UNITED BITCOIN

[jubalix]

Can some one clarify how to claim BTC UNITED in the second phase?

It really unclear from the website::

Eligibility

All users with Bitcoins who failed to get UnitedBitcoin in Phase #1, and who make at least one transfer to his/her own Bitcoin address between Block 498777 and Block 501878 (12 December 2017 to 12:00 on 3 January 2018 GMT).

Only address balances at the time of the fork will be considered for post-fork crediting
Only the original address can make the transfer to itself
The receiving address must have a prior balance of more than 0.01BTC, and must be used as one of the sending (input) addresses

so do they mean

[1] for an address that you owned at the fork BTC block height #498777

[2] you have to send some bitcoin between [ 498777 and Block 501878] to said address in [1].

[q1] do they credit you on the basis of the funds at the block height #498777 ? regardless if you have emptied them since?
[q2] the private key for owned address is used?




Further confusion is here the bitshares united below, is this a seperate claiming mechansim for same coin because they seem to say jsut yuse you priv key....? see below

https://steemkr.com/btc-u/@nickeles/bitshares-united-is-the-better-option-for-the-future-of-bitcoin

https://steemit.com/btc-u/@nickeles/bitshares-united-is-the-better-option-for-the-future-of-bitcoin

[jkminkov]

[2] send from same address to same address 0.0001 BTC, then check their ub explorer, then import private key(after you secure BTC to another address)
[q1] yes, if you moved funds to another own address, you can claim by sending some back to original address
[q2] they will send ub to same address with ballance @ #498777, you will have to import private key to get them

if for some reason you had transaction between Block 494000 and Block 498777, which returns change to sending address, you already have ubtc, check ubtc block explorer

[European Central Bank]

[2] send from same address to same address 0.0001 BTC, then check their ub explorer, then import private key(after you secure BTC to another address)
[q1] yes, if you moved funds to another own address, you can claim by sending some back to original address
[q2] they will send ub to same address with ballance @ #498777, you will have to import private key to get them

if for some reason you had transaction between Block 494000 and Block 498777, which returns change to sending address, you already have ubtc, check ubtc block explorer

ah. some clarification. i've changed my mind about this. as it's such an offensive shitfork i want to claim it for pure dumping.

currently my funds are on a hardware wallet and there's no way i can be bothered to expose the seed of that.

if i send to a paper wallet does anyone know if i can use the mycelium cold store spending feature to send to the same address in the same way? i really would not want to screw it up.

once that's done it's back to the hardware wallet.

[known-user]

where can you find a ub explorer? i have searched for it, but can't find one.

[known-user]

where can you find a ub explorer? i have searched for it, but can't find one.

ignore that, found it already, https://www.ub.com/explorer
(typical... i'm always finding things after asking for it, but never before asking somehow)

[known-user]

i dont completely get how the phase #2 is working.  (https://www.ub.com/project/get)
under 'eligibility' it says that 'only address balances at the time of the fork will be considered for post-fork crediting'.
under 'quantity' it says 'Eligible addresses will receive a UB balance that is the equivalent of the BTC balance (of that address) at block height #498777.'

let's say i have the following at block 498777:
address 1000   1 btc
address 1001   1 btc
address 1002   0.5 btc
address 1003    0.3 btc
address 1004    0.2 btc
etc
let's say 15 btc in total (just to give an example)

in the notes under 'how to get' it says:
"
a) If your wallet contains a large number of addresses, please send all your BTC to one address first; then transfer a fraction to the address itself (0.0001 BTC is ok)
b) If you don’t know your sending address(es), create a new address and transfer all your Bitcoins to it; then transfer a fraction to the address itself (0.0001 BTC is ok)
Afterwards, find your BTC transaction ID (TXID) and submit it to UB.com
"

in my example having many addresses with smaller amounts, i would first best need to transfer them to 1 single adress, so
transfer from address 1000 to address 2000 1 btc
transfer from address 1001 to address 2000 1 btc
transfer from address 1002 to address 2000 0.5 btc
transfer from address 1003 to address 2000 0.3 btc
transfer from address 1004 to address 2000 0.2 btc
etc

now my new address 2000 would have 15 btc in total on that address

next step would be to transfer 0.0001 BTC from address 2000 to address 2000

after that you need to submit your BTC transaction id (TXID) to Ub.com.

my questions:
1.
which transaction id would i need to submit? the transaction id from / to address 2000 does not contain any balance on block #498777, so from that i would not receive any UBTC, right?
if that is the case, why would you need to transfer smaller addresses to one bigger address first? this does not make sense to me.

2.
where should you submit the transaction id to ub.com?

[dotbitme]

Note that they have now simplified the procedure, it is no longer necessary to send an amount to yourself:

https://www.ub.com/project/get

Regards
Btcdiv.com - The ultimate source for bitcoin dividends & airdrops

[simongoat]

Does anyone know if I send the bitcoin to myself it will work with the nano ledger as the ledger uses multiple address.

[known-user]

Note that they have now simplified the procedure, it is no longer necessary to send an amount to yourself:

https://www.ub.com/project/get

Regards
Btcdiv.com - The ultimate source for bitcoin dividends & airdrops

thanks for letting us know, appreciated!

so now it will be like this:

"
During phase 2, an amount of UBTC, equal to the balance at Bitcoin block 498,777, will be distributed at a 1:1 ratio to eligible addresses that satisfy the following conditions.
(1) did not receive UBTC in the first round; and
(2) had a Bitcoin balance at block 498,777 higher than 0.01 BTC; and
(3) had activity (outgoing) between block 494,000 and 501,878 (around 12th November 2017 to 3rd January 2018);
"

i am hodling, since before 498,777. i did nothing with my coins, so i did not have activity so far.
based on (3) above this means that i need to 'have activity before block 501,878' or otherwise i will NOT receive them? so, just transfer from my wallet to another wallet for instance?

that number (3) doesn't make sense to me to be honest.

[European Central Bank]

still kinda weird, but yes it looks like you need to send them out of a wallet by that point, but that's annoying because it had to have balance a few months back which means you have to use the private key of your cold storage or hardware wallet which will screw up your storage if you have seeds locked away.

i think i preferred the previous version where you sent it hardware wallet - temporary wallet - hardware wallet which left you with a junk key. this way means you'll have to get a new seed for your main storage.

[known-user]

still kinda weird, but yes it looks like you need to send them out of a wallet by that point, but that's annoying because you have to use the private key of your cold storage or hardware wallet which will screw up your storage if you have seeds locked away.

i think i preferred the previous version where you sent it hardware wallet - temporary wallet - hardware wallet which left you with a junk key. this way means you'll have to get a new seed.

i dont mind creating a new wallet and send everything to that one. just hate to use the old private keys on one of these hard forks, because there are so many hard forks to claim out of which some of them can not be claimed yet. the whole system with claiming with private keys is too fragile in that way.

so, in short, create new wallet, send all btc over there.
on the third of january download ub wallet, use private keys of old wallet and see your UBTC balance... is that correct?

[European Central Bank]

i dont mind creating a new wallet and send everything to that one. just hate to use the old private keys on one of these hard forks, because there are so many hard forks to claim out of which some of them can not be claimed yet. the whole system with claiming with private keys is too fragile in that way.

so, in short, create new wallet, send all btc over there.
on the third of january download ub wallet, use private keys of old wallet and see your UBTC balance... is that correct?

yes. but for me my seed is stored in numerous places and written down manually. redoing all of that is going to be a pain in the ass. i'll see if ub is worth anything before doing that.

[known-user]

i dont mind creating a new wallet and send everything to that one. just hate to use the old private keys on one of these hard forks, because there are so many hard forks to claim out of which some of them can not be claimed yet. the whole system with claiming with private keys is too fragile in that way.

so, in short, create new wallet, send all btc over there.
on the third of january download ub wallet, use private keys of old wallet and see your UBTC balance... is that correct?

yes. but for me my seed is stored in numerous places and written down manually. redoing all of that is going to be a pain in the ass.

same here. i maintain a whole administration at a certain moment for this. i did also create a new wallet for bcash and for btc gold, just to be on the safe side.
good part of these was that there was only 1 hard fork at the same time. now there are many of them, with some (if not most) of them still waiting for the main network to go live, or waiting for replay protection (and even then i prefer to create a new wallet again to be sure)

i mean, if i use the private keys on the ubtc wallet, i can not be sure that they are not going to try them out on any of the other hard forks to see if something is still in there

[known-user]

still kinda weird, but yes it looks like you need to send them out of a wallet by that point, but that's annoying because it had to have balance a few months back which means you have to use the private key of your cold storage or hardware wallet which will screw up your storage if you have seeds locked away.

i think i preferred the previous version where you sent it hardware wallet - temporary wallet - hardware wallet which left you with a junk key. this way means you'll have to get a new seed for your main storage.

and still, i also just dont get why you would need to transfer something. if it's there on your private keys already, why not just give it. why is that extra outgoing transfer needed for them in order to give you your ubtc. that rule just does not make sense to me.

[European Central Bank]

and still, i also just dont get why you would need to transfer something. if it's there on your private keys already, why not just give it. why is that extra outgoing transfer needed for them in order to give you your ubtc. that rule just does not make sense to me.

jeff garzik is an enthusiastic data gatherer. i guess that means he can mark your card and trace your real bitcoin with that much more ease.

also they still want to keep the inactive balances on their fork so that's the only way to check that it is active. 

[known-user]

new thought. i transfer all of my btc to a new wallet. i will keep the old private keys.
then , months later whenever i would find the time for it, and feel like it, finished other hard fork claims, i can still download the ub wallet and "claim" the ubtc because they would still be in there based on the private keys, is that correct?

[European Central Bank]

new thought. i transfer all of my btc to a new wallet. i will keep the old private keys.
then , months later whenever i would find the time for it, and feel like it, finished other hard fork claims, i can still download the ub wallet and "claim" the ubtc because they would still be in there based on the private keys, is that correct?

they haven't mentioned a time limit so yes in theory. however considering the way they're treating inactive balances and how this was announced you'll probably find out about the time limit after they've closed it.

[somac.]

I'm using a ledger wallet, would it be beneficial to transfer only some dust from the addresses in order to satisfy the outgoing activity requirement? or should I transfer the whole amount to a new address?

The addresses I currently have my coins on already have hardfork coins on them, I'd prefer to have all hardfork coins on these addresses so that I can claim all the coins in one hit. Say in a years time.

[Rosewater Foundation]

I'm using a ledger wallet, would it be beneficial to transfer only some dust from the addresses in order to satisfy the outgoing activity requirement? or should I transfer the whole amount to a new address?

The addresses I currently have my coins on already have hardfork coins on them, I'd prefer to have all hardfork coins on these addresses so that I can claim all the coins in one hit. Say in a years time.

Bump. This would be convenient. 

[somac.]

I'm using a ledger wallet, would it be beneficial to transfer only some dust from the addresses in order to satisfy the outgoing activity requirement? or should I transfer the whole amount to a new address?

The addresses I currently have my coins on already have hardfork coins on them, I'd prefer to have all hardfork coins on these addresses so that I can claim all the coins in one hit. Say in a years time.

Bump. This would be convenient. 

would make it a lot easier, what do you reckon? do you think that would be safe and work? I'm thinking it would but really have no idea.