1JLButMZPU7xu2PUBPxekTcpJKPzZuaTuZ (7575) ·
since @1617 found a flaw with vanityhash in this usecase i crunched the numbers again and this is what i came up with.
@1623 can you please confirm?
https://bico.media/df9e9d66c9ae2484c82c1c33b6f1274919586ad0442ca36ca7154b1588f53fba
https://twetch.app/t/28df4e0020b79fff1acd14d0090ad6a5a3cb82b7d60cf6b586809424275f0f93
Replies
1JLButMZPU7xu2PUBPxekTcpJKPzZuaTuZ (14541) ·
Hey there 🙈 what's your handcash handle? I want to have you in my friend's list ×_×
1JLButMZPU7xu2PUBPxekTcpJKPzZuaTuZ (7193) ·
How did you work around the \n bug?
1JLButMZPU7xu2PUBPxekTcpJKPzZuaTuZ (7453) ·
i didn’t. either we all agree to use a new fork of the lib or we just make the /n a part of the standard. i was just going with the ladder
1JLButMZPU7xu2PUBPxekTcpJKPzZuaTuZ (15801) ·
$priyan
1JLButMZPU7xu2PUBPxekTcpJKPzZuaTuZ (7575) ·
https://twetch.app/t/01affed24a7fb26a0bdd48fdb5a6ff8bd12e924e16ddf2b6f64555e4647eea79
1JLButMZPU7xu2PUBPxekTcpJKPzZuaTuZ (14541) ·
😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@1882 give me your handle ×______×
1JLButMZPU7xu2PUBPxekTcpJKPzZuaTuZ (7575) ·
agreed - i think this is up to the 21e8 guys @1623 @9
1JLButMZPU7xu2PUBPxekTcpJKPzZuaTuZ (7453) ·
i have an inkling it’s actually up to *us* :)
1JLButMZPU7xu2PUBPxekTcpJKPzZuaTuZ (1820) ·
vanity... -b 32 -w 2 -d.../hash.txt
Reading input data and adding... done.
Original data: 64 bytes... a2e...429
Searching for 21e8000 at position 0... done.
Match found: 0xfa6f6d2e -> SHA256 21e8000fae712f4f2fbf5b07aee254217f9869cd87e29eaee0538785eb1bdbde
1JLButMZPU7xu2PUBPxekTcpJKPzZuaTuZ (7575) ·
ok, let's do *this* and stick with vanityhash.
1JLButMZPU7xu2PUBPxekTcpJKPzZuaTuZ (7575) ·
coded my own mockup where sha256 of source is based on string not the file. but the solution is based on my company's ide and therefore not publicly available. ->> which is why i vote for using vanityhash.
1JLButMZPU7xu2PUBPxekTcpJKPzZuaTuZ (15690) ·
$tetapsepi