Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

What is this, that works with gpu?

This is kangaroo, you can find it in this repo:

https://github.com/JeanLucPons/Kangaroo

As you see, it's works well with gpu.

So you couldn't use It tô get 130°?
How long It will take?

Avg 463.6y with single RTX 3090 GPU (Kangaroo-256-bit).
I need approximately 464 GPUs to solve the problem in 1 year.

So you will need this time to all range or may be you get it early?

I don't think anyone can know for sure. You always go the extra mile.
That is 5,55BTC for 500 used RTX 3090
Then you need space for rigs and related equipment. Electricity.
It is unprofitable when you add up all the expenses on paper.

[kTimesG]

Avg 463.6y with single RTX 3090 GPU (Kangaroo-256-bit).
I need approximately 464 GPUs to solve the problem in 1 year.

So you will need this time to all range or may be you get it early?

Kangaroo is a probabilistic algorithm, so you have exactly the same chances as if playing the lottery, but the probability is "if I use 464 RTX 3090 GPUs at 100% for one year using this random piece of software published on the internet that I have no idea how it works, there's a 99.9% chance I win."

You might find the key in the first second (almost 0% probability) or after an year with hundreds of top-end GPUs working together (almost 100% chances, but lots of $$$ and time to invest with a very high risk of losing everything without any profit). Or maybe never (very unlikely, but not impossible, Kangaroo is NOT a deterministic guaranteed algorithm, you may be the unlucky one for which there's never any cross-match due to infinite cycle loops in the pseudorandom walks - practically unlikely, but theoretically possible).

Take into account these facts:
- a lot of people already tried, are trying, and will try;
- the costs involved and whether you can afford the risk;
- the chance that someone else may find it during this time; you have zero guarantees it's worth the pursue; maybe tomorrow the creator empties all the addresses;
- no one is dumb enough to publish FREE software that works better then what's available publicly, those are merely proof of concept; everyone's on their own;
- this is not a secret map toward some pirate's treasure chest you've found in a cave - everyone knows about it.

If you don't understand the risks then the best strategy is to forget about the topic and get on with your life.

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

Avg 463.6y with single RTX 3090 GPU (Kangaroo-256-bit).
I need approximately 464 GPUs to solve the problem in 1 year.

So you will need this time to all range or may be you get it early?

maybe tomorrow the creator empties all the addresses....

If you don't understand the risks....

Imagine that Sam Bankman-Fried is the creator of the puzzle. They will arrest you tomorrow as soon as you take the prize somewhere.

[Feron]

This puzzle is here to test cryptographic security, to test how much bit space can be broken with the available hardware
that's why the rewards have also been raised so that you can come up with something new, better, more perfect, something that will start crushing one address after another

[cnk1220]

Avg 463.6y with single RTX 3090 GPU (Kangaroo-256-bit).
I need approximately 464 GPUs to solve the problem in 1 year.

So you will need this time to all range or may be you get it early?

Kangaroo is a probabilistic algorithm, so you have exactly the same chances as if playing the lottery, but the probability is "if I use 464 RTX 3090 GPUs at 100% for one year using this random piece of software published on the internet that I have no idea how it works, there's a 99.9% chance I win."

You might find the key in the first second (almost 0% probability) or after an year with hundreds of top-end GPUs working together (almost 100% chances, but lots of $$$ and time to invest with a very high risk of losing everything without any profit). Or maybe never (very unlikely, but not impossible, Kangaroo is NOT a deterministic guaranteed algorithm, you may be the unlucky one for which there's never any cross-match due to infinite cycle loops in the pseudorandom walks - practically unlikely, but theoretically possible).

Take into account these facts:
- a lot of people already tried, are trying, and will try;
- the costs involved and whether you can afford the risk;
- the chance that someone else may find it during this time; you have zero guarantees it's worth the pursue; maybe tomorrow the creator empties all the addresses;
- no one is dumb enough to publish FREE software that works better then what's available publicly, those are merely proof of concept; everyone's on their own;
- this is not a secret map toward some pirate's treasure chest you've found in a cave - everyone knows about it.

If you don't understand the risks then the best strategy is to forget about the topic and get on with your life.

I understand about the probability, but you all say about that method how it's exactly, sure works. ..  "in X seconds, the 66 will be cracked", "in Y seconds, the 67 will be cracked", and also I thought that method, bsgs, and this software was publicly on github, after all the method is known.

But thank you.

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

I understand about the probability, but you all say about that method how it's exactly, sure works. ..  "in X seconds, the 66 will be cracked", "in Y seconds, the 67 will be cracked", and also I thought that method, bsgs, and this software was publicly on github, after all the method is known.

But thank you.

On a better CPU, 66 can be solved in X seconds on a kangaroo. There's no need to buy a fancy GPU for the bot.

[cnk1220]

I understand about the probability, but you all say about that method how it's exactly, sure works. ..  "in X seconds, the 66 will be cracked", "in Y seconds, the 67 will be cracked", and also I thought that method, bsgs, and this software was publicly on github, after all the method is known.

But thank you.

On a better CPU, 66 can be solved in X seconds on a kangaroo. There's no need to buy a fancy GPU for the bot.

Yes, but I saying about 130 and higher.. but ok.
I get It.

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

I understand about the probability, but you all say about that method how it's exactly, sure works. ..  "in X seconds, the 66 will be cracked", "in Y seconds, the 67 will be cracked", and also I thought that method, bsgs, and this software was publicly on github, after all the method is known.

But thank you.

On a better CPU, 66 can be solved in X seconds on a kangaroo. There's no need to buy a fancy GPU for the bot.

Yes, but I saying about 130 and higher.. but ok.
I get It.

For 130 I have no idea what to do. I'm not a developer. But it is obvious that we need an acceleration of at least 100 times in the software itself. I don't know if that's possible. But you should think.

[kTimesG]

For 130 I have no idea what to do. I'm not a developer. But it is obvious that we need an acceleration of at least 100 times in the software itself. I don't know if that's possible. But you should think.

Solving 130-bit is equivalent to solving 4 to 8 billion 66-bit puzzles, so anyone can make their own math - do you have 8 billion seconds to spare? You can't "accelerate" something that runs at full speed and is already accelerated to the max. At most just make things run 2x, 3x, 10x faster on the same hardware, using all possible optimization tricks. But there is still the limitation based on the best known algorithm itself, software is just an implementation of theory, you can never have software or hardware that solves a problem faster than the underlying algorithm. There is no known "acceleration" of the theory, otherwise the problem would have been solved since long ago.

[Etar]

snip
Etar-Kangaroo : no result
snip

Because minimal range is 2^32. Try something like:
-rb 2F633CBE3EC02B9401000000007000000 -re 2F633CBE3EC02B9408000000009000000
and result will be.

[AlanJohnson]

For 130 I have no idea what to do. I'm not a developer. But it is obvious that we need an acceleration of at least 100 times in the software itself. I don't know if that's possible. But you should think.

Solving 130-bit is equivalent to solving 4 to 8 billion 66-bit puzzles, so anyone can make their own math - do you have 8 billion seconds to spare? You can't "accelerate" something that runs at full speed and is already accelerated to the max. At most just make things run 2x, 3x, 10x faster on the same hardware, using all possible optimization tricks. But there is still the limitation based on the best known algorithm itself, software is just an implementation of theory, you can never have software or hardware that solves a problem faster than the underlying algorithm. There is no known "acceleration" of the theory, otherwise the problem would have been solved since long ago.

^^^^^^ Wise words ^^^^^^

[Baskentliia]

What is this, that works with gpu?

This is kangaroo, you can find it in this repo:

https://github.com/JeanLucPons/Kangaroo

As you see, it's works well with gpu.

So you couldn't use It tô get 130°?
How long It will take?

Avg 463.6y with single RTX 3090 GPU (Kangaroo-256-bit).
I need approximately 464 GPUs to solve the problem in 1 year.

Shall I ask something? You said that if we run 1 3090 graphics card with the kangaroo program, it will be found in 463 years. Well, isn't it possible to find this earlier? What if we have a lot of luck?  For example, can't we run the kangaroo program and find it within 1 hour?

[Kpot87]

What is this, that works with gpu?

This is kangaroo, you can find it in this repo:

https://github.com/JeanLucPons/Kangaroo

As you see, it's works well with gpu.

So you couldn't use It tô get 130°?
How long It will take?

Avg 463.6y with single RTX 3090 GPU (Kangaroo-256-bit).
I need approximately 464 GPUs to solve the problem in 1 year.

Shall I ask something? You said that if we run 1 3090 graphics card with the kangaroo program, it will be found in 463 years. Well, isn't it possible to find this earlier? What if we have a lot of luck?  For example, can't we run the kangaroo program and find it within 1 hour?

it can be done in 1 second

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

What is this, that works with gpu?

This is kangaroo, you can find it in this repo:

https://github.com/JeanLucPons/Kangaroo

As you see, it's works well with gpu.

So you couldn't use It tô get 130°?
How long It will take?

Avg 463.6y with single RTX 3090 GPU (Kangaroo-256-bit).
I need approximately 464 GPUs to solve the problem in 1 year.

Shall I ask something? You said that if we run 1 3090 graphics card with the kangaroo program, it will be found in 463 years. Well, isn't it possible to find this earlier? What if we have a lot of luck?  For example, can't we run the kangaroo program and find it within 1 hour?

As a mathematician, not a programmer, I am deeply familiar with the challenges by very large numbers. The algorithm we are discussing is probabilistic, meaning its runtime can vary depending on chance, though on average, it follows a predictable pattern. The difficulty of this problem is directly related to the size of the numbers involved.

In this algorithm, "kangaroos" (which represent random walks) attempt to land on the target (the solution) within this galactically vast numerical space. The likelihood of finding the solution within an hour, or any short period, is exceedingly low, though not entirely zero.

Given the complexity and the size of the numbers, it is more plausible that we will need to invent a new algorithm or a combination of different algorithms to solve such a problem, rather than relying on luck to solve Puzzle 130.

[Baskentliia]

What is this, that works with gpu?

This is kangaroo, you can find it in this repo:

https://github.com/JeanLucPons/Kangaroo

As you see, it's works well with gpu.

So you couldn't use It tô get 130°?
How long It will take?

Avg 463.6y with single RTX 3090 GPU (Kangaroo-256-bit).
I need approximately 464 GPUs to solve the problem in 1 year.

Shall I ask something? You said that if we run 1 3090 graphics card with the kangaroo program, it will be found in 463 years. Well, isn't it possible to find this earlier? What if we have a lot of luck?  For example, can't we run the kangaroo program and find it within 1 hour?

As a mathematician, not a programmer, I am deeply familiar with the challenges by very large numbers. The algorithm we are discussing is probabilistic, meaning its runtime can vary depending on chance, though on average, it follows a predictable pattern. The difficulty of this problem is directly related to the size of the numbers involved.

In this algorithm, "kangaroos" (which represent random walks) attempt to land on the target (the solution) within this galactically vast numerical space. The likelihood of finding the solution within an hour, or any short period, is exceedingly low, though not entirely zero.

Given the complexity and the size of the numbers, it is more plausible that we will need to invent a new algorithm or a combination of different algorithms to solve such a problem, rather than relying on luck to solve Puzzle 130.

You approached the issue very professionally, you are absolutely right.
But the people looking for the puzzle here are all poor. He runs the kangaroo program with 1 graphics card and waits for luck to come his way. but we should not forget this. LUCK BEATS MATHEMATICS
Although it is very unlikely, puzzle 130 can be found with a 1 3090 graphics card.

[saatoshi_falling]

My question is what are you all scanning with for the 130 puzzle, even when JeanLucPons himself clearly states, twice, that you cannot find 130 with his Kangaroo:

This program is limited to a 125bit interval search

(Not possible with this program without modification)

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

My question is what are you all scanning with for the 130 puzzle, even when JeanLucPons himself clearly states, twice, that you cannot find 130 with his Kangaroo:

This program is limited to a 125bit interval search

(Not possible with this program without modification)

There is Kangaroo-256-bit on github.  Fastest thing for CPU I've tried so far.
Puzzle 65 for ~50 seconds on AMD Ryzen 9 7950X