Topic: Pollard's kangaroo ECDLP solver - page 35. (Read 60381 times)

How I begin to read about how to use “subtracted” ?
I try to read up to date from 6 month I missing update all knowledge (unfortune some knowledge I forget between un used, now try to understand again it is very complex)

i dont want to reply your foolish things but you pushed me in limit ~ let me give you bad news and please stop your childish acts


lets say if 120 is in 8..... range and you will subtract  900000...... or even f00000..... you will end up with higher range than the orignal key range and big lol. you try more by flipping (02 with 03 or 03 with 02) the key you will never know which bit you have to search. assume you flip the key and its come in 119 and you start searching in 118 or in some other range. well good luck to you

you need to be so precise and in other word should know private key of lower range 

and remember what you are trying to do here i cover this shit million of time so its waster of time. rather than going with your so call one key i will prefer to go with divisor 32 keys as at least i know they are in 115.

now stop this shit and talk about math first . show us your calculation with any other key etc. i know already what you are doing . you are flipping the key and assuming this is in this range but let me tell you .

its all wrong what you are doing ~ wasting your time and our time as well.

Please describe what you are doing. I mean, we should invest calculation power on the premise, that your key is resulting in a solution. But till now, you are lacking the proof, that it makes sense.

And why dont you reduce it further and further?

With my private formula. This is not a simple divide or substract.

Let’s go fin a key and we slit profit.

How do you generate these pubkeys?

What you mean reduce 120 public key? Sorry I not yet back to read all information?

I busy and not follow thread over 5-6 month, What I miss, What new interesting?

I think may be some one running Pollard's kangaroo continue 6 month may be some one solve already but still not that mean nobody running continue too longer enough can solve puzzle.

I agree about fine other methods to can solve puzzle.

I forget a lot of knowledge, may be I need to re-learning again.

Because you will have only partial private key. For getting funds you need provide private key to me in pm or simple through post message on phorum and I will get find after ad share 1.2 btc with you or any another person who will find a privkey.

P.s. I will find a privkey for myself if no one will be interested, but right now I too busy so, I will like any privkey solve from a phorum community.

If I have the privatekey for your public key... why should i share it with you?

I was reduce 120 public key, find a privkey, and we share 1.2 btc 50/50.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5358408.new#new

It is fantastic 

I think a lot of people in this thread have tried to solve puzzle 120 with a kangaroo. But since bitcoins are still in place, it means no one has solved it. Brainless somehow found a way to reduce the number of keys to search and if I understand the translation correctly, solved the puzzle 120, but did not withdraw funds. I could be wrong.

Hi, Now still no anybody solve puzzle #120

Did anyone try using kangaroo for solve puzzle #120 ?

You did manage to fool a good number of people apparently , it made for an entertaining read.

I would +1 Merit this but I have no more sMerit to give

Very good explanation, also I did post the whole Quantpy Beta thing as a joke, obviously its infeasible to simulate anything close to 63 Qubits with a classical computer.

However there are a ton of quantum simulators out there but to have the same effect as a quantum computer it takes alot of ram to simulate. 2.9TB is not far fetched for a classical computer to run a very basic quantum simulation. This is primarily for testing purposes and even something as simple as bit flipping requires a tremendous amount of processing power, the speed increase in my testing doesnt even compare to the most basic of BSGS programs.

...except that even Google's classical computers are all hosted in datacenters with stupidly high specs and speeds, a magnitude faster than even enterprise servers I can rent from any old reseller or cloud provider. [I can rent 24-core servers at some places].

Hold that thought there.

Say you have a "classical computer" that's really just an aggregation of a bunch of dedicated systems similar to the ones powering their clouds. Now if you put enough of these together (as they probably did - into a cloud of course - remember that private clouds are also a thing), of course you will be able to make a classical computer that outperforms any other system.

Now considering that Google already has some of the most powerful classical computers, it's a no-brainer that they will also have one of the most powerful quantum computers as well.

Are they going to pass that on to end-users? Of course not. We're talking about internal hardware that powers things like Google Search and Youtube. They would never sell or even lease the hardware to third-parties, because they have no use for all that collective raw power.

Now a dumbed-down version of their QC that's much slower than your 100 million-x fast Google QC (we are talking around 100M x the speed of a PC) - that's more viable to be used in commercial settings (and hacker-oafs who attempt to use this to search the full 160-bits of BTC addresses, or the 256-bits of private keys).

Now 100M log 2 is about 26.5.

Assume the best single-PC build can crack 50 bits like a champ (and just for kicks, assume a cluster of 1000 of these can do 60 bits).

That means your rad, spiffy "x100M" commercial QC can only crack 76.5 bits feasibly (86.5 bits in a cluster of 1000). Nice, will solve you a few stubborn puzzles like #64+ and earn you a couple thousand dollars of BTC, but nowhere near enough to threaten the security of secp256k1 or even HASH160.

lets talk about it  

" Google announced it has a quantum computer that is 100 million times faster than any classical computer in its lab. "

https://bernardmarr.com/15-things-everyone-should-know-about-quantum-computing/

so assume world super computer can do max 20 Qubits calculations but google created with 50 Qubits , which is almost 3 time faster than any super computer on earth and what about D-Wave?
do you know D-wave offering quantum solution with 5000+ Qubits. only thing matter now is how to keep them cool and how to effectively get speed benefits , of course there will be time required to bring them
in full form with correct programming but dont forget first IBM pc was just doing some flops 7 calculations / running on shit OS and now where we are and doing CPU or GPU calculations in tera flops.

i told you before and will repeat it again its just matter of time 256bit algo will be piece of shit in front of quantum   trust me. its not looks simple but i have believe that optimization and improvements will bring this all in coming 50 years.

time to say good bye BITCOIN.BTC  

long story short lets say google claim regarding 100 million times faster so assume right now your pc can make 1 tera flops or can invert 1 tera bits /sec and with 50 Qubits right now you have power to invert
8.e+21 bits/sec as per google and if you talk about D-waver that is 100 times more powerful than google quantum. 5000/50 = 100    ====  8.e+21*100 = bla bla bla (these all are basic calcultion just for your understanding if you need exact start calculation by searching on D-waver)
still this all is initial stage and what about when there will be real implementation ~ you need to feel fear now  

hope you get the point

I don't know why people keep assuming that quantum computers will be able to overcome 120 bits instantly - notwithstanding they don't exist yet - but let's be real here. A GPU can tackle about 40 bits very quickly. That's the cube root of the search space of #120. Hardware improvements can only do so much to improve the speed and I wouldn't be surprised if 60 or even 70 bits at an instant will be possible on QCs. But 120 bits is a bit of a stretch at this point especially without any algorithms specifically for QC (Shor will not work against ECDSA).

I'm not saying that quantum computers won't be able to crack #120, I'm just saying it won't be instant.

that childish thing to invert bits is old shit , i can make python script or gpu program to do that. there are already programs who can do this to recover lost private key to invert bits at the specific locations

for example , you need to find private key from 120 range so you will assume and keep static some part of private key as we already know key can be in 8,9,a,b,c,d,e,f so you can keep that bits static and start inverting remaining one. if you really have quantum power you can over come 120 in blink of eye but if you dont have that power ~ then Good luck 

You look at the screenshots, but do not read the text?
He is wrote - it not for sale and is not available to test

i guess he have not that "kind" heart