Re: Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it
I never trust other people's code. Only the programs I write myself are the most stable.（linux） 
There are faster and more efficient tools out there. Python’s great for a lot of things, but for this? Not so much.
But he has the most stable (linux) programs he writes himself! ChatGPT must be envy of his code, searching for multiple matches between uncompressed and compressed addresses. Really stable stuff. If we combine this with COBRAS's 50000 public key division "how to get y" breakthroughs and the other guy's database, we might turn that needle into a giant Dune worm. But then it might be the one who finds us, we're digging into dangerous sands.
Meanwhile, 3Emi...YESs probably already spinning up his ASICs for 135.
So, you who criticize everything, what have you achieved? In your posts, you only refer to more computing power = more keys generated, but I don’t see anything we haven’t known for decades.
Fermat’s Last Theorem, although it may seem like an abstract problem with no direct practical applications, has had a significant impact on the development of mathematics. The quest for its proof led to advances in areas such as number theory, algebraic geometry, and the theory of automorphic forms.
Without the pursuit of solving this “insignificant” problem for practical purposes over 300 years, technology would not be what it is today.
What do I mean by this? The beauty of math is that even when we fail, we make progress.
A true scientist is one who does not impose their beliefs on others as absolute truth, and an intelligent person knows this.
Math lesson of the day: “humility.”
It’s unfortunate that instead of fostering a productive discussion your response seems to miss the mark and resorts to personal attacks. Let’s take a moment to set the record straight.
First, the person you’re criticizing has demonstrated a deep understanding of the topics he discuss, consistently backing up his points with logical reasoning, facts, and clear examples. His contributions have been informative and accessible which is the hallmark of someone who not only understands the subject but also knows how to communicate complex ideas effectively. This is invaluable in any discussion especially one involving technical topics like mathematics or computing power.
Your point about Fermat’s Last Theorem is certainly valid. Yes, theoretical pursuits often lead to unexpected practical advances ... this is one of the most beautiful aspects of mathematics. But it seems you’ve mischaracterized the person you’re addressing. Nowhere did he dismiss theoretical pursuits as "insignificant." Instead, he has focused on the practical application of increased computing power, which is a factual statement: more computing power does indeed generate more possibilities in key generation and encryption. This isn't a reductionist view of mathematics but an acknowledgment of how certain technological advancements operate.
The tone of your message suggests that you feel entitled to define what constitutes "real" scientific contribution. But a true scientist doesn’t rely on condescension or unfounded accusations. They engage with ideas based on merit and not by attempting to discredit others through personal attacks.
If you disagree with his perspective, by all means, engage with his arguments directly. However, resorting to accusations without offering your own valuable insights or knowledge weakens your position. Disagreement is welcome in any intellectual conversation but respect and humility... well ... values you mention, should go both ways.
Let’s elevate the conversation. Criticism can be constructive when it’s backed by evidence, but dismissing someone’s contributions without adding substance of your own is hardly the way forward.
I much appreciate the contribution of the person you're attacking and hope he'll keep on ...