Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[drpxxx]

I think I’ve approached all of this the wrong way.

I’m offering a 0.1 BTC bounty for the formal proof of any traversal method that provides a statistical edge over a linear scan for puzzle 69. By statistical edge I mean that this new traversal method running on a statistically significant number of executions requires significantly fewer checks (let’s put the threshold at 5%) to find the key.

Conditions :
- Has to be written using math semantics. Not “where does John lives” metaphors.
- Has to be empirically validated using a python / nodeJS script.
- First one posting it to this thread will be recipient of the bounty.

What if someone proves that no such method exists including the prefix one, is the bounty valid for such proof ?

[Benjade]

whatever you all do, dont keep giving bram more of your code.  he already has 3000 computers and the rest of us might only be using two.  so giving away all of your code secrets to him will only make sure that the rest of us end up broke with no money when he uses that knowledge to solve every remaining puzzle.   dont say i never warned you when it happens.  lol   i do believe in some knowledge sharing though.  but he has too big of an advantage already over the rest of us.  just my opinion or thoughts. 

I think I already said I’m not working on any puzzle now that they are no longer profitable.

I sent you a scrypt, check your private messages

Please do not send me generic AI generated scripts which don’t even make sense.

I imagine you are aware that big data already uses AI for their code, as is the case with GitHub itself. Your reasoning is ridiculous. Whether it is code that comes out of AI or human, it is still code. It is the way it is worked that matters.

[fantom06]

whatever you all do, dont keep giving bram more of your code.  he already has 3000 computers and the rest of us might only be using two.  so giving away all of your code secrets to him will only make sure that the rest of us end up broke with no money when he uses that knowledge to solve every remaining puzzle.   dont say i never warned you when it happens.  lol   i do believe in some knowledge sharing though.  but he has too big of an advantage already over the rest of us.  just my opinion or thoughts. 

I think I already said I’m not working on any puzzle now that they are no longer profitable.

I sent you a scrypt, check your private messages

Please do not send me generic AI generated scripts which don’t even make sense.

I imagine you are aware that big data already uses AI for their code, as is the case with GitHub itself. Your reasoning is ridiculous. Whether it is code that comes out of AI or human, it is still code. It is the way it is worked that matters.

and you Bram24732 didn't even write that you don't need it! You asked for it - here you go! And don't show off like a little child!

[kTimesG]

What if someone proves that no such method exists including the prefix one, is the bounty valid for such proof ?

I doubt it, since you'd simply prove that something is, by its own definition, as true. A really hard thing to prove indeed, requiring vast amounts of funding and research, in order to get to a definitive conclusion (e.g. reaching the definitions we started with). But while we're at it, let's also prove these stringent problems which also have no definitive answer so far:

- is the sky really blue? it may look more like white; and why does it go black during the night?
- does free will actually exist, or are we living in a simulation of a type 7 civilization, living in a simulation of a type 42 civilization?
- can we live forever? seems like we die at some point, makes no sense;
- does light actually go through glass? has anyone proved it yet without a doubt?
- is there a way to prove that all of the above are unprovable?

I'm offering a 9000 trillion multiverse BTC bounty if someone proves that the last one is unprovable to be proven. Or something like that. Please no AI.

I imagine you are aware that big data already uses AI for their code, as is the case with GitHub itself. Your reasoning is ridiculous. Whether it is code that comes out of AI or human, it is still code. It is the way it is worked that matters.

Except that the code generated by AI is a total non-sense that doesn't really actually work. But script kiddies think it's enterprise-level code, when in reality its complete bullshit. This is how some people inhere think that they know how to count the number of matching bits between two hashes, and the result is a total disaster.

If you want the plane you're boarding to crash 5 minutes after departure, throw some AI-generated firmware on its control circuits.

[Benjade]

What if someone proves that no such method exists including the prefix one, is the bounty valid for such proof ?

I doubt it, since you'd simply prove that something is, by its own definition, as true. A really hard thing to prove indeed, requiring vast amounts of funding and research, in order to get to a definitive conclusion (e.g. reaching the definitions we started with). But while we're at it, let's also prove these stringent problems which also have no definitive answer so far:

- is the sky really blue? it may look more like white; and why does it go black during the night?
- does free will actually exist, or are we living in a simulation of a type 7 civilization, living in a simulation of a type 42 civilization?
- can we live forever? seems like we die at some point, makes no sense;
- does light actually go through glass? has anyone proved it yet without a doubt?
- is there a way to prove that all of the above are unprovable?

I'm offering a 9000 trillion multiverse BTC bounty if someone proves that the last one is unprovable to be proven. Or something like that. Please no AI.

I imagine you are aware that big data already uses AI for their code, as is the case with GitHub itself. Your reasoning is ridiculous. Whether it is code that comes out of AI or human, it is still code. It is the way it is worked that matters.

Except that the code generated by AI is a total non-sense that doesn't really actually work. But script kiddies think it's enterprise-level code, when in reality its complete bullshit. This is how some people inhere think that they know how to count the number of matching bits between two hashes, and the result is a total disaster.

If you want the plane you're boarding to crash 5 minutes after departure, throw some AI-generated firmware on its control circuits.

Well it seems you know better than the expert how it works. 

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

What if someone proves that no such method exists including the prefix one, is the bounty valid for such proof ?

I doubt it, since you'd simply prove that something is, by its own definition, as true. A really hard thing to prove indeed, requiring vast amounts of funding and research, in order to get to a definitive conclusion (e.g. reaching the definitions we started with). But while we're at it, let's also prove these stringent problems which also have no definitive answer so far:

- is the sky really blue? it may look more like white; and why does it go black during the night?
- does free will actually exist, or are we living in a simulation of a type 7 civilization, living in a simulation of a type 42 civilization?
- can we live forever? seems like we die at some point, makes no sense;
- does light actually go through glass? has anyone proved it yet without a doubt?
- is there a way to prove that all of the above are unprovable?

I'm offering a 9000 trillion multiverse BTC bounty if someone proves that the last one is unprovable to be proven. Or something like that. Please no AI.

I imagine you are aware that big data already uses AI for their code, as is the case with GitHub itself. Your reasoning is ridiculous. Whether it is code that comes out of AI or human, it is still code. It is the way it is worked that matters.

Except that the code generated by AI is a total non-sense that doesn't really actually work. But script kiddies think it's enterprise-level code, when in reality its complete bullshit. This is how some people inhere think that they know how to count the number of matching bits between two hashes, and the result is a total disaster.

If you want the plane you're boarding to crash 5 minutes after departure, throw some AI-generated firmware on its control circuits.

Well it seems you know better than the expert how it works. 

What do you expect from @digaran? Dude can’t stop talking to himself—someone get this man some help! 

[Bram24732]

whatever you all do, dont keep giving bram more of your code.  he already has 3000 computers and the rest of us might only be using two.  so giving away all of your code secrets to him will only make sure that the rest of us end up broke with no money when he uses that knowledge to solve every remaining puzzle.   dont say i never warned you when it happens.  lol   i do believe in some knowledge sharing though.  but he has too big of an advantage already over the rest of us.  just my opinion or thoughts. 

I think I already said I’m not working on any puzzle now that they are no longer profitable.

I sent you a scrypt, check your private messages

Please do not send me generic AI generated scripts which don’t even make sense.

I imagine you are aware that big data already uses AI for their code, as is the case with GitHub itself. Your reasoning is ridiculous. Whether it is code that comes out of AI or human, it is still code. It is the way it is worked that matters.

I think you missed the important part : which don’t even make sense
I don’t care if you use AI to make code as long as the code makes sense. All the code I received in my DM makes zero sense whatsoever.

[Benjade]

whatever you all do, dont keep giving bram more of your code.  he already has 3000 computers and the rest of us might only be using two.  so giving away all of your code secrets to him will only make sure that the rest of us end up broke with no money when he uses that knowledge to solve every remaining puzzle.   dont say i never warned you when it happens.  lol   i do believe in some knowledge sharing though.  but he has too big of an advantage already over the rest of us.  just my opinion or thoughts. 

I think I already said I’m not working on any puzzle now that they are no longer profitable.

I sent you a scrypt, check your private messages

Please do not send me generic AI generated scripts which don’t even make sense.

I imagine you are aware that big data already uses AI for their code, as is the case with GitHub itself. Your reasoning is ridiculous. Whether it is code that comes out of AI or human, it is still code. It is the way it is worked that matters.

I think you missed the important part : which don’t even make sense
I don’t care if you use AI to make code as long as the code makes sense. All the code I received in my DM makes zero sense whatsoever.

You have to be stupid to send you solutions, so it's logical that you receive stupid code. 

[Bram24732]

What if someone proves that no such method exists including the prefix one, is the bounty valid for such proof ?

I doubt it, since you'd simply prove that something is, by its own definition, as true. A really hard thing to prove indeed, requiring vast amounts of funding and research, in order to get to a definitive conclusion (e.g. reaching the definitions we started with). But while we're at it, let's also prove these stringent problems which also have no definitive answer so far:

- is the sky really blue? it may look more like white; and why does it go black during the night?
- does free will actually exist, or are we living in a simulation of a type 7 civilization, living in a simulation of a type 42 civilization?
- can we live forever? seems like we die at some point, makes no sense;
- does light actually go through glass? has anyone proved it yet without a doubt?
- is there a way to prove that all of the above are unprovable?

I'm offering a 9000 trillion multiverse BTC bounty if someone proves that the last one is unprovable to be proven. Or something like that. Please no AI.

I imagine you are aware that big data already uses AI for their code, as is the case with GitHub itself. Your reasoning is ridiculous. Whether it is code that comes out of AI or human, it is still code. It is the way it is worked that matters.

Except that the code generated by AI is a total non-sense that doesn't really actually work. But script kiddies think it's enterprise-level code, when in reality its complete bullshit. This is how some people inhere think that they know how to count the number of matching bits between two hashes, and the result is a total disaster.

If you want the plane you're boarding to crash 5 minutes after departure, throw some AI-generated firmware on its control circuits.

Indeed no bounty for the reverse proof.
I think it has already been proven that sha256 distribution is uniform anyway ? So that would directly translate as a proof that no such method exist.

[FrozenThroneGuy]

A few updates: https://github.com/Dookoo2/Cyclone

[drpxxx]

What if someone proves that no such method exists including the prefix one, is the bounty valid for such proof ?

I doubt it, since you'd simply prove that something is, by its own definition, as true. A really hard thing to prove indeed, requiring vast amounts of funding and research, in order to get to a definitive conclusion (e.g. reaching the definitions we started with). But while we're at it, let's also prove these stringent problems which also have no definitive answer so far:

- is the sky really blue? it may look more like white; and why does it go black during the night?
- does free will actually exist, or are we living in a simulation of a type 7 civilization, living in a simulation of a type 42 civilization?
- can we live forever? seems like we die at some point, makes no sense;
- does light actually go through glass? has anyone proved it yet without a doubt?
- is there a way to prove that all of the above are unprovable?

I'm offering a 9000 trillion multiverse BTC bounty if someone proves that the last one is unprovable to be proven. Or something like that. Please no AI.

I imagine you are aware that big data already uses AI for their code, as is the case with GitHub itself. Your reasoning is ridiculous. Whether it is code that comes out of AI or human, it is still code. It is the way it is worked that matters.

Except that the code generated by AI is a total non-sense that doesn't really actually work. But script kiddies think it's enterprise-level code, when in reality its complete bullshit. This is how some people inhere think that they know how to count the number of matching bits between two hashes, and the result is a total disaster.

If you want the plane you're boarding to crash 5 minutes after departure, throw some AI-generated firmware on its control circuits.

Indeed no bounty for the reverse proof.
I think it has already been proven that sha256 distribution is uniform anyway ? So that would directly translate as a proof that no such method exist.

Well I doubt anyone will be able to solve this without breaking the cryptographic functions. This is a hard one.

[Benjade]

Just updated KeyQuest V1 to V1.1 - see full Changelog in Readme: https://github.com/Benjade/KeyQuest

Here some changes:

Config & CLI: dynamic batch size (`-b`) argument, interactive config prompts, “full-random” with `randomHexCount=0`.
Suffix Gen: auto switch hybrid/full-random, any suffix length.
Performance: batch-size ECC points, adaptive hash buffers, modern STL/`thread_local`.
UI: single summary box, optional per-thread view, throttled refresh.
Email/Encryption: upfront passphrase, AES-256-CBC+PBKDF2, same HTML template.
Code: removed static buffers, C++11+ idioms, stricter input checks.

Etc..

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

A few updates: https://github.com/Dookoo2/Cyclone

@nomachine we expect your update soon? 

[nomachine]

A few updates: https://github.com/Dookoo2/Cyclone

@nomachine we expect your update soon? 

Nope. It is not critical update for my version. Gradually, our scripts are starting to diverge in terms of functionality. The next thing I’m going to update is SECP256K1 itself—I’ve already removed some unnecessary files from Git, like Timer.cpp, Timer.h, Random.cpp, and Random.h. They were just collecting dust and serving no purpose, unnecessarily increasing the size of the executable file.

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

The next thing I’m going to update is SECP256K1 itself—I’ve already removed some unnecessary files from Git

How fast can this go? 

[nomachine]

The next thing I’m going to update is SECP256K1 itself—I’ve already removed some unnecessary files from Git

How fast can this go? 

For example, the Ryzen 9 7940HS achieves ~10 MK/s when using 1 thread and ~67 MK/s with 16 threads. Performance also depends on how it is compiled—using GCC, Clang, etc...

[POD5]

Nope. It is not critical update for my version. Gradually, our scripts are starting to diverge in terms of functionality. The next thing I’m going to update is SECP256K1 itself—I’ve already removed some unnecessary files from Git, like Timer.cpp, Timer.h, Random.cpp, and Random.h. They were just collecting dust and serving no purpose, unnecessarily increasing the size of the executable file.

How many keys are scanned at once (batch = group_size) when using sequential or random mode? 0x10000? 0x100000?
This would be interesting to know, for example, when using STRIDE.
If I start at 0x400000000000000000 and STRIDE = 0x10000000 and BATCH = 0x10000, at the end of each round I just need to add
BATCH * Number of rounds to the start point 0x400000000000000000 (keeping the same STRIDE value)
The same principle of both python scripts that I had sent you in PM some weeks before.

[bcchanger]

The next thing I’m going to update is SECP256K1 itself—I’ve already removed some unnecessary files from Git

How fast can this go? 

For example, the Ryzen 9 7940HS achieves ~10 MK/s when using 1 thread and ~67 MK/s with 16 threads. Performance also depends on how it is compiled—using GCC, Clang, etc...

Any chance you could compile a Windows compatible version?

[nomachine]

Nope. It is not critical update for my version. Gradually, our scripts are starting to diverge in terms of functionality. The next thing I’m going to update is SECP256K1 itself—I’ve already removed some unnecessary files from Git, like Timer.cpp, Timer.h, Random.cpp, and Random.h. They were just collecting dust and serving no purpose, unnecessarily increasing the size of the executable file.

How many keys are scanned at once (batch = group_size) when using sequential or random mode? 0x10000? 0x100000?
This would be interesting to know, for example, when using STRIDE.
If I start at 0x400000000000000000 and STRIDE = 0x10000000 and BATCH = 0x10000, at the end of each round I just need to add
BATCH * Number of rounds to the start point 0x400000000000000000 (keeping the same STRIDE value)
The same principle of both python scripts that I had sent you in PM some weeks before.

That function has never worked here as it should. It just causes problems—either showing unrealistically high speeds or unrealistically low ones. I think I’ll remove it from the script altogether.

P.S. Removed the stride option—to avoid further confusion, since this option does nothing.

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

P.S. Removed the stride option—to avoid further confusion, since this option does nothing.

I think it's my fault. I asked for that option—to make it similar to Keyhunt.