Comparing Prefix and Sequential Searches in Cryptocurrency

Last time we talked, we kinda brushed over how prefix searching and sequential searching don't really have a winner according to the stats. But honestly, I feel like we can dig deeper into this topic and see where prefix searching might actually shine. It's not about picking a side but more about showing what prefix searching can do better.

I hear you, but maybe it's a bit harsh on the sequential method to say it always loses 1:1. I mean, sure, when prefix searching wins, it usually does so really well. This is especially true when you're not aiming for a perfect match. I think we need to look at the bigger picture here.

So, for instance, if we're tackling puzzle 71, you might kick things off by searching with the prefix 1PWo3JeB9jr. There’re about 3150 prefixes in that keyspace. If you start from the middle and nail it around 50%, imagine breaking this keyspace into chunks of 750 quadrillion keys. What if you jumped around those points from the prefix both up and down? Seems like a solid approach to me.

What I’d try is chopping the whole search area into 3150 random blocks. I'd look for hash160 prefixes that line up with our prefix, running through the blocks one by one. Each time I find a match, I’d save the rest of that block's range in a text file. Honestly, you probably won't even need to check that file most of the time, since statistically, there's a 60 to 80% chance you'll get lucky.

Just added a script to simulate Bitcoin conditions but in a smaller bit range. Real-life probabilities are key here! The range size won’t matter too much as long as you follow certain tests. To make it work, check out the Iceland module. Just keep in mind, you might need some extra software for your OS. You can control the testing runs by changing total_runs to 100.