Retired Coder shared the private key for puzzle #120 after a year, and in the thread below, he clearly mentions he has 20 PC of the RTX 4090(maybe he's lying). https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5512304.msg64643001#msg64643001If you look at the timing of puzzles #125 and #130, there’s just a two-month gap between them. So, do you still believe that in just two months, Retired Coder created a 1TB distinguished points table with 20 GPUs and also solved puzzle #130? so he solved 120, 125 and 130. Where are the privkeys for them, I don't see them? What's the reason for not sharing them ? |
|
|
|
FYI - The certification processes at Nicehash are getting more and more complicated. KYC with proof of address / income / photo / etc. which makes me stop using Nicehash from now on, so there will probably be no more block parties.
so do not send any more BTC to our old nicehash groupbuy wallet! I'm not able to refound if the account is restricted.
That's sad to hear hear Willi, because you've been doing this successfully for so long. Long before I joined here. As some may remember, I also organized a solo mining group called “citb0in block solvers”. If anyone is interested, just click on my signature and get in touch. Maybe we can organize a run or two on a regular basis. I run via MRR and it has always gone smoothly in the previous runs. So just let me know in the citb0in Solo-Mining Group]Block Solvers Thread if you are interested, I would be happy. Regards citb0in |
|
|
|
Der LTR6 ist durch und war auch der letzte.
Zur Info - Die Zertifizierungsprozesse bei Nicehash werden immer komplizierter. KYC mit Adressnachweis / Einkommen / Lichtbild / etc. was mich dazu bewegt Nicehash ab jetzt nicht mehr zu benutzen, daher wird es wohl keine Blockpartys mehr geben.
Also bitte keine witeren BTC auf unser Nicehash Wallet senden. Ich bin nicht in der Lage etwas zurückzusenden wenn der Account beschränkt wurde.
FYI - The certification processes at Nicehash are getting more and more complicated. KYC with proof of address / income / photo / etc. which makes me stop using Nicehash from now on, so there will probably be no more block parties.
so do not send any more BTC to our old nicehash groupbuy wallet! I'm not able to refound if the account is restricted.
das ist schade zu hören Willi, weil du das schon so lange und erfolgreich durchgeführt hast. Lange bevor ich hier dazugestoßen bin. Wie einige vielleicht noch in Erinnerung haben, organisierte ich ebenfalls eine sole Solo Mining Gruppe namens "citb0in block solvers". Wenn jemand Interesse haben sollte, einfach auf meine Signatur klicken und sich melden. Eventuell können wir den einen oder anderen Run regelmäßig organisieren. Ich wickle über MRR ab und das war in den bisherigen runs immer problemlos. Also einfach im citb0in Solo-Mining Group]Block Solvers Thread Bescheid geben falls Interesse besteht, würde mich freuen. Grüße citb0in |
|
|
|
If we have a probability of 1 in approximately 2 ** 50 to find Puzzle 135, why has it not been resolved?
The question is irrelevant since the premise is incorrect, you lost a factor of 300.000x there, out of the blue, without any reasonable explanation. E.g. your question is equivalent to "if the sun is green, why wasn't puzzle 135 found yet?" Also, deleting your own posts (to remove your fake allegations from new eyes) shows a very low level of confidence of both you in yourself, and us in you. Otherwise, I'd consider this non-sense just the usual trolling, by you and your clones. Don't you really have like, anything better to spend time with, then spreading misinformation? Was not believing challenge can be worked - I own the changed address.
Congrats! opchecksig aka COBRAS aka ... -indefinite- ... |
|
|
|
If we have a probability of 1 in approximately 2 ** 50 to find Puzzle 135, why has it not been resolved?
Because it has not been solved yet. In that case it cannot be resolved  |
|
|
|
Does anyone else see the zcash in the first 5 puzzle addresses?
Puzzle 1, PVK=1, ZEC p2pkh address = t1UYsZVJkLPeMjxEtACvSxfWuNmddpWfxzs Puzzle 2, PVK=3, ZEC p2pkh address = t1VLyEX9gpXZdZeVXeuAvqPRPxj8u8qiVHL Puzzle 3, PVK=7, ZEC p2pkh address = t1SSFwcYTiLApC5RXEZvNWsLdTPeWQxduZU Puzzle 4, PVK=8, ZEC p2pkh address = t1XaScJtVuFehnJP2dEMDyRVWTkjQXJ4PU7 Puzzle 5, PVK=15, ZEC p2pkh address = t1Wxyub9LgLu6gdrRcZGYmRYM5nG51YqEqL ... Puzzle 66, PVK=2832ED74F2B5E35EE, ZEC p2pkh address = t1LsC22pjUpfCd5ATPzbWA5Aq3HZTZXJWuS what do you mean ? |
|
|
|
|
Digaran, Cobras, etc. go to bed please
|
|
|
|
Please explain:
1) why you create a fresh new account to anonymously spread such crap and try to back it up without any technical explanation while maintaining to disguise your real and regularly username used on this forum
2) what exactly you have not understood about the avalanche effect and the result is that you assume you can use it to reduce the address range (which is not true)
3) why you bring randomness into play, that doesn't fit in with what you said, technically speaking in that context
Thanks for the response! Let me clarify a few things: 1) Since the topic here is brute force, DVAA is simply a new brute force method targeting specific areas of addresses (prefix and suffix). It doesn’t brute-force the entire address space but narrows the search, making phishing or impersonation easier. 2) No brute force method is 100% successful, and DVAA is no different. It reduces randomness at the boundaries, not the entire space. It’s not about breaking Bitcoin’s security entirely but exploring an attack vector where randomness is reduced. Especially quantum computing will make a difference in brute forcing. 3)The avalanche effect and full randomness still hold, but in DVAA, the focus is on manipulating smaller sections. For example, in your case with prefixes and suffixes, the complexity is significantly reduced for those target areas, even if the overall security remains intact. 4) I’m new to the forum and everyone has a starting point, right? This was a good point to start. Is it the idea or the number of entries that matters more here? Just because I don’t have many posts doesn’t mean the idea isn’t worth discussing. Let’s focus on the concept please! what a load of rubbish. On top of that, you haven't even answered a single one of the questions asked, instead you blather on about pointless, theoretical, superficial stuff. Nobody can be that stupid, I'm now wondering if there are only some wannabe intelligent AI generated forum bots around, everything else makes no sense. As long as you cannot technically substantiate your self-created hippie jewelry name DVAA and explain it using the example provided, there is nothing more to discuss, period. |
|
|
|
Important info stored in here, related to the wallet challenges / puzzles :50BA1F083DE4F022B32996C8070B71F7D27A73E439AE20E5B87B85F3064835EDDB98AFF04FA09B4 D66EA70436C44D927B48408D85D4AB69E57CD466CF922E9A7
More to come...
good luck with TX  |
|
|
|
Hey everyone, this got me thinking about something I recently read called the Dual Vanity Address Attack (DVAA). It’s where attackers can generate Bitcoin addresses that match patterns at both the start and end of an address. By doing this, they reduce the randomness we usually rely on for security, making it easier to pull off phishing or impersonation scams. It’s not quite brute-forcing keys, but it's another angle that shows how address generation can be vulnerable.
Hey everyone, this got me thinking about something I recently read called the Dual Vanity Address Attack (DVAA). Dual Vanity Address Attack (DVAA) is not about brute-forcing private keys but rather reducing the address space that attackers need to search by matching both the prefix and suffix of Bitcoin addresses. This drastically lowers the randomness, shrinking the area we rely on. As a result, it makes impersonation or phishing much easier. This method doesn’t replace brute-forcing I guess but complements it, further it shows one more weaknesses in address generation. Please explain: 1) why you create a fresh new account to anonymously spread such crap and try to back it up without any technical explanation while maintaining to disguise your real and regularly username used on this forum 2) what exactly you have not understood about the avalanche effect and the result is that you assume you can use it to reduce the address range (which is not true) 3) why you bring randomness into play, that doesn't fit in with what you said, technically speaking in that context Let's take your last username used " xupaxi wy" and for the sake of example the first and last two characters to look for... FormatBitcoin Address | Private Key ***********************************
1xuoyW6VS9JcEbwXmeKwZCPxJVmLyqFwy | B916A3BCF9DE0D3D97547A4E5CE541D7DEC5291DD86BA8975006F6FBA9F8FDA4
1xuxaNFBvMXwB6P5H9qc5TaKmh91DwFwy | D51E7843F7B980E257F27DA7A943C60F4549D0B627185556A289CBD3E48CD8CE
1xujEHjYxnPv9iiirpjZmG8ZYdC1asSwy | 6539D4FA10903B1E1230B484F96889CEA8112D31495EF0DF77E6F3CA1DBE9319
4) please explain the reduction of keyspace on the shown example |
|
|
|
There are faster and more efficient tools out there. Python’s great for a lot of things, but for this? Not so much. But he has the most stable (linux) programs he writes himself! ChatGPT must be envy of his code, searching for multiple matches between uncompressed and compressed addresses. Really stable stuff. If we combine this with COBRAS's 50000 public key division "how to get y" breakthroughs and the other guy's database, we might turn that needle into a giant Dune worm. But then it might be the one who finds us, we're digging into dangerous sands. Meanwhile, 3Emi...YESs probably already spinning up his ASICs for 135. So, you who criticize everything, what have you achieved? In your posts, you only refer to more computing power = more keys generated, but I don’t see anything we haven’t known for decades. Fermat’s Last Theorem, although it may seem like an abstract problem with no direct practical applications, has had a significant impact on the development of mathematics. The quest for its proof led to advances in areas such as number theory, algebraic geometry, and the theory of automorphic forms. Without the pursuit of solving this “insignificant” problem for practical purposes over 300 years, technology would not be what it is today. What do I mean by this? The beauty of math is that even when we fail, we make progress. A true scientist is one who does not impose their beliefs on others as absolute truth, and an intelligent person knows this. Math lesson of the day: “humility.” It’s unfortunate that instead of fostering a productive discussion your response seems to miss the mark and resorts to personal attacks. Let’s take a moment to set the record straight. First, the person you’re criticizing has demonstrated a deep understanding of the topics he discuss, consistently backing up his points with logical reasoning, facts, and clear examples. His contributions have been informative and accessible which is the hallmark of someone who not only understands the subject but also knows how to communicate complex ideas effectively. This is invaluable in any discussion especially one involving technical topics like mathematics or computing power. Your point about Fermat’s Last Theorem is certainly valid. Yes, theoretical pursuits often lead to unexpected practical advances ... this is one of the most beautiful aspects of mathematics. But it seems you’ve mischaracterized the person you’re addressing. Nowhere did he dismiss theoretical pursuits as "insignificant." Instead, he has focused on the practical application of increased computing power, which is a factual statement: more computing power does indeed generate more possibilities in key generation and encryption. This isn't a reductionist view of mathematics but an acknowledgment of how certain technological advancements operate. The tone of your message suggests that you feel entitled to define what constitutes "real" scientific contribution. But a true scientist doesn’t rely on condescension or unfounded accusations. They engage with ideas based on merit and not by attempting to discredit others through personal attacks. If you disagree with his perspective, by all means, engage with his arguments directly. However, resorting to accusations without offering your own valuable insights or knowledge weakens your position. Disagreement is welcome in any intellectual conversation but respect and humility... well ... values you mention, should go both ways. Let’s elevate the conversation. Criticism can be constructive when it’s backed by evidence, but dismissing someone’s contributions without adding substance of your own is hardly the way forward. I much appreciate the contribution of the person you're attacking and hope he'll keep on ... |
|
|
|
Hello. First thing first: i am the solver of Puzzle 66. But i lost it soon as it was spend. i was searching for a couple of years and finally i had some "bad" luck on puzzle 66. after importing the key, i was withdrawing it so so fast in the hope of finally can change my life and stop eating this bad food here. ( i dont want to say which contry i am from and sorry for my bad english ) but sadly... it was only a dream for a short time... so.... hey stealer, if you read this, please give me 50% and get me right back up after falling in a deep depression after this... i am really sad... i put so much energy in it and it was all for nothing...  bc1qgfeg5kxzpk9dkxla9lkpcuucdjjtu9swqntl7l .. good bye guys unimaginative and very bad drama what you are trying to stage here, simply pathetic go get some life, don't blame others, stop begging |
|
|
|
I fired up my rig and found a vanity address for you. Here you go dude 1AkitoSMHosanaQuantumRigxxxunWXyG
Can I get a WIF for that address of mine?  it all depends on your offer |
|
|
|
Willkommen an Bord! fühl dich wie zu Hause ... aber Füße bitte nicht auf den Tisch  |
|
|
|
Can someone tell me how much computing power would be needed for someone to hit the 28-characters "AndCausingCLimateChange6666" in address ? With Tools like Vanitygen or VanitySearch. That is an enormous number of possible combinations, roughly equal to 7.5 × 10^48. To generate a 28-characters in address, it could take trillions of years on a single consumer-grade GPU.  I fired up my rig and found a vanity address for you. Here you go dude 1AkitoSMHosanaQuantumRigxxxunWXyG
|
|
|
|
...
I will have to speak with you, that looks like a modified version and I can only speculate you fell upon the growth factor of 18 to 20. Since the puzzle is already solved and the factor only helps find #66 I don't mind sharing the math behind my similar conclusion. I can not upload the image\screenshot of the conversation with my custom, privately hosted model. I can share the text within a small section of it.
So let me disclose this first and foremost. I have a custom model trained and fine-tuned by myself for personal research and assistance. This is not any publicly avaliable chat model. I am lazy and use it for rapid calculations and assistance in holding large hex values and decimal values in a memory pool to save on computations and energy load.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model said:
GO GET SOME LIFE
---snip---
I believe there are some parties and individuals who possess both above average intelligence and have private means which they used in order to develop some cutting-edge applications of technology not tied to any large corporations. While these are not supercomputers, or quantum circuits in line with mainstream public knowledge.
I can say with positive proof and personal observations of such systems, they are impressive in their capabilities when compared to the average software running in any programming language on the standard operational systems. They are not a quantum computer in any sense, but their computational abilities are staggering.
I also have a B.A. in mathematics with a concentration in computer science. And some other education, I think if people still accept my cereal box diploma.
I deal with logistics, material science and the electronic engineering of emerging technologies.
I am horrible at writing code from scratch, so I tend to modify broken code snippets fixing the one-off errors or faulty logic to build my own software for my needs.
I guess that would make something of a lesser mathematician, perhaps on a good day?
I would humbly like to offer, we are in a time of profound revolution of conventional models of development and production. Anyone with half a brain, determination and some diy skills, can build things to rival billion dollar corporations.
These last two decades of technological advancements, coupled with the vast libraries available via the internet.
Humor me a moment, and fathom, what a being with 130 IQ or higher, insomnia and an unquenchable thirst of knowledge could accomplish?
Digaran, stop your consecutive posts and don't be a fool. Go get some education before talking crap and sharing your monologue with AI and then go get some life. Please |
|
|
|
Just curious, So is the solver of #120, #125, #130 the same solvers or#130 is a new guy?
nobody knows that except the solver himself and anyone who claims the opposite is lying, icluding me  |
|
|
|
Or someone simply noticed the lid does more than keep the liquid in.
I have made more progress by simply eliminating parts that it could not be, logistical analysis of key space and just some plain hands-on common sense. Real-world problem solving applied to reducing the key space by logical means. All keys with repeating prefixes, all with more than two repeating characters to list some already mentioned before. I am actively seeking puzzle solutions personally.
I have only been working on these puzzles for perhaps a year with direction and structured aim. I can only imagine what stage most of you all are at if far beyond my new presence is stumbling blindly through.
I do work with ML, tinker with special custom models in attempts to bridge the rational logic beyond the simple prediction, transformers or Berts.
Someone with the knowledge and means to code bug free model training and compile datasets upon which to aim these models.... now that, seems more likely as those able and with enough understanding could be leveraging this emerging technology which is gaining ground and establishing a stable foundation anyone dedicating the time can begin doing in some garage setup.
I'm sure after removing all those false positives. The reduced key space hardly takes a "hidden mathematical genius".
Though all my work is done, on a single graphics card on a laptop. I believe any solutions happening at this moment is due to the collimation of over four years of continual persistence and well mapped logic in isolated sectors, in calculated sub-ranges.
not true for #110 and #115 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
