Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[Anonymous User]

You might be thinking it was a bot. Was the bot programmed to only withdraw 90%, leaving behind 10% of  such a large amount for free? Or was it trained to withdraw 100% so the thief could have all the money at once in their address? Think about it before answering. Who could it possible be ?

From my post on another thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5218972.msg64561048#msg64561048

As for your other questions (again I'm no expert, just an observer):
1. Maybe key finder was a newb and tried to sweep all funds which failed
2. Maybe the replacement transaction was a bot, choosing to only spend 66's largest input with a much higher fee to increase chances it would be accepted into the mempool and be mined
3. Maybe the key finder was an expert, and in a clever and methodical way, intentionally broadcasted the first sweep transaction as well as the replacement transaction of just the largest input, to increase the chances they would at least get the 5.9BTC, and this (may have??) had the effect of causing the mempool to reject any more replacement transaction attempts until the next block was mined and
4. Maybe there were no bots, or if there was, they either weren't running at the time, were not configured properly/not fast enough to get a replacement transaction broadcast to the mempool or the transactions were simply just rejected because of the then-pending existing replacement transaction
5. Maybe the number of possible scenario's that could have played out is as big as the bitcoin keyspace itself, I doubt we will ever really know who/what/when/where/how it happened.

 

And what do you think about solving puzzle 130 just a few days after puzzle 66 was solved? It seems highly unlikely that this was a coincidence. Given the complexity and time normally required to solve these puzzles, the fact that puzzle 130 was solved so quickly after puzzle 66 strongly suggests it was intentionally orchestrated.

It's hard to believe that two such difficult puzzles could be cracked in such close succession without some kind of prior planning or coordination. This leads me to think that the timing was deliberately chosen to generate more attention and hype around the puzzles. The creators may have wanted to stir up more interest and draw more participants by making it seem like these puzzles are being solved at an incredible pace. It feels like part of a larger strategy rather than a random occurrence.

[mcdouglasx]

You might be thinking it was a bot. Was the bot programmed to only withdraw 90%, leaving behind 10% of  such a large amount for free? Or was it trained to withdraw 100% so the thief could have all the money at once in their address? Think about it before answering. Who could it possible be ?

From my post on another thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5218972.msg64561048#msg64561048

As for your other questions (again I'm no expert, just an observer):
1. Maybe key finder was a newb and tried to sweep all funds which failed
2. Maybe the replacement transaction was a bot, choosing to only spend 66's largest input with a much higher fee to increase chances it would be accepted into the mempool and be mined
3. Maybe the key finder was an expert, and in a clever and methodical way, intentionally broadcasted the first sweep transaction as well as the replacement transaction of just the largest input, to increase the chances they would at least get the 5.9BTC, and this (may have??) had the effect of causing the mempool to reject any more replacement transaction attempts until the next block was mined and
4. Maybe there were no bots, or if there was, they either weren't running at the time, were not configured properly/not fast enough to get a replacement transaction broadcast to the mempool or the transactions were simply just rejected because of the then-pending existing replacement transaction
5. Maybe the number of possible scenario's that could have played out is as big as the bitcoin keyspace itself, I doubt we will ever really know who/what/when/where/how it happened.

 

And what do you think about solving puzzle 130 just a few days after puzzle 66 was solved? It seems highly unlikely that this was a coincidence. Given the complexity and time normally required to solve these puzzles, the fact that puzzle 130 was solved so quickly after puzzle 66 strongly suggests it was intentionally orchestrated.

It's hard to believe that two such difficult puzzles could be cracked in such close succession without some kind of prior planning or coordination. This leads me to think that the timing was deliberately chosen to generate more attention and hype around the puzzles. The creators may have wanted to stir up more interest and draw more participants by making it seem like these puzzles are being solved at an incredible pace. It feels like part of a larger strategy rather than a random occurrence.

You see Puzzle 130 as equal to Puzzle 66 because you are only seeing numbers and not the maths behind them. It was actually more likely that Puzzle 130 would be solved before Puzzle 66. Now, it is more likely to solve Puzzle 135 than Puzzle 67. There are mathematical principles behind them capable of reducing the public keys to an adequate environment for the search. This creates a cognitive bias with the numbers. I know this because you say, “Puzzle 130 was solved just a few days after Puzzle 66,” as if no one had been working on it for years.

The challenge of a puzzle without revealed public keys is greater because it involves ECC, SHA-256, and RIPEMD-160. On the other hand, puzzles with revealed public keys only involve maths.

[Anonymous User]

It is simply a crude measuring instrument, of the cracking strength of the community.

Finally, I wish to express appreciation of the efforts of all developers of new cracking tools and technology.  The "large bitcoin collider" is especially innovative and interesting!

Actions the creator should take if he really wants to test the strength of Bitcoin:

Reveal the puzzles already claimed.

This would reduce uncertainty and speculation.

Reveal the public keys (pubkeys) from 110 to 160.

This way, we will know how far he has advanced in the cracking methods. As far as we know, puzzles 130 and 125
could have been just a matter of luck. If he reveals these keys, when the others start to be found, we will know
precisely the progress, and it will also encourage research.

Encourage developers with donations.

He can make sporadic donations to active developers with the best tools. This way, new ideas will be revealed.
Currently, very few want to share their best ideas for fear that a big miner will take them without even thanking them.

Otherwise, this topic will die over time, and the desire to innovate will too.

Ahhh, I see you're the one who said solving puzzles 125 and 130 was just luck. Never mind then.

[mcdouglasx]

It is simply a crude measuring instrument, of the cracking strength of the community.

Finally, I wish to express appreciation of the efforts of all developers of new cracking tools and technology.  The "large bitcoin collider" is especially innovative and interesting!

Actions the creator should take if he really wants to test the strength of Bitcoin:

Reveal the puzzles already claimed.

This would reduce uncertainty and speculation.

Reveal the public keys (pubkeys) from 110 to 160.

This way, we will know how far he has advanced in the cracking methods. As far as we know, puzzles 130 and 125
could have been just a matter of luck. If he reveals these keys, when the others start to be found, we will know
precisely the progress, and it will also encourage research.

Encourage developers with donations.

He can make sporadic donations to active developers with the best tools. This way, new ideas will be revealed.
Currently, very few want to share their best ideas for fear that a big miner will take them without even thanking them.

Otherwise, this topic will die over time, and the desire to innovate will too.

Ahhh, I see you're the one who said solving puzzles 125 and 130 was just luck. Never mind then.

Do I have to teach you how to interpret a text? Because I never made such a statement, and in the context in which I spoke I was quoting the creator. It is impossible to know how much we have advanced without managing all the variables.

[Anonymous User]

This will be my final goodbye, and I want to make my intentions clear to everyone. To those who still don’t see what’s happening, I urge you not to waste your time. Wise individuals learn from the mistakes of others, but if you choose not to, you may end up living with regret for the rest of your life. Take this as a reminder to think carefully about the path you’re on—don’t let time slip away chasing something that leads nowhere.

I also want to take a moment to respect the developers like albert0bsd, JLP and zielar for their contributions to this community.

— Anonymous

[mcdouglasx]

This will be my final goodbye, and I want to make my intentions clear to everyone. To those who still don’t see what’s happening, I urge you not to waste your time. Wise individuals learn from the mistakes of others, but if you choose not to, you may end up living with regret for the rest of your life. Take this as a reminder to think carefully about the path you’re on—don’t let time slip away chasing something that leads nowhere.

I also want to take a moment to respect the developers like albert0bsd, JLP and zielar for their contributions to this community.

— Anonymous

I could make you a huge list of geniuses that were belittled and by then they discovered the "impossible", an example, the inventor of the blue LED.
Science does not know the impossible word, and that you feel in a dead end does not mean that others cannot achieve what you did not do.
Conspiracy theories may seem easier to accept for some people because science can sometimes be complex and difficult to understand.

[citb0in]

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

[albert0bsd]

1.1 high fee over 100

Current Slipstream minumun fee is 10 Sat/vB to be accepted, 100 sat/vB is ten times that amount it is excessive, right?

3. transfer the long TX ID to mara use a high fee 1000

Did you know how signatures Works? Once that you signed one, you can't change the fee amount, Now 1000 sat/vb That is ten times excessive from your previous suggest of 100 sat/vB

4. then it should be very secure!

I never said that, i said that it was the only commercial option available, and its trustfulness need to be tested...

I fired up my rig and found a vanity address for you. Here you go dude
1AkitoSMHosanaQuantumRigxxxunWXyG

Awasome!! Hope your Rigs are still OK.

To be honest with all of you I am also taking some break from answering post messages, emails and telegrams, since the last two puzzles were solved I start to receive an incredible amount of new emails and messages of all kind all of them asking the same again and again... (I am tired of this repetitive shit)

I am going to keep reading the relevant messages in silent.

I am learning GPU CUDA development at deep level. I am also working in some cool ideas and trying to optimize some things.
Currently i have two jobs to cover my daily spends so i have less time to lose with noob messages. But I am still open to new ideas/messages as long those have some of background research and not just assumptions based on "I think that", "I believe that..."

[COBRAS]

If someone thant.


Needs exact a Puzzle  number, split Puzzle number to parts:


D - input pubkey with priv:

0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5

D in dec: 832946130895382117613268982759290465973

puzzle = 7359469092758289261376

combinations of puzzle:

73,59,46,90,92,75,82,89,26,13,76


result privkey of pubkey:

new priv 0x127ec0260e7d0a3 puzz part 76 11
new priv dec 83294613089538211

Code:

N =    115792089237316195423570985008687907852837564279074904382605163141518161494337

def inv(v): return pow(v, N-2, N)
def divnum(a, b): return ( (a * inv(b) ) % N )

i=0
inpu =0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5

w = 0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5

print(hex( 0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5))
g = 2**140
0x949f903e58ad4af7d81efb0ed

0x18ef52683b9ac262340
i = 1

k = 0

h = 0

j =""

while  g >=2**60 and g >= 2**10:
    
    h = h+1
    
    g = divnum(inpu- (i),100)
    
    
    
    
    
    if (g %N ) %N<= 2**220 and (g %N)%N >=0:# and i % 10 == 0:
        
        inpu = g
        
        k = k +1
        print("***start priv",hex(w))
        
        print("***start priv dec",(w))
        
        print("new priv",hex((g%N)%N),"puzz part",i,k)
        print("new priv dec",g)
        
        j = j + str(i) + ","
        
        print("combination",j)
        
        inpu = g
        
        i = 1
        
        #if i == 50: i =0
        
    
        
    #inpu = inpu - i
    if i == 10:
        1
        #i =1
        #print("xxxxx")
    i = i  +1

result:

Code:

0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5
***start priv 0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5
***start priv dec 832946130895382117613268982759290465973
new priv 0x644322636012a5e433de0dabbdb9fd3 puzz part 73 1
new priv dec 8329461308953821176132689827592904659
combination 73,
***start priv 0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5
***start priv dec 832946130895382117613268982759290465973
new priv 0x100abdd275c58b2ec09e68965bcbd6 puzz part 59 2
new priv dec 83294613089538211761326898275929046
combination 73,59,
***start priv 0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5
***start priv dec 832946130895382117613268982759290465973
new priv 0x2911421ac7186e8c2a8b492eff7a puzz part 46 3
new priv dec 832946130895382117613268982759290
combination 73,59,46,
***start priv 0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5
***start priv dec 832946130895382117613268982759290465973
new priv 0x6921f0e8641595e1b497c59708 puzz part 90 4
new priv dec 8329461308953821176132689827592
combination 73,59,46,90,
***start priv 0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5
***start priv dec 832946130895382117613268982759290465973
new priv 0x10d23b067669da8a834b7bc63 puzz part 92 5
new priv dec 83294613089538211761326898275
combination 73,59,46,90,92,
***start priv 0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5
***start priv dec 832946130895382117613268982759290465973
new priv 0x2b0ff343be7fa01ae9b6ff6 puzz part 75 6
new priv dec 832946130895382117613268982
combination 73,59,46,90,92,75,
***start priv 0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5
***start priv dec 832946130895382117613268982759290465973
new priv 0x6e3d500995c199de7f451 puzz part 82 7
new priv dec 8329461308953821176132689
combination 73,59,46,90,92,75,82,
***start priv 0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5
***start priv dec 832946130895382117613268982759290465973
new priv 0x11a368f74b293756ccae puzz part 89 8
new priv dec 83294613089538211761326
combination 73,59,46,90,92,75,82,89,
***start priv 0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5
***start priv dec 832946130895382117613268982759290465973
new priv 0x2d27731ce95f45fced puzz part 26 9
new priv dec 832946130895382117613
combination 73,59,46,90,92,75,82,89,26,
***start priv 0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5
***start priv dec 832946130895382117613268982759290465973
new priv 0x739830edda8d7ff8 puzz part 13 10
new priv dec 8329461308953821176
combination 73,59,46,90,92,75,82,89,26,13,
***start priv 0x272a396ed18748cd2442bd57161ca6eb5
***start priv dec 832946130895382117613268982759290465973
new priv 0x127ec0260e7d0a3 puzz part 76 11
new priv dec 83294613089538211
combination 73,59,46,90,92,75,82,89,26,13,76,

[Program finished]

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

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? 

[eggsylacer]

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.  

To make a transfer you need to specify the address where you want to transfer. To enter an address, all you have to do is press the keys on your keyboard or whatever you're typing the characters with.

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

all you have to do is press the keys on your keyboard or whatever you're typing the characters with.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem

[citb0in]

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 

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

I'm going fishing again.

Seriously?

[nomachine]

I'm going fishing again.

Seriously?

Fishing offers a peaceful connection with nature, allowing the mind to relax and reset, while solving unsolvable BTC puzzles can lead to frustration and mental fatigue. Reduce stress, unlike the endless search for solutions in puzzles that may never yield results. Spending hours in front of a screen on futile tasks drains mental energy.

[bibilgin]

Hello friends,

I have thoughts that the creator of 120 - 125 - and 130 wallets has moved to 3Emiwzxme7Mrj4d89uqohXNncnRM15YESs wallet.

17s2b9ksz5y7abUm92cHwG8jEPCzK3dLnT on 27/02/2023
1PXAyUB8ZoH3WD8n5zoAthYjN15yN5CVq5 on 09/07/2023
1Fo65aKq8s8iquMt6weF1rku1moWVEd5Ua on 24/09/2024

all of these are being transferred to 3Emiwzxme7Mrj4d89uqohXNncnRM15YESs. But for some reason, as of 27/02/2023, not even $1 can be withdrawn or processed? Another person who doesn't need it?

[ihsotas91]

Hello friends,

I have thoughts that the creator of 120 - 125 - and 130 wallets has moved to 3Emiwzxme7Mrj4d89uqohXNncnRM15YESs wallet.

17s2b9ksz5y7abUm92cHwG8jEPCzK3dLnT on 27/02/2023
1PXAyUB8ZoH3WD8n5zoAthYjN15yN5CVq5 on 09/07/2023
1Prestige1zSYorBdz94KA2UbJW3hYLTn4 on 24/09/2024

all of these are being transferred to 3Emiwzxme7Mrj4d89uqohXNncnRM15YESs. But for some reason, as of 27/02/2023, not even $1 can be withdrawn or processed? Another person who doesn't need it?

What I do not understand is they are not even converting it to USDT or trading with some other coins etc.
So it is not about anonymity. Most probably does not need it..

[albert0bsd]

it all depends on your offer  

Looks that somebody just offer a single satoshi: https://mempool.space/address/1AkitoSMHosanaQuantumRigxxxunWXyG

So it is not about anonymity. Most probably does not need it..

HODL!!!

There are so many conspiracy theories driven by the frustrations of those users.

Somebody said that there is no enough power to solve those challenges. I have some word for them, cloud-computing even if that was used without the permission of the owner of those servers, the computing capacity is there and exist without any doubt.

Some other claim about not wasting or move that balance, Maybe they are waiting to bitcoin new highs to recover its investments.
Maybe there are private sponsors paying for that computing power we don't know.
Maybe is some one with a lot of GPUs in a country where electricity is cheap, stolen or free. (I've been reached by people working in gas and oil industries that are trying to pivot to crypto using their excess of energy available from burning gas)

There is a endless of possibilities about the reason of not moving that balance.

I reached out to the creator personally over PM on September 16, initially to defend him from some unfair criticism. I asked questions and made suggestions about the project, such as revealing more information to reduce speculation and encouraging developers. Unfortunately, I didn’t receive a direct response from him.

Hahaha and you seriously expected that him is going to answer you?
He is not going to reply to ANYONE....

Just imagine having access to thousand of bitcoin and you create some challenge like this, and you start to replying to random strangers over internet, they may try to trick you to enter some links and they will try to record your IP, your browser vulnerabilities and other nasty stuff...

Please you mention that you are based in logic to reach some fallacy conclusions, and you don't see the logic to see that the author of that challenge is not going to answer to anyone?

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

Hahaha and you seriously expected that him is going to answer you?
He is not going to reply to ANYONE....

Just imagine having access to thousand of bitcoin and you create some challenge like this, and you start to replying to random strangers over internet, they may try to trick you to enter some links and they will try to record your IP, your browser vulnerabilities and other nasty stuff...

Please you mention that you are based in logic to reach some fallacy conclusions, and you don't see the logic to see that the author of that challenge is not going to answer to anyone?

I appreciate your perspective, and you're right that it can be risky for the creator to engage with everyone. However, my intention wasn't to seek personal engagement or easy answers. I joined the discussion because I find the intellectual challenge intriguing and wanted to contribute my thoughts.

While I don't expect the creator to respond, I believe it’s reasonable to offer feedback, especially to counter unfair criticism. Even though the puzzles are designed to be incredibly difficult, I value the process of attempting to solve them. Perhaps I’m being a bit naive in thinking that personal outreach could make a difference, but I still believe in the importance of constructive dialogue in these kinds of situations.

[Anonymous User]

Hey Akito, based on my analysis, none of the developers have come forward to address this. The sequence of events (dates of decisions, prize increases) seems suspicious. For them, it will always remain a theory without proper evidence. Either they fear backlash or worry that no one will use or respect the code they spent thousands of hours developing and sharing for the community. If one of the developers admits this was orchestrated by the creator, thousands of people could lose interest, and no one would care about the puzzle anymore.

I believe the creator of this puzzle is watching every single conversation. If someone actually solved 120, 125, and 130, the creator would at least be curious about who cracked them. After all, they invested 1,000 BTC into this puzzle and would want to know what code and math were used to break it.

And if the creator orchestrated all of this, they probably don’t even care about joining the conversation or addressing all the backlash they're receiving.

I am not pinpointing any specific developers—this is just my analysis or, as they always say, a theory.