Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bitcoin puzzle #66 was solved: 6.6 BTC (~$400k) withdrawn

blockchain.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 428 posts

Re: Bitcoin puzzle #66 was solved: 6.6 BTC (~$400k) withdrawn

#381

Post by zeagle »

stavros wrote: post #253
zeagle wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the one where someone else pays a higher ATM fee and scoops my cheque deposit? We can talk about reduced bits in the puzzle vs a regular transaction but when you need to consider how you are going to safely claim your money as if you are laundering you have to admit this is a little nuts.

You're discounting how nuts it is that a third party has veto over whether you can spend your money and how.

I think it's part of living in a society with rules and law. It also protects me from rampant fraud and theft and also helps ensure taxes are paid for the benefits I use like roads, hospitals, and education.

Re: Bitcoin puzzle #66 was solved: 6.6 BTC (~$400k) withdrawn

#384

Post by yunohn »

Terr_ wrote: post #380
yunohn wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point about the features you claim have to do with adoption and scale. You don’t need crypto to make a more efficient payment network. Regarding nano-gpt, that’s already a solved problem. Literally all API platforms support pay-as-you-go credits. I went to your link, and I loved the irony of them asking for a 0.10$ minimum deposit - note the complete lack of crypto rates. That is par for the course for crypto apps…

> nobody cares what the coin conversion is TBF, that particular data-point tends to have a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" extrapolation, ex: 1. "If sellers only care about what regular currency it can be turned into, that means it has failed as a currency because it's just an intermediate payment scheme." 2. "If sellers don't care about what regular currency it can become, that probably means it has failed a…

Sure, but it’s really easy to list both - even that almost never happens.

Re: Bitcoin puzzle #66 was solved: 6.6 BTC (~$400k) withdrawn

#386

Post by DoctorOetker »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #323
drexlspivey wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the only other way is to mine it yourself. They are a public company that run their own miners if it makes you feel any better.

No, the other way would be for the organizer to author proper scripts that prevent front-running.

Please provide substantive feedback, I don't mind a downvote, but there is no learning opportunity without feedback content.

I wish HN eliminated downvotes without posting associated feedback

I stand by my point: pay peanuts, get monkeys.

If you don't take extra measures to ensure the safe reception of the reward, don't be surprised your security gauge turns out sticky.

Re: Bitcoin puzzle #66 was solved: 6.6 BTC (~$400k) withdrawn

#387

Post by drexlspivey »

dheera wrote: post #374
drexlspivey wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you underestimate how big the number of 2^128 ECDSA operations are. It is 20 orders of magnitude bigger than the puzzle that was just solved (that took 2 years). There is no way we scale our compute that much in 70 years unless we start building Dyson spheres. To answer your question that change in bitcoin can happen at any point in time with a protocol update. It would probably won’t even require a hard fork…

> no way we scale our compute that much in 70 years Huh? Ask someone in 1950 if we would ever achieve petaflops on a desktop-sized PC. Yet here we are with H100's. About 10 decimal orders of magnitude faster than the state of the art in 1950. Quantum computing will also happen, and I think 70 years is more than a realistic time frame.

The bottleneck is energy you can’t scale human energy consumption by 20 orders of magnitude (not in 70 years anyway). There is just not enough of it.

Re: Bitcoin puzzle #66 was solved: 6.6 BTC (~$400k) withdrawn

#388

Post by y42 »

What I don't understand, hopefully someone is still reading it here: The hint says this:

>> First output: take random number from 2^0 upto 2^1-1, use it as private key >> Second output: take random number from 2^1 upto 2^2-1, use it as private key >> Third output: take random number from 2^2 upto 2^3-1, use it as private key

To me it sounds like that wallet #10 has a range from 2^9 to 2^10 - 1 - so you don't actually need to check previous bits. But somehow it seems like everyone is crawling through the whole range of possible private key. Doesn't make sense, does it? Am I missing something?

Re: Bitcoin puzzle #66 was solved: 6.6 BTC (~$400k) withdrawn

#389

Post by mandmandam »

edm0nd wrote: post #375
mandmandam wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Raiblocks was never hacked, an exchange was (though it could have been an inside job, and BitGrail was at the very least negligent). Very different, though yes, still damaging. And this isn't about personal beliefs, market cap, market share, etc. The conversational point was that it's technically vastly superior to BTC, which it undeniably is. On market cap, adoption and hype, BTC wins hands down, for now, but there'…

I love crypto, not dunking on it. The FranciscoTheBomber admin of BitGrail should have served prison time over the entire thing. He got off basically with zero consequences. Nano will never be in the top 100 of crypto projects ever again. That's just a fact.

> That's just a fact.

Do I need to paste the definitions of fact, vs prediction, prophecy, belief and opinion in here?

I remember hearing similar pronouncements presented as 'ironclad fact' after Mt. Gox, and after the DAO hack, and even during the Bitcoin Cash debate. The field is more full to the brim of people presenting opinions as fact than I would ever have believed. Even if you were someone I'd heard of and respected, a known expert; if you claimed your opinion in this space as fact I would yawn and put my respect for you down a notch.

And, the discussion wasn't about market cap, top 100, or anything like that - just verifiable technical characteristics.

The scam talked about in this thread wouldn't work in Nano, because Nano doesn't require mining or fees. Many other coins have the same characteristics, Nano was an example. I would bet that any other example would have been just as triggering to people.

Re: Bitcoin puzzle #66 was solved: 6.6 BTC (~$400k) withdrawn

#390

Post by TrapLord_Rhodo »

alex_duf wrote: post #293
TrapLord_Rhodo wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's all bitcoin is... If someone had a quantum-supreme solution they would go after the sitoshi wallets. Some addresses have like $1B+ and combined represent ~$200B.

But touch that $1B+ wallet and suddenly nothing is worth anything... so if I had the capability to silently steal money from the bitcoin blockchain, I would go slow, and in discrete places.

Sitoshi wallets awaken all the time, and transfer to different wallets and go to sleep for years again.

Granted, moving a sitoshi era wallet to a coinbase wallet would raise red flags, but those sized deals are done otc.

Post reply on HN