Topic: Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it - page 43. (Read 245388 times)

Yes, interesting.

17s2b9ksz5y7abUm92cHwG8jEPCzK3dLnT 27/02/2023
1PXAyUB8ZoH3WD8n5zoAthYjN15yN5CVq5 09/07/2023
1Fo65aKq8s8iquMt6weF1rku1moWVEd5Ua 24/09/2024

All of these are being transferred to 3Emiwzxme7Mrj4d89uqohXNncnRM15YESs.

But for some reason, as of 27/02/2023, not even $1 can be withdrawn or processed? Another person who doesn't need it?

Isn't it strange that the 130th puzzle was solved just 10 days after the 66th puzzle?? 

Bullshit until you properly prove it that you're in control of the first destination address you presumably tried to transfer the funds of #66 to. Without a proof anybody can make such a pathetic claim who's willing to embarrass himself in public.


And now tell us, why didn't you use slipstream.mara.com to transfer the funds non-publicly? Not the brightest candle on the cake?

Anyway, nobody will believe you until you prove it. I say: won't happen. Surprise me!

TTD (ttdsales) changed the name to Chris.

New Member - 1 Message

Nice tactic.

He IS a scammer. He shows no proofs. The original solver address is 1Jvv4yWkE9MhbuwGUoqFYzDjRVQHaLWuJd and there is no use to beg using any other address. Anyone can send to the proper address. The one who stole the fund was sending a mocking message to there. I don't think he is willing to send half of the stack.

Sign a message with the first address that tried to withdraw puzzle 66 because I don't believe you, I think you're a scammer.

unimaginative and very bad drama what you are trying to stage here, simply pathetic
go get some life, don't blame others, stop begging

Hello.

First thing first: i am the solver of Puzzle 66.
But i lost it soon as it was spend.

i was searching for a couple of years and finally i had some "bad" luck on puzzle 66.

after importing the key, i was withdrawing it so so fast in the hope of finally can change my life and stop eating this bad food here. ( i dont want to say which contry i am from and sorry for my bad english )
but sadly... it was only a dream for a short time...

so....
hey stealer, if you read this, please give me 50% and get me right back up after falling in a deep depression after this... i am really sad... i put so much energy in it and it was all for nothing...
bc1qgfeg5kxzpk9dkxla9lkpcuucdjjtu9swqntl7l



.. good bye guys

IMO the Creator is using you and your brute-forcing software available on Github to help him recover a big wallet which maybe was lost in the past, it could be even a 160 bits key with a known pubkey. (eg this one https://bitinfocharts.com/bitcoin/address/12ib7dApVFvg82TXKycWBNpN8kFyiAN1dr )
He can't do it alone so sacrificed some of his bag by creating this puzzle.

I was thinking something in objective C or C++ native langs for MacOs. Thanks for sharing the python script anyways 

If you check the probability of finding the exact same address, it might take 100 or even 1,000 years using random numbers. But if you think you're lucky enough, you might find it today itself!

Thank you. I thought the same in the beginning. However check the range for the addresses I shared, it is not a small range to cluster. That's why I could not understand how. I mean system should cluster some portion of different ranges in the defined range, if so, this is amazing, because it can give a chance to solve small puzzles like in #67 or #68 (extremely low probability but still good) to any personal computer with silicone chips.

It is very simple vanity search using "random" and written in Python


<sup>import sqlite3
import random
from bit import Key
import bitcoin

# Connect to vanity_addresses.db for storing found vanity addresses
vanity_conn = sqlite3.connect('vanity_addresses.db')
vanity_cursor = vanity_conn.cursor()

# Create a table in vanity_addresses.db to store vanity addresses and private keys
vanity_cursor.execute('''
    CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS vanity_addresses (
        address TEXT PRIMARY KEY,
        private_key TEXT
    )
''')
vanity_conn.commit()

def generate_vanity_address(prefix):
    while True:
        # Generate a new private key
        private_key = random.randint(147573952589676412927, 295147905179352825855)
        # Compute the corresponding public key
        key = Key.from_int(private_key)
        addr = key.address
        addr_uncompressed = bitcoin. privkey_to_address(private_key)

        if addr.startswith(prefix):
            # Insert found vanity addresses into the vanity_addresses.db database
            vanity_cursor.execute(
                'INSERT INTO vanity_addresses (address, private_key) VALUES (?, ?)', (addr, str(private_key)))
            vanity_conn.commit()

        if addr_uncompressed.startswith(prefix):
            # Insert found vanity addresses into the vanity_addresses.db database
            vanity_cursor.execute(
                'INSERT INTO vanity_addresses (address, private_key) VALUES (?, ?)', (addr_uncompressed, str(private_key)))
            vanity_conn.commit()

            # Log that a vanity address was found
            # print(
            #     "Vanity Address found and inserted into the vanity_addresses.db database:", addr)


prefix = '1MVDY'
generate_vanity_address(prefix)</sup>

There are already plenty of people using the same trick or method to find private keys within a similar range, as I mentioned. It's not surprising or new information to most of us. Developers have known for a while that there are tens of thousands of addresses like this clustered in the same range. You spent time, energy, and resources on this approach, but it may not be as productive as you hoped. My intention is not to stop you but to educate you.

Do you have a binary to search vanity which runs on Silicon CPUs? I could not find any nor make it work, a lot of libraries are only for intel.
Could you share it ?

I realized something strange after some tests.
I have a lot of equipment. All running for searches about these puzzles.

To have fun, I chose to search via vanity in last days.
I have desktops and notebooks with latest and powerful intel chips, nvidia graphics, 120GB DDR5 etc. each. On vanity, these setups find ~20 addresses per day for each.

However, when I applied vanity via apple silicone chips (M1, M2, M3), daily found vanity addresses ~500 per each setup.
I observed the behavior, and when it finds a vanity address in the pool I search, immediately it finds 5-6 addresses more in milliseconds, it is moving to the numbers to check that might have the vanity around some near numbers while I'm generating those numbers using "random".

For example:


^{1MVDYUvrcMqdprCTYuthuaQxWWAL8Ty2KS 220647290646478288674
1MVDYE2EHY3VR3AXKrD7mYvpSgD2SGgqZb 257335783054352585279
1MVDYuE5HGPjYaEH72sZukwNXhdtdKSQRY 280101386265359359876
1MVDYNcMjPsAW1PQgjwCGRNwijJMSW1UcR 274962343828436157207
1MVDYGms9qGRsrDD7AuoyYJBZnJTzAj9B8 213173989571665196391
1MVDYnfq7s3yG8fdnhQ66cqDa4h2DNoGeB 247904416465366500764
1MVDYY8GUU8or4WfLSrsbHip8F7pwA4xpv 243282287509672730681
1MVDYxMNG8fKf9fvX3r5PmwNXY8tjfESsu 245042251007899478320
1MVDY8aYEQsCWqU2MVWRjhrLHaX28SHFky 270190501490895327846}


These are found in the same second and it keeps this behavior.

This behavior made me crazy guys. I do not understand how it can do this.

 

Hey Akito, based on my analysis, none of the developers have come forward to address this. The sequence of events (dates of decisions, prize increases) seems suspicious. For them, it will always remain a theory without proper evidence. Either they fear backlash or worry that no one will use or respect the code they spent thousands of hours developing and sharing for the community. If one of the developers admits this was orchestrated by the creator, thousands of people could lose interest, and no one would care about the puzzle anymore.

I believe the creator of this puzzle is watching every single conversation. If someone actually solved 120, 125, and 130, the creator would at least be curious about who cracked them. After all, they invested 1,000 BTC into this puzzle and would want to know what code and math were used to break it.

And if the creator orchestrated all of this, they probably don’t even care about joining the conversation or addressing all the backlash they're receiving.

I am not pinpointing any specific developers—this is just my analysis or, as they always say, a theory.

I appreciate your perspective, and you're right that it can be risky for the creator to engage with everyone. However, my intention wasn't to seek personal engagement or easy answers. I joined the discussion because I find the intellectual challenge intriguing and wanted to contribute my thoughts.

While I don't expect the creator to respond, I believe it’s reasonable to offer feedback, especially to counter unfair criticism. Even though the puzzles are designed to be incredibly difficult, I value the process of attempting to solve them. Perhaps I’m being a bit naive in thinking that personal outreach could make a difference, but I still believe in the importance of constructive dialogue in these kinds of situations.

Looks that somebody just offer a single satoshi: https://mempool.space/address/1AkitoSMHosanaQuantumRigxxxunWXyG


HODL!!!

There are so many conspiracy theories driven by the frustrations of those users.

Somebody said that there is no enough power to solve those challenges. I have some word for them, cloud-computing even if that was used without the permission of the owner of those servers, the computing capacity is there and exist without any doubt.

Some other claim about not wasting or move that balance, Maybe they are waiting to bitcoin new highs to recover its investments.
Maybe there are private sponsors paying for that computing power we don't know.
Maybe is some one with a lot of GPUs in a country where electricity is cheap, stolen or free. (I've been reached by people working in gas and oil industries that are trying to pivot to crypto using their excess of energy available from burning gas)

There is a endless of possibilities about the reason of not moving that balance.


Hahaha and you seriously expected that him is going to answer you?
He is not going to reply to ANYONE....

Just imagine having access to thousand of bitcoin and you create some challenge like this, and you start to replying to random strangers over internet, they may try to trick you to enter some links and they will try to record your IP, your browser vulnerabilities and other nasty stuff...

Please you mention that you are based in logic to reach some fallacy conclusions, and you don't see the logic to see that the author of that challenge is not going to answer to anyone?

What I do not understand is they are not even converting it to USDT or trading with some other coins etc.
So it is not about anonymity. Most probably does not need it..