.58 bits
Theoretically LBC only needs to search from private key 20 through 2160 in order to find all possible Bitcoin addresses. This is because there are 296 public/private key pairs that map to every Bitcoin address. Assuming the aliasing is even remotely evenly distributed then by the time they get to 2160 they will have exhausted all possible Bitcoin addresses - so they will not need to search from 2160 through 2256.
actually 134.58 bits
Are you on topic, man? 134.58 is just an AVERAGE distance in 2^256 between addresses. And nothing more.
Can you read??? I posted the link where it said that
https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/stats
actually 134.58 bits
Are you on topic, man? 134.58 is just an AVERAGE distance in 2^256 between addresses. And nothing more.
For those interested:
| Puzzle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 | Key 1 3 7 8 21 49 76 224 467 514 1155 2683 5216 10544 26867 51510 95823 198669 357535 863317 1811764 3007503 5598802 14428676 33185509 54538862 111949941 227634408 400708894 1033162084 2102388551 3093472814 7137437912 14133072157 20112871792 42387769980 100251560595 146971536592 323724968937 1003651412950 1458252205147 2895374552463 7409811047825 15404761757071 19996463086597 51408670348612 119666659114170 191206974700443 409118905032525 611140496167764 2058769515153876 4216495639600700 6763683971478124 9974455244496710 | Low 0 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096 8192 16384 32768 65536 131072 262144 524288 1048576 2097152 4194304 8388608 16777216 33554432 67108864 134217728 268435456 536870912 1073741824 2147483648 4294967296 8589934592 17179869184 34359738368 68719476736 137438953472 274877906944 549755813888 1099511627776 2199023255552 4398046511104 8796093022208 17592186044416 35184372088832 70368744177664 140737488355328 281474976710656 562949953421312 1125899906842620 2251799813685250 4503599627370500 9007199254741000 | High 1 3 7 15 31 63 127 255 511 1023 2047 4095 8191 16383 32767 65535 131071 262143 524287 1048575 2097151 4194303 8388607 16777215 33554431 67108863 134217727 268435455 536870911 1073741823 2147483647 4294967295 8589934591 17179869183 34359738367 68719476735 137438953471 274877906943 549755813887 1099511627775 2199023255551 4398046511103 8796093022207 17592186044415 35184372088831 70368744177663 140737488355327 281474976710655 562949953421311 1125899906842620 2251799813685250 4503599627370490 9007199254740981 18014398509482000 | % In the space 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 33.33% 54.84% 19.05% 75.59% 82.75% 0.39% 12.81% 31.02% 27.35% 28.71% 63.99% 57.20% 46.21% 51.57% 36.39% 64.66% 72.78% 43.41% 33.49% 72.00% 97.80% 62.54% 66.82% 69.60% 49.28% 92.44% 95.80% 44.05% 66.18% 64.53% 17.07% 23.36% 45.89% 6.94% 17.77% 82.56% 32.63% 31.67% 68.48% 75.13% 13.67% 46.11% 70.06% 35.86% 45.35% 8.56% 82.86% 87.25% 50.18% 10.74% |
So, LBC is going through first 160 bits of 256? But Rico says it is not.
https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/stats
actually 134.58 bits
So, LBC is going through first 160 bits of 256? But Rico says it is not.
Jump to: