Next scheduled rescrape ... never
Version 2
Last scraped
Edited on 15/06/2025, 06:54:17 UTC
85 seconds for puzzle 48, equivals to aproximately 45 years for puzzle 71 at, think about it 
Your estimate is for sequential calculations within a range, right? The lottery is either a lottery or it never comes or it could be now because it doesn't follow any range
only luck It has been debated to death (and proved in all shapes and forms): "luck" is not affected if you scan either sequentially vs. some picked untested key (either at a random position, or via whatever other made-up logic, like prefixes).
What gets affected though, is the efficiency of the computations, and there is absolutely nothing currently that is known to be more efficient (e.g. that costs less or runs faster) than a full-on sequential scan. That is, if one wants to solve anything in the most efficient manner possible, not playing bingo with the elliptic curve and two uniform hash functions.
That way I have fun and luck (whitout calculations) and chance remain with me to find 71 at low cost.
That's why it was so much fun to take 2 hours to find key 48,
The expectation is very good, even when it may never happen. "Put the coin in the machine, select the 18 characters and let it go" . 1000 Millions tikets per second
and just only need 1 ticker winner.But I get what you mean, but I've been here for a while and have been following all the posts
ps: Anyone who takes this too seriously is halfway to victory or defeat and the destruction of their own life.
make it fun
Version 1
Edited on 08/06/2025, 07:24:27 UTC
85 seconds for puzzle 48, equivals to aproximately 45 years for puzzle 71 at, think about it
Your estimate is for sequential calculations within a range, right? The lottery is either a lottery or it never comes or it could be now because it doesn't follow any range
only luck It has been debated to death (and proved in all shapes and forms): "luck" is not affected if you scan either sequentially vs. some picked untested key (either at a random position, or via whatever other made-up logic, like prefixes).
What gets affected though, is the efficiency of the computations, and there is absolutely nothing currently that is known to be more efficient (e.g. that costs less or runs faster) than a full-on sequential scan. That is, if one wants to solve anything in the most efficient manner possible, not playing bingo with the elliptic curve and two uniform hash functions.
That way I have fun and luck (whitout calculations) and chance remain with me to find 71 at low cost.
That
The expectation is very good, even when it may never happen. "Put the coin in the machine, select the 18 characters and
1000 Millions tikets per second not bad and But I get what you mean, but I've been here for a while and have been following all the posts
Original archived Re: Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it
Scraped on 08/06/2025, 06:54:24 UTC
85 seconds for puzzle 48, equivals to aproximately 45 years for puzzle 71 at, think about it
Your estimate is for sequential calculations within a range, right? The lottery is either a lottery or it never comes or it could be now because it doesn't follow any range
only luck It has been debated to death (and proved in all shapes and forms): "luck" is not affected if you scan either sequentially vs. some picked untested key (either at a random position, or via whatever other made-up logic, like prefixes).
What gets affected though, is the efficiency of the computations, and there is absolutely nothing currently that is known to be more efficient (e.g. that costs less or runs faster) than a full-on sequential scan. That is, if one wants to solve anything in the most efficient manner possible, not playing bingo with the elliptic curve and two uniform hash functions.
That way I have fun and luck and chance remain with me.