Next scheduled rescrape ... never
Version 1
Last scraped
Scraped on 06/04/2025, 17:04:01 UTC
Well that is the funny thing, no one believes in true sequential. None of the pools, not even Bram lol.
If solve time is average of 50% regardless of the order of ranges, why don't the pools nor anyone, start at key x and search it all to key z? Does human nature/gut feelings get involved? Or some kind of personal, average probability based on past wallets solved? Would love to hear their reasoning.
If solve time is average of 50% regardless of the order of ranges, why don't the pools nor anyone, start at key x and search it all to key z? Does human nature/gut feelings get involved? Or some kind of personal, average probability based on past wallets solved? Would love to hear their reasoning.
If you go full sequential from 0 to N you’re giving away your progress to the competition. It has nothing to do with better probabilities of finding the key.
For the record the only reason I talk here is to prevent folks from spending money thinking they have a 0.0001% chance of success while it’s in fact more like 0.00000000…..0001%
I’m likely taking 68 but that does not mean I enjoy people throwing their money out the window. Especially when fooled by baseless math theories.
Some times it takes people losing money or their time, to finally understand, there are no shortcuts. So if you tell them once, and they don't listen, why beat a dead horse?
Quote
I admit that the first time someone told me about the prefix theory, I said: wow! Cool! But then I thought about it for five minutes and realized it didn’t make sense.
What was their theory, regarding prefixes/partial h160 matches?
Original archived Re: Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it
Scraped on 06/04/2025, 16:58:52 UTC
Well that is the funny thing, no one believes in true sequential. None of the pools, not even Bram lol.
If solve time is average of 50% regardless of the order of ranges, why don't the pools nor anyone, start at key x and search it all to key z? Does human nature/gut feelings get involved? Or some kind of personal, average probability based on past wallets solved? Would love to hear their reasoning.
If solve time is average of 50% regardless of the order of ranges, why don't the pools nor anyone, start at key x and search it all to key z? Does human nature/gut feelings get involved? Or some kind of personal, average probability based on past wallets solved? Would love to hear their reasoning.
If you go full sequential from 0 to N you’re giving away your progress to the competition. It has nothing to do with better probabilities of finding the key.
For the record the only reason I talk here is to prevent folks from spending money thinking they have a 0.0001% chance of success while it’s in fact more like 0.00000000…..0001%
I’m likely taking 68 but that does not mean I enjoy people throwing their money out the window. Especially when fooled by baseless math theories.
Some times it takes people losing money or their time, to finally understand, there are no shortcuts. So if you tell them once, and they don't listen, why beat a dead horse?