Quote from: btcdvl on October 29, 2024, 10:27:21 AM

Quote

What are you talking about? secp256k1 (as part of ECDSA) is used to generate public key and sign transaction/message, not handling password.

Just so you understand the subject, there are much superior methods other than SHA-256 Eliptic Curve that you can generate both public and private keys. I know what Public Key and Private Key are. Satoshi designed it as a system that is impossible to recycle but can be signed with a public key. A private key gives you full access. But today's cryptography is way beyond that. That's why it's not bruteforce-proof.

1. Why do you mention SHA-256? After all, it's not used to generate private or public key.
2. If you know about private and public key, then why did mention password when i asked about secp256k1?
3. What exactly do you mean by "That's why it's not bruteforce-proof."? AFAIK it's still not practical to brute-force Bitcoin address (even when it's public key is known), assuming the private key and K value (which used to sign transaction/address) is generated securely.

Quote from: btcdvl on October 29, 2024, 10:27:21 AM

Quote

IMO it's flawed way, when i've seen people claim they attempt to recover their Bitcoin they obtained a decade ago or longer. Besides, how do you determine whether certain Bitcoin were stolen? Rely on people's report?

I'm looking at how people use technology and what their security is.

Actually, your point of view is right, opening the door of a house with thousands of keys is a similar level of theft.
We agree that this is unethical.

My point of view is to accelerate this process and evolve cryptocurrencies into higher-level structures.

The principle of Bitcoin was built entirely on being trustworthy against other valuable currencies.

The Chinese, who are not asleep, with a good ASIC and good Logic, will design this and take over BTC funds.

1. What do you mean by "accelerate this process"? Accelerate cracking Bitcoin?
2. I don't think cracking alone would evolve Bitcoin. How about proposing to make Bitcoin to use more secure cryptography instead?

Quote from: btcdvl on October 29, 2024, 07:51:44 PM

Quote from: alani123 on October 29, 2024, 05:05:20 PM

--snip--

I'm not talking about a computer, I'm talking about P2P. For that, you need to read what is written first.
Give me a mathematical probability that it won't happen.

Do you mean peer to peer when you say "P2P"? If so, how it's different than using lots of computer to crack Bitcoin's cryptography?