Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[nomachine]

I am the creator. No,, not god man. I am the creator of this puzzle! I apologize, I had a bug in my script that generates WIF and ADDRESS so I was 100% sure it was using a 66 bits key but in fact it was using 62 . Well the money is still with me, so bug have been fixed, we will try again Tomorrow

I don't know what are you trying to prove, you don't need to do it. In any case you can generate address in any range with my tool

https://github.com/albertobsd/ecctools?tab=readme-ov-file#keygen

I want see if someone would be able to create a transaction before my transaction is confirmed and get the BTC. This can potentially happen to the winner of 66, but we want to see it happening in the real world. Like when they start to prove Enstein's stuff after they can't progress with the theory anymore

Your testing would have been successfully completed yesterday if you had kept the private key in the correct range. No worries, just be mindful of it this time. If the funds you sent go to this address (1ND6VxAAdamzix1ZffoZww78YcMZQAWDEa), understand that I have won this Bot race. I invite all bots to participate in this race. Let's see something new tomorrow ... after a long time.

Edit:
Wait a moment. Why are you giving us a specific time? There is no fixed time for the transaction of puzzle 66. Just complete this task at any time tomorrow and let all the bots do their work.

It is not the same to send 6.6 BTC and 0.0045 BTC. We need a list of transactions that recently sent 6 BTC to see how long it takes so that we can draw a conclusion. If sending 6 BTC takes 30 seconds, I will give up using the bot.

[albert0bsd]

Edit:
Wait a moment. Why are you giving us a specific time? There is no fixed time for the transaction of puzzle 66. Just complete this task at any time tomorrow and let all the bots do their work.

I think that is the hour he can sit down and do his streaming

I have a theory, when making a transfer using the electrum wallet and sending the total, the value in the wallet is reset to zero, how would your program do to cancel the transaction if there are no more funds? and to do the RBF you would need funds to increase rates, and without funds it would only be possible to make the first transaction. Do you have any theories if it would still be possible?

Well first there is not such thing as "Cancel Transaction" even if the wallet call it as is. In reality it is just a Full RBF tx to a new wallet still owned by you.

And that is just a software feature of some wallets, if I do that with a script it don't care about the Virtual "Zero Balance" it only does a new TX with the available utxos for that address regarless if they are waiting confirmation in mempool, that is actually the whole point of Full RBF

[nomachine]

send it to my keyhunt server retrieve the private key and the last part is  still  not complete....

I'm more interested in the techniques you use to preload files like:

keyhunt_bsgs_4_4294967296.blm

Mine range from 14 to 32 gigabytes. 😄

I’ve tried several techniques:

/etc/udev/rules.d/99-nvme-readahead.rules

Code:

ACTION=="add|change", KERNEL=="nvme0n1", RUN+="/sbin/blockdev --setra 65536 /dev/nvme0n1"

Code:

vmtouch -t keyhunt_bsgs_4_3258974208.blm

Some of these methods can speed up loading by up to 10 seconds.

[wilspen]

Wait a moment. Why are you giving us a specific time? There is no fixed time for the transaction of puzzle 66. Just complete this task at any time tomorrow and let all the bots do their work.

his audience is on YouTube, a channel for Brazilians who speak Portuguese, I brought it here to show you since we are testing technology, the more people the better, that's why he has an appointment with his audience in Brazil, which is the time he can do the live.

[albert0bsd]

I'm more interested in the techniques you use to preload files like:

Well is interesting know what you are doing, maybe i test it in the future.

To "preload" the files in memory I actually use the BSGSD  (bsgs daemon)


https://github.com/albertobsd/keyhunt/blob/main/BSGSD.md

It is a keyhunt server that only run BSGS for some small ranges like 66 bits it listen in a TCP socket on some PORT for incoming jobs, this is a public key and range to scan it only returns the private key if that was found or "404 NOT FOUND", check the link above for more information.

[nomachine]

I'm more interested in the techniques you use to preload files like:

Well is interesting know what you are doing, maybe i test it in the future.

To "preload" the files in memory I actually use the BSGSD  (bsgs daemon)


https://github.com/albertobsd/keyhunt/blob/main/BSGSD.md

It is a keyhunt server that only run BSGS for some small ranges like 66 bits it listen in a TCP socket on some PORT for incoming jobs, this is a public key and range to scan it only returns the private key if that was found or "404 NOT FOUND", check the link above for more information.

puzzle 63 in ~8 Seconds


Thanks for this info. This is genius for a bot.

[wilspen]

Yes, as I said, it's just theory, I believe that ...

---snip---

faith belongs in the church. Even if you don't like to hear it, it doesn't matter what you or I think, feel, hope or believe. What counts are the facts, and these are implemented in the Bitcoin protocol, can be read and reproduced. It's a program, it has a way of working and it will stick to it

This topic has already been dealt with many times on previous pages, including links to the technical explanations. It is completely irrelevant which software you use, whether you activate RBF or not. I would highly recommend that you read and study the technical documentation on this topic.

perfect, since you are the guy, tomorrow at 15:30 (UTC -3. Brasilia Time), the creator will do the transaction and expose the public key, put your knowledge into practice and prove what you are saying, otherwise , and if it is not hacked, it can be said that we still have hope.

[jacky19790729]

I have a theory, when making a transfer using the electrum wallet and sending the total, the value in the wallet is reset to zero, how would your program do to cancel the transaction if there are no more funds? and to do the RBF you would need funds to increase rates, and without funds it would only be possible to make the first transaction. Do you have any theories if it would still be possible?

Your theory is wrong. It doesn't matter what amount you will transfer or how high the fee is or the software you will use.

The transaction can be replaced at any time by anyone from any location. Only a higher fee is required to make this fully effective.

yesterday , I am online and use Kangaroo.exe crack private key about 2 minutes
then I import private key to Electrum  ( Win10 )
I got 2 transaction notifications immediately, one was +0.00495561  BTC , the other was -0.00495561 BTC , while the balance was 0 BTC
At the time , Transaction is  0  confirmations  , but I can't do anything ....
Electrum show the balance 0 BTC

[nomachine]

2 minutes is is too much

#time python3 toddlers_bot.py
INFO:root:Running rsz_rdiff_scan.py...
INFO:root:2024-07-20 00:28:33 - Public Key: 025b2fb64f70afceded779f874ce13407698e406037e0bcd406c1ecec9d1d92880
INFO:root:Extracted Public Key: 025b2fb64f70afceded779f874ce13407698e406037e0bcd406c1ecec9d1d92880
INFO:root:Running command: echo '025b2fb64f70afceded779f874ce13407698e406037e0bcd406c1ecec9d1d92880 2000000000000000:3fffffffffffffff' | nc -v localhost 8080
INFO:root:Keyhunt stdout: 3895508353aa46e8
INFO:root:Keyhunt stdout: Connection to localhost (127.0.0.1) 8080 port [tcp/http-alt] succeeded!

INFO:root:Private Key: 3895508353aa46e8
INFO:root:WIF Key: KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qYpPyTxb6TR2EXMEW1LL
Daemon stopped
starting daemon (PID 990)
INFO:root:restore_wallet output: KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qYpPyTxb6TR2EXMEW1LL
INFO:root:load_wallet output:  1DWQHdi1mh27vcUyrN5NYB1kWrs3BBKUXA
INFO:root:history output: {
    "summary": {
        "begin": {
            "BTC_balance": "0.",
            "block_height": 852775,
            "date": "2024-07-18 20:29"
        },
        "end": {
            "BTC_balance": "0.",
            "block_height": 852837,
            "date": "2024-07-19 06:15"
        },
        "flow": {
            "BTC_incoming": "0.00495561",
            "BTC_outgoing": "0.00495561"
        }
    },
    "transactions": [
        {
            "bc_balance": "0.00495561",
            "bc_value": "0.00495561",
            "confirmations": 169,
            "date": "2024-07-18 20:29",
            "fee": null,
            "fee_sat": null,
            "height": 852776,
            "incoming": true,
            "label": "",
            "monotonic_timestamp": 1721327365,
            "timestamp": 1721327365,
            "txid": "098fec25954faad5571bb81234658228c888cd428a2531538ed1d40e278af9e3",
            "txpos_in_block": 337
        },
        {
            "bc_balance": "0.",
            "bc_value": "-0.00495561",
            "confirmations": 108,
            "date": "2024-07-19 06:15",
            "fee": "0.00001152",
            "fee_sat": 1152,
            "height": 852837,
            "incoming": false,
            "label": "",
            "monotonic_timestamp": 1721362520,
            "timestamp": 1721362520,
            "txid": "95e892276c80e888087e14c94d221d8afa49f511087b02639eaa99b6b36d5bc6",
            "txpos_in_block": 336
        }
    ]
}
 
INFO:root:bumpfee output: No Transactions to bumpfee
Daemon stopped

real   0m13.485s
user   0m5.462s
sys   0m0.248s

This is ridiculous

[albert0bsd]

yesterday , I am online and use Kangaroo.exe crack private key about 2 minutes
then I import private key to Electrum  ( Win10 )
I got 2 transaction notifications immediately, one was +0.00495561  BTC , the other was -0.00495561 BTC , while the balance was 0 BTC
At the time , Transaction is  0  confirmations  , but I can't do anything ....
Electrum show the balance 0 BTC

That is why you need to avoid to those wallets for this purpose, you need to automate the TX somehow without any wallet software.

2 minutes is is too much

....

Daemon stopped

real   0m13.485s
user   0m5.462s
sys   0m0.248s

This is ridiculous

What part is ridiculous  ?

[nomachine]

yesterday , I am online and use Kangaroo.exe crack private key about 2 minutes
then I import private key to Electrum  ( Win10 )
I got 2 transaction notifications immediately, one was +0.00495561  BTC , the other was -0.00495561 BTC , while the balance was 0 BTC
At the time , Transaction is  0  confirmations  , but I can't do anything ....
Electrum show the balance 0 BTC

That is why you need to avoid to those wallets for this purpose, you need to automate the TX somehow without any wallet software.

2 minutes is is too much

....

Daemon stopped

real   0m13.485s
user   0m5.462s
sys   0m0.248s

This is ridiculous

What part is ridiculous  ?

Finding out how fast the BSGS server is.. And after that it became clear to me what this sentence means.

I don't know what are you trying to prove, you don't need to do it.

[Woz2000]

Whether this transaction gets replace or not is not going to prove definitively that puzzle 66 will or will not be hijacked when the solver tries to withdraw it (with a public transaction). There are miners that observe the RBF rule and miners that observe the Full RBF rule. So the miner actually produces the block will determine if it is going to get replaced or not.

Yes, as I said, it's just theory, I believe that ...

---snip---

faith belongs in the church. Even if you don't like to hear it, it doesn't matter what you or I think, feel, hope or believe. What counts are the facts, and these are implemented in the Bitcoin protocol, can be read and reproduced. It's a program, it has a way of working and it will stick to it

This topic has already been dealt with many times on previous pages, including links to the technical explanations. It is completely irrelevant which software you use, whether you activate RBF or not. I would highly recommend that you read and study the technical documentation on this topic.

perfect, since you are the guy, tomorrow at 15:30 (UTC -3. Brasilia Time), the creator will do the transaction and expose the public key, put your knowledge into practice and prove what you are saying, otherwise , and if it is not hacked, it can be said that we still have hope.

[albert0bsd]

Whether this transaction gets replace or not is not going to prove definitively that puzzle 66 will or will not be hijacked when the solver tries to withdraw it (with a public transaction). There are miners that observe the RBF rule and miners that observe the Full RBF rule. So the miner actually produces the block will determine if it is going to get replaced or not.

Yes, I agree with this. I've observed some unusual occurrences because not all miners adhere to the same rules. There have been instances where transactions with lower fees were mined instead of those with higher fees, such as 20 satoshis per virtual byte (sat/vB) being chosen over 200 sat/vB. This happens because not all miners promptly update their block templates when a transaction's fee is increased by a bot. Therefore, even if you offer the highest fee, there's no guarantee you'll win the mining competition.

I just finish my bot, i just did a test in mainnet for address: 1Sk4K8upb9beiKZtxnbN6DYLkHWhhKf5Z

First TX for reveal the Publickey was 1sat/vB 5bc8a39149f4f5a421418d36c173d941053b39ad896aa1d986a0e1e7e2e14471  (This trigger the bot)

TX made fully automated with  8sat/vB is 88e918f1d5a92640036a913d2eae6f6f55619161a8bd4ec6641c3372138f0047
And some oher with 12 and 16 sat/vB
9c27f54778b3642a99baefaad748bb2fa1633209d71a2abb5115377974f1e7a6
9657ead0a66aade90b48d25d43252172e905f232ec081c2cc14a3bbb91dd7f62

All TX were made by the bot full automated

TX where broadcasted using the mempool.space API

https://mempool.space/docs/api/rest#post-transaction

Sometimes i get some weirds errors like:

Code:

sendrawtransaction RPC error: {"code":-26,"message":"txn-mempool-conflict"}
sendrawtransaction RPC error: {"code":-26,"message":"insufficient fee, rejecting replacement b15dd6cccc3dd9d40452e8fdb3f9a05003b8ac273fcccb0dc31e4d837d86f822; new feerate 0.00014382 BTC/kvB <= old feerate 0.00016507 BTC/kvB"}

This is because i was stoping the bot and starting it again, just to try to catch those errors:

Something that helpme to do a lot of test with a single TX was that the previous block was mined half hour before

Finding out how fast the BSGS server is.. And after that it became clear to me what this sentence means.

I am glad that you like it!

[wilspen]

Yes, I agree with this. I've observed some unusual occurrences because not all miners adhere to the same rules. There have been instances where transactions with lower fees were mined instead of those with higher fees, such as 20 satoshis per virtual byte (sat/vB) being chosen over 200 sat/vB. This happens because not all miners promptly update their block templates when a transaction's fee is increased by a bot. Therefore, even if you offer the highest fee, there's no guarantee you'll win the mining competition.

How can I have this bot of yours, will it be available on github?

[Tepan]

the creator doesn’t involve any pattern for create the address puzzle, he's just make it randomly, but per bit of range has "sequence" IMO ("Nowadays people say in range of bit), since the bit is larger the 10% is like 1000000% for that bit.

he just make us curious, with his formula to make the puzzle.
don't delete this, i dont mean to make spam on thread, it's just clarifying THERE'S NO PATTERN.

Are you looking for eggs, the creator himself here in this thread said that there is no logical pattern, that they are random, you will be theorizing aimlessly, wasting time.

read again my statement, who's theorizing aimlessly, i just explain it, i'm sick for ppl saying this puzzle has pattern, read again bruh, womp womp.

[nomachine]

Yes, I agree with this. I've observed some unusual occurrences because not all miners adhere to the same rules. There have been instances where transactions with lower fees were mined instead of those with higher fees, such as 20 satoshis per virtual byte (sat/vB) being chosen over 200 sat/vB. This happens because not all miners promptly update their block templates when a transaction's fee is increased by a bot. Therefore, even if you offer the highest fee, there's no guarantee you'll win the mining competition.

How can I have this bot of yours, will it be available on github?

Probably when 66, 67, 68, 69 are over 

[Akito S. M. Hosana]

Yes, I agree with this. I've observed some unusual occurrences because not all miners adhere to the same rules. There have been instances where transactions with lower fees were mined instead of those with higher fees, such as 20 satoshis per virtual byte (sat/vB) being chosen over 200 sat/vB. This happens because not all miners promptly update their block templates when a transaction's fee is increased by a bot. Therefore, even if you offer the highest fee, there's no guarantee you'll win the mining competition.

How can I have this bot of yours, will it be available on github?

Probably when 66, 67, 68, 69 are over 

This is not fair. How can we get a piece of cake?

[sssergy2705]

Yes, I agree with this. I've observed some unusual occurrences because not all miners adhere to the same rules. There have been instances where transactions with lower fees were mined instead of those with higher fees, such as 20 satoshis per virtual byte (sat/vB) being chosen over 200 sat/vB. This happens because not all miners promptly update their block templates when a transaction's fee is increased by a bot. Therefore, even if you offer the highest fee, there's no guarantee you'll win the mining competition.

How can I have this bot of yours, will it be available on github?

Probably when 66, 67, 68, 69 are over 

This is not fair. How can we get a piece of cake?

This is not a public pool, everyone invests their time and knowledge. In this thread and in development, the guys are laying out excellent tools, without which we would not have been able to get to 66 and 130. This is your piece of the pie, but it’s up to you to decide how to use it.

[Baskentliia]

Whether this transaction gets replace or not is not going to prove definitively that puzzle 66 will or will not be hijacked when the solver tries to withdraw it (with a public transaction). There are miners that observe the RBF rule and miners that observe the Full RBF rule. So the miner actually produces the block will determine if it is going to get replaced or not.

Yes, I agree with this. I've observed some unusual occurrences because not all miners adhere to the same rules. There have been instances where transactions with lower fees were mined instead of those with higher fees, such as 20 satoshis per virtual byte (sat/vB) being chosen over 200 sat/vB. This happens because not all miners promptly update their block templates when a transaction's fee is increased by a bot. Therefore, even if you offer the highest fee, there's no guarantee you'll win the mining competition.

I just finish my bot, i just did a test in mainnet for address: 1Sk4K8upb9beiKZtxnbN6DYLkHWhhKf5Z

First TX for reveal the Publickey was 1sat/vB 5bc8a39149f4f5a421418d36c173d941053b39ad896aa1d986a0e1e7e2e14471  (This trigger the bot)

TX made fully automated with  8sat/vB is 88e918f1d5a92640036a913d2eae6f6f55619161a8bd4ec6641c3372138f0047
And some oher with 12 and 16 sat/vB
9c27f54778b3642a99baefaad748bb2fa1633209d71a2abb5115377974f1e7a6
9657ead0a66aade90b48d25d43252172e905f232ec081c2cc14a3bbb91dd7f62

All TX were made by the bot full automated

TX where broadcasted using the mempool.space API

https://mempool.space/docs/api/rest#post-transaction

Sometimes i get some weirds errors like:

Code:

sendrawtransaction RPC error: {"code":-26,"message":"txn-mempool-conflict"}
sendrawtransaction RPC error: {"code":-26,"message":"insufficient fee, rejecting replacement b15dd6cccc3dd9d40452e8fdb3f9a05003b8ac273fcccb0dc31e4d837d86f822; new feerate 0.00014382 BTC/kvB <= old feerate 0.00016507 BTC/kvB"}

This is because i was stoping the bot and starting it again, just to try to catch those errors:

Something that helpme to do a lot of test with a single TX was that the previous block was mined half hour before

Finding out how fast the BSGS server is.. And after that it became clear to me what this sentence means.

I am glad that you like it!

So did this bot work?
Did your bot steal bitcoins the moment you sent the transaction to the network?


We are waiting for you to participate in the trial of Puzzle 66 in the evening.

[nomachine]

I also tested mine, and it works. The problem will be when 2, 3, or 50 bots attack the same wallet simultaneously. I have no idea what will happen. This is like roulette; someone will leave the casino with a bag, and some won't. Or will everyone be left empty-handed and the casino (miners) takes everything?

This is not fair. How can we get a piece of cake?

I think it's a bad idea for all of us to have the same cloned bot with the same or similar parameters.