Quote from: mahmood1356 on Today at 03:59:31 AM

Quote from: onepuzzle on August 07, 2025, 03:23:43 PM

Quote from: mahmood1356 on August 07, 2025, 02:50:20 PM

Quote from: kuramuqnko on August 07, 2025, 12:41:12 PM

Quote from: mcdouglasx on August 07, 2025, 12:20:27 PM

Quote from: kuramuqnko on August 07, 2025, 11:53:07 AM

Sorry, guys, but unfortunately I have to ask my question for the third time, as Im still curious. SimonNeedsBitcoin steered the conversation in a completely different direction that’s already been discussed multiple times here and whether that path is right or wrong doesn’t concern me. What SimonNeedsBitcoin decided to explain was an answer to a question I never asked. So… once again, I had like to ask my question, and if anyone can answer, I will really appreciate it. I don’t understand what difference the puzzle number makes - whether it’s #61, #71, #82, etc. And specifically, what makes the puzzles that are multiples of 5 special — like #85, #100, #105? Or in the end, since no one is giving an answer, does that just mean this thing has no significance at all?

The public keys of multiple 5 puzzles were intentionally revealed, which opens the way to the possibility of using kangaroo, which allows for a faster solution of the problem, something that is not possible with puzzles 71, 72... that do not end in 5 or 0, which makes them difficult to solve because only conventional (slow) brute force can be applied. However, if for example you solve puzzle 71 and do not use the Mara service, when sending the transaction, you are exposing its public key to the world, which will cause bots to use kangaroo and replace your transaction, taking away your prize, since the difficulty of puzzle 71 lies in the fact that the public key is hidden, but once an attempt is made to spend it and it is included in the mempool, the public key is leaked.

For this reason you should use mara Slipstream for these puzzles, because mara does not broadcast the transaction publicly, which means it does not reveal the public key until the transaction is confirmed (included in a block) and at this point, this is not reversible, so you will have collected the reward without problems.

Thank you for the answer! The explanation was simple, but I just didn't pay attention. I thought there were several puzzles with known public keys, but I hadn’t noticed that it's specifically the ones that are multiples of 5.

I personally have no trust in intermediary sites like Slipstream Mara. These are all delusional thoughts that are expressed. Anyone who can solve Puzzle 71 can create a transaction with a gift of 1 million Satoshi and broadcast it on the network. Rest assured, with this reward, miners will not hesitate for a moment to accept it. Your transaction will be confirmed and there is no need to worry until the robots try to reach the public key from the private key.

Bullshit.

Even if you accept a 6 BTC fee, a pool still has to find a block in the end. And as we’ve seen before, many vultures are active and would use the replace-by-fee method to overwrite the transaction. Just admit it—you want to steal the money and nothing else. So far, slipstream has always worked; why wouldn’t it work now? Especially with Marapool behind it. For Marapool, 7 BTC is like $1,000. No one there would try to steal—it’s at least extremely unlikely.

Don't say this nonsense in this thread. What I said has nothing to do with standard transaction sending methods. Everyone has been using this method since the beginning of Bitcoin. Your nonsense is a misleading way of breaking the standard and normal principles of sending transactions. So stop telling your lies. Are you getting paid by Slipstream for these ads?

It's entirely possible that this was just advertising.

I'm not targeting any private mining pool. I'm saying that all private, third-party sources shouldn't be trusted. We can only trust ourselves, not anyone else. The claim that private keys can be cracked in seconds is, in my opinion, a form of intimidation. The claim that puzzle #69 was stolen by a bot is also a form of intimidation. If they were truly that powerful, why is puzzle #71 still sitting there? Everyone knows that cracking private keys is a difficult task, requiring immense computing power and even luck. If bots were truly that powerful, I believe all the puzzles would have already been cracked.

If you cracked the private key for #71, I'm sure everyone would say you were lucky because everyone was working hard to crack it, but no one else had your luck. When you try to transfer your winnings to your address, they'll say, "Hey, wait, don't do it normally. A bot will steal it! You should give me your transaction information and I'll do the transfer for you. That way it's safe." Haha, they're too embarrassed to ask you to give them your private key because it's too obvious. They only need your transaction information and claim they won't steal your winnings. Don't you think this is the biggest joke of the 21st century?

Only normal, traditional transfers can be guaranteed to be secure, comply with Bitcoin's rules and decentralized principles, and truly receive your winnings. Of course, if you're afraid and want speed, just use the highest fee.