Large Bitcoin Collider (Collision Finders Pool)

[rico666]

And your notorious requirement of negative proof... almost looks like you beg for upgrading your title from mascot to jester.

So, you can't prove anything! Why should we trust your claims?

First, get rid of the "we" in your statements. There really is no one else but you.

Second, I can perform - like anyone else - positive proofs. (debunking your "anything")
I can prove, I have a private key to an address.
I cannot (and no one can) prove I have NOT a private key to an address.

We shall try: Please prove, you have NOT the private key to https://blockchain.info/address/1FeexV6bAHb8ybZjqQMjJrcCrHGW9sb6uF
(a.k.a. this address isn't yours)

If I could prove something ISN'T, my 1st victim would be god.
As I cannot prove something ISN'T, god and the FSM may exist.

We chewed this through like 4 or 5 times. You still do not understand (as you bring this up over and over again), you're like a broken record.



Rico

[1713875893]

1713875893

[1713875893]

1713875893

[1713875893]

1713875893

[1713875893]

1713875893

[Jude Austin]

HERE WE ASK AAAAAGAIN:

1. Prove you have the privkey.
2. Prove it is not yours.

Proving one has the privkey to a 80k BTC address discards the need for any further proof down the line.
The laws of physics don't apply anymore etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_Cvtr86H5g

And your notorious requirement of negative proof... almost looks like you beg for upgrading your title from mascot to jester.


Rico

Speaking of physics, finding a collision is similar to quantum particles, only the observer really knows, lol.

Speaking of privkeys, finding a privkey is different to finding a collision, lol.

Yes, but finding a privkey to an existing address with funds on it are proof of a collision.

NO!
It just proves you've "found" the privkey for that bitcoin address. To find a collision you have to find TWO privkeys to the same bitcoin address!

Ugh, my God, you want a collision in EC.

Yeah, that'll be really hard to prove:

1. You will have to have both private keys to show any substantial proof of a collision.
2. Now instead of finding 1 private key out of all the atoms in the known universe you must find 2 and they have to be different and equal the same thing.

Still finding one private key out of all the possible private keys is pretty intriguing and possibly we may encounter a second private for the same address.

You never know if you don't look! Hopefully Rico keeps the address hashes in the bloom filter of ones we have found already to catch any true EC collisions.

Thanks,
Jude

[becoin]

HERE WE ASK AAAAAGAIN:

1. Prove you have the privkey.
2. Prove it is not yours.

Proving one has the privkey to a 80k BTC address discards the need for any further proof down the line.
The laws of physics don't apply anymore etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_Cvtr86H5g

And your notorious requirement of negative proof... almost looks like you beg for upgrading your title from mascot to jester.


Rico

Speaking of physics, finding a collision is similar to quantum particles, only the observer really knows, lol.

Speaking of privkeys, finding a privkey is different to finding a collision, lol.

Yes, but finding a privkey to an existing address with funds on it are proof of a collision.

NO!
It just proves you've "found" the privkey for that bitcoin address. To find a collision you have to find TWO privkeys to the same bitcoin address!

Ugh, my God, you want a collision in EC.

Ugh, yeah! I told ya from the very beginning.The name of this "project" is misleading!

[Jude Austin]

HERE WE ASK AAAAAGAIN:

1. Prove you have the privkey.
2. Prove it is not yours.

Proving one has the privkey to a 80k BTC address discards the need for any further proof down the line.
The laws of physics don't apply anymore etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_Cvtr86H5g

And your notorious requirement of negative proof... almost looks like you beg for upgrading your title from mascot to jester.


Rico

Speaking of physics, finding a collision is similar to quantum particles, only the observer really knows, lol.

Speaking of privkeys, finding a privkey is different to finding a collision, lol.

Yes, but finding a privkey to an existing address with funds on it are proof of a collision.

NO!
It just proves you've "found" the privkey for that bitcoin address. To find a collision you have to find TWO privkeys to the same bitcoin address!

Ugh, my God, you want a collision in EC.

Ugh, yeah! I told ya from the very beginning.The name of this "project" is misleading!

"Large Bitcoin Private Key Finder"

It can serve both purposes!

And that doesn't sound nearly as cool.

It's all fun and games man, are the odds really in our favor?

I mean come on you are arguing with people who are looking for a specific pair of entangled particles in the known universe...

WHO'S THE CRAZY ONE NOW?

lol

[cz3kit]

HERE WE ASK AAAAAGAIN:

1. Prove you have the privkey.
2. Prove it is not yours.

Proving one has the privkey to a 80k BTC address discards the need for any further proof down the line.
The laws of physics don't apply anymore etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_Cvtr86H5g

And your notorious requirement of negative proof... almost looks like you beg for upgrading your title from mascot to jester.


Rico

Speaking of physics, finding a collision is similar to quantum particles, only the observer really knows, lol.

Speaking of privkeys, finding a privkey is different to finding a collision, lol.

Yes, but finding a privkey to an existing address with funds on it are proof of a collision.

NO!
It just proves you've "found" the privkey for that bitcoin address. To find a collision you have to find TWO privkeys to the same bitcoin address!

Ugh, my God, you want a collision in EC.

Ugh, yeah! I told ya from the very beginning.The name of this "project" is misleading!

Who cares? I personally think it is an interesting name. Due to the name I got interested into this project started to read up more on it and I learned what it really does. If someone is interested they will do the same. If it is not interesting, they won't. I don't get your hateful behavior. Let the people here work on the project in peace on you mind your own business, unless you have something useful to add here.

[rico666]

NO!
It just proves you've "found" the privkey for that bitcoin address. To find a collision you have to find TWO privkeys to the same bitcoin address!

Ugh, my God, you want a collision in EC.

No and no.

He is right that for a proof of collision you need two different private keys resolving to the same address.

He is of course totally off by using the term "the privkey for that bitcoin address" which is indicating that he isn't aware of the 2⁹⁶-1 other private keys to that address.

Strictly speaking, until proven otherwise, we have found two privkeys where only by a chance of

1.26217744835361888866e-29

for each of them, we hit "the one 'original' key this address was 'created' with"

You see, I'm almost running out of quotation marks. Some have expressed the hypothesis that these were created by "bad wallet software" or were "experiments". However, probability theory says, we would have been as lucky as 1 in 6277101735386680763835789423049210091073826769276946612225 to find twice the "original" key to two addresses found. 1/(2⁹⁶-1)²

It's no proof, but for the time being my hypothesis is, we were not that lucky.


Rico

[becoin]

HERE WE ASK AAAAAGAIN:

1. Prove you have the privkey.
2. Prove it is not yours.

Proving one has the privkey to a 80k BTC address discards the need for any further proof down the line.
The laws of physics don't apply anymore etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_Cvtr86H5g

And your notorious requirement of negative proof... almost looks like you beg for upgrading your title from mascot to jester.


Rico

Speaking of physics, finding a collision is similar to quantum particles, only the observer really knows, lol.

Speaking of privkeys, finding a privkey is different to finding a collision, lol.

Yes, but finding a privkey to an existing address with funds on it are proof of a collision.

NO!
It just proves you've "found" the privkey for that bitcoin address. To find a collision you have to find TWO privkeys to the same bitcoin address!

Ugh, my God, you want a collision in EC.

Ugh, yeah! I told ya from the very beginning.The name of this "project" is misleading!

"Large Bitcoin Private Key Finder"

It can serve both purposes!

And that doesn't sound nearly as cool.

Of course. I can understand this. A pool of "thieves" doesn't sound nearly as cool as pool of "researchers".
Or you just pretend to be the Bitcoin Black Swan? lol

[cz3kit]

HERE WE ASK AAAAAGAIN:

1. Prove you have the privkey.
2. Prove it is not yours.

Proving one has the privkey to a 80k BTC address discards the need for any further proof down the line.
The laws of physics don't apply anymore etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_Cvtr86H5g

And your notorious requirement of negative proof... almost looks like you beg for upgrading your title from mascot to jester.


Rico

Speaking of physics, finding a collision is similar to quantum particles, only the observer really knows, lol.

Speaking of privkeys, finding a privkey is different to finding a collision, lol.

Yes, but finding a privkey to an existing address with funds on it are proof of a collision.

NO!
It just proves you've "found" the privkey for that bitcoin address. To find a collision you have to find TWO privkeys to the same bitcoin address!

Ugh, my God, you want a collision in EC.

Ugh, yeah! I told ya from the very beginning.The name of this "project" is misleading!

"Large Bitcoin Private Key Finder"

It can serve both purposes!

And that doesn't sound nearly as cool.

Of course. I can understand this. A pool of "thieves" doesn't sound nearly as cool as pool of "researchers".
Or you just pretend to be the Bitcoin Black Swan? lol

Thieves? Wow That's nice.
This means each locksmith is a thieve because he is able to open your front door? Every researcher on computer security, crypt analysis is a thieve/black hat because they try to figure out if something is secure?

[icanscript]

You need to know how to break something before you know how to properly secure it. This is what research is for. Not Thieves.

[becoin]

HERE WE ASK AAAAAGAIN:

1. Prove you have the privkey.
2. Prove it is not yours.

Proving one has the privkey to a 80k BTC address discards the need for any further proof down the line.
The laws of physics don't apply anymore etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_Cvtr86H5g

And your notorious requirement of negative proof... almost looks like you beg for upgrading your title from mascot to jester.


Rico

Speaking of physics, finding a collision is similar to quantum particles, only the observer really knows, lol.

Speaking of privkeys, finding a privkey is different to finding a collision, lol.

Yes, but finding a privkey to an existing address with funds on it are proof of a collision.

NO!
It just proves you've "found" the privkey for that bitcoin address. To find a collision you have to find TWO privkeys to the same bitcoin address!

Ugh, my God, you want a collision in EC.

Ugh, yeah! I told ya from the very beginning.The name of this "project" is misleading!

"Large Bitcoin Private Key Finder"

It can serve both purposes!

And that doesn't sound nearly as cool.

Of course. I can understand this. A pool of "thieves" doesn't sound nearly as cool as pool of "researchers".
Or you just pretend to be the Bitcoin Black Swan? lol

Thieves? Wow That's nice.
This means each locksmith is a thieve thief because he is able trying to open your front door (without been asked to)?

You've figured it right.

[Jude Austin]

HERE WE ASK AAAAAGAIN:

1. Prove you have the privkey.
2. Prove it is not yours.

Proving one has the privkey to a 80k BTC address discards the need for any further proof down the line.
The laws of physics don't apply anymore etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_Cvtr86H5g

And your notorious requirement of negative proof... almost looks like you beg for upgrading your title from mascot to jester.


Rico

Speaking of physics, finding a collision is similar to quantum particles, only the observer really knows, lol.

Speaking of privkeys, finding a privkey is different to finding a collision, lol.

Yes, but finding a privkey to an existing address with funds on it are proof of a collision.

NO!
It just proves you've "found" the privkey for that bitcoin address. To find a collision you have to find TWO privkeys to the same bitcoin address!

Ugh, my God, you want a collision in EC.

Ugh, yeah! I told ya from the very beginning.The name of this "project" is misleading!

"Large Bitcoin Private Key Finder"

It can serve both purposes!

And that doesn't sound nearly as cool.

Of course. I can understand this. A pool of "thieves" doesn't sound nearly as cool as pool of "researchers".
Or you just pretend to be the Bitcoin Black Swan? lol

Now now, you can't call anyone a thief if they haven't stolen anything, right?

I think the best way to go about proving a collision in EC and not stealing from someone would be to set it up so if the original owner of the address provides a PK that is different to the one that LBC found then it does two things:

1. Proves that LBC found a collision.
2. Gives LBC the ability to give the user their funds back.

It would be hard to prove that they were the original owner using the same PK because the PK being found by LBC would be public knowledge. Since, as Rico explained, it would be easier to find a collision than the same PK.

IF (Original PK != LBC PK)
{
returnFunds = true;
collisionFound = true;
}
ELSE
{
returnFunds = false;
collisionFound = false;
}


I am not about stealing people's Bitcoins but I am definitely interested in recirculating "dead" or "lost" Bitcoins, 1FeexV6 for example.

Then of course a huge party would get thrown and I would probably be found lifeless with a huge smile on my face, haha.

Thanks,
Jude

[rico666]

Stop the excessive quoting or else. I have also nuclear options.

Rico

[Jude Austin]

Stop the excessive quoting or else. I have also nuclear options.

Rico

Take it easy, Putin.

[rico666]

As some of you remember, arulbero proposed some changes to the ECC generation process.
Meanwhile, he also implemented a drop-in replacement of EC computations and I integrated it.
After a frenzy search for a bug which I introduced by premature optimization ... the new LBC client works!

It ran now through for 7 hours straight, delivering over 530 Gkeys. (~ 21 Mkeys/s)

Code:

Ask for work... got blocks [1406666464-1406672415] (6241 Mkeys)
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo (19.91 Mkeys/s)

Code:

$ nvidia-smi 
Sat Mar 25 07:37:19 2017       
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| NVIDIA-SMI 378.13                 Driver Version: 378.13                    |
|-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| GPU  Name        Persistence-M| Bus-Id        Disp.A | Volatile Uncorr. ECC |
| Fan  Temp  Perf  Pwr:Usage/Cap|         Memory-Usage | GPU-Util  Compute M. |
|===============================+======================+======================|
|   0  Quadro M2000M       Off  | 0000:01:00.0     Off |                  N/A |
| N/A   63C    P0    N/A /  N/A |   2201MiB /  4042MiB |     81%      Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
                                                                               
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Processes:                                                       GPU Memory |
|  GPU       PID  Type  Process name                               Usage      |
|=============================================================================|
|    0     21092    C   ./gen-hrdcore-skylake+gpu-linux64              540MiB |
|    0     21094    C   ./gen-hrdcore-skylake+gpu-linux64              540MiB |
|    0     21095    C   ./gen-hrdcore-skylake+gpu-linux64              540MiB |
|    0     21096    C   ./gen-hrdcore-skylake+gpu-linux64              540MiB |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

To give you a comparison: The current GPU client for download does 7.5 Mkeys/s on my notebook.
My development version (bloom@GPU, some optimizations) did 9 Mkeys/s.
Now, that libsecp256k1 got replaced by the arulbero-ECC: 19-20 Mkeys/s

GPU usage up from 34% to roughly 80% - there is still a capacity margin we have ;-)


PS: So of course I will make this version available after some more tests and compiling the packages.



Rico

[becoin]

HERE WE ASK AAAAAGAIN:

1. Prove you have the privkey.
2. Prove it is not yours.

Proving one has the privkey to a 80k BTC address discards the need for any further proof down the line.
The laws of physics don't apply anymore etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_Cvtr86H5g

And your notorious requirement of negative proof... almost looks like you beg for upgrading your title from mascot to jester.


Rico

Speaking of physics, finding a collision is similar to quantum particles, only the observer really knows, lol.

Speaking of privkeys, finding a privkey is different to finding a collision, lol.

Yes, but finding a privkey to an existing address with funds on it are proof of a collision.

NO!
It just proves you've "found" the privkey for that bitcoin address. To find a collision you have to find TWO privkeys to the same bitcoin address!

Ugh, my God, you want a collision in EC.

Ugh, yeah! I told ya from the very beginning.The name of this "project" is misleading!

"Large Bitcoin Private Key Finder"

It can serve both purposes!

And that doesn't sound nearly as cool.

Of course. I can understand this. A pool of "thieves" doesn't sound nearly as cool as pool of "researchers".
Or you just pretend to be the Bitcoin Black Swan? lol

Now now, you can't call anyone a thief if they haven't stolen anything, right?

A thief that tried but didn't succeed is still a thief, right?

[icanscript]

A thief that tried but didn't succeed is still a thief, right?

No, Nothing has been stolen, A thieve who steals nothing is a nothing.

[rico666]

@rico666
"....Because we assume the private keys to addresses with funds on them are also uniformly distributed in the search space, this means that the effective search space until any collision for these is found is 160bit - log2(9000000)bit = ~137bit."

I might be wrong, but because of this (wolfram alpha expression):

1-(((2^21)! * (2^160 über  2^21))/((2^160)^(2^21))) 

I'm not sure I follow this. (mathematically I do, but semantically I don't)

Where do you get the 2²¹ from? Thats 2M.

I assume the possibilty of hitting one of your approximately 2,5 mil target addresses is:
1.5*10^-36  or  1/(2^119)

We have 14 mil target addresses at the moment.

If you agree with the things written above, I would recommend to expand the target address space to 2^23 (8.x mil pub keys)
and gain a 4 times higher possibility to hit one of your targets:
2.4*10^-35 or or  1/(2^115)

It's still 160 - log₂(14000000) = ~ 136.26bit search space


Rico

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

Stop the excessive quoting or else. I have also nuclear options.

Rico

24 hours with no quote, no reply??!!  I saw my life colliding before my eyes!

I apologize for myself, becoin, and everybody else, going forward for the next 2¹⁶⁰ posts.

[rico666]

I'm going to consolidate the DB a little bit. There are Ids that evidently made it so far as of installing the LBC client and even fetching work, setting the password, but never delivered a single block, so I'm going to clean up that cruft (except unlimitedwings) as no work is lost.

Code:

201	d569c66deb88b4547fd880d1f7a6d7e5	0	n/a
202	Broutinjoel	0	n/a
203	panglaoIsland	0	n/a
204	2d3c673afd7a8ed0c3ce1d839c6787af	0	n/a
205	_1_2_3_4_	0	n/a
206	cc575cfb261730ae3d27950af8514acd	0	41d 12h 5m 6s
207	Hoolakawoola	0	n/a
208	A_N_T_R_a_t	0	47d 44m 55s
209	Pelumpu_	0	28d 13h 35m 54s
210	f21c9d1b1b8a74a7c988b0a1f890c151	0	n/a
211	unlimitedwings	0	15h 8m 55s
212	fddf2ed38e2046733ea7ac2ab72439ec	0	95d 18h 50m 25s
213	9fa2f89ede80442a0fcc7ecd17667770	0	n/a
214	d99429a21f453dd575644a291daa517a	0	n/a
215	_TOM______	0	n/a
216	DarkMann	0	n/a
217	ratel007	0	n/a
218	ExploitAgency	0	19d 14h 55m 4s
219	tg43te4t534	0	n/a

"Earlier access"

Anyone with GPUauth=1, a Skylake or a AVX2 capable CPU and a GPU of course, please PM me if you'd like to try the new double-speed (that was for me, for you it's) triple-speed client before official release.


Rico

[Real-Duke]

Hi rico,

good work! The new beta-client does a really nice job here:

real-duke@C1-Ubuntu:~/gcollider$ ./LBC
GPU authorized: yes
Will use 4 CPUs.
Ask for work... got blocks [1439310448-1439333807] (24494 Mkeys)
oooooooooooo -snip- ooooooooooooooooooooooo (20.32 Mkeys/s)

with "time": 20 (my default setting)

A big jump compared to the "old" client and his ~6.6 Mkeys/s