We do not need to conduct empirical testing because of that. But it you want to, you can use my 67 proofs to do so, which will also disprove the prefix theory.
How did it disprove anything?
Were there multiple h160 matches that were back to back to back or something? Did I miss that?
I dunno about others, but I have been talking about averages...and I think your public data set, kind of proves what I was saying weeks back.
First Run:
- Average difference: 282602011632656
- Smallest difference: 194903573833
- Largest difference: 1946984192923367
Second Run (Excluding Smallest and Largest Differences):
- Average difference: 281241799946404
For reference, 2^48 = 281474976710656
So I do not know what it disproved, from my point of view, just the opposite really, that over x amount size range, an average starts to form for difference/distances apart.
That's all I've seen anyone say on the matter. No one claims to have made finding the key faster, or a better method/way. I think some are just trying to improve their odds, with little fire power, by using averages, versus a lot of fire power and random + sequential. That's all.
You can say you do not see how it helps and I would counter with, how does it hurt??
Also, in general, for others on the forum, so what if people "collect" or search for prefixes? How does it hurt? If someone is randomly searching the range and find a prefix, cool...but you know what else could happen while searching for a prefix...they could find the full address. No harm, no foul.