Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it
by
Bram24732
on 09/03/2025, 02:19:59 UTC
I don’t think there is value in having a debate here. kTimesG is right everytime he talks against the 300+ pages of nonsense theories here. If you can’t handle his blunt way of doing it, just ignore him. it won’t make him more right or you less wrong.

Are you suggesting that every time he speaks, we should be silent and accept his words as absolute truth, even when we believe he is wrong? Seriously? What a low argument. I prefer he responds, at least he knows how to debate, even though I don't share his dirty debate tactics. Principally, just to continue embodying the role of "ktimesg" here, I suspect you are talking to him seeking whatever you wanted to talk about with Retiredcoder, and he denied you, and now you are flattering him. I'm not going to ignore him if I don't want to. After all, this is a forum to discuss ideas, not Wikipedia. As practice, answer this: in what do you think he is right, or in what did I fail? Without deviating from the direct topic and with arguments, without generalizing? I believe you won't be able to do it without falling into some kind of fallacy. Give us your technical opinion on why you think probabilistic search is unfeasible.

I think you are extrapolating quite a bit here Smiley
Now to your question. The probability for each of the 2^67 keys in the space to be valid is equal, and is independent from other keys. That’s a consequence of uniform distribution and is basic math. As a result any pattern you might think exist simply doesn’t.

that is a bias, since it is the probability of finding 1 unique match, which is what you explain, it is basic properties, I am clear about that, but it does not end there, we are looking for composite probability, that is, several, which totally destroys your argument, I would agree with you if the probabilities of finding 2 or 3 matches in a data set were the same as finding 1, but it is not. your logic failed, it is because of that same logic that I can say that in the bit68 range there should not be two exactly the same matches for 1MVDYgVaSN6iKKEsbzRUAYFrYJadLYZvvZ , this being very unlikely to occur, I decide to omit that search in the entire range when finding a 1MVDYgVaSN6iKKEsbzRUAYFrYJadLYZvvZ . Now do you get it?

Nope. You’re the one with the bias Smiley
The odds of finding key X a second time is exactly the same as it was before you found it. That’s again a consequence of random uniform distribution.