Topic: Large Bitcoin Collider (Collision Finders Pool) - page 52. (Read 193484 times)

The rightfull owner could send you a signed message, BUT if i would be the owner, i would have no idea who to contact. I dont think alot of people are reading your thread. It could be any wallet... maybe a cold storage or something. You could wait years before someone show up. And even if the one realizes, his coins are gone, how could he know you took them.
I think you are at a point where you have to decide if you want to stop this, because you have proven it works, or if you want to continue, but this could be called theft.
Which way you will go?

You wrote this October 5th and although a week is almost over,
I assume you are not talking about
https://blockchain.info/address/1PVwqUXrD5phy6gWrqJUrhpsPiBkTnftGg
because this has been deposited in May 2014.

I swear I have nothing to do with this address - except my client found its private key tonight!

I must admit, I am still quite puzzled, because if things are as they seem (to me), this would be the 1st real (like in real real) PK found by the pool. Is this for real or am I still not fully awake?

Damned be the TODO - I thought we would have more time to sort that out.

I know - I wrote this text, but it is bad. So what will be the process? I looked up various European national regulations for finders-keepers.
There is a deadline of 6 months after which the finder gains the ownership if the original owner does not show up or make a claim.
If the value of the found is less than 10EUR (Germany), this deadline runs from the day found which would be today.
Still, the original owner can claim  it back for a period of 3 years. Here's what I think - so far - should be done:

• I transferred the funds to 16cFBcM27DGriyvz5i8SLmd8n5ai8hCTEE
• When the confirmations are through, I may or may not (should I? What are the pros/cons?) publish the PK
• I have of course no intention to keep these funds (like $5 dollar atm)
• If the rightful owner does show up within the 6-month period, I will even round up that sum to 0.01 BTC and give that back.
• If no one will show up within the 6 months, the funds will go as pool bounty to its members.
• If - after that - the owner should appear within 3 years, I will transfer these 0.007899 BTC back to him regardless

Phew. I'm glad this has happened with such a small sum. Honestly, I pulled this process out of my nose today morning, so I'd really really appreciate if the Bitcoin community could work out some "standard" to this. I've looked up the forums and this case seems so exotic, that most of the takes on it is really just nonsense blah blah.

So:

How can one make clear he is actually the rightful owner? Just stating "It's me" obviously won't cut it.
It may very well be, that he used an entirely different PK (of the 2⁹⁶) for this address (because this one is a little bit shitty), so I assume providing ANOTHER PK to this address would count as good proof - wouldn't it?


Rico

Try to steal my notebook.   
Or wait a couple of days and get 0.860 - or so.

Working on a new release as fast as I can.

Rico

And.... how to get .857 ?

Glitch during the server update (new shinier stats) - unfortunately. Apologies.
For now 0.832 is still good enough a.k.a. minimum requirement.
I ditched the "factor" info in favor of the keys/s already:


I hope it's more intuitive this way.


Rico

Got it, thanks..  I was mining last night and I woke up to see "Server requires minimum client version 0.841.".  Where is .841 ?

Thanks!

Lower numbers are better?
Although 2.5 -> 2.49 is probably a measurement tolerance.
The benchmark is 1 mio keys per I will add a translation to keys/s.
If you get a factor of 2.5 it means you're doing like 400000 keys/s per core.
2.49 -> 401606  

edit: Also please be aware, that hyperthreaded cores yield only about 30% of the performance of physical cores.
So let's say you have a 8-core CPU with hyperthreading enabled (16 logical cores) and benchmark shows 2.5

That means you can do about 3.2 mio keys/s with LBC -c 8, but only about 4.16 mio keys/s with LBC -c 16
Modern CPUs may perform a little better.

Personally, I leave the hyperthreaded cores alone, so while my CPU has 4 physical and 8 logical cores, I drive LBC with -c 4
The hyperthreaded cores are left for the OS and are more than enough (for me) to do my programming, browsing, even compiling.


Rico

So what's up with this latest build ?  I was getting a benchmark of 2.5 with 2 cores, went up to 16 cores and my benchmark went DOWN to 2.49  ??


sky

Just when I think you couldn't get any dumber you do something like this....

AND TOTALLY REDEEM YOURSELF!!!

Haha, keep up the good work man!

Indeed. In my defence, the reason why this lapse happened is me programming my ass off for the past two weeks.
Dropping off the keyboard - barely awake, I just started my LBC client to have it some searching done while I was snoring away.
I didn't realize it was still pointed to my development server. Well...

So what am I programming anyway? This is what a "cold start" looks like now:


You basically download ~40kB of code and it figures out the rest. In theory.
If there is a new generator available, it updates and benchmarks.
If there is new balances data available it updates. If there is only a diff, it downloads that
and patches to minimize data traffic.
If the server is unresponsive, it retries.
If you query the server, it answers:


So I will - once again - need 2-3 diehards to test a "Jarvis" pre-release next week. You should have a Linux 64bit and a machine capable of AVX2 or SSE4.2



Rico

Who's trembling in despair now, mortal?

 

My notebook hammered 33.5 GKeys over night to the development server in some area explored long ago.  Please someone shoot me.


Rico

Hmm...

Seems someone needs their processing power for other tasks. Let's see if that is only temporary or not.
As 90% of the pools performance seems to come from 5 (in words: f*i*v*e) people, such a fluctuation may happen if 2-3 of them have to point their machines to some other task.

The pool speed shown is a moving average updated once per 24h. I turned on my notebook with my special icc-compiled Skylake-optimized generator. So - tremble and despair mortals -  tomorrow we should see at least 15 MKey/s provided no one else jumps on or off. ;-)


Rico

Only 12m keys/sec right now.

What happend? :O

edit: if you download the HRD-client after I posted this, I have already repacked
http://62.146.128.45/download/LBChrd-0.837_l64.tbz2
so it contains the newest blf file (also md5sums is updated, so you can check).
In that case reloading the blf file is not necessary.



In order to be able to find it, all HRD client operators should download (166MB) the newest blf file from:

http://62.146.128.45/download/LBChrd-client/161005-635eefe9b85d45003fecc19b747d3817.blf.bz2

After download, please bunzip2 that file


Then you can check file integrity by


Which should yield the same result as you can see in the file name.
Finally, rename the file to funds_h160.blf


Of course the new funds_h160.blf file has to be put in the LBC-client directory.
And during the replacement, no LBC client/generator should run as you might get errors in block generation and therefore lose work.

----

All Go-client operators, should download (215 MB) the newest balances file from

http://62.146.128.45/download/LBC-client/161005-73794d00771f739e5f8e9845ba2f75e7.pst.bz2

Procedure is the same as above, except you rename it to balances.pst


Rico

Would you please form your own thread for ETH/ETC in the Altcoin section?

I'd like to not have to bother the admin.


Rico

Which version Ethereum chain (including ETC) using?

The attacks described in the paper only apply to reduced round versions of keccak which aren't ever used other than for cryptanalysis. They won't work on the regular version, which has 24 rounds.

Your consulting fee of 0.3BTC per hour seems okay to me. But are you aware of Keccak-256 on which ETH is based? I want you to help me write Python code and a C2(Command and Control Github Server) for Keccak-256 attack vectors as described in the following paper(downloadable PDF document): http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-34047-5_25

From my perspective it's a challenging task, but could prove to be financially rewarding to a Billionth degree(literally speaking)
I look forward to hearing from you.