Hey Rico,
could you pls enable --gpu auth for my ID 785872e03932a91cb17634861c6b6c31
THX in advance
Topic: Large Bitcoin Collider Thread 2.0 - page 7. (Read 57411 times)
-Snip-
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/name-the-00001-btc-unit-final-poll-406312
Yes, I was referring to the value of the wallets in btc, not the difficulty of finding a working key for them. This is why I mentioned "balances" several times and specified 0.0001 btc whenever I used the somewhat uncommon term "bit" or "bits".
None of your rant actually answered my question?
It's easy, the difference is because you're assuming 1 Block = 1,000,000 but it's actually 1,048,576.
So 3711 blocks * 1,048,576 = 3,891,265,536
Basically 3892 MKeys.
Hope that helps.
So 3711 blocks * 1,048,576 = 3,891,265,536
Basically 3892 MKeys.
Hope that helps.
>Is there anything wrong
Megakeys means millions of keys. 18607006172-18607002461=3711
Megakeys means millions of keys. 18607006172-18607002461=3711
Thanks, but what is the relation between 3892 Mkeys and 3711 Mkeys? Did you mean the LBC client is searching in the range [18607002461x10^6-18607006172x10^6]?
Sorry for being ignorant
---
Edit:
Okay I got this: https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/man/user
Quote
pages/blocks
The parameter is called "pages", for historic reasons. A page (sometimes also called a "block") contains 2^20 (1048576) private keys. The history of LBC dates back to directory.io, where 128 private keys are listed on one page. As our "pages" do have 1048576 keys and therefore each represents "8192 directory.io pages", we started to call pages blocks. You remember: pages=blocks
The parameter is called "pages", for historic reasons. A page (sometimes also called a "block") contains 2^20 (1048576) private keys. The history of LBC dates back to directory.io, where 128 private keys are listed on one page. As our "pages" do have 1048576 keys and therefore each represents "8192 directory.io pages", we started to call pages blocks. You remember: pages=blocks
3711 block, each contains 2^20 key (the output has oooooo.. but I don't understand why they are not fat block) -> 3892M keys
>Is there anything wrong
Megakeys means millions of keys. 18607006172-18607002461=3711
Megakeys means millions of keys. 18607006172-18607002461=3711
Guys, sorry for being noob, but what does this mean:
Does this mean my client will search in this range [18607002461-18607006172]? I believe this range is < 2^35; while LBC is already done with 2^54? I'm searching on the already searched space?
I run LBC with this command:
Is there anything wrong? Thank you so much.
Code:
Ask for work... got blocks [18607002461-18607006172] (3892 Mkeys)
Does this mean my client will search in this range [18607002461-18607006172]? I believe this range is < 2^35; while LBC is already done with 2^54? I'm searching on the already searched space?
I run LBC with this command:
Code:
sudo ./LBC --address xxx --id xxx --secret xxx --cpus 8
Is there anything wrong? Thank you so much.
Just curious, can this https://github.com/basil00/pairgen contribute to LBC in a way?
That program uses the Pollard rho algorithm (a probabilistic algorithm) to find a collision between any 2 addresses.
LBC checks all the private keys from 1 to 2^134 to find a collision with an address with bitcoin.
The 2 ways are very different.
The other thread is depreciated?
You are confused. The bits mentioned on the trophies page refer to the search space, not Bitcoin value.So, being new here in general as well as this thread I may just be ignorant but I have to ask.
If the goal of this project is to find collisions and the best way to find one is if an "owner" comes forward claiming their wallet was stolen by LBC, then why is the LBC only searching addresses that have balances "up to 1 Satoshi"? Especially given that the average bitcoin holder has a balance of 2 bits (0.0002 btc)?
I get the whole "we are searching for collisions, not trying to crack wallets" but it seems to me that you get just as many abandoned wallets with small balances as you do with large balances and that the ideal search space should be in the average balance range of 2 bits. (For that matter I would crank the number up to the 20-150 bit range considering that a guy with $20 or more in it is a lot more likely to seek out why his btc have gone missing)
I have read the entire thread as well as have used the search box and Google, however I have yet to come to an answer for this seemingly obvious question.
Edit: According to the "trophies" page the balances are 0.1 to 79 bits (0.00001 to 0.0079 btc) not 1 Satoshi? Regardless the question remains the same.
If the goal of this project is to find collisions and the best way to find one is if an "owner" comes forward claiming their wallet was stolen by LBC, then why is the LBC only searching addresses that have balances "up to 1 Satoshi"? Especially given that the average bitcoin holder has a balance of 2 bits (0.0002 btc)?
I get the whole "we are searching for collisions, not trying to crack wallets" but it seems to me that you get just as many abandoned wallets with small balances as you do with large balances and that the ideal search space should be in the average balance range of 2 bits. (For that matter I would crank the number up to the 20-150 bit range considering that a guy with $20 or more in it is a lot more likely to seek out why his btc have gone missing)
I have read the entire thread as well as have used the search box and Google, however I have yet to come to an answer for this seemingly obvious question.
Edit: According to the "trophies" page the balances are 0.1 to 79 bits (0.00001 to 0.0079 btc) not 1 Satoshi? Regardless the question remains the same.
Here is what you need to know:
1 Bitcoin = 1 BTC
1 Satoshi = 0.00000001 BTC
1 BTC = 100,000,000 Satoshi
On the statistics page here: https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/stats
Quote
keys per day: 282.21 tn
total keys generated: 19498.14 tn
pages on directory.io 152329.19 bn
search space covered: 54.11 of 160 bits
search space in 1y: 56.77 bits
total keys generated: 19498.14 tn
pages on directory.io 152329.19 bn
search space covered: 54.11 of 160 bits
search space in 1y: 56.77 bits
Means:
tn = trillion
bn = billion
search space covered of 54.11 bits means LBC has tried 254.11 private keys (about 19,441,647,535,076,223)
search space in 1y: 56.77 bits means at the current rate they will cover 256.77 private keys in the next year.
On the trophies page you mentioned that "bit" was used. I only see one reference to the word "bit" and it is:
Quote
A manual revisit of the 38-42 bit search space revealed these private keys
Which simply means they were searching private keys with values from 238 through 242
Where are you getting your very confusing definition of "bit", trying to make it equal to 0.0001 BTC ? I have never seen that in all my years.
There was a push to call one millionth of a BTC a "bit" in the distant past. But that really is not what you are talking about here.
Are you trying to use the antiquated definition of 1 bit = $0.125 ? That would be really strange.
That's a wrong statement. They are killed (with 30 seconds timeout) when there's demand from google itself.
So they live from several minutes to 24 hours.
So they live from several minutes to 24 hours.
Google cloud is the best but preemptive machines are killed when CPU rate is high :-(
DigiOcean highCPU seems to be ordinary dedicated CPUs, price is $160 for 8core.
Probably google's "preemptible instance" for $40/month is the winner (8core). Speed differs from 3.1 to 3.4 megakeys.
Probably google's "preemptible instance" for $40/month is the winner (8core). Speed differs from 3.1 to 3.4 megakeys.
which company offer the best vps for lbc? (cost/effort)
What do you think about digitalocean high cpu droplets?
What do you think about digitalocean high cpu droplets?
The other thread is depreciated?
So, being new here in general as well as this thread I may just be ignorant but I have to ask.
If the goal of this project is to find collisions and the best way to find one is if an "owner" comes forward claiming their wallet was stolen by LBC, then why is the LBC only searching addresses that have balances "up to 1 Satoshi"? Especially given that the average bitcoin holder has a balance of 2 bits (0.0002 btc)?
I get the whole "we are searching for collisions, not trying to crack wallets" but it seems to me that you get just as many abandoned wallets with small balances as you do with large balances and that the ideal search space should be in the average balance range of 2 bits. (For that matter I would crank the number up to the 20-150 bit range considering that a guy with $20 or more in it is a lot more likely to seek out why his btc have gone missing)
I have read the entire thread as well as have used the search box and Google, however I have yet to come to an answer for this seemingly obvious question.
Edit: According to the "trophies" page the balances are 0.1 to 79 bits (0.00001 to 0.0079 btc) not 1 Satoshi? Regardless the question remains the same.
If the goal of this project is to find collisions and the best way to find one is if an "owner" comes forward claiming their wallet was stolen by LBC, then why is the LBC only searching addresses that have balances "up to 1 Satoshi"? Especially given that the average bitcoin holder has a balance of 2 bits (0.0002 btc)?
I get the whole "we are searching for collisions, not trying to crack wallets" but it seems to me that you get just as many abandoned wallets with small balances as you do with large balances and that the ideal search space should be in the average balance range of 2 bits. (For that matter I would crank the number up to the 20-150 bit range considering that a guy with $20 or more in it is a lot more likely to seek out why his btc have gone missing)
I have read the entire thread as well as have used the search box and Google, however I have yet to come to an answer for this seemingly obvious question.
Edit: According to the "trophies" page the balances are 0.1 to 79 bits (0.00001 to 0.0079 btc) not 1 Satoshi? Regardless the question remains the same.
Hi Rico,
I started being involved in LBC pool a few days ago, I got over 3000 Gkeys, and would like to try with GPU on a local machine and on AWS. If I do:
I got:
Is the threshold of 3000 Gkeys still used?
My id is : peter_doe
Regards,
I started being involved in LBC pool a few days ago, I got over 3000 Gkeys, and would like to try with GPU on a local machine and on AWS. If I do:
Code:
./LBC -q --gpu
I got:
Code:
OpenCL diganotics written.
GPU authorized: no
Is the threshold of 3000 Gkeys still used?
My id is : peter_doe
Regards,
Got a reply on discord,
GPU is enabled now.
Thanks Rico
Hi Rico,
I started being involved in LBC pool a few days ago, I got over 3000 Gkeys, and would like to try with GPU on a local machine and on AWS. If I do:
I got:
Is the threshold of 3000 Gkeys still used?
My id is : peter_doe
Regards,
I started being involved in LBC pool a few days ago, I got over 3000 Gkeys, and would like to try with GPU on a local machine and on AWS. If I do:
Code:
./LBC -q --gpu
I got:
Code:
OpenCL diganotics written.
GPU authorized: no
Is the threshold of 3000 Gkeys still used?
My id is : peter_doe
Regards,
I have a Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E3-1270 v6 @ 3.80GHz server and I want to do some tests with it..
Can anyone give me a step by step guide for install lbc on centos? I tried but I'm pretty noob with Linux OS.
Can anyone give me a step by step guide for install lbc on centos? I tried but I'm pretty noob with Linux OS.
On 6core (12ht) server you'll get around 3-4 million keys a second. It is 0.1% of pools speed.
For CentOS7 (if you are NOT root, but privileged user)
If root remove sudo
sudo rpm -vi http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/7/x86_64/Packages/o/ocl-icd-2.2.11-2.el7.x86_64.rpm
sudo yum -y install cpan perl openssl-devel wget make gcc bzip2
sudo cpan Log::Log4perl LWP::UserAgent Net::SSLeay LWP::Protocol::https Parallel::ForkManager Term::ReadKey JSON
wget https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/static/client/LBC
chmod 755 LBC
./LBC --cpus 12 -x
nohup ./LBC --cpus 12 > logg &
tailf logg
answer yes on all questions of third line
10-100m? well - whats that compared to the loot 
If you recover wallet with 79k BTC, the loot is more than 10-100m. But it is not abandoned.
p.s. the "loot" is actually, not what you get from wallets, but what hunters are willing to pay for ASICs. It might be a larger sum, than actual finding.
By the way, I've read that there was a lot of fraud with crowdfunding of ASICs. People payed and had to wait forever...
I have a Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E3-1270 v6 @ 3.80GHz server and I want to do some tests with it..
Can anyone give me a step by step guide for install lbc on centos? I tried but I'm pretty noob with Linux OS.
Thanks in advance
P.S.
Is that server good for this?
Can anyone give me a step by step guide for install lbc on centos? I tried but I'm pretty noob with Linux OS.
Thanks in advance
P.S.
Is that server good for this?
wallet miner asics work in progress yet?
a bounty pot bitcoiners/donors can donate to
a bounty pot bitcoiners/donors can donate to
The donation pot cannot collect couple of BTC for GPU development
ASIC development costs around $10-100MLN.
The worst thing is - even if you get an investor with 100 megabucks, the chinese will steal your tech and start flooding the market with cheap clones.
I guess, LBC (or it's clone projects) should go the BTC way - CPU-GPU-FPGA-ASIC... GPU is still immature, no FPGA. You want too much.
10-100m? well - whats that compared to the loot
i guess its not about computation power anyways but IO. Dont have the means to test on a decent cluster - would love to do some benchmarking xD
looking for a donor lol https://www.ebay.de/itm/HP-BladeSystem-C7000-16x-BL460c-Gen8-4096GB-RAM-32x-Xeon-E5-2660v2-10-Core/222609616134?hash=item33d4912d06:g:HtsAAOSw6VRaJlHk
Jump to: