Quote from: kTimesG on Today at 06:35:19 AM

Quote from: denyAKA BLACKANGEL on Today at 05:56:27 AM

i help a little to all,evry time what you find you save and you can see the frequenz and distanz of address f = 1/T this can help a loot you dont need a loot of GPU more it's a luck and knowledg i use python i write a self,not vanity just random address generate and some algorithm Cool

thx for sharing the path to success!

There are soooooo many wrong things with it (literally one wrong thing every few words).

I have a question for all of ya prefix hunters who stubbornly think there is a single seed of truth in that theory.

On April 1st I posted here a joke which in fact, was not a joke at all.

I intentionally searched for the wrong H160 of the puzzle 68 prefix.

For who's not a math expert: because the puzzle 68 address has the first byte of its H160 larger than 58, then we can divide by 58 and, voila, obtain addresses that start with the same address prefix, but an address which is one less in length. Nobody observed the flaw until I hinted at the issue!

After scanning less than 500 trillion keys, a 53-bit prefix was found.

Now, here's what another experiment ended up at:

After scanning 9000 trillion keys for the actual address (the good hash) of Puzzle 69, there was still no 53 bits or larger prefix found.

Question: why did I find a 53 bit prefix of some hash after 500 trillion keys, and no 53 bit prefix after 9000 trillion keys (and counting)?

So, never forget that just as well as you might get lucky, you never, ever, ever, have the guarantee to find anything remotely closer than what you expect.

Oh, and just for fun, the bad luck scenario was actually done under the theoretical base that prefixes should be spaced apart rather than being close. The magnitude between the min and max distance does a great job of making this concept useless. No idea what you people see, I think you only see what you want to see.

They like the program`s output, it just feels like a zero.zero win =)