gmaxwell
Moderator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2128


November 07, 2013, 03:13:24 AM 

Really the network has only done about 73.6 bits of work so far, our lowest is lucky.







Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.




e4xit


November 07, 2013, 01:52:31 PM 

Really the network has only done about 73.6 bits of work so far, our lowest is lucky. Statistically, as the block hashes (I assume) form some kind of distribution, I would say in laymans terms, that we are likely within the 73.6 bits of work done so far to have some outliers or 'lucky' results. My question would therefore be, would the amount of 'luck' required for our lowest yet fall outside the expected distribuition (and therefore be truely 'lucky') or is this "expected luck"?

If you don't have the private key for "your" bitcoins then you have no bitcoins. There are a million bits in a bitcoin: 1 ฿ = 1,000,000 ƀ



elgreco


June 22, 2014, 05:05:13 AM 

Update please

1E1GrECoNP1RpvWe72kS5cDZozA47nUFs4



gmaxwell
Moderator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2128


June 22, 2014, 06:17:23 AM 

Not too much has happened, I was waiting to get one with apparent work > 2^80 to update again.
Best right now is 0x000000000000000000049bb3b6b9c135f66536e066704369905043df809c2441 ... or about 2^77.79, the cumulative block measured work level on the network is at 2^79.3 so we're behind.




sile16
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 25


June 24, 2014, 04:38:53 AM 

What is the best block for litecoin?




abcdefyyy
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 5


July 02, 2014, 07:54:59 PM 

Ok, I scan the blockchain in python and calculated the achieved difficulty for each block.
If anyone is interested I can put the data here.
Interesting thing is that the block 0 (genesis block) have achieved difficulty equal to 2536.





gmaxwell
Moderator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2128


July 07, 2014, 01:22:21 AM 





gmaxwell
Moderator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2128


August 01, 2014, 07:30:35 AM 

00000000000000000000b7de9e5c19e52be073156924b7cf235efb27ae8a202a
math.log((2**256)/0x00000000000000000000b7de9e5c19e52be073156924b7cf235efb27ae8a202a,2) = 80.47746080768307
"Apparent difficulty" of 391,895,084,984,304.
And pretty much just on track with the regular block measured work: UpdateTip: new best=00000000000000000000b7de9e5c19e52be073156924b7cf235efb27ae8a202a height=313338 log2_work=79.978295 tx=43580048 date=20140731 13:29:05 progress=0.999999
This is the first block solution we've found which is a >80 bit partial preimage of 0.




amaclin


August 01, 2014, 08:02:43 AM 

We should start "Guinness facts for Bitcoin" project with an answers to all popular (and even dumb) questions
1. What is the lowest block hash seen? 2. What is the maximum tx (in bytes, in funds, in fees) 3. What is the longest scriptPub and scriptSig? 4. How many zeros does your publicKey have in hex representation? 5. The first and last (alphabet order) address (need signature verifying) 6. Maximum transactions count in block ... etc

Last night, at last, the Evil's spine was broken It was impaled and quartered where it stood. New day has dawned and people are awoken By proudly marching, stinking, gory Good.



teukon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246


August 01, 2014, 07:15:38 PM 

00000000000000000000b7de9e5c19e52be073156924b7cf235efb27ae8a202a
math.log((2**256)/0x00000000000000000000b7de9e5c19e52be073156924b7cf235efb27ae8a202a,2) = 80.47746080768307
"Apparent difficulty" of 391,895,084,984,304.
And pretty much just on track with the regular block measured work: UpdateTip: new best=00000000000000000000b7de9e5c19e52be073156924b7cf235efb27ae8a202a height=313338 log2_work=79.978295 tx=43580048 date=20140731 13:29:05 progress=0.999999
This is the first block solution we've found which is a >80 bit partial preimage of 0.
Oh, nice! May I ask how you are calculating/estimating the total work done by the network?




gmaxwell
Moderator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2128


August 02, 2014, 12:59:57 AM 

Oh, nice! May I ask how you are calculating/estimating the total work done by the network?
The smallest block hash yet found is an estimate of the total work done by the network. Also, the sum of the difficulties (well *2^32) on the blocks so far is an estimate, which is the one returned in the bitcoin core logs or in the getblockchaininfo rpc.




teukon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246


August 02, 2014, 07:42:31 AM 

The smallest block hash yet found is an estimate of the total work done by the network. Also, the sum of the difficulties (well *2^32) on the blocks so far is an estimate, which is the one returned in the bitcoin core logs or in the getblockchaininfo rpc.
I see, thanks. Interestingly, it seems to me that we should be "ahead" in this sense about 2/3 of the time. I believe this follows from the fact that given some amount of work done, n say (number of hashes), the probability that we are behind at that point is simply (1  1/n)^n which converges to exp(1) as n tends to infinity.




TheRealSteve


April 09, 2015, 07:53:34 PM 

The current top 20 are:
Time for an update, as another thread was posted that basically asked the same thing The current top 20 are: height hash note 334261 000000000000000000002d414bb8f9175ba6c6563721e1ba2c1373c2bd94f29f 336175 000000000000000000005a5e143087632fbf0eea743ad99646d9fc67d40f7441 331908 000000000000000000006836c4009ab00485cd1de4d5958ca7839184d0b80067 326055 000000000000000000007e1166d92acf81d4e2d95934fcdec1276b09a7db9390 343775 000000000000000000007eef13ee1f2fcf1b469bd862fcc93b48ec49548ecf6d 340483 000000000000000000008ac86ba28085be84af2ebd6fc6935a004e57fb60c083 313338 00000000000000000000b7de9e5c19e52be073156924b7cf235efb27ae8a202a 331987 00000000000000000000ec03e3183bacc8b18437180f63f6a563267a186225bc 334151 0000000000000000000119adb3da72742b1eba98f9dc26f73858e91652b42287 333904 0000000000000000000119f88871f8a3c3b7be053c98b31e9c4676df30243cfe 320736 0000000000000000000137130c5a047157e7b0e063de6f3d30246a4f2005a818 315024 0000000000000000000181f37629e8b80debca2c295c350cb1bd156e7e1a25ee 340600 00000000000000000001a092bb0f2311bf00987a8f7d92e2ed6b36a522054741 324204 00000000000000000001bdebf80d8c40d9b30a6fe76b962ff59c8d3cdeec3473 343641 000000000000000000020fc1ca1268a27de8646059ae2bcca61d13d16890b5db 326091 000000000000000000024b7dea2b63b4e2be64ef1663369fe2f22504587d094b 330140 000000000000000000026ccbc4bbb6a608e90132329190291127f971a604e5c9 266381 000000000000000000028c32e6952731326747bae4be8db0f832d6eea0362050 lowest block height 349240 00000000000000000002a133e4691d2f8894a3af7a1b3624e8c2e8c7a8a4fe3c highest block height 330727 00000000000000000003107221e16ef91fdf83b3729c5f370dafb754bf6443b2




TheRealSteve


April 09, 2015, 09:01:04 PM 

Just to poke at some of David Rabahy's trivia questions: Is a hash of *all* 0s possible? Current block with the most number of 0's (anywhere, not just leading) in the hash: height hash note 326799 000000000000000003fec4b5cd08090ab80010345952ab08048e088a00c2b09b 29/64* zeros
(* see earlier discussion on whether all zeros is even theoretically possible ) One wonders when a trailing triple 0 appears.
http://btc.blockr.io/block/info/9521 (actually four trailing zeros  other blocks with four trailing: 83373, 293374, 332802) http://btc.blockr.io/block/info/10169 (actual triple) ( there's none with 5 trailing zeros ) Which hash has the most trailing 0s? Tie between the above four listed Why not a leading sequence of 3.1415926535...? Can't have it leading, of course, but here's one with 314159 in it, at least (only one, thus also no longer sequence yet): height hash 234923 0000000000000171ae44bb6c1700314159dc61480b54edf71e5281ee7c6147a7
Here's some other fun ones height hash 132928 00000000000011eec4defc0ffee303401e460d2b8406474692d0ff141b9cbbf4 170852 00000000000002b58bf498d718db69dfc25cb318036949d3dad6bc0ffee28744 57598 00000000051565707437c6626a8f88c92fe9decaf4c19f0c1b77558d3bf03aac 84177 0000000000161062e2762c06457decaf0298724f662468465c84ff595abde159 137577 00000000000001e06f54fa79354e337678f840a7bc75ddecaf8fd9d089f9eed2 148781 00000000000004c2d5703896fb122b28dc7347f3023b0decaf28e3aacffffcb1 189433 00000000000005decafc4b33943d70fc596dd080f9a6737d94e9b4c88d890bf7 210406 00000000000002de9c1decaf9cb207af4452e8f00baeadc7729618ff3f4ce9e9 272206 00000000000000048d9564d82b8ac4d20decafb08e831ea7c8ddef7b9b5fac90 279275 00000000000000004ada6d6cead5c00a860494582252371c9c294decaf3b422a 303682 00000000000000005a9d3af33c5b4b52cc6b53c8decafc6dfb4259b06681dfaa 317717 000000000000000002e4c9274d83196ef16b0130972e7cc6ddecaf735cc67699 344465 000000000000000006c7cdecaf9dbe50a5fc693e7a555550d57aa1706f3f964b 344545 00000000000000000bbcc57dd86a829d674506e0cb151a09e91a9decafbf292e
No 'deadbeef'... yet.




Mikestang


April 09, 2015, 09:36:32 PM 

Thanks for the update!




Har01d


April 10, 2015, 05:57:49 PM 

There is a couple more... 323453  000000000000000 012345b434cea9b76ae6bffb49e624ca60182fc15a0a1ee2b 155644  00000000000002ad18f02d363564da35 01234596dae6345b93fa1579fc3f7d98 218505  0000000000000141c1e370d4 123456771e7d77463e91e4f2a5e572257ef46362 321252  000000000000000010c1948fe886469b0e8d4f6aef7c2373 abcdefe8fc9a2e86 270096  0000000000000003606abfa5b19 abcdefd839cc1b0da2fea63cbda317597de5a 112974  000000000000b6e76dba167cc240c0014 abcdef563ecd8ceec73f1ac57c6f420 and there is no "dead*beef" yet, but there is... 18851  000000005a18c8f3b0c7a32159b76edcdc7af5 bada903a f00d60dd8fad297c0c Have fun




Taras


April 10, 2015, 09:19:37 PM 

Okay, but what about the highest block hash? I'm predicting it to start with 00000000ffff.

this is a good signature



TheRealSteve


April 10, 2015, 10:33:29 PM 

Okay, but what about the highest block hash? The current bottom 10 are: height hash note 32009 00000000fff9e01287736bee2fecdd88ae31b5602858c5273d43351cfadecd58 highest block height 5386 00000000fff91949181449d048aca5a1cc6d0e3e3f34e89c00ab2709696b8da0 27948 00000000fff58158d6ce595a2976d547f16b0ec8aba64b7a9a68c78d469b54b5 31664 00000000fff3d56591bc0eae8cee73a214d1d451d704f86126415ed540850df7 30133 00000000fff31576873d6ec35ba6659e72193ddf621ea1edd7faa462336a2211 1304 00000000fff0728c5da1548b4f15576aa272f0f4952031ae56a5be355310ba0a lowest block height 31108 00000000ffeec57f29c3f3df6014774aa1a2f00114ab16bd26b0d270974cd706 9396 00000000ffeb8e847d94f7085c6cc0359c77d8ebe52b9fb59b90e9ef95a23c44 16250 00000000ffeb2708cfc0aa1b5db3a6eacccc9112eb10cc0de2ec3e98c6c11a7a 28614 00000000ffe5255e229781dd72b1626c4df90e77390d38f6337ce949bc3ff300
I'm predicting it to start with 00000000ffff.
AMAZING! but wrong :x




Taras


April 11, 2015, 03:59:45 AM 

Okay, but what about the highest block hash? The current bottom 10 are: height hash note 32009 00000000fff9e01287736bee2fecdd88ae31b5602858c5273d43351cfadecd58 highest block height 5386 00000000fff91949181449d048aca5a1cc6d0e3e3f34e89c00ab2709696b8da0 27948 00000000fff58158d6ce595a2976d547f16b0ec8aba64b7a9a68c78d469b54b5 31664 00000000fff3d56591bc0eae8cee73a214d1d451d704f86126415ed540850df7 30133 00000000fff31576873d6ec35ba6659e72193ddf621ea1edd7faa462336a2211 1304 00000000fff0728c5da1548b4f15576aa272f0f4952031ae56a5be355310ba0a lowest block height 31108 00000000ffeec57f29c3f3df6014774aa1a2f00114ab16bd26b0d270974cd706 9396 00000000ffeb8e847d94f7085c6cc0359c77d8ebe52b9fb59b90e9ef95a23c44 16250 00000000ffeb2708cfc0aa1b5db3a6eacccc9112eb10cc0de2ec3e98c6c11a7a 28614 00000000ffe5255e229781dd72b1626c4df90e77390d38f6337ce949bc3ff300
I'm predicting it to start with 00000000ffff.
AMAZING! but wrong :x Damn! My Big Gang Mafia intuition was wrong! I wrote a chain parser myself but only did the first 10,000 blocks. (It can only see blk000000.dat) What about the hashes with the most zeros anywhere in the hash?

this is a good signature



