Quote from: smartpermutations on Today at 07:25:25 AM

The sequence bbb appeared 3 times, which is uncommon.

Not uncommon; your excuse showcases how weak your algorithms are...

I guess you must have skipped this analysis instead of trying to project this as a marketing tool for your business. Basically my understanding is, when you are failing to cover all the combinations, how you will hit the target key?

(Also, you posted this here and on main topic. Posting same contents twice may fall into a category of plagiarism, I am not sure.)

But, I found some interesting from your site:

Quote from: https://www.smartpermutations.ch/bitcoin-puzzle-tx

2024-09-12: puzzle #66 (6.6 BTC) was solved by 1Jvv4yWkE9MhbuwGUoqFYzDjRVQHaLWuJd (tx) but the original spending transaction was replaced by bc1qpkp47q5cucrvnyepsdnjcv2kzyav5ze0ta7n67 (tx) spending only 5.94 BTC. Another address 15XVN6hFkzGdUTY1XcsYKXxRezjARwyBQx took the rest of the prize: 0.66 BTC (tx).

Quote

the transaction was mined bypassing the public mempool to avoid interception as in the case of puzzle #66.

I am not sure but these sound like bitcoin mining is not happening in a fair way.

Could you explain how you knew that 1Jvv4yWkE9MhbuwGUoqFYzDjRVQHaLWuJd was the original finder of the key of puzzle-66..

Also, how we can confirm that puzzle-67 was spent by bypassing the public mempool?

What about the recent puzzle-68? It was also spent similar to puzzle-67 or like usual BTC tx ?