Quote from: mr.mister on Today at 06:02:50 PM

Everyone here is partly right, but the disagreement is mostly semantic, not technical.

Yes, a private key can theoretically be derived from a public key. That’s basic math. The mapping is bijective — for every valid public key, there's exactly one corresponding private key, based on the elliptic curve parameters.

But — the process is computationally infeasible with today’s hardware and known algorithms. That’s the foundation of Bitcoin’s security. The elliptic curve discrete logarithm problem (ECDLP) is not mathematically impossible to reverse — it's just so hard that even a trillion computers working together for a billion years wouldn’t crack a single key.

So:

Yes — possible in theory (mathematically speaking).

No — not feasible in practice (computationally speaking).

This is why we say Bitcoin is secure. Not because it's unbreakable in the abstract, but because it’s practically unbreakable without a major cryptographic or quantum breakthrough.

Let’s not confuse “possible” with “realistic.”

Which is what I precisely wrote, is it not? People with superficial knowledge and no touch with science tend to communicate badly. They confuse even simple stuff like correlation with causation.

Quote from: Satofan44 on July 20, 2025, 02:20:00 PM

It is called computationally infeasible, not mathematically impossible.

It is possible.

Quote from: stwenhao on July 20, 2025, 05:25:16 PM

Quote

Case closed. Walk away with some dignity.

Well, it's not my fault, that programmers and tech-savvy users understand Bitcoin better, than the rest of the community. Maybe I have too much patience, but usually I try to explain things in baby steps, even if I feel like some people don't deserve it.

Your patience is your strongest asset, much more so than your technical knowledge. Cheers to you, keep it that way.

I don't have such a resource at my disposal, especially not with brainless signature spammers.