Quote from: mcdouglasx on Today at 09:10:03 PM

Quote from: kTimesG on Today at 08:30:12 PM

Quote from: mcdouglasx on Today at 07:10:22 PM

If someone can solve bit 100 quickly with kangaroo, they can solve 135 in record time using a little ingenuity.

So you went from prob. stat. 90% reduction achievements straight to breaking the DLP sqrt(N) bound theorem, which is proven for 40 years?

The public keys are nothing more than labels, unless one actually breaks the EC math itself. In a N-bit set / interval / whatever, there are 2**N colors. Or 2**N emojis. Or 2**N fruits. Using any kind of binary logic on their index / value / counter has exactly zero relevance, because it is totally relative and can always be rebased to some other base value. This is like saying you have telepathic capacities and can read someone's mind when they think of a color / emoji / fruit.

And it would be a stupid idea to solve 135 using a 100-bit solver, it just increases the complexity terribly, no matter how you approach the problem (splitting to 2**35 100-bit solve steps, introducing statistical non-sense, mixing unicorn algorithms, etc.). Because it would defy the laws of nature to find something that goes below sqrt(N) (on long-term average, not on a lucky hit exception).

Your brain, with all due respect, does not allow for intuitive solutions. That is why some of us believe your responses are based on AI. Without knowing what I'm referring to, you complain and attack. You assume too much without understanding what I'm talking about.

That's why Bibilgin humiliated you, you assured that he didn't have the key and he slapped you. You don't give anyone the benefit of the doubt, that's being arrogant, and the most ignorant person is always the one who thinks they know everything.

Next time you want to refute something, at least ask what I mean because I made an assertion but not the how. That way you don't reveal your frustration and need to stand out; you only make yourself look ridiculous. How can someone who considers themselves moderately intelligent refute an idea they don't know? It's like if I said that your ultra-fast Kangaroo code that you promised is impossible, I would never say that because I haven't seen it, nor do I know what your futuristic Kangaroo does to jump to a conclusion.

I also think that Mr.Bibilgin searched hard using different methods and the probability was higher for him, maybe he found it, I don’t know.