Apologies if this has been addressed yet -
did anyone follow backwards to where these coins came from?

If this is mentioned earlier already, can someone maybe please just point me to there?
 

I haven't read much about it here, but I think the creator Satoshi Rising knows how to cover his steps very well, otherwise, due to the popularity of the puzzle, we would already know who he is.




What is certain is that none of us knows who is behind this.

Aren't your "couple of weeks" off, we were all eager and anxious to hear you spell out the "HEX code" of your MATHEMATICAL and PROBABILITY-based crackpot theories. You know, the ones that defy the modern understanding of statistics. The one that disproves that independent events of an random uniform distribution does NOT have memory. The holy theory that shows that it is totally weird to have a coin flip heads 66 times in a row. The proof that the Gambler's Fallacy is a hoax. Yes, I mean your continuous statements that you found statistical average distribution of prefixes in a double hashed cryptographically secure system, which were built on the very basis of acting exactly as a pure random numbers generator.

Disappointement.

Now, since you're the guy that thinks that if you play a slot machine many times in a row will increase your win chances, you should either keep quiet and accept your losses, or show that the last 500 years of MATHEMATICS and PROBABILITY got it wrong indeed, and proof to us that having two consecutive private keys produce the exact same hash is more unlikely than having them different any other way won't you say?

What are you really saying? You don't need to prove that you are useless other than chatter.

Now listen carefully;

My hardware power is 56 days, 3 RTX 4070 ti = 7500Mk/s
I currently have 50+ 1BY8GQbnue prefixes. (Just the ones I found) There are around 20+ from others. (Total is close to 80.)
I have a total of 3 with the 1BY8GQbnueY prefix, including the one sent by cctv.

Now I want to ask everyone a question.
Who can find so many prefixes with this hardware in 56 days?

Now you take that memorized software knowledge and don't show up for a while. Because when I come back you won't have an answer.

Note: I definitely know who this Puzzle maker is. There are also proofs of this. But I don't want to share anything with you about this. Because you are not a good person. You are selfish, only thinking about your own pocket.

A note to the puzzle creator: MM - 1991 (only he understands this.)

I'm saying you're in denial of the basic rules of PROBABILITY you are so fond of. Your knowledge in the area is null, otherwise you would maybe understand the first law of independent events (e.g. hashes in your case): they don't have memory, and their history (sequences) do not matter. You're also totally clueless on the MATHEMATICS level as well, otherwise you would quickly realize (it takes 30 seconds) that using the prefix as some sort of base for averaging and scan-jumping is flawed, in the same way that using the suffix, or any middle part, is flawed. What you should be looking for are the RIPEMD-160 bits matching 1:1, not some base-whatever representation, which actually diverges from the raw information you're seeking. And the only way to do that matching is brute-force, no BS crackpot probability statistical theory. What you are doing is exactly the Gambler's Fallacy put in practice, and unfortunately nothing anyone tries to prove it to you in any way will ever change your mind. You will continue to believe that because you found X prefixes there are only some semi-exact number of prefixes, and that they are somehow spread apart, which is in complete opposition with their intended design: nothing stops the range from having much more or much less than N amount of prefixes, and nothing stops two consecutive/close keys to hash to the same value.

Also you seem to use some very slow software, so basically you're just wasting electricity and are proud of that. All I can say is keep it up. NB: I said many times I don't care about any puzzle below 100 ~ 110 bits, so my advices to you are totally free, take them or leave them.

I still do not understand what this proves. I can do the same, if given a hex, I can eventually give you the closest 1BY8GQbnu or 1BY8GQbnue.

This script is a simple way to try to check for statistical patterns in the results of a hash160. Even if exact patterns are not found, relatively close matches with approximate intervals are visualized, and I suppose this is what is being explored here. Still, cryptographic hashes are designed to minimize the probability of discernible patterns. However, questioning mathematics has never been wrong; it has always been the driving force of development. As I always say, statistics are counterintuitive, so we can only observe and see where the investigation leads.

Might be this one:
1BY8GQbnueq2o7rhTM9rT6utJUVeGSxvhF

No, I understood it. But I figured you had the hex code (private key) already, so I was giving you the address that I believe close to the one you posted.
I know the private key, but if what all you say is true, surely you know it too.

No, it is not right. It is way under 19 decimals lol.

Look bib, I have more prefixes than you do, so don't try to educate me on "...in fact there are many wallets with similar prefixes", this has been known for years lol.

You posted a hex and wallet, and I told you which one I think may be the closest, based on what I have. I could hash away to try and find maybe the one you think is the closest to it, but I won't.

You could tell me the hex of the one you think is closest, and I can tell you if that is closer than the one I posted.