It was the Bitcointalk forum that inspired us to create Bitcointalksearch.org - Bitcointalk is an excellent site that should be the default page for anybody dealing in cryptocurrency,
since it is a virtual gold-mine of data. However, our experience and user feedback led us create our site;
Bitcointalk's search is slow, and difficult to get the results you need, because you need to log in first to find anything useful - furthermore, there are rate limiters for their search functionality.
The aim of our project is to create a faster website that yields more results and faster without having to create an account and eliminate the need to log in -
your personal data, therefore, will never be in jeopardy since we are not asking for any of your data and you don't need to provide them to use our site with all of its capabilities.
We created this website with the sole purpose of users being able to search quickly and efficiently in the field of cryptocurrency
so they will have access to the latest and most accurate information and thereby assisting the crypto-community at large.
So I'm messing with Puzzle #130 and JLP's Pollard Kangaroo ECDLP Solver using a RTX 2070. When I first launch it, this is the speed I get: [1553.87 MK/s][GPU 1459.12 MK/s]
After a few seconds running at that speed it will slowly decrease until it reaches this speed, where it stays for the rest of the operation: [1209.19 MK/s][GPU 1134.42 MK/s]
Does anyone know why this is happening?
Thanks in advance!
Because statistics are wrong until all threads loads kangaroos. Wait about 10-15 seconds to get right numbers.
Oh, this makes total sense. Thank you for your quick and concise answer!
About: "The rules in crypto are different, when you hold a private key by the law you are the owner" What if money were yours? Still OK with this?
"The designer ... increased the prize 10x folds after community's request." OK! Time for another community's request: Mr./Mrs. Puzzle creator and puzzle addresses money owner, Please sign a message with any known non-broken puzzle address, and state your will! Are you fine, if money from these addresses are taken?" Or "you consider us thieves?" or ... (the signing #150, #155... public keys are already known and will not compromise security)
Thanks
You should talk about it over there in puzzle thread, even though kangaroo was developed for these puzzles but it would be more or less off topic especially since OP is not active to provide any insights of morality standards.
This would be my last reply regarding your concerns, why would he send more Bitcoins to those addresses if he wanted them untouched? Moreover did you even read his post from 2019?
So I'm messing with Puzzle #130 and JLP's Pollard Kangaroo ECDLP Solver using a RTX 2070. When I first launch it, this is the speed I get: [1553.87 MK/s][GPU 1459.12 MK/s]
After a few seconds running at that speed it will slowly decrease until it reaches this speed, where it stays for the rest of the operation: [1209.19 MK/s][GPU 1134.42 MK/s]
Does anyone know why this is happening?
Thanks in advance!
Because statistics are wrong until all threads loads kangaroos. Wait about 10-15 seconds to get right numbers.
So I'm messing with Puzzle #130 and JLP's Pollard Kangaroo ECDLP Solver using a RTX 2070. When I first launch it, this is the speed I get: [1553.87 MK/s][GPU 1459.12 MK/s]
After a few seconds running at that speed it will slowly decrease until it reaches this speed, where it stays for the rest of the operation: [1209.19 MK/s][GPU 1134.42 MK/s]
About: "The rules in crypto are different, when you hold a private key by the law you are the owner" What if money were yours? Still OK with this?
"The designer ... increased the prize 10x folds after community's request." OK! Time for another community's request: Mr./Mrs. Puzzle creator and puzzle addresses money owner, Please sign a message with any known non-broken puzzle address, and state your will! Are you fine, if money from these addresses are taken?" Or "you consider us thieves?" or ... (the signing #150, #155... public keys are already known and will not compromise security)
Hello fellow puzzle solvers, After spending really too much time of my life trying different code and algorithms, buying and running loud hot hardware to solve #66 & #130I started to wander about ethics of what I am trying to do ! OK, if I have a really really good luck, I will find the key after 1-2 more years! ... BUT !!! Do I have the right to take the coins in the address? ... The coins (the money) are not mine, and the owner (the assumed puzzle creator) never said that, if I brake the private key, I have the right to take the money !!! (Also the fact that the person has more money than us, does not give us the right to take his money!) So .. did I spent so much time of my life trying to become a thief? ... The assumption when I started was ... That is a challenge .. I can do my best .. BUT Do I have the moral right to get money assuming it is by the rules ? ... There are no official rules? We conveniently assume the owner intentions and are ready to get his money ... but what if we are wrong?
Tell me something, when you find the puzzle key and transfer it to your address, who is going to say you weren't the real owner? The rules in crypto are different, when you hold a private key by the law you are the owner, ethically?
If it's for someone else, you should never touch them, but when someone intentionally sends bitcoins to 160 addresses starting from 1, it means they are dropping bread crumbs along the way as a beacon to signal those capable to take them if they can, to what end? To see how fast they can take it. Now since finding a key even in lowest ranges is not an easy task, the person who finds it, can keep it as a bounty prize. More importantly, solving them requires fast tools, and not everyone is able to develop such programs, so when they do and use it to find a key, they take the coins as their reward.
You might wonder, but why?? Because paying $30M to make sure +$600B is safe is a good deal. Now where are those 600B? They reside in 255+ bit range, where are puzzle keys 30M? They reside from 66 bit up to 160 bit. To realize how big that gap is, you'd need to multiply 2^160 by 2^96 to reach there.
The designer doesn't need to say anything, he already said thanks to those who were developing cracking tools, also a few month ago, he increased the prize 10x folds after community's request. Unless he is mentally happy (lol) I would doubt he would add more to the pot after #125 was solved if he wanted the coins for himself.
Hello fellow puzzle solvers, After spending really too much time of my life trying different code and algorithms, buying and running loud hot hardware to solve #66 & #130I started to wander about ethics of what I am trying to do ! OK, if I have a really really good luck, I will find the key after 1-2 more years! ... BUT !!! Do I have the right to take the coins in the address? ... The coins (the money) are not mine, and the owner (the assumed puzzle creator) never said that, if I brake the private key, I have the right to take the money !!! (Also the fact that the person has more money than us, does not give us the right to take his money!) So .. did I spent so much time of my life trying to become a thief? ... The assumption when I started was ... That is a challenge .. I can do my best .. BUT Do I have the moral right to get money assuming it is by the rules ? ... There are no official rules? We conveniently assume the owner intentions and are ready to get his money ... but what if we are wrong?
Can you please be less obvious about your hurt feelings and stay on topic @citb0in? I have no experience in coding, so I can't understand even if I read the code, hence the reason for my question. There is no shame in asking questions to learn new things.
One more question related to Kangaroo program. Let's say I run Kangaroo and search for a 145bit key. I run it for 1 hour and then quit it because no key was found. Then I re-execute exactly the same command. Will the program iterate through the same values as it did on run first or is it theoretically possible that the 2nd run will find a key? My question basically is: does it behave like VanitySearch where it's theoretically possible to find a match each second regardless of what happened in the history and which range was scanned. Or does it behave more like BitCrack which searches in linear mode ?
Answer: You are right. Pollard rho will not iterate the same values. it means that second or third run command maybe will find the key,
understood. Thank you for clarification @ecdsa123 I just ran a successful test with a 129bit key and it worked like a charm.
One more question related to Kangaroo program. Let's say I run Kangaroo and search for a 145bit key. I run it for 1 hour and then quit it because no key was found. Then I re-execute exactly the same command. Will the program iterate through the same values as it did on run first or is it theoretically possible that the 2nd run will find a key? My question basically is: does it behave like VanitySearch where it's theoretically possible to find a match each second regardless of what happened in the history and which range was scanned. Or does it behave more like BitCrack which searches in linear mode ?
I have the same doubt!
Answer: You are right. Pollard rho will not iterate the same values. it means that second or third run command maybe will find the key,
understood. Thank you for clarification @ecdsa123 I just ran a successful test with a 129bit key and it worked like a charm.
One more question related to Kangaroo program. Let's say I run Kangaroo and search for a 145bit key. I run it for 1 hour and then quit it because no key was found. Then I re-execute exactly the same command. Will the program iterate through the same values as it did on run first or is it theoretically possible that the 2nd run will find a key? My question basically is: does it behave like VanitySearch where it's theoretically possible to find a match each second regardless of what happened in the history and which range was scanned. Or does it behave more like BitCrack which searches in linear mode ?
while True: for k in range(Nt): Hops += 1 pw = T[k].x % hop_modulo dt[k] = 1 << pw solved = check(T[k], t[k], DP_rarity, T, t, W, w) if solved: stop_event.set() # Set the stop event to signal all processes return "sol. time: %.2f sec" % ( time.time() - starttime ) # Return solution time sys.stdout.write("\033[01;33m") sys.stdout.flush() t[k] += dt[k] T[k] = add(P[pw], T[k])
for k in range(Nw): Hops += 1 pw = W[k].x % hop_modulo dw[k] = 1 << pw solved = check(W[k], w[k], DP_rarity, W, w, T, t) if solved: stop_event.set() # Set the stop event to signal all processes return "sol. time: %.2f sec" % ( time.time() - starttime ) # Return solution time sys.stdout.write("\033[01;33m") sys.stdout.flush() w[k] += dw[k] W[k] = add(P[pw], W[k])
you change for additional thread or multicore -> will be faster about 20-25 s
I have a better idea. TO insert all calculations and search in @numba.jit....To use Numba to compile the performance-critical parts of code into machine code, which can significantly speed up computation.
understood. Thank you for clarification @ecdsa123 I just ran a successful test with a 129bit key and it worked like a charm.
One more question related to Kangaroo program. Let's say I run Kangaroo and search for a 145bit key. I run it for 1 hour and then quit it because no key was found. Then I re-execute exactly the same command. Will the program iterate through the same values as it did on run first or is it theoretically possible that the 2nd run will find a key? My question basically is: does it behave like VanitySearch where it's theoretically possible to find a match each second regardless of what happened in the history and which range was scanned. Or does it behave more like BitCrack which searches in linear mode ?