Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[kTimesG]

Read the article again and stop copy-pasting whatever the AI generates for you.
https://faculty.uml.edu/rmontenegro/research/kangaroo-journal.pdf?utm_source

Pollard’s kangaroo method computes a discrete logarithm over a bounded interval by running two independent pseudorandom walks in a group. The solution arises when the walks first meet, yielding an expected running time of order √L, governed by the time to this collision.
This behavior is directly linked to the birthday paradox: as in the classical setting, the probability of a collision between two stochastic processes becomes significant after roughly the square root of the state-space size. Hence the kangaroo method is viewed as a specialized form of a birthday-type attack, adapted to group structure and the discrete logarithm problem.

Go take a shower, eat a sandwich, and think it over once again.

There is no such sentence in that paper, dude. Also, me caring about your continuous trolling ends at this point.

Retrospectively, I think I should have stopped right from the start, at your initial divergence that you're gonna test out how good PollardRho works for finding a key in an interval Good luck with that! Nothing more than awesome science.

[Torin Keepler]

Read the article again and stop copy-pasting whatever the AI generates for you.
https://faculty.uml.edu/rmontenegro/research/kangaroo-journal.pdf?utm_source

Pollard’s kangaroo method computes a discrete logarithm over a bounded interval by running two independent pseudorandom walks in a group. The solution arises when the walks first meet, yielding an expected running time of order √L, governed by the time to this collision.
This behavior is directly linked to the birthday paradox: as in the classical setting, the probability of a collision between two stochastic processes becomes significant after roughly the square root of the state-space size. Hence the kangaroo method is viewed as a specialized form of a birthday-type attack, adapted to group structure and the discrete logarithm problem.

Go take a shower, eat a sandwich, and think it over once again.

There is no such sentence in that paper, dude. Also, me caring about your continuous trolling ends at this point.

Retrospectively, I think I should have stopped right from the start, at your initial divergence that you're gonna test out how good PollardRho works for finding a key in an interval Good luck with that! Nothing more than awesome science.

It’s good that you stopped. Don’t dig yourself in any deeper. Also, the only one who never makes mistakes is the one who does nothing or analyzes nothing. So it’s normal.

[kTimesG]

PSA

Joining a pool, even for Puzzle 135, should only ever be considered with maximum care.

Statements like

k — the total speed of checkpoint generation by all participants.

The efficiency of the solution is estimated as O(√n / k), which significantly exceeds single-participant approaches used in smaller puzzles (71, 69, 67).

followed by a total lack of understanding of WTF they're even asking people to run, is a total red flag - the organizer has no idea what he's talking about.

When you also see something like

Prize pool distribution

15% of the total reward is divided equally between the two participants whose checkpoints produced the collision (7.5% each).

60% is distributed proportionally to the number of unique checkpoints submitted by each participant to the pool.

The remaining 25% goes to the pool organizer.

the translation is: "hey, I need some stupid idiots to fill my DP database, thanks".

Bonus: let's dump some EXE files to try hiding some basic 100 lines Python code, just to pretend we're the smartest kid on the block. Why do it this way, unless there is something to hide, either now or in some future? If you'd knew the calibre of people  working in this field, decompiling some binaries to see what's going on is a picnic.

So, recipe to success:

- clone a repo that you have no idea how it works
- ask GPT for a few lines of Python, and try to be smart by hiding everything under a precompiled binary
- find idiots to contribute, while trying to still pretend you know WTF you're even dealing with.

[Torin Keepler]

PSA

Joining a pool, even for Puzzle 135, should only ever be considered with maximum care.

Statements like

k — the total speed of checkpoint generation by all participants.

The efficiency of the solution is estimated as O(√n / k), which significantly exceeds single-participant approaches used in smaller puzzles (71, 69, 67).

followed by a total lack of understanding of WTF they're even asking people to run, is a total red flag - the organizer has no idea what he's talking about.

When you also see something like

Prize pool distribution

15% of the total reward is divided equally between the two participants whose checkpoints produced the collision (7.5% each).

60% is distributed proportionally to the number of unique checkpoints submitted by each participant to the pool.

The remaining 25% goes to the pool organizer.

the translation is: "hey, I need some stupid idiots to fill my DP database, thanks".

Bonus: let's dump some EXE files to try hiding some basic 100 lines Python code, just to pretend we're the smartest kid on the block. Why do it this way, unless there is something to hide, either now or in some future? If you'd knew the calibre of people  working in this field, decompiling some binaries to see what's going on is a picnic.

So, recipe to success:

- clone a repo that you have no idea how it works
- ask GPT for a few lines of Python, and try to be smart by hiding everything under a precompiled binary
- find idiots to contribute, while trying to still pretend you know WTF you're even dealing with.

The fact that you’ve started to look into it is already good. That’s at least something. In my eyes, you’re just an upstart trying to look like you understand every topic. A person who actually knows what they’re talking about would ask a series of questions, wait for the answers, and only then conduct a discussion in a polite manner. But you’re performing for the audience because your ego is hurt after I pointed out your complete incompetence. And once again, you’re criticizing without any arguments - claiming I used ChatGPT to write the code, claiming it’s only 100 lines. Unfortunately, as always, you can’t provide any proof for your words. So I’ve concluded that you’re someone who doesn’t stand behind what they say.

https://t.me/puzzle135/14976

[kTimesG]

But you’re performing for the audience because your ego is hurt after I pointed out your complete incompetence.

Listen, dude, first of all, you don't know the difference between Rho and Kangaroo. You made your account yesterday, and today you're asking GPT for your first readings on basic things. It's OK, we all had a day zero for learning.

Me? Well, I had an actual ECDLP competition one year ago, some guy got 500 $ for breaking a 80-bits key in 15 minutes.

I also broke a 56-bits ECDSA signature challenge just a few months ago, for which no software even exists publicly. It took two weeks and actual hundreds of GPUs running around the clock, to solve the problem. Should I mention that I didn't need stupid idiots to convince to run my code on their machines, but rather implemented a distributed low-latency interruptible fully working system?

As for Kangaroo & co., I have around 20 or so versions of it, written from scratch, ranging from Python to C to CUDA, and using all sorts of shit (symmetry, multiple types of walks, endomorphism, etc.) and made literally tens of thousands of simulations to see how each one works and what parameters work better than others. So I know my shit pretty well, and guess what? It's also running as we speak.

Nevermind that there was a bot competition of breaking a 70 or so bits key once in the mempool.

My bot cracked it in 3 seconds. Just as it can crack any 80 bits key in a couple of seconds. Any key.

You? You have no clue about what the difference is between three totally different categories of algorithms, and are hiding weird Python code in EXE wrappers for unknown reasons.

[Torin Keepler]

But you’re performing for the audience because your ego is hurt after I pointed out your complete incompetence.

Listen, dude, first of all, you don't know the difference between Rho and Kangaroo. You made your account yesterday, and today you're asking GPT for your first readings on basic things. It's OK, we all had a day zero for learning.

Me? Well, I had an actual ECDLP competition one year ago, some guy got 500 $ for breaking a 80-bits key in 15 minutes.

I also broke a 56-bits ECDSA signature challenge just a few months ago, for which no software even exists publicly. It took two weeks and actual hundreds of GPUs running around the clock, to solve the problem. Should I mention that I didn't need stupid idiots to convince to run my code on their machines, but rather implemented a distributed low-latency interruptible fully working system?

As for Kangaroo & co., I have around 20 or so versions of it, written from scratch, ranging from Python to C to CUDA, and using all sorts of shit (symmetry, multiple types of walks, endomorphism, etc.) and made literally tens of thousands of simulations to see how each one works and what parameters work better than others. So I know my shit pretty well, and guess what? It's also running as we speak.

Nevermind that there was a bot competition of breaking a 70 or so bits key once in the mempool.

My bot cracked it in 3 seconds. Just as it can crack any 80 bits key in a couple of seconds. Any key.

You? You have no clue about what the difference is between three totally different categories of algorithms, and are hiding weird Python code in EXE wrappers for unknown reasons.

👍This is called bragging about nothing. One of us has to be smarter and put an end to this pointless, stupid conversation.

[Niekko]

Ok, this is probably enough. Pages and pages of useless nonsense.

Please K, don’t give him any more attention.  Anyone following this thread knows perfectly well how things really are, regardless of what this troll says. Just end it here.

[Sattoshi-rising]

can I use single stream prefix (append bits) or Blum Blum Shub and force ECC?
And dose anyone know how much of the range have been scanned I'm collecting data!
Don't mind the name I'm a fan only.

[coinableS]

Has anyone else attempted to quantify the actual keys per second on some of the popular puzzle solving scripts (ie fixedpaul)?

The fixedpaul vanitysearch reports a much higher keys per second than other scripts yet when I attempt to quantify those checks via expected prefix matches per m/keys checked it fails horribly, suggesting in reality it's running at 1% or less than the reported keys per second.

I'm reliably hitting one 1PWo3Je prefix hit approx every 5 billion keys checked on "slower" scripts.
Fixedpaul on the other hand is only hitting one 1PWo3J every 80 billion keys, and zero 1PWo3Je's.

I've tested these for weeks on multiple machines getting the same results: Fixedpaul is the fastest if you trust it's keys per second output; and if going by average prefix matches per m/keys checked the fixedpaul produces the least amount of prefix matches.

Prefix matches don't really matter but based on simple probability and averages it's a decent way to benchmark the actual keys checked.

  

Could you please share more information about the tests you ran? The repository has existed for a year now, and I think that if the speed were really as you said 1% of the reported output, someone would have noticed.

I tried running a quick test, comparing it with some “VanitySearch v1.16”, searching for the prefixes 1PWo3Je in the range 20000000000000000:2000000FFFFFFFFFF.
I’m copying both logs here:

-SNIP-

Honestly, I wasn’t able to reproduce the issue you found. The only difference, aside from the speed, is that the “old version” finds one extra prefix:

Public Addr: 1PWo3Je9Jc7wiMvUoH571GXZdgd1Ew4M7c
Priv (HEX): 0x00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000200000111A8C5B6DF

But this key is outside the range, because older VS versions made the GPU perform unnecessary work when the size of the range wasn’t a multiple of the number of threads.

Ok yours is benchmarking around 12.5 billion keys per 1PWo3Je match which is similar to my other scripts I'm using, so it's an issue on my end resulting in low prefix hits with fixedpaul. Maybe Windows is the issue.
I retract my 1% of actual speed comment.

[bibilgin]

Greetings to all.

Many people here have low GPU power, moderate GPU power, or a lot of GPU power. I'm sure everyone works differently.

Who can say which software they're most satisfied with?

Example: FixedPaul - VanitySearch works really well and is fast. I'd like to thank him very much.

For example, Kangaroo, BSGS, and Birthday Paradox, which open-source software are you most satisfied with, and which are fast, reliable, and really good?

The reason I ask this is this:
Some of us, including myself, sometimes run out of GPU power.

But we might have a thought, it might be luck, it might be probability. Everything starts with belief.

For example, I have a few rough ideas about the range of a 135-bit wallet. I just want to test these ranges. Does anyone have any software recommendations?

[Ovixx]

......................... Does anyone have any software recommendations?

Why do you ask stupid questions before trying to convince yourself? Test what you want and see which software better fits the capacity and hardware performance you use. Reread the 609 pages of discussions on this topic (and besides this topic), if you don't feel like trying it yourself.

[Garys27]

What setup is best on vast.ai for tools like bitcrack and keyhunt-cuda?
I am having trouble getting some of these tools to compile

[E36cat]

What setup is best on vast.ai for tools like bitcrack and keyhunt-cuda?
I am having trouble getting some of these tools to compile

for people like you would be better to start your own gpu renting website, they are making money, you guys are loosing money, puzzle 71 will not be found in the next 10 years minimum

[bibilgin]

Why do you ask stupid questions before trying to convince yourself? Test what you want and see which software better fits the capacity and hardware performance you use. Reread the 609 pages of discussions on this topic (and besides this topic), if you don't feel like trying it yourself.

Dude, look, someone asked a question after you.

Read and answer now, or forever SILENCE!

Keep your stupidity to yourself. My goal is to provide more meaningful information to help newcomers or those with missing information, rather than having them reread 609 pages.

Now, don't confuse the topic and get lost. If you know something, ask, tell, or ignore.

[NewCryptocasinos]

Address 20 = 863,317

[brainless]

What setup is best on vast.ai for tools like bitcrack and keyhunt-cuda?
I am having trouble getting some of these tools to compile

Write error codes, for examine, where is  need to be correct

[ccinet]

Greetings to all.

Many people here have low GPU power, moderate GPU power, or a lot of GPU power. I'm sure everyone works differently.

Who can say which software they're most satisfied with?

Example: FixedPaul - VanitySearch works really well and is fast. I'd like to thank him very much.

For example, Kangaroo, BSGS, and Birthday Paradox, which open-source software are you most satisfied with, and which are fast, reliable, and really good?

The reason I ask this is this:
Some of us, including myself, sometimes run out of GPU power.

But we might have a thought, it might be luck, it might be probability. Everything starts with belief.

For example, I have a few rough ideas about the range of a 135-bit wallet. I just want to test these ranges. Does anyone have any software recommendations?

We often have no idea of ​​the sheer scale of the space we're dealing with. If each space in puzzle 135's range was equivalent to one meter, the total space in that range would be equivalent to 2 × 10²⁴ light-years, or 25 trillion times larger than the known universe.

[brainless]

Greetings to all.

Many people here have low GPU power, moderate GPU power, or a lot of GPU power. I'm sure everyone works differently.

Who can say which software they're most satisfied with?

Example: FixedPaul - VanitySearch works really well and is fast. I'd like to thank him very much.

For example, Kangaroo, BSGS, and Birthday Paradox, which open-source software are you most satisfied with, and which are fast, reliable, and really good?

The reason I ask this is this:
Some of us, including myself, sometimes run out of GPU power.

But we might have a thought, it might be luck, it might be probability. Everything starts with belief.

For example, I have a few rough ideas about the range of a 135-bit wallet. I just want to test these ranges. Does anyone have any software recommendations?

We often have no idea of ​​the sheer scale of the space we're dealing with. If each space in puzzle 135's range was equivalent to one meter, the total space in that range would be equivalent to 2 × 10²⁴ light-years, or 25 trillion times larger than the known universe.

But you forget, all universe dimention can calculate with math, and math have only 0-9 dec digits, nothing beyond to 9
0 to 9 calc within second
Think and try to apply math,
Remember total math have only 4 element+ - * /. , above any root sq cube sq etc are details of 4 element, not a separate math
If you get command on 4 element you can solve whole universe within second
Brainless

[eggsylacer]

Greetings to all.

Many people here have low GPU power, moderate GPU power, or a lot of GPU power. I'm sure everyone works differently.

Who can say which software they're most satisfied with?

Example: FixedPaul - VanitySearch works really well and is fast. I'd like to thank him very much.

For example, Kangaroo, BSGS, and Birthday Paradox, which open-source software are you most satisfied with, and which are fast, reliable, and really good?

The reason I ask this is this:
Some of us, including myself, sometimes run out of GPU power.

But we might have a thought, it might be luck, it might be probability. Everything starts with belief.

For example, I have a few rough ideas about the range of a 135-bit wallet. I just want to test these ranges. Does anyone have any software recommendations?

We often have no idea of ​​the sheer scale of the space we're dealing with. If each space in puzzle 135's range was equivalent to one meter, the total space in that range would be equivalent to 2 × 10²⁴ light-years, or 25 trillion times larger than the known universe.

But you forget, all universe dimention can calculate with math, and math have only 0-9 dec digits, nothing beyond to 9
0 to 9 calc within second
Think and try to apply math,
Remember total math have only 4 element+ - * /. , above any root sq cube sq etc are details of 4 element, not a separate math
If you get command on 4 element you can solve whole universe within second
Brainless

In mathematics, there is only +, -, 0 and 1, and everything else is a derivative of that

[brainless]

Greetings to all.

Many people here have low GPU power, moderate GPU power, or a lot of GPU power. I'm sure everyone works differently.

Who can say which software they're most satisfied with?

Example: FixedPaul - VanitySearch works really well and is fast. I'd like to thank him very much.

For example, Kangaroo, BSGS, and Birthday Paradox, which open-source software are you most satisfied with, and which are fast, reliable, and really good?

The reason I ask this is this:
Some of us, including myself, sometimes run out of GPU power.

But we might have a thought, it might be luck, it might be probability. Everything starts with belief.

For example, I have a few rough ideas about the range of a 135-bit wallet. I just want to test these ranges. Does anyone have any software recommendations?

We often have no idea of ​​the sheer scale of the space we're dealing with. If each space in puzzle 135's range was equivalent to one meter, the total space in that range would be equivalent to 2 × 10²⁴ light-years, or 25 trillion times larger than the known universe.

But you forget, all universe dimention can calculate with math, and math have only 0-9 dec digits, nothing beyond to 9
0 to 9 calc within second
Think and try to apply math,
Remember total math have only 4 element+ - * /. , above any root sq cube sq etc are details of 4 element, not a separate math
If you get command on 4 element you can solve whole universe within second
Brainless

In mathematics, there is only +, -, 0 and 1, and everything else is a derivative of that

Sorry If I am wrong , but in my first school I learn +-*/ 4 element and count from 0 to 9
And in computer world learn how to make chips and their structure where bin 0 1 create a machine language,  0 1 is not a math
If any mathematics professor here can explain much better