We got robbed of Puzzle 69.
Hello, we are coming out to claim we are the group that solved puzzle 69.
We are a group consisting of 12 software developers in Asia with interest in cryptography.
Prove it by signing a message with private key of public address bc1qlp0z45ctphhz0kywpmw3x2kjy7umhyfawxctah which you would need to be in control of, because it is the target output address of claiming puzzle #69.
According to mempool.space this is the first transaction
651d171e1b103501f57563c2c12a9154e7659e2d9c72c87e92c6609d8213c07a of the RBF timeline that mempool.space got aware of.
Excuse me to be frank and blunt, but publishing the claiming transaction in public mempool is plain stupid and the reason why the solver has very likely been robbed. Why didn't you use slipstream.mara.com as has been proven to be working as intended by the solver of puzzles #67 and #68 (Bram24732).
We are aware of RBF attack so we used a wallet software (we prefer not to say which one) which does not enable RBF by default, to transfer the coins. But when we checked the transaction, before it was confirmed, another transaction was created.
You clearly don't understand how unconditional Full-RBF works. Basically every miner or mining pool has that enabled because it gives them a financial incentive to do so. Miners don't give a shit if your super-secret wallet software (hilarious) flags RBF disabled.
I'm puzzled, you don't know such details or didn't dare to inform yourself upfront properly. This has also been discussed in this thread extensively. Well, it's not easy to find in all the repetative full-qote, no value response bs that we see too much here.
Now, our problem is how to pay our remaining GPU bill which amounts to $158,954.07. This is so frustrating! Why can't people play fair and square???
Blame yourself for not understanding how Full-RBF works. It seems you were aware that puzzle #66 was robbed, but #67 and #68 not. Why didn't you adapt the smarter strategy discussed here and likely elsewhere to safely claim puzzles with lower bitranges?