dextronomous
|
 |
January 12, 2024, 01:59:50 AM Last edit: January 12, 2024, 08:09:46 AM by hilariousandco |
|
Added mod 013 https://github.com/alek76-2/VanitySearch/tree/main/mod/013Added Path - m/0'/0'/66' For 32 BTC Puzzle Use SSE2 instructions - default VanitySearch code / Disable SSE cmd: -nosse Initial SEED extension to 64 bits GPU Added rotation - #define NB_SPIN 16 Modification file GPUHash.h The speed on the Tesla T4 GPU is 670.98 Mkeys/s If Use GPU Rekey multiple by 1000 RUN CMD: VanitySearch.exe -stop -nosse -verbose 1 -level 0 -t 1 -bits 66 -r 10 13zb1hQbWVsc2S7ZTZnP2G4undNNpdh5so
VanitySearch.exe -stop -t 0 -nosse -o Result.txt -verbose 1 -level 0 -gpu -r 500000000 -bits 66 13zb1hQbWVsc2S7ZTZnP2G4undNNpdh5so
Added play sound buzzer.wav in Windows version  p.s. The binaries assemble everything themselves. Bro thanks again, will test, but is it still present somewhere the bip39_english.h and Winm.lib
|
|
|
|
alek76
Member

Offline
Activity: 93
Merit: 16
|
 |
January 12, 2024, 02:12:26 AM Last edit: January 12, 2024, 10:53:46 AM by alek76 |
|
Bro thanks again, will test, but is it still present somewhere the bip39_english.h and Winm.lib
Added in VanitySearch.vcxproj <AdditionalDependencies> Winmm.lib; Wordlist_en.h in folder 013 commented - not use. Just uploaded bip39_english.h. Thank you. Forgot to copy  They differ only in the sizes of the rows, the array is the same here and there. If the countdown starts from zero, then you can change keyIndex = 65; Replace: keyIndex = (uint32_t)TARGET_KEY_BITS;// BITS 66
To: keyIndex = (uint32_t)TARGET_KEY_BITS - 1;// BITS 66
Or any: keyIndex = 65;
it will be a patch - m/0'/0'/65' But we still don’t know the patch.
|
|
|
|
mabdlmonem
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 37
Merit: 1
|
 |
January 12, 2024, 10:19:05 AM |
|
The beginning of private key for 130 is 0x3
You are already stuck with your guesses! Stop spreading spam! Ok!
|
|
|
|
FlleOWA
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
 |
January 12, 2024, 12:11:46 PM |
|
By the way, I didn’t find any discussion of the public key, the owner of this puzzle, in the topic.
Do you mean to say this by chance?
024b0faa9624763002e963816b2f6774df0dedd770896a9511cb5c9d90f674ecda
It is clear that a letter is missing, but even such a combination is too much for an accident.
|
|
|
|
PrivatePerson
Member

Offline
Activity: 174
Merit: 12
|
 |
January 16, 2024, 05:09:07 PM |
|
I can't figure out how to calculate the ccap=20 parameter? I have an RTX 4050 Laptop. Help please. ./deviceQuery ./deviceQuery Starting...
CUDA Device Query (Runtime API) version (CUDART static linking)
Detected 1 CUDA Capable device(s)
Device 0: "NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPU" CUDA Driver Version / Runtime Version 12.3 / 12.3 CUDA Capability Major/Minor version number: 8.9 Total amount of global memory: 6140 MBytes (6438780928 bytes) (020) Multiprocessors, (128) CUDA Cores/MP: 2560 CUDA Cores GPU Max Clock rate: 2055 MHz (2.06 GHz) Memory Clock rate: 8001 Mhz Memory Bus Width: 96-bit L2 Cache Size: 25165824 bytes Maximum Texture Dimension Size (x,y,z) 1D=(131072), 2D=(131072, 65536), 3D=(16384, 16384, 16384) Maximum Layered 1D Texture Size, (num) layers 1D=(32768), 2048 layers Maximum Layered 2D Texture Size, (num) layers 2D=(32768, 32768), 2048 layers Total amount of constant memory: 65536 bytes Total amount of shared memory per block: 49152 bytes Total shared memory per multiprocessor: 102400 bytes Total number of registers available per block: 65536 Warp size: 32 Maximum number of threads per multiprocessor: 1536 Maximum number of threads per block: 1024 Max dimension size of a thread block (x,y,z): (1024, 1024, 64) Max dimension size of a grid size (x,y,z): (2147483647, 65535, 65535) Maximum memory pitch: 2147483647 bytes Texture alignment: 512 bytes Concurrent copy and kernel execution: Yes with 1 copy engine(s) Run time limit on kernels: Yes Integrated GPU sharing Host Memory: No Support host page-locked memory mapping: Yes Alignment requirement for Surfaces: Yes Device has ECC support: Disabled Device supports Unified Addressing (UVA): Yes Device supports Managed Memory: Yes Device supports Compute Preemption: Yes Supports Cooperative Kernel Launch: Yes Supports MultiDevice Co-op Kernel Launch: No Device PCI Domain ID / Bus ID / location ID: 0 / 1 / 0 Compute Mode: < Default (multiple host threads can use ::cudaSetDevice() with device simultaneously) >
deviceQuery, CUDA Driver = CUDART, CUDA Driver Version = 12.3, CUDA Runtime Version = 12.3, NumDevs = 1 Result = PASS
|
|
|
|
citb0in
|
I can't figure out how to calculate the ccap=20 parameter? I have an RTX 4050 Laptop. Help please. This is architecture "Ada Lovelace", you need 8.9 so use ccap=89 in your compiling task. In case you have no success try downgrading and use max CUDA 11.8. However I wish you best of luck and success. citb0in
|
_ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ |_) | / \ / |/ (_ / \ | \ / |_ |_) (_ |_) |_ \_/ \_ |\ __) \_/ |_ \/ |_ | \ __) --> citb0in Solo-Mining Group <--- low stake of only 0.001 BTC. We regularly rent about 5 PH/s hash power and direct it to SoloCK pool. Wanna know more? Read through the link and JOIN NOW
|
|
|
alek76
Member

Offline
Activity: 93
Merit: 16
|
 |
January 17, 2024, 03:05:04 AM Last edit: January 17, 2024, 04:03:47 AM by alek76 Merited by PrivatePerson (1) |
|
I can't figure out how to calculate the ccap=20 parameter? I have an RTX 4050 Laptop. Help please. This is architecture "Ada Lovelace", you need 8.9 so use ccap=89 in your compiling task. In case you have no success try downgrading and use max CUDA 11.8. However I wish you best of luck and success. citb0in and edit GPUEngine.cu; 4 lines are commented out; they are not in version 10.2. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1306983.msg63128300#msg63128300
|
|
|
|
Stanislav01
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 1
Merit: 0
|
 |
January 17, 2024, 02:48:41 PM |
|
Can you tell me if I'm calculating the range scan time correctly for the 130 puzzle?
Time = (End Range - Start Range) / (Speed * 60 * 60 * 24 * 365)
Start Range = 200000000000000000000000000000000 (hex); 680564733841876926926749214863536422912 (decimal) End Range = 400000000000000000000000000000000 (hex); 1361129467683753853853498429727072845824 (decimal) Speed = 100 Ekeys/s
Time = (1361129467683753853853498429727072845824 - 680564733841876926926749214863536422912) / (100000000000000000000*60*60*24*365) = 215 805 661 416 years
|
|
|
|
Woz2000
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 85
Merit: 2
|
 |
January 17, 2024, 03:49:17 PM |
|
My math concurs. Can you tell me if I'm calculating the range scan time correctly for the 130 puzzle?
Time = (End Range - Start Range) / (Speed * 60 * 60 * 24 * 365)
Start Range = 200000000000000000000000000000000 (hex); 680564733841876926926749214863536422912 (decimal) End Range = 400000000000000000000000000000000 (hex); 1361129467683753853853498429727072845824 (decimal) Speed = 100 Ekeys/s
Time = (1361129467683753853853498429727072845824 - 680564733841876926926749214863536422912) / (100000000000000000000*60*60*24*365) = 215 805 661 416 years
|
|
|
|
nomachine
Member

Online
Activity: 507
Merit: 38
|
 |
January 17, 2024, 10:14:55 PM |
|
215 805 661 416 years
Your calculation is correct. With 100 Ekeys/s would take an incredibly long time. That is unbreakable even at that speed. Speed needed for a 130 range scan time of 5 minutes is approximately 719,000,000 Ekeys/s. 
|
bc1qdwnxr7s08xwelpjy3cc52rrxg63xsmagv50fa8
|
|
|
NAKAMOT0
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 3
Merit: 0
|
 |
January 18, 2024, 04:31:37 AM Last edit: January 18, 2024, 04:49:38 AM by NAKAMOT0 |
|
I can give you some clues for this problem and you can reflect on it... *Addresses are in order. *Addresses are not random. * Addresses always have PVK values that differ by one PVK value. * There is a pattern.
The key is to use the common factor within each address pair and its PVK value.
A common factor between addresses 1 and 2 is that their PVK value is equal to 3.
A common factor between addresses 3 and 4 is that their PVK value is equal to 7.
A common factor between addresses 5 and 6 is that their PVK value is equal to 21.
Etc...
PVK values are always in a mathematical progression (in this case, I don't like to use the word "sequence") that appears to be in a progression of prime numbers.
* What is important is not the PVK values but the mathematical relationship between the PVK values. *Addresses are in a progression of prime numbers. *The addresses are always in order. * There is always a relationship between the PVK value of the following addresses.
*PVK values do not always have to be prime numbers. * PVK addresses are always generated mathematically and never randomly. * Don't look for the answer in the Bitcoin blockchain.
* Think of the relationship between the directions as the common factor between two very large prime numbers. * The equation to be solved for the PVK values is a unique mathematical solution. *Also remember that PVK addresses are always in order.
*The key is the PVK value pattern. * The pattern goes beyond PVK values.
* Use a mathematical relationship between the PVK values to calculate the PVK values of the directions in the depressed progressions.
Some clues are a little more ambiguous, but if you think about it it can give you a little idea of how to decipher the directions in this case. I can't give you more information about the exact formula behind all this for security reasons, but I hope you have fun and someone very special sends you greetings. ✌️
|
|
|
|
mcdouglasx
|
 |
January 18, 2024, 05:46:02 AM Last edit: January 18, 2024, 06:37:55 AM by mcdouglasx |
|
I can give you some clues for this problem and you can reflect on it... *Addresses are in order. *Addresses are not random. * Addresses always have PVK values that differ by one PVK value. * There is a pattern.
The key is to use the common factor within each address pair and its PVK value.
A common factor between addresses 1 and 2 is that their PVK value is equal to 3.
A common factor between addresses 3 and 4 is that their PVK value is equal to 7.
A common factor between addresses 5 and 6 is that their PVK value is equal to 21.
Etc...
PVK values are always in a mathematical progression (in this case, I don't like to use the word "sequence") that appears to be in a progression of prime numbers.
* What is important is not the PVK values but the mathematical relationship between the PVK values. *Addresses are in a progression of prime numbers. *The addresses are always in order. * There is always a relationship between the PVK value of the following addresses.
*PVK values do not always have to be prime numbers. * PVK addresses are always generated mathematically and never randomly. * Don't look for the answer in the Bitcoin blockchain.
* Think of the relationship between the directions as the common factor between two very large prime numbers. * The equation to be solved for the PVK values is a unique mathematical solution. *Also remember that PVK addresses are always in order.
*The key is the PVK value pattern. * The pattern goes beyond PVK values.
* Use a mathematical relationship between the PVK values to calculate the PVK values of the directions in the depressed progressions.
Some clues are a little more ambiguous, but if you think about it it can give you a little idea of how to decipher the directions in this case. I can't give you more information about the exact formula behind all this for security reasons, but I hope you have fun and someone very special sends you greetings. ✌️
If you are satoshi try it by sending me 1 btc, just kidding. Your analysis is very interesting, friend. edit: My doubt is that I believe that there is no common factor for 5 and 6 to have a result of 21.
|
|
|
|
NAKAMOT0
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 3
Merit: 0
|
 |
January 18, 2024, 08:07:09 AM |
|
You are right, the common factor for PVK addresses is not just the difference in PVK values.
I will tell you a mathematical relationship between PVK values that can be easily calculated.
The PVK value of address 5 is 21 because address 4 has a PVK of 8, and address 5 is the next first value after 4. So, 21 = PVK 5 = PVK 4 + 8.
Do you understand? If you still don't understand, I'll give you another example. Suppose we are looking for the PVK value of address 7. We know that the PVK value of address 6 is 49.
We understand that the PVK value of address 7 is = to the nearest prime number after 49. The next prime number after 49 is 61.
So address 7 is at PVK 61.
Now you understand?
|
|
|
|
dextronomous
|
 |
January 18, 2024, 08:45:32 AM |
|
again but probably another digaran version? really clear presentation, of it's own toughts on how to calculate this puzzle, get it..
|
|
|
|
nomachine
Member

Online
Activity: 507
Merit: 38
|
 |
January 18, 2024, 09:40:41 AM Last edit: January 18, 2024, 10:33:30 AM by nomachine |
|
Now you understand?
I've enlisted the help of my imaginary friends, Fibonacci and Euclid, for an epic escapade through the primeval forest of PVK values and the enigmatic realm of depressed progressions. Armed with nothing but a slide rule and a cat's evil eye, we've sacrificed Netflix binging to decode cryptographic riddles, as the crypto-gods eagerly await our impending mathematical breakthrough. Let's ride the prime number rollercoaster together and unveil the grand secret hidden within the pattern that goes beyond PVK values. I'm convinced we're on the verge of a breakthrough that will shake the foundations of mathematical academia. The pulse of the prime force guides our quest, and we stand on the cusp of a revelation that promises to echo through the corridors of intellectual history. Get ready for the revelation of the century! Cheers to the thrilling adventure of PVK values and their clandestine connections. May the prime force be with us! 
|
bc1qdwnxr7s08xwelpjy3cc52rrxg63xsmagv50fa8
|
|
|
GR Sasa
Member

Offline
Activity: 200
Merit: 14
|
 |
January 18, 2024, 10:08:36 AM Last edit: January 18, 2024, 10:54:52 AM by GR Sasa |
|
You are right, the common factor for PVK addresses is not just the difference in PVK values.
I will tell you a mathematical relationship between PVK values that can be easily calculated.
The PVK value of address 5 is 21 because address 4 has a PVK of 8, and address 5 is the next first value after 4. So, 21 = PVK 5 = PVK 4 + 8.
Do you understand? If you still don't understand, I'll give you another example. Suppose we are looking for the PVK value of address 7. We know that the PVK value of address 6 is 49.
We understand that the PVK value of address 7 is = to the nearest prime number after 49. The next prime number after 49 is 61.
So address 7 is at PVK 61.
Now you understand?
If you are the creator could you please sign a something to prove us? Alternative you can increase the puzzle by 10x again. The Creator said once in 2017, that there is not an pattern. Now you are saying the opposite, so how would we believe you if you didn't prove yourself and you aren't digaran? EDIT: We understand that the PVK value of address 7 is = to the nearest prime number after 49. The next prime number after 49 is 61.
Wrong? The next prime number after 49 is 53.
|
|
|
|
nomachine
Member

Online
Activity: 507
Merit: 38
|
 |
January 18, 2024, 10:52:40 AM Last edit: January 18, 2024, 11:14:29 AM by nomachine |
|
probably another digaran version?
It's amazing how persistent he is in his imagination. It turns out that the real Satoshi Nakamoto has been living a double life. The digaran mysterious genius behind it all.  If you are the creator could you please sign a something to prove us? Alternative you can increase the puzzle by 10x again.
Why would anyone prove anything when we already have a verified creator: A few words about the puzzle. There is no pattern. It is just consecutive keys from a deterministic wallet (masked with leading 000...0001 to set difficulty).
|
bc1qdwnxr7s08xwelpjy3cc52rrxg63xsmagv50fa8
|
|
|
kalos15btc
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 50
Merit: 1
|
 |
January 18, 2024, 11:31:59 AM |
|
im asking the admin to ban digran and his multiple accounts, this thread become useless with his useless ideas @modeator, verify those replies you will find the same ip address
|
|
|
|
AlanJohnson
Member

Offline
Activity: 126
Merit: 11
|
 |
January 18, 2024, 01:03:18 PM Last edit: January 18, 2024, 03:31:38 PM by AlanJohnson |
|
Gee... it's getting worse with him ... He is not only mad but also thinks he is Satoshi Nakamoto now...
|
|
|
|
mcdouglasx
|
 |
January 18, 2024, 01:58:21 PM |
|
You are right, the common factor for PVK addresses is not just the difference in PVK values.
I will tell you a mathematical relationship between PVK values that can be easily calculated.
The PVK value of address 5 is 21 because address 4 has a PVK of 8, and address 5 is the next first value after 4. So, 21 = PVK 5 = PVK 4 + 8.
Do you understand? If you still don't understand, I'll give you another example. Suppose we are looking for the PVK value of address 7. We know that the PVK value of address 6 is 49.
We understand that the PVK value of address 7 is = to the nearest prime number after 49. The next prime number after 49 is 61.
So address 7 is at PVK 61.
Now you understand?
Satoshi is too busy doing things about gods to be commenting here on the theories of mere mortals. What you're telling me is that as if I were saying the following. Address 2, pvk decimal value: 3 Address 3, pvk decimal value: 7 Address 4, pvk decimal value: 8 Address 5, pvk decimal value: 21 Address 6, pvk decimal value: 49 Address 7, pvk decimal value: 76 Address 8, pvk decimal value: 224 Address 9, pvk decimal value: 467 Address 10, pvk decimal value: 514 9 and 10 =467 because 9*10 = (90 + (224 + 76 + 49 + 21 + 8 )) - 1= 467 What I did was create a mathematical pattern, conveniently to get the value I want, but this is just an illusion. Therefore, I don't see much sense in your explanation. I'm not one to judge, but in science we speak with evidence.
|
|
|
|
|