Pages:
Author

Topic: Large Bitcoin Collider (Collision Finders Pool) - page 20. (Read 193420 times)

legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1037
฿ → ∞
If I was to have per-user keyrate charts (hourly), would you agree them to be public or not?


Rico
member
Activity: 62
Merit: 10

#52 I'm coming for you ...

How many days do we need for #52 ?

Btw can someone tell me what space did we searched from a 160 bit ? ... how many % ?

P.S. Need to setup a few more Gkeys/s

1/2^(161-51)  =  1/2^(110) =  1/(2^10)^11 =  (0.001)^11 =  0.00000...0001  with 33 zeros 


-->   0.00000...001 % with 31 zeros  after the point .
thats insane Cheesy ..
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1037
฿ → ∞

1/2^(161-51)  =  1/2^(110) =  1/(2^10)^11 =  (0.001)^11 =  0.00000...0001  with 33 zeros  


Why 2^161?

1 bit = 2^1 keys (-1)
2 bit = 2^2 keys (-1)
3 bit = 2^3 keys (-1)
...
160 bit = 2^160 keys (-1)

Anyway:

https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/stats
https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/trophies

Rico
legendary
Activity: 1932
Merit: 2077

#52 I'm coming for you ...

How many days do we need for #52 ?

Btw can someone tell me what space did we searched from a 160 bit ? ... how many % ?

P.S. Need to setup a few more Gkeys/s

1/2^(161-51)  =  1/2^(110) =  1/(2^10)^11 =  (0.001)^11 =  0.00000...0001  with 33 zeros 


-->   0.00000...001 % with 31 zeros  after the point .
member
Activity: 62
Merit: 10
Unknownhostname just informed me, that he found #51.
And because he has shown me the privkey, I know he's not making it up.

Please stand by for further details...


Why do you move funds from the address to itself? What is the reason?

https://blockchain.info/address/1NpnQyZ7x24ud82b7WiRNvPm6N8bqGQnaS

I look for a 10k BTC dormant address ^^ ..

who cares when it comes to 0.051 ^^ , you can play with it ... you can even play until you spend all your btc's on fees ^^

#52 I'm coming for you ...


How many days do we need for #52 ?

Btw can someone tell me what space did we searched from a 160 bit ? ... how many % ?

P.S. Need to setup a few more Gkeys/s
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1037
฿ → ∞
Why do you move funds from the address to itself? What is the reason?

https://blockchain.info/address/1NpnQyZ7x24ud82b7WiRNvPm6N8bqGQnaS

It's not me.  Wink Don't know if Unknownhostname is experimenting or what.

I do consider all puzzle transaction addresses bounties, so this one does belong to Unknownhostname.
As far as I am concerned it's his.

Rico
legendary
Activity: 1932
Merit: 2077
Unknownhostname just informed me, that he found #51.
And because he has shown me the privkey, I know he's not making it up.

Please stand by for further details...


Why do you move funds from the address to itself? What is the reason?

https://blockchain.info/address/1NpnQyZ7x24ud82b7WiRNvPm6N8bqGQnaS
legendary
Activity: 1100
Merit: 1058
+1 for Leet's last Secret try. Smiley

Yay for UHN, his effort's paid in the last end. NOT!  Cheesy

And a PLUSONE!!! for automatic updating of either executable and Filter file.
Once a day or so, so we all work with the latest data, even on headless machines.
legendary
Activity: 1932
Merit: 2077
Unknownhostname just informed me, that he found #51.
And because he has shown me the privkey, I know he's not making it up.

VERY GOOOD!!!  Grin Grin
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1037
฿ → ∞
Probably I'm only frustrated, I would really be sorry if we don't hit #51  Roll Eyes
There is still hope. Wink Time for frustration is tomorrow 11 a.m. UTC

Unknownhostname just informed me, that he found #51.
And because he has shown me the privkey, I know he's not making it up.

Please stand by for further details...


Rico
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1037
฿ → ∞
Quote from: rico666
LBC is certainly not for the faint of heart.
...
Clearly, anyone with Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder would be in the wrong place here.  Cheesy

Code:
# grep 35.157.195.158 LBC.log 
1491376396  35.157.195.158 SECRET: given != stored (a2ca7a3a3079cc296c3c3fdff6ed8114-65f2)
1491376625  35.157.195.158 SECRET: given != stored (1337Leet-65f2)
1491376683  35.157.195.158 SECRET: given != stored (1337Leet-65f2)
1491376721  35.157.195.158 SECRET: given != stored (1337Leet-65f2)
1491376793  35.157.195.158 Change Secret (1337Leet)
1491376793  35.157.195.158 PUT-NIL: toofast (1337Leet-65f2)
1491376807  35.157.195.158 Change Secret (1337Leet1337)
1491376807  35.157.195.158 PUT-NIL: toofast (1337Leet1337-65f2)
1491376880  35.157.195.158 Change Secret (1337Leet1337)
1491376890  35.157.195.158 PUT-NIL: toofast (1337Leet1337-65f2)
1491376893  35.157.195.158 PUT-NIL: toofast (1337Leet1337-65f2)
1491376901  35.157.195.158 PUT-NIL: toofast (1337Leet1337-65f2)
1491377091  35.157.195.158 PUT-NIL: toofast (1337Leet1337-65f2)
1491377346  35.157.195.158 PUT-NIL: blacklisted (1337Leet1337-65f2)
1491377411  35.157.195.158 PUT-NIL: blacklisted (SetupOfThisShitIsHorrible-65f2)

 Cheesy Sorry, LBC needs at least 3 3 in 1337
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1037
฿ → ∞
I read that pages, but I don't understand what kind of "proof of work" we are talking about.

I mean: I'm interested in a "proof of correct work". This kind of proof needs not only to you, but to everyone is running this client.
My incentive is: I'm sure that I (and we all) are working in the correct way.

I know what you mean. We have no proof of correct work @ runtime. Even less so for every single key.
We have proof of correct work before generators are released. Then, we have "only" proof of work (done).

Quote
My question is: do you check in some way that my work is correct or you check only that I run your code without tampering? It is different.

It is. If your machine had e.g. faulty memory or a CPU/GPU that would exhibit faulty computations, your client would effectively pollute the "done"-db. Of course, your client would have to exhibit this behavior after the LBC -x run (which would have to run without errors).

Quote
For example incentive firework from SlarkBoy is good as a control system too. And money is not even necessary to perform this kind of control.

Do you have any mechanism in mind? We could issue periodic "LBC -x" runs for the extra paranoid.

Quote
We are searching for something extremely rare. So sentences like:

"I do trust the LBC codebase"
"anyone with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder would be in the wrong place here"

are not soothing to me  Cheesy

Probably I'm only frustrated, I would really be sorry if we don't hit #51  Roll Eyes

I think I am pretty well aware of the "rare event" problem. In fact, programming the LBC is like programming a spacecraft: After months of no events, you need it to do the right thing within seconds. I give you that "anyone with ADHD is in the wrong place here" is not soothing. Ok.

But "I trust the LBC codebase" should be.

We have still over 100 tn keys search space, so there is hope. We may also have already a FOUND.txt slumbering somewhere again and the operator slumbering too.  There is still hope. Wink Time for frustration is tomorrow 11 a.m. UTC


Rico
legendary
Activity: 1932
Merit: 2077

While I do trust the LBC codebase, we're really entering uncharted territory here, so if someone of us doesn't confirm the #51 find, probably no-one will. Except the maker of the puzzle transaction and that one chooses to remain silent.

As for proof of work, read https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/man/tech and https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/man/admin#security
there is a tight challenge-response framework in place to make sure delivered work was really done by the generators and code tampering  to circumvent this has been refuted ever since.


I read that pages, but I don't understand what kind of "proof of work" we are talking about.

I mean: I'm interested in a "proof of correct work". This kind of proof needs not only to you, but to everyone is running this client.
My incentive is: I'm sure that I (and we all) are working in the correct way.

My question is: do you check in some way that my work is correct or you check only that I run your code without tampering? It is different.

For example incentive firework from SlarkBoy is good as a control system too. And money is not even necessary to perform this kind of control.


We are searching for something extremely rare. So sentences like:

"I do trust the LBC codebase"
"anyone with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder would be in the wrong place here"

are not soothing to me  Cheesy

Probably I'm only frustrated, I would really be sorry if we don't hit #51  Roll Eyes
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1037
฿ → ∞
Do we know for sure that there is a key for each bit?

We don't. It might actually be the reason why #51 is "still standing". Then, on the other hand, the so-called puzzle transaction would have a certain trolling aspect and it would not fulfill the "canary in a coalmine" function as many (including me) suspect it does.

Quote
I think we need to have another control (and incentive) system for our work. We cannot run for weeks and get at this point with the doubt that we have lost (in some way) a key.

EDIT: for example, how do you know (and I know) that I made effectively a search between keys "a and b"?  What is the proof of my work?

LBC is certainly not for the faint of heart. It's actually one of the reasons I do not give e.g. GPUauth to anyone who thinks his "willingness to test it" is qualification enough. If you start with LBC you know you're in for the long run. If not, you're just wasting your time and resources.
As for incentives: We will have a nice incentive firework from SlarkBoy soon - where "soon" with LBC means "within a week or so". Clearly, anyone with Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder would be in the wrong place here.  Cheesy

We're giving found BTCs back to their rightful owners, because that's the morally right thing to do. On the other hand, there are potentionally a million lost BTCs we might be able to recycle. If that's no incentive for someone - I could understand that - then LBC is of course the wrong project for him.



While I do trust the LBC codebase, we're really entering uncharted territory here, so if someone of us doesn't confirm the #51 find, probably no-one will. Except the maker of the puzzle transaction and that one chooses to remain silent.

As for proof of work, read https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/man/tech and https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/man/admin#security
there is a tight challenge-response framework in place to make sure delivered work was really done by the generators and code tampering  to circumvent this has been refuted ever since.

Should we ex-post become aware of any client having cheated, it's one script call to carve this client's work from the "done"-database.


Rico
legendary
Activity: 1932
Merit: 2077

No sign of #51 yet? We're seriously running out of search space - less than 24h left.


Do we know for sure that there is a key for each bit?

I think we need to have another control (and incentive) system for our work. We cannot run for weeks and get at this point with the doubt that we have lost (in some way) a key.

EDIT: for example, how do you know (and I know) that I made effectively a search between keys "a and b"?  What is the proof of my work?
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1037
฿ → ∞
Good morning guys (and becoin)!

No sign of #51 yet? We're seriously running out of search space - less than 24h left.

Rico
legendary
Activity: 3431
Merit: 1233

I read a bit about this project at lbc.cryptoguru.org and (addressing anybody and everybody who is doing this) I have a few questions:

They've found nothing. You're not allowed to ask such questions. If he sounds like a jerk he probably is a jerk. It's fun to watch how these jerks burn their money. Only interesting thing here is who is funding this "project"?
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1037
฿ → ∞
I read a bit about this project at lbc.cryptoguru.org and (addressing anybody and everybody who is doing this) I have a few questions:

I am willing to answer a stripped down version of your questions.

That is, after you have read this thread where some of your questions are discussed - in length - already.


Rico
newbie
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
Hi,

I read a bit about this project at lbc.cryptoguru.org and (addressing anybody and everybody who is doing this) I have a few questions:

1. The "About" section claims that the reason "why" is because somebody said it wasn't possible. That certainly makes sense but once the first "collision" was found the point was proven and there is nothing to prove anymore so why keep going?

2. If a "collision" is found the amount (if any) is "misplaced" (i.e. stolen) into so-called custodial address. The reason for that is because when the discovery is announced somebody else could quickly find the same and steal it. And the reason why the discovery is announced in the first place is.. to prove the point that has already been proven? Again, why this whole thing still keeps going? To prove the point was a valid and perfectly understandable reason. What valid reason is there now?

3. The webpages are full of "rightful owner" this, "rightful ownership" that, but how is this rightful owner supposed to find out about what really happened, i.e. that they in fact weren't robbed, they were just "robbed"? Assuming that every owner of bitcoins in the whole world will somehow magically become aware of some random thread at some random Internet forum and from now on will be anxiously reading it every day for the rest of their lives is just insane. From their point of view their bitcoins were stolen, end of story.
Now this is somewhat an uncharted territory but the same way as manufacturing, sale etc. of some weapons is illegal, and also developing and distributing of software to circumvent copy protection schemes (cracks) is in some jurisdictions illegal, it's not unreasonable to imagine that this software might be deemed illegal in some jurisdictions as well and everybody participating (abetting) might face criminal prosecution. So yet again, since the original goal was already reached is it really worth it to keep going and risk all the possible repercussions?

4. So far only empty or almost empty addresses have been found but what will happen when some reasonable amount (hundreds or thousands BTC) is found? Will the "announcing" and "misplacing" happen again? If somebody has such an amount in one address they are either stupid or they have many similarly loaded addresses. If the latter is the case then aren't you afraid what may happen to you and your dear ones if you piss off the wrong people? I don't see it entirely unrealistic if some angry criminals tracked you down and murdered you and your whole family, and they will most certainly not care one single bit about your "proving the point", "custodial address" etc. bullshit. Internet is not as anonymous as you might think. Is it really worth it to keep doing something that doesn't have any upside, only many downsides?
Maybe you don't value your own life but do you really have the right to put other innocent human beings in grave danger? Maybe you don't have any family, maybe you don't have any friends, but those murderers won't really investigate your personal life, they will just murder you and whoever will be near you at the moment. To make an example of you, to discourage others. Sure the probability of this happening is very low but so is the probability of being shot by a stray bullet, dying in a car/train/airplane fatal accident etc. etc., and yet all those things happen to people on daily basis.

5. When you get a hit do you also test derived addresses, i.e. assuming what you just found might be the top of a HD tree? Since the hit frequency seems to be quite low the slowdown would be negligible.
member
Activity: 114
Merit: 11
Please always remember

LBC: 100 Mkeys/s = 200 Maddresses/s
oclvanitygen: 270 Mkeys/s = 270 Maddresses/s (only compressed)

Rico

I think that if oclvanitygen computes 270 Maddress/s, that means that it computes only 135M of x-coordinates (x = coordinates of points of the curve that represent the public keys) and not even a single y-coordinate.
Then the strings: "02x" and "03x" produce 2 addresses ( 2 for each x):

"02x" --> compressed public key
"03x" --> compressed public key


Current LBC generator computes 100 Mkey/s, that means that it computes 100M of x-coordinates + 100M of y-coordinates, then

"04xy" --> uncompressed public key
"02 or 03x" --> compressed public key

Total: 200 Maddresses/s.

Potentially our generator could computes other 2 addresses (not in the same time) from the same x/y, because there are other 2 points related to the same x,y coordinates:

"04x(-y)"  --> uncompressed public key
"03x / 02x" --> compressed public key

Note: sha256 should take half time if only applied to strings like "02x" or "03x" (only 256bit) respect of "04xy" (more than 512 bit).
That's why oclvanitygen seems faster than LBC.

Essentially the cost of compute an uncompressed public key is higher than that related to compressed key (because of y and because of sha256)

Thanks for the explanation  Wink
Pages:
Jump to: