Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[Dom1nic]

@Bram24732

So from big to small, everyone here, and all the cryptographers involved with the puzzle who aren’t with you, we are sub 1% 

Yes. That is what we consider in our modelling.
You are free to disagree of course.

The sub 1% that’s a great pitch for your investors.
If I find the key soon, I’ll move the funds after 60 days. )

[Bram24732]

@Bram24732

So from big to small, everyone here, and all the cryptographers involved with the puzzle who aren’t with you, we are sub 1% 

Yes. That is what we consider in our modelling.
You are free to disagree of course.

The sub 1% that’s a great pitch for your investors.
If I find the key soon, I’ll move the funds after 60 days. )

Not really a pitch. They are already convinced by 2 wins. It’s just an additional data point.

[Ovixx]

Okay, thanks for the hate, I guess — but can you show me even one person who’s getting this kind of speed on a CPU like mine?
https://ibb.co/VYP4vh7h

https://talkimg.com/images/2025/04/09/xSja5.png

keyhunt ? 

Yes 

[Ovixx]

Okay, thanks for the hate, I guess — but can you show me even one person who’s getting this kind of speed on a CPU like mine?
https://ibb.co/VYP4vh7h

https://talkimg.com/images/2025/04/09/xSja5.png

i got 30Ekeys and the chances between p69 and p135 cannot be compared, why go for 135 and not 69 i dont get it

Because anyone has the right to scan in whatever range or puzzle they want, without the opinion of others. Some members of this forum are under the impression that they have discovered patterns, that they have "clues" about private keys, with the claim that they have accomplished great mathematical achievements. The truth is, the main factors that can lead to success in this puzzle are processing power, how to choose the ranges and a bit of luck. The rest is bullshit and useless chatter.
If someone also invests a lot of money to rent GPU farms just for "sporting glory", it's their choice, but my guess is that after they draw the line and make the balance sheet, they will remain "sporty".

[Desyationer]

Yes. Theoretically, you need at least 1TB. I've never tried more than 60. Anything around 300GB is considered a baby table. I don't have time to wait for a bigger one to be generated.  

Why are you publishing all the scripts from before now?

Because it's a dead end. Game over. There's no point in hiding any more scripts for the puzzles  - whether they're useful or not. For Puzzle 69, you're over 2,500 GPUs. For Puzzle 71, over 3,000.

What are you guys planning to do now ?  Is something similar to bitcoin puzzle out there to hunt ?  

https://privatekeys.pw/puzzles/0.2-btc-puzzle
https://privatekeys.pw/puzzles/0.01-btc-corey-phillips-puzzle
https://privatekeys.pw/puzzles/gsmg-puzzle
https://privatekeys.pw/puzzles/0.03-btc-coinmonks-puzzle
https://privatekeys.pw/puzzles/0.005-btc-lvl5-puzzle
https://privatekeys.pw/puzzles/2-btc-rushwallet-puzzle

It must be pretty funny to put some BTC on an address ... then announce some stupid picture or something and tell people it's a "puzzle"  when in fact it's just bullshit and they are wasting their time.

In this case, the creator's credibility plays an important role. If the puzzles were made by someone well-known, like Elon Musk, then it would be much more likely that they are genuine challenges with real solutions and a prize at the end. Otherwise, there's a risk that it's just a meaningless set of riddles with no answer or reward, designed only to mock those who try to solve them. Since the creator is anonymous, anyone could pose as such an "author" and take pleasure in watching others struggle.
Is the creator of these puzzles known?

[Ovixx]

Yes. Theoretically, you need at least 1TB. I've never tried more than 60. Anything around 300GB is considered a baby table. I don't have time to wait for a bigger one to be generated.  

Why are you publishing all the scripts from before now?

Because it's a dead end. Game over. There's no point in hiding any more scripts for the puzzles  - whether they're useful or not. For Puzzle 69, you're over 2,500 GPUs. For Puzzle 71, over 3,000.

What are you guys planning to do now ?  Is something similar to bitcoin puzzle out there to hunt ?  

https://privatekeys.pw/puzzles/0.2-btc-puzzle
https://privatekeys.pw/puzzles/0.01-btc-corey-phillips-puzzle
https://privatekeys.pw/puzzles/gsmg-puzzle
https://privatekeys.pw/puzzles/0.03-btc-coinmonks-puzzle
https://privatekeys.pw/puzzles/0.005-btc-lvl5-puzzle
https://privatekeys.pw/puzzles/2-btc-rushwallet-puzzle

It must be pretty funny to put some BTC on an address ... then announce some stupid picture or something and tell people it's a "puzzle"  when in fact it's just bullshit and they are wasting their time.

In this case, the creator's credibility plays an important role. If the puzzles were made by someone well-known, like Elon Musk, then it would be much more likely that they are genuine challenges with real solutions and a prize at the end. Otherwise, there's a risk that it's just a meaningless set of riddles with no answer or reward, designed only to mock those who try to solve them. Since the creator is anonymous, anyone could pose as such an "author" and take pleasure in watching others struggle.
Is the creator of these puzzles known?

But how do you implicate Elon Musk in anything? for now he's in a big hole where he's lost billions.

[kTimesG]

Okay, thanks for the hate, I guess — but can you show me even one person who’s getting this kind of speed on a CPU like mine?
https://ibb.co/VYP4vh7h

i got 30Ekeys and the chances between p69 and p135 cannot be compared, why go for 135 and not 69 i dont get it

I have great news! You can compare the chances between puzzle 69 and puzzle 135. You will discover that 135 is actually easier to solve than 69, by an edge of around 50% (when factoring in the GK/s processing advantage).

[E36cat]

Okay, thanks for the hate, I guess — but can you show me even one person who’s getting this kind of speed on a CPU like mine?
https://ibb.co/VYP4vh7h

https://talkimg.com/images/2025/04/09/xSja5.png

i got 30Ekeys and the chances between p69 and p135 cannot be compared, why go for 135 and not 69 i dont get it

I have great news! You can compare the chances between puzzle 69 and puzzle 135. You will discover that 135 is actually easier to solve than 69, by an edge of around 50% (when factoring in the GK/s processing advantage).

i use privatekeys.pw calculator for puzzle 135 with 30Ekeys i get 13802108831432.087 years , for puzzle 69 with 400Mkeys i get 46763.364 years (same server)

[Ovixx]

Okay, thanks for the hate, I guess — but can you show me even one person who’s getting this kind of speed on a CPU like mine?
https://ibb.co/VYP4vh7h

https://talkimg.com/images/2025/04/09/xSja5.png

i got 30Ekeys and the chances between p69 and p135 cannot be compared, why go for 135 and not 69 i dont get it

I have great news! You can compare the chances between puzzle 69 and puzzle 135. You will discover that 135 is actually easier to solve than 69, by an edge of around 50% (when factoring in the GK/s processing advantage).

i use privatekeys.pw calculator for puzzle 135 with 30Ekeys i get 13802108831432.087 years , for puzzle 69 with 400Mkeys i get 46763.364 years (same server)

Just as you can discover the pvkey in the millions or billions of years that the calculator estimates, you can find the private key in the first five minutes, five hours, or five months. Depends where you're looking for.

[farou9]

I'm a bit tired with the quotes and marks, and plans to find P69 and P71 in the next days.
But yes, if I had a GPU farm I probably would to the same. Even with a simple python script
I would do something miraculous, say, with around 1000 CPUS?

@NoMachine1: Now it is official...   Thanks for your Cyclone version. And I think you are exagerating the BSGS maths. Python and ICE(LAND) are much more flexible regarding the size of the precomputed table, or even Alberto's BSGS or BSGSD (the server version)


This is a BSGS version for P135. You'll need ICELAND's latest Python library. Have fun!
For those who want to know: STRIDE in this case means the number of keys that are being scanned at once.
So, each times that cursor shows the new UP and DOWN, there were been scanned 0x10000000000 x 100000 (x2 fronts) [in around 10 seconds]
This is Python, baby!   <3

Code:

# 24.02.25
# @AlphaCentury AKA @ByThePowerOfSha AKA @POD5 AKA @Whatever
# BSGS on the rocks

import secp256k1 as ice

# Do this the first time you run the script and then uncomment both lines
#ice.bsgs_2nd_check_prepare(10000000000)
#ice.dump_bsgs_2nd('file_2nd_dump_10000000000.bin', True)

# Load the BSGS 2nd file
ice.load_bsgs_2nd('file_2nd_dump_10000000000.bin', True)

# Define the ranges
end_range_down = 0x400000037a3a9c673017fb17c96349ec13  # Lower search limit
middle_point = 0x5ffb2a127827aef098d9d61fb1cc162ba7 # STEP = 0x55f336924d605de21ba40feaffc 0x6000000000000000000000000000000000  # Starting point for both fronts
end_range_up = 0x7ffffffffffffffffffffffffffceea7a7  # Upper search limit

# Number of keys per segment
num_keys = 100_000_000

# Step size per iteration
step_size = 0
step_size = 0x55f336924d605de21ba40feaffc #(end_range_up - middle_point) // num_keys  
# Stride increment after each full round
stride = 0x10000000000

# Target public key
Q = bytes.fromhex("04145d2611c823a396ef6712ce0f712f09b9b4f3135e3e0aa3230fb9b6d08d1e16667a05e9a1bdd6f70142b66558bd12ce2c0f9cbc7001b20c8a6a109c80dc5330")

# Initialize round and iteration counters
round_num = 55 # Initialize round here
iteration = 87600000 # 0 # Initialize iteration here
print_interval = 100_000 # print after each 100_000 iterations

while True:
    # Calculate the starting private keys
    start_pvk_up = middle_point + step_size * iteration + stride * round_num
    start_pvk_down = middle_point - step_size * iteration - stride * round_num

    # Stop conditions
    if start_pvk_up >= end_range_up and start_pvk_down <= end_range_down:
        print("End of search range reached.")
        break

    # Check for matches
    found_up, key_up = ice.bsgs_2nd_check(Q, start_pvk_up)
    found_down, key_down = ice.bsgs_2nd_check(Q, start_pvk_down)

    # Print progress
    if iteration % print_interval == 0:
        print(f"R: {round_num}, I: {iteration}: Up: {hex(start_pvk_up)}, Down: {hex(start_pvk_down)}")
        with open("rounds_log_TwoFronts_P135.txt", "a") as f:
            f.write(f"ROUND {round_num}, Iteration 0, Up: {hex(start_pvk_up)}, Down: {hex(start_pvk_down)}\n")

    # If found, write to file and exit
    if found_up:
        with open("found_key.txt", "a") as f:
            f.write(f"Found (Upward): {key_up.hex()}\n")
        print("Found (Upward):", key_up.hex())
        break

    if found_down:
        with open("found_key.txt", "a") as f:
            f.write(f"Found (Downward): {key_down.hex()}\n")
        print("Found (Downward):", key_down.hex())
        break

    iteration += 1  # Increment iteration

    # If we reach num_keys, move to the next round
    if iteration >= num_keys:
        round_num += 1  # Increment round number
        iteration = 0  # Reset iteration count for the next round


# ROUND 0, Iteration 0, Up: 0x5ffb2a127827aef098d9d61fb1cc162ba7, Down: 0x5ffb2a127827aef098d9d61fb1cc162ba7
# ROUND 1, Iteration 0, Up: 0x5ffb2a127827aef098d9d620b1cc162ba7, Down: 0x5ffb2a127827aef098d9d61eb1cc162ba7
...
# ROUND 55, Iteration 0, Up: 0x5ffb2a127827aef098d9d656b1cc162ba7, Down: 0x5ffb2a127827aef098d9d5e8b1cc162ba7
# ROUND 56, Iteration 0, Up: ...

And now you also know, how people are finding the low range puzzles so fast: Not because of the speed, but because of the maths beyound it...  
Fuck the money, I want my life back...  

  how much speed does this script give or specifically how much time for 100 bit key ?

[kTimesG]

I have great news! You can compare the chances between puzzle 69 and puzzle 135. You will discover that 135 is actually easier to solve than 69, by an edge of around 50% (when factoring in the GK/s processing advantage).

i use privatekeys.pw calculator for puzzle 135 with 30Ekeys i get 13802108831432.087 years , for puzzle 69 with 400Mkeys i get 46763.364 years (same server)

Oh no, 30 ExaKeys/s to solve 135 takes 1000 times the age of the Universe?

Do you have access to a piece of paper and a pencil? Maybe solve for this:

- number of operations: 1.7 * 2**67
- speed: [whatever you can afford] ops/second

As a hint: a single RTX 4090 has [whatever you can afford] around 10.5 GK/s
Another hint: a single core of a medium-grade CPU has [whatever you can afford] around 15 MK/s

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

single RTX 4090 has around 10.5 GK/s

HOW MANY GPU YOU HAVE??
[3000 RTX 4090s go BRRRRR = 31.5 TK/s]
[10,000 RTX 4090s = 105 TK/s = ELON MUSK SUPERCLUSTER]
ME? [crying soyface] I HAVE GT 1030…
ELON? [gigachad pose] HE HAS A GPU MOUNTAIN!!!

(Bonus: If you want the meme visualized, imagine a crying soyjack next to a towering GPU pyramid with Elon’s face shining in the background.)

 

[E36cat]

I have great news! You can compare the chances between puzzle 69 and puzzle 135. You will discover that 135 is actually easier to solve than 69, by an edge of around 50% (when factoring in the GK/s processing advantage).

i use privatekeys.pw calculator for puzzle 135 with 30Ekeys i get 13802108831432.087 years , for puzzle 69 with 400Mkeys i get 46763.364 years (same server)

Oh no, 30 ExaKeys/s to solve 135 takes 1000 times the age of the Universe?

Do you have access to a piece of paper and a pencil? Maybe solve for this:

- number of operations: 1.7 * 2**67
- speed: [whatever you can afford] ops/second

As a hint: a single RTX 4090 has [whatever you can afford] around 10.5 GK/s
Another hint: a single core of a medium-grade CPU has [whatever you can afford] around 15 MK/s

you are comparing speed of 1 rtx4090 with speed of one CPU / compare the prices and electricity also not only the speed
i was just saying that chances (even it takes milions trilions of years dont matter) but the chances are better with 1 GPU/CPU to scan for p69 than p135

[nomachine]

HE HAS A GPU MOUNTAIN!!!

I have the BIGGEST ONE.



FISHING ROD.  


P.S. The topic turned into who has the bigger one. (a pi*sing contest)

[zahid888]

Where to rent CPU ?

[deep_seek]

https://www.talkimg.com/images/2025/04/09/xZPmc.gif

Where to rent CPU ?

Can I use it ? Encrypted or Normal doesn't matter!

[zahid888]

Can I use it ? Encrypted or Normal doesn't matter!

Lol.. No worries — I’ll be posting the clean version with source code on GitHub soon. After all, the puzzle journey has already come to an end.

[kTimesG]

I have great news! You can compare the chances between puzzle 69 and puzzle 135. You will discover that 135 is actually easier to solve than 69, by an edge of around 50% (when factoring in the GK/s processing advantage).

i use privatekeys.pw calculator for puzzle 135 with 30Ekeys i get 13802108831432.087 years , for puzzle 69 with 400Mkeys i get 46763.364 years (same server)

Oh no, 30 ExaKeys/s to solve 135 takes 1000 times the age of the Universe?

Do you have access to a piece of paper and a pencil? Maybe solve for this:

- number of operations: 1.7 * 2**67
- speed: [whatever you can afford] ops/second

As a hint: a single RTX 4090 has [whatever you can afford] around 10.5 GK/s
Another hint: a single core of a medium-grade CPU has [whatever you can afford] around 15 MK/s

you are comparing speed of 1 rtx4090 with speed of one CPU / compare the prices and electricity also not only the speed
i was just saying that chances (even it takes milions trilions of years dont matter) but the chances are better with 1 GPU/CPU to scan for p69 than p135

It is faster to solve 135 rather than 69, no matter if you use a CPU, a GPU, or a toaster. I think you missed the entire point. So your claim ("the chances are better with 1 GPU/CPU to scan for p69 than p135") has nothing to do with reality, as it contradicts a basic mathematical comparison of two terms.

[deep_seek]

Can I use it ? Encrypted or Normal doesn't matter!

Lol.. No worries — I’ll be posting the clean version with source code on GitHub soon. After all, the puzzle journey has already come to an end.

Exited to play with it you can try this thousands core free signup bonus, do not have more idea. Just google it https://www.sabalcore.com/supercomputer-rental/

[Bram24732]

I have great news! You can compare the chances between puzzle 69 and puzzle 135. You will discover that 135 is actually easier to solve than 69, by an edge of around 50% (when factoring in the GK/s processing advantage).

i use privatekeys.pw calculator for puzzle 135 with 30Ekeys i get 13802108831432.087 years , for puzzle 69 with 400Mkeys i get 46763.364 years (same server)

Oh no, 30 ExaKeys/s to solve 135 takes 1000 times the age of the Universe?

Do you have access to a piece of paper and a pencil? Maybe solve for this:

- number of operations: 1.7 * 2**67
- speed: [whatever you can afford] ops/second

As a hint: a single RTX 4090 has [whatever you can afford] around 10.5 GK/s
Another hint: a single core of a medium-grade CPU has [whatever you can afford] around 15 MK/s

you are comparing speed of 1 rtx4090 with speed of one CPU / compare the prices and electricity also not only the speed
i was just saying that chances (even it takes milions trilions of years dont matter) but the chances are better with 1 GPU/CPU to scan for p69 than p135

It is faster to solve 135 rather than 69, no matter if you use a CPU, a GPU, or a toaster. I think you missed the entire point. So your claim ("the chances are better with 1 GPU/CPU to scan for p69 than p135") has nothing to do with reality, as it contradicts a basic mathematical comparison of two terms.

If you have very limited computing power, isn't it better to try your long shot on 69 than on 135 due to the non linear nature of the odds of collision ?