I don't think what you are looking for is information.

1- You are here to satisfy your EGO and ease your psychology of meddling in everything.

2- You are thinking of selling a few things from those who find wallets.

You can answer the topics you want to get information about.

Now, without making yourself look small, keep your "KNOW-IT-ALL, COOL, LONG" bla bla articles to yourself. The person who wants to get information from you will write you privately. Like they wrote to me. lol

@RetiredCoder I want to admit that unfortunately I did not win mini game #130, I just followed your explanations and found the key #130 0x33e7665705359f04f28b88cf897c603c9

Yes missed out on mini 130 but learned something new heh.

Although someone clarify this for me (Base64) :   IIONt3uYHbMh+vUnqDBGHP2gGu1Q2Fw0WnsKj05eT9P8KI2kGgPniiPirCd5IeLRnRdxeiehDxxsyn/VujUaX8o= 
                                                      (Base64)  :  IIONt3uYHbMh+vUnqDBGHP2gGu1Q2Fw0WnsKj05eT9M=        is from priv key 20838db77b981db321faf527a830461cfda01aed50d85c345a7b0a8f4e5e4fd3   

First 32 bytes are "r" value ?

Hi thanks for this.

Thought i would give win wsl a bash and get many build errors.

First was SECP256k1.h renamed to SECP256K1.h fixed that
Then secp256k1/Timer.h and bloom/bloom.h missing #include <cstdint> done that

after that i now get In file included from bloom/bloom.cpp:6:
/usr/include/openssl/md5.h:52:38: note: declared here
   52 | OSSL_DEPRECATEDIN_3_0 unsigned char *MD5(const unsigned char *d, size_t n,

Now it builds but when running Bigdb -bs 1000000 it gives Bigdb: command not found

Just a heads up maybe its my setup or maybe i smoked too much but i like tinkering with things like this so ill update when running.

well that was quick got it running on wsl.

./BigDb -bs 1000000 didnt work for me renaming to ./Bigdb -bs 1000000 worked

Bigdb v0.1(alpha) by Mcdouglasx
[======================================================================] 100 %

Now i can play.

My approach is just like that, I just try to do it in more sophisticated way. Such as, in the case of #67, my experimental version of Bitcrack can be ordered, based on parameters prior to start, to do all private keys from a given range, but forced to contain, looking at the private key as if it were a string of characters, for example this:
---
At least one "letter-letter" next to each other anywhere in the string, at least one number "5" anywhere, but not more than 3 occurrences of number "5" anywhere, at least 3 times "any-number" anywhere but lower than <8, at least one occurrence of "D" anywhere, and must not contain any occurrence of "letter-letter-letter" or more occurrences, no number "7" anywhere in the string, etc., etc.
---

What profit are you talking about? The profit is zero, and the fee does not matter. In fact, what justice are you talking about? Who are you protesting against? No one stole anything from nobody, less alone from you. If you're investing time in the puzzle, you already lost more than one dollar already, but it was your time, why do you feel like you deserve anything from anyone? No one cares, less alone the creator or the bots.

No one is asking anything from you, so there's nothing to claim. If you are smart, you shouldn't even attempt to solve a puzzle for each you already know there are bots that can snatch the UTXO from right under your nose in a matter of fraction of a second after the pubKey is exposed. I don't, I give zero f***s about any puzzles under 100 bits. So, no reason to complain before-hand, for something you shouldn't even care about, since you should know it's a lost and useless battle before you even load your gun to go to war. This is why I don't understand what you are trying to demonstrate. This is like a chicken and egg problem - you're creating a logical paradox from nothing.

Maybe before someone brags about issues they will most likely (basically 100%) never encounter and have to face with, they should first post here the SHA256 of the public key, to prove they actually solved the puzzle without risking their precious discovery gets stolen. That should be your first step, otherwise you are simply dreaming of the day you actually find the solution, you know, without investing hundreds of thousands of dollars (which is, with almost 100% probability, how much you'd have to waste on compute power to crack #67). I think you underestimate the problem size, versus your random chance of success, which is close to the infinitesimal value if you only invest 1 $.

Hi Alberto, could retiredcoder be the creator himself?
Yes, it's as possible as it is unlikely.

So, do you know him? Why are you defending him even though it seems suspicious? Or is it just flattery?

I know you probably won't answer, but don't you find it at least a little suspicious that he has the keys to the puzzle but still slowly publishes code on GitHub, as if he's writing it on the fly and making corrections as he goes?

Don't you think someone with three or more years in this should have had his code ready long ago?

For me, it's simple: either he's the creator or he's someone who just threw a bunch of money at him and is using the kangaroo we all know, trying to act interesting.

I thought you were smarter than that, but I'd like to hear a solid reason why you think retiredcoder shouldn't be questioned.

Hi Alberto, could retiredcoder be the creator himself?
Yes, it's as possible as it is unlikely.

So, do you know him? Why are you defending him even though it seems suspicious? Or is it just flattery?

I know you probably won't answer, but don't you find it at least a little suspicious that he has the keys to the puzzle but still slowly publishes code on GitHub, as if he's writing it on the fly and making corrections as he goes?

Don't you think someone with three or more years in this should have had his code ready long ago?

For me, it's simple: either he's the creator or he's someone who just threw a bunch of money at him and is using the kangaroo we all know, trying to act interesting.

I thought you were smarter than that, but I'd like to hear a solid reason why you think retiredcoder shouldn't be questioned.

How did he help him with the transaction? I have been reading this thread for quite some time but I think I missed the part about BOTs where someone tries to steal the sats after when someone withdraws the BTC.   Is there someone who can reply to this explanation of what really is going on?  If we really find out the private key then how can we claim it safely by not getting trapped by the Bots?

Question for everyone.

If you find a effective method to complete 135 are you going to share your method/code ?
We have known for years that if you have money you have a head start in these puzzles if you bothered to read from page 70 odd if not before that.

No one here is going to hand you that.

snippets yes.

Me personally i wouldn't.
I would tip a few people in this forum for the intel posted if that's what helped me other than that why am i putting others in a million dollar race when i have a head start.

Its a dog eat dog world full of delusional people.

80bit yes, because you can use low DP. For 120-130 and higher - you have to use high DP and you will get big overhead with JLP. And it's not easy to test 120-130bit range to confirm


Yes I started with JLP code a long time ago, but after some time I got enough experience and I created my own software from scratch - much faster and efficient. So it's not a mod.

If someone really has 2.3 mil in Bitcoin, why would they spend so much time bragging about it on a forum?
I would never sign up here again. I would NOT be online anymore. Publicly announcing large sums could attract unwanted attention, including scammers or hackers. Or something much worse than that.

All I wanna know is whether it was a manner of hopping or a manner of giant babies. Nothing more.

Congrats to the winner!


Come on, you don't need to check the balance, you just need to get address of puzzle #120, that's all.