I've been looking for the backdoor in Bitcoin, and if it exists it comes through SHA256 via DES, but since nobody has ever found it the odds are good that it doesn't exist. I do have one line on an anomaly in Bitcoin that is not relevant to this discussion and, if true, wouldn't prove anything significant to it, but I'm not commenting further about that without doing my own math first.
Unlike SETI@Home with crypto you work on known unencrypted data block with recent transactions inside. Everybody at network work on the same piece of data. You just need to add some random bytes to that block so that hash of that block along with your bytes as an integer number will be less than current limit. If you are the first to find solution, you get reward in form of transactions fees in block plus system award. Same with pools, just reward divided among participants. All pools I know use only opensource miners (pretty simple ones, easy to look into and check what they really do), and pool server just can't do anything except tell you what ranges of additional bytes already in work by other participants.
In SETI@Home you get some unknown data from server and try to find regularities or whatever. You can't look into data and see what's inside. Everybody receive different chunks of data, and you have no way to determine if it is a radio noise from radiotelescope or some encrypted data provided by three-letter agency to crack (finding regularities in encrypted data is one of the steps of cracking encryption).
Cryptopools and SETI@Home or other similar networks are completely different things. The only similarity is they are both distributed computing. In former you have to create some data to get necessary result, so data flows from you to network, in latter somebody else give you data to crack, so data flows from somebody to you. Direction of dataflow is opposite crypto and SETI@Home.
However, you could run your own SETI@Home with your friends getting data from your own radiotelescope, not some shit from unknown source. It is not difficult to build a radiotelescope today. And it's size and sensitivity, I think, does not matter really. If somebody out there will have to say something to us, he will do it loud enough for even simple garage built radiotelescope.
People have, I just dont think they realized it. And it looks like once they slipped up, they learned to disassociate the data on the blockchain and aggregate it together off network.
Shortly after the mass covid vaccine campaigns began, peoples medical data started popping up on ethereum.
I believe they were using these networks to crunch data about the vaccines and the effects. I also have this weird nagging thought that they prolly used a quantum AI to do it. Because it sounds like one was involved with the creation of the vaccine.
Moderna and IBM are teaming up to use generative artificial intelligence and quantum computing to advance mRNA technology, the development at the core of the company's Covid vaccine. The companies said they signed an agreement that would allow Moderna to access IBM's quantum computing systems and generative AI model.
Seems easy enough to do...
We develop smart contracts to automate the traceability of COVID-19 vaccines while ensuring data provenance, transparency, security, and accountability. We integrate the Ethereum blockchain with off-chain storage to manage non-critical and large-sized data.
Is this not someone just straight up admitting it?
In this study, we presented a method for securely and rapidly storing and retrieving COVID-19-related health information using smart contracts with the Ethereum blockchain. It enables the protection of patient information while facilitating more efficient research and communication.
That was oddly the time that ethereum hit a all time high.
The source code reflects the work but not the pooled data. And the algorithmic process is identical but the illusion is created by segregating the bits in that there is never an identified symmetry EXCEPT that each hash compliments the succeeding hash. There is linear connectivity but its not logged by miners or represented in process.. but they are shared back to the core for validation ie whomever manages that pool etc (wink)
Have followed you awhile, but this one I have a bit of experience on.
You seem to be saying Bitcoin miners are not only (as per official storyline) generating value by performing mathematically verifiable labor, but also having their labor secretly diverted toward deep-state functions.
However, any miner can verify what is being computed, and it's merely a very game-based attempt to generate a rare hash with a set process. There can be no insertion of separately useful computation in the hash generation process because that would be a waste and miners fight each other for efficiency.
The only ways your implication would be true would be if the programming contained some unauditable, unfindable segment (but surely an end-to-end security check would find it and surely this has been done); or if the math contained some secret dual function (but because of the complementary hash chain there is no infusion of new data for a miner to assist with analyzing). Satoshi's whole point was to produce a math system that broad consensus would agree is unhackable and performs its purpose of creating value without any (or hardly any) central control or doubt. He published the white paper and then verified that the emergent community had established the consensus. If someone today could outthink Satoshi it wouldn't be found out like this.
Ayh have had a miner running for several months now. Ayh did this to watch the cpu, gpu, ram, net.. and the actual truth is that there is leakage.
This leakage is then the sum of parts but the sum of nothing to miners. The papers speak nothing to the end to end mechanisms without skipping a crucial part -- what happens between.
Ayh have long explained that there is no such thing as privacy when we do not own the wires that traverses the web.
Just take a look at source code of your miner and you wiil find all answers you need,
Some pools were caught on spreading source code that include some fee for pool. You sould account it as fair share for organising pool or theft, It is up to you, to accept that or deny.
If you get source code for your pool miner from third party, then you could fing that it do some work for third party.. That's also up to you to believe in some "better performance" of third party miner or check it by yourself and find out what is the real price.
If you use some binary you downloaded from some source and you didn;t check and compile source code by yourself, then it is you the worst enemy of yourself.
That's it. either you question everything, either you are fucked up. Simple as that.
I know you, you are smart enough to qestion everything. So just do it.
Then someone else should be able to report on it too, right? Been a long time and only you the keeper of narratives noticed it? I don't doubt you, but "extraordinary claims".
There are others who have been researcher the patterns. Aym not solo in this -- and it has been suggested for some time actually -- but the patterns have become too cogent to dismiss any longer. Ayh have seen the data discrepancies my self and have seen high end cryptographers examine how the algorithms assemble and then fire back data for "validation".
Meanwhile the retorts to this conspiracy theory has been still just "a packet of mysterious data algorithmically resorted and decrypted/encrypted for absolutely no purposeful reason"
What are the bitcoin hash that miners are solving based on?
In summary, Bitcoin miners are solving hashes based on combinations of data from previous blocks, transaction data encapsulated into Merkle roots, timestamps, difficulty targets, and nonce values—all processed through SHA-256 hashing until they achieve a result that meets network-defined criteria.
In the context of the Bitcoin blockchain, a nonce (short for “number used once”) is a 32-bit (4-byte) numerical value that miners use during the mining process to create a new block. The nonce is included in the block header and serves as a variable that miners manipulate to generate a hash that meets specific criteria set by the network’s difficulty target.
ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ Usually it's just the pool stealing your hash, and mining a second merged coin, or simply not crediting your rig for it's effort. ㅤ Another possibility, is that a secondary miner has been installed on your rig. ㅤ My level of knowledge is not high enough to look beyond those possibilities.
Individuals not knowing the minutae of a blockchain protocol does not mean that what you say about it is true.
The hash value I believe you are talking about is used in the block headers. They contain the hash of the previous block in the chain.
The critical thing to remember is that choosing a nonce value that along with the transaction information generates a small enough hash value to be accepted is difficult while verifying that the hash is correct is trivially easy.
ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ Watch any video on mining, and when it gets to the part where hash are described, how they are generated, and how they are implemented, the answer is: "Magic!".
ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ You are correct on this fact. ㅤ As those who are programing the software, and overseeing the projects don't seem to know where these algos came from, or wish not to discuss it in detail. ㅤ They only seem to know the front end human interface.
(PS: Lokicoin no longer uses miners and went POS several years back. ㅤ This is a scheme where you get paid coins for already having coins. ㅤ then they changed their name to OXEN. ㅤ Killing their mining community and rendering their coin useless to anyone who had interest in it.)
Banking encryption has not been secure since they started making hash farms in Russia and Iceland.
"It would take a million years of calculating to crack!" Yes, but doing a million calculations concurrently that means it takes a year.
I dont think they meant 1 calculation per day, or per year for millions of years when they make such a claim.
But i get what you imply. But almost all internet connected piece of hardware has a hidden backdoor for monitoring/access to private networks.
So they even might not lie and it is in fact secure for gen pop, but access from high up is always easy.
Afaik all major brands in the west are compromised, as well as all the chinese knockoffs.
I've been looking for the backdoor in Bitcoin, and if it exists it comes through SHA256 via DES, but since nobody has ever found it the odds are good that it doesn't exist. I do have one line on an anomaly in Bitcoin that is not relevant to this discussion and, if true, wouldn't prove anything significant to it, but I'm not commenting further about that without doing my own math first.
Unlike SETI@Home with crypto you work on known unencrypted data block with recent transactions inside. Everybody at network work on the same piece of data. You just need to add some random bytes to that block so that hash of that block along with your bytes as an integer number will be less than current limit. If you are the first to find solution, you get reward in form of transactions fees in block plus system award. Same with pools, just reward divided among participants. All pools I know use only opensource miners (pretty simple ones, easy to look into and check what they really do), and pool server just can't do anything except tell you what ranges of additional bytes already in work by other participants.
In SETI@Home you get some unknown data from server and try to find regularities or whatever. You can't look into data and see what's inside. Everybody receive different chunks of data, and you have no way to determine if it is a radio noise from radiotelescope or some encrypted data provided by three-letter agency to crack (finding regularities in encrypted data is one of the steps of cracking encryption).
Cryptopools and SETI@Home or other similar networks are completely different things. The only similarity is they are both distributed computing. In former you have to create some data to get necessary result, so data flows from you to network, in latter somebody else give you data to crack, so data flows from somebody to you. Direction of dataflow is opposite crypto and SETI@Home.
However, you could run your own SETI@Home with your friends getting data from your own radiotelescope, not some shit from unknown source. It is not difficult to build a radiotelescope today. And it's size and sensitivity, I think, does not matter really. If somebody out there will have to say something to us, he will do it loud enough for even simple garage built radiotelescope.
People have, I just dont think they realized it. And it looks like once they slipped up, they learned to disassociate the data on the blockchain and aggregate it together off network.
Shortly after the mass covid vaccine campaigns began, peoples medical data started popping up on ethereum.
I believe they were using these networks to crunch data about the vaccines and the effects. I also have this weird nagging thought that they prolly used a quantum AI to do it. Because it sounds like one was involved with the creation of the vaccine.
Seems easy enough to do...
Is this not someone just straight up admitting it?
That was oddly the time that ethereum hit a all time high.
The source code reflects the work but not the pooled data. And the algorithmic process is identical but the illusion is created by segregating the bits in that there is never an identified symmetry EXCEPT that each hash compliments the succeeding hash. There is linear connectivity but its not logged by miners or represented in process.. but they are shared back to the core for validation ie whomever manages that pool etc (wink)
Have followed you awhile, but this one I have a bit of experience on.
You seem to be saying Bitcoin miners are not only (as per official storyline) generating value by performing mathematically verifiable labor, but also having their labor secretly diverted toward deep-state functions.
However, any miner can verify what is being computed, and it's merely a very game-based attempt to generate a rare hash with a set process. There can be no insertion of separately useful computation in the hash generation process because that would be a waste and miners fight each other for efficiency.
The only ways your implication would be true would be if the programming contained some unauditable, unfindable segment (but surely an end-to-end security check would find it and surely this has been done); or if the math contained some secret dual function (but because of the complementary hash chain there is no infusion of new data for a miner to assist with analyzing). Satoshi's whole point was to produce a math system that broad consensus would agree is unhackable and performs its purpose of creating value without any (or hardly any) central control or doubt. He published the white paper and then verified that the emergent community had established the consensus. If someone today could outthink Satoshi it wouldn't be found out like this.
u/CrazyRussian explains accurately in more detail.
Ayh have had a miner running for several months now. Ayh did this to watch the cpu, gpu, ram, net.. and the actual truth is that there is leakage.
This leakage is then the sum of parts but the sum of nothing to miners. The papers speak nothing to the end to end mechanisms without skipping a crucial part -- what happens between.
Ayh have long explained that there is no such thing as privacy when we do not own the wires that traverses the web.
The sum of parts.
Just take a look at source code of your miner and you wiil find all answers you need,
Some pools were caught on spreading source code that include some fee for pool. You sould account it as fair share for organising pool or theft, It is up to you, to accept that or deny.
If you get source code for your pool miner from third party, then you could fing that it do some work for third party.. That's also up to you to believe in some "better performance" of third party miner or check it by yourself and find out what is the real price.
If you use some binary you downloaded from some source and you didn;t check and compile source code by yourself, then it is you the worst enemy of yourself.
That's it. either you question everything, either you are fucked up. Simple as that.
I know you, you are smart enough to qestion everything. So just do it.
Then someone else should be able to report on it too, right? Been a long time and only you the keeper of narratives noticed it? I don't doubt you, but "extraordinary claims".
There are others who have been researcher the patterns. Aym not solo in this -- and it has been suggested for some time actually -- but the patterns have become too cogent to dismiss any longer. Ayh have seen the data discrepancies my self and have seen high end cryptographers examine how the algorithms assemble and then fire back data for "validation".
Meanwhile the retorts to this conspiracy theory has been still just "a packet of mysterious data algorithmically resorted and decrypted/encrypted for absolutely no purposeful reason"
Salsa?
https://iask.ai/?mode=question&q=What+are+the+bitcoin+hash+that+miners+are+solving+based+on%3F
What are the bitcoin hash that miners are solving based on?
https://iask.ai/?mode=question&q=what+is+a+nonce+value+in+the+bitcoin+blockchain.
what is a nonce value in the bitcoin blockchain.
The issue is the leakage.
There is a discrepancy between computation, receipt, validation, linearity.
There is leakage. That leak is the work.
ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ Usually it's just the pool stealing your hash, and mining a second merged coin, or simply not crediting your rig for it's effort. ㅤ Another possibility, is that a secondary miner has been installed on your rig. ㅤ My level of knowledge is not high enough to look beyond those possibilities.
ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ -̱͞|͞מ͟͞͞פ͟ו͟͞͞ק͞פ͟͞͞ק͞|̊̆ ‡.̗̀́
Individuals not knowing the minutae of a blockchain protocol does not mean that what you say about it is true.
The hash value I believe you are talking about is used in the block headers. They contain the hash of the previous block in the chain.
The critical thing to remember is that choosing a nonce value that along with the transaction information generates a small enough hash value to be accepted is difficult while verifying that the hash is correct is trivially easy.
ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ Watch any video on mining, and when it gets to the part where hash are described, how they are generated, and how they are implemented, the answer is: "Magic!".
ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ You are correct on this fact. ㅤ As those who are programing the software, and overseeing the projects don't seem to know where these algos came from, or wish not to discuss it in detail. ㅤ They only seem to know the front end human interface.
(PS: Lokicoin no longer uses miners and went POS several years back. ㅤ This is a scheme where you get paid coins for already having coins. ㅤ then they changed their name to OXEN. ㅤ Killing their mining community and rendering their coin useless to anyone who had interest in it.)
ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ -̱͞|͞מ͟͞͞פ͟ו͟͞͞ק͞פ͟͞͞ק͞|̊̆ ‡.̗̀́