Agreed, that's why the:
min = base58.b58decode('1BY8GQbnueY11111111111111111111111').hex()
max = base58.b58decode('1BY8GQbnueYzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz').hex()
Throws me off, because it doesn't take into consideration, everything. I know years ago this was a topic of discussion, not to find patterns but to base payment for vanity addresses.
This was a good start (JLPs):
double VanitySearch::getDiffuclty() {
double min = pow(2,160);
if (onlyFull)
return min;
for (int i = 0; i < (int)usedPrefix.size(); i++) {
int p = usedPrefix[i];
if (prefixes[p].items) {
for (int j = 0; j < (int)prefixes[p].items->size(); j++) {
if (!*((*prefixes[p].items)[j].found)) {
if ((*prefixes[p].items)[j].difficulty < min)
min = (*prefixes[p].items)[j].difficulty;
}
}
}
}
return min;
}
But I think the individual even broke it down even further (don't remember how or what was used). Thanks to you and ktimesg for the input!