Many use Chat Gpt to fix grammar or simplify sentences so everyone can understand. Just because something looks like it's formatted by ChatGPT doesn't mean it was fully written by AI.

1. Does the method guarantee finding the target?

Random Method:
No, the random method does not guarantee that the target will be found. Since the selection is random, there's always a chance the correct key may never be hit, even after billions of attempts.

Sequential Method:
Yes, the sequential method does guarantee that the target will be found—eventually. It walks through the entire keyspace in a defined order, ensuring the target is reached if it exists within the range.

2. Memory usage and performance

Random Method:
One major downfall of the random method is that you need to store every point that has already been calculated.
Why? Because there's a high chance the algorithm will hit the same key multiple times.
To avoid repeating calculations, you’d need to store and check against all previously visited keys, which requires a huge amount of memory.
This not only slows down performance due to frequent memory lookups but also increases the complexity of the implementation.

Sequential Method:
In contrast, with the sequential method, you don’t need to store every key.
You only need to track the last key calculated. There's no duplication, and memory usage remains minimal.
This makes the sequential method faster, more memory-efficient, and easier to manage.

Conclusion
While the random method might give the illusion of better performance in short experiments due to lucky hits, it comes with significant drawbacks: lack of guarantee, heavy memory use, and slower performance over time. The sequential method is predictable, memory-efficient, and guaranteed to succeed, making it a more reliable and scalable solution in the long run.

Can you tell me the difference between the prefix method and the random method? At the end of the day, the code is still random—there’s no magic to it and it's not surprising..


It's better to use both random and sequencial.

I already told him he wasted his time, energy & electricity. I think he finally got a reality check now 😂

It is a common characteristic of hashes that different numbers can produce the same initials. For example, as in the case you provided, 1BY8GQbnH7ny3ZbLpmVtBZLZ2Lw7528UfK. This is not surprising.


If you really think it has some mathematical connection with the private key, then can you explain why the Bech32 and SegWit addresses of the same private key don’t have the same initials, while only the legacy address does? Does legacy address  have some magic in it?

Lol... Congratulations on wasting your 5 years. The hash function was specifically designed so that there wouldn’t be any pattern or relationship between the private key and the address.

First, go and research how a hash is created in the first place; you will automatically understand everything you talked about is BS. Your research is just nonsense and a complete waste of time. You wasted 5 years trying to find a pattern, but if you had invested those 5 years studying how a hash works, it would have been much better. I’m saying this from my own experience.

If I find private keys with similar patterns like "ddd," "eee," "fff," and so on, which one should I choose? There will be hundreds of such patterns, and so on.

Even though it's an idea it doesn't make any improvement. If you Brute force all the similar patterns, It will just make the code even more slower and there will be no guarantee.

Cryptographic hash functions are designed to be random and unpredictable. When you input a public key into the hash function, the resulting hash is a seemingly random sequence of numbers and letters.

Even a tiny change in the public key (e.g., flipping a single bit) will completely change the hash due to a property called the avalanche effect.

This randomness ensures there is no discernible pattern in the hash.


When someone makes a statement and if it does makes sense it doesn't mean it's disrespect.

If the creator wasn’t the one who took out Puzzle #66, then it was definitely a puzzle-solving pool that stole the money from its investors. Because there was a pool funded with thousands of dollars for this puzzle, and those investors got nothing, doesn’t it make these puzzle-solving pools look suspicious? Despite thousands of dollars being invested and using hundreds of GPU'S for years, they couldn’t solve even a single puzzle.


The guy who solved puzzle 65 didn't even moved his funds and the solver of the puzzle 120,125&130 claims he solved the highest puzzle within two months also puzzle 66 and 130 solved in the same month. The creator increased the prize to 1000 btc even before the private keys to Puzzle 120 was revealed. Everything looks fishy.


The reason why RetiredCoder is not cashing out his winnings despite investing in hundreds of GPU'S to solve these puzzles (as he claims). It clearly indicates that he has millions of dollars in Bitcoin in multiple different address and he moved BTC from 3Emiw...YSs just for a formality for everyone to think he's cashing out... may be who knows he's someone working with the creator.

Absolutely correct, @Ktimes. Creating slow Kangaroo codes from random papers on the internet and then modifying them to claim oneself as an inventor or mathematical genius is the most foolish thing anyone could do. There are only two ways to solve these puzzles: either you have to be a mathematical genius, or you need to be a millionaire willing to burn your money just for the world record tag.

I also think the creator might have already known who the puzzle solver was even before the rest of us did, as he increased the prize to 1000 BTC before the private key to Puzzle 120 was revealed.We will never know if the creator is the puzzle solver or its an organisation or its a single individual or its a relative of the creator or its a close friend of the creator. If you look at saatoshi_rising's last statement, it's evident that the creator also enjoys testing random codes from the internet.

130 bits wasn’t solved in two months. It’s just a psychological trick he’s playing on people like JLP and Zielar or many other who also have access to hundreds of GPUs. He’s just playing psychological tricks on them so they won’t work on the higher range and cut down his competitors.

We have no hate against anyone's success—in fact, we genuinely wish him the best and hope he breaks the world record for solving #135. But let’s not forget that he’s the one who started all the trolling and later deleted his messages to avoid the backlash.

That's correct. The more GPUs you have, the higher the chances of collisions due to the Birthday Paradox and the known key range. But I still don't believe 130 bits in 2 months 

Lol... RetiredCoder just came here to beg for 100 merit points and show off his money. That’s all he accomplished. We don’t need anything from him, nor do we need to waste time learning his slow codes from part 1, 2, or 3.

Anyone using the slowest code with 100+ GPUs will obviously become fast, and if that’s what he calls an "OPTIMIZED VERSION," then he’s living in a delusion. There are plenty of developers who could easily solve these puzzles if they had access to 100-500+ GPUs—nothing surprising about that.

As we’ve already said, if Elon Musk wakes up tomorrow with a whim to solve 135 or 140, he will. The real challenge isn’t throwing money at GPUs but finding a cheap and efficient algorithm capable of solving it. That's where the true magic lies.

The reason we call it a puzzle-solving community is simple: it's not a place for people to beg for merit points, flaunt their wealth, or brag about "optimized" codes without backing it up. It’s for individuals who genuinely help each other and contribute to collective progress.

Take JLP as an example—he openly shared one of the most effective codes, helping developers and pushing the community forward. That’s the kind of spirit this space is meant for, not empty boasting or selfish motives. If you're here for anything else, maybe you're in the wrong place.

The guy who solved the puzzle is living in a delusion. He thinks he has the fastest version, but in reality, it's the slowest. Anyone using the slowest version with 100 - 500 GPUs will obviously become fast.

Why are your feelings getting hurt? Are you the puzzle solver? Because to me, it sure looks like you’re RetiredCoder. A guy who solves his own mini-puzzle for attention—what more can we expect from him? A guy who supposedly holds a world record but shares code with the public that’s slower than what is already available—what can we expect from him? A millionaire who begs for 100 merit points despite having millions of dollars—what can we expect from him?

If he doesn’t want to share the code, he should just be a man and say, 'I don’t want to share it,' instead of teasing us with 'I’ll share the GPU version in Part 3.' What are we supposed to do with his Part 1, 2, and 3 if he never actually shares his method?

People like JLP have earned respect because they openly shared code that was effective at the time and helped many developers. Meanwhile, RetiredCoder himself said he started with JLP’s code. But where’s the credit to JLP? Instead, we get empty promises and slower code. What can we expect from someone like that?

Lol..May be the creator is also enjoying the drama just like us.

The fact that RetiredCoder had to come back using his secondary ID to support himself is honestly the funniest thing we've ever seen here.

Did you forget about creating fake mini-puzzles and solving them using a dummy ID? If you add that to the list, it would be really great. We'll let you know if there's anything else we want to include. Till then, take care.

Thanks in advance!

Guys, if you notice, some people still think that 130 bits was solved in two months. I think it's best to stay silent and avoid arguments—it would just be a waste of your time.