I know that this is not answering your question at all, but if you don't mind I would like to just express my opinion that the question itself is wrong.
Wrong as it made a claim that Bitcoin has to be regulated. I simply don't see why that would have to be the case. Bitcoin was built to be hard to regulate.

All of those risks in using Bitcoin should be on the user himself. In case of a robbery the criminal should be prosecuted for the way he obtained them, like threatening or use of other persons property without his permission. Things that should be illegal when it comes to Bitcoin, already are. I don't see many people complaining in Bitcoin world how we need to get the police involved in the currency itself.

When it comes to fraud (false advertisement), that is supposed to be illegal on it's own, either you bought it with bitcoins,cash or peanuts.

As I understand, Java is not the most resource efficient language, That would probably be C/C++.


It makes it a lot easier. It can depend on differences between languages, some are simply for different purposes, but they still use same ideas and syntax is the easiest to learn. If you know C++, you will probably learn Java very quickly. Other way around, I think is harder. But they are all probably like 90% the same when you are learning for the first time.

The wallet file should be called "wallet.dat". Ok, now start that new version Bitcoin Core on that pc. It will create it's data folder, you can look up the location on the link I post earlier. I think it should create a wallet.dat file as well. Now just turn the Bitcoin Core off, don't need to wait for the sync to finish and replace the new wallet.dat in your data directory with your old wallet.dat from the usb. You might need to run Bitcoin Core with the option "--rescan" next time you start your Bitcoin Core. Either way, after sync is over (it can take quite a while), you will be able to use your bitcoins normally.

Were you not using that laptop for few years? Do you know how many approximately? If it is pretty old, then it might be the old Windows XP.
I wouldn't even start that old PC for security reasons. I would boot TailsOS and move that wallet to somewhere else safe. And put it in a new Bitcoin Core software on a new PC.

PS: wallet should be in a data directory https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Data_directory#Windows

It sounds very useless. They claim multiple times that there is a problem for people with "insufficient finances" and that the price is like "Bitcoin 7 years ago".
Are they trying to trick people that don't know that you can just buy a fraction of bitcoin (what is a problem with just buying 0.002 BTC ?).
If PAX coin will give you the same portion of profit that you would have if you bought BTC, then why would you bother? Just buy 0.002 BTC in the first place, you won't have to worry about there being other traders who will buy your PAX for BTC.
1. Why wouldn't you just buy a fraction of BTC?
2. Why wouldn't you be able to trade BTC on it's upward and downward trend? Buy if you think it will go up, sell if you think it will fall. You have none and think it will fall, then wait so you can buy at a low price. This only makes sense for people that think that BTC will just fall and nothing else.
3. If these is no 1 and 2, then there is no use for the PAX coin in the first place. If there is no use for it and you share profit just from people buying something with no value doesn't it sound like a type of pyramid scheme where all share equal profits together. Furthermore, I have a feeling that this is not true and that the ones who started it will earn more from the fees, probably from having more pregenerated PAX coins, so it would be identical to a pyramid scheme to it's creators.

PS: They claim more reasons for not using BTC like:
1. "geographical constraints" - so I assume that PAX will somehow be more accessible then BTC? Bigger adoption, why would it be? Makes no sense.
2. "fear of risk" - and this is somehow less risky? Let's see, if you buy bitcoins and the price falls, that is the worst case scenario for BTC. But if you buy PAX BULL whatever it is called and the price falls, which would be same as buying BTC, then not only you lose the same amount of BTC, but you have more in between which can cause problems, like no PAX buyers from small adoption, PAX team dumping their coins as an exit scam, maybe generating more PAX coins, who knows what they could do. Even if there is no risk in PAX itself,which would be the best case scenario, it would still be as risky as BTC.
3. "lack of knowledge" - I assume this is what you target in the first place. If they had any knowledge, they wouldn't use PAX in the first place.

I don't really know much about other wallets.

You could also backup your wallet from the Electrum data directory and reinstall your wallet. You will probably be able to recover from seed in a new installation.

Well, thanks for the information about this new attack, if it turns out to be valid.
I would like to ask you to spare us the worrying and tell us if there is an economical incentive for large mining pools not to cooperate with the rest of the network in mining or something similar, since possible attack isn't always the profitable attack.

Child-Pay-For-Parent method of bumping up the fees wouldn't be possible if it wasn't for this btw. So I assume that recent blocks are full of it, since the fees skyrocketed in last few weeks.

Blockchain might not be needed in this scenario. Maybe for laws, but election itself, I don't see yet why.

You could just let everyone make their public keys and let them be known and verifiable publicly ( a list of all the public keys from all the citizens where you need to download it and you can check offline that you and everyone you know is there, this check could be done even automatically). Later you could use something called ring signatures ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_signature) to ensure voters privacy when casting votes signed with their public keys.

Ron Rivest (R in the RSA) is the guy who has been looking into this for quite some time now. He is the genius for these things.

There are services that do this on regular basis. They might be your best option. You could check this one out https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=239665.0

You could always install Electrum on some other device like another phone,laptop,PC.. You could probably install other wallets that have the same Electrum seed support.

Well then as I understand you will not be using a split key generation, since third parties will have the customers private key, which is kind of ridiculous. You might as well just make a online wallet with vanity address feature, instead of giving users false hope that only they can use that address. Third party here will have access to all the bitcoins forever and since customers payed money to have that address, there would be no sense in moving those coins to a better address. You might as well make a vanity address proxy service, where you pass along funds sent to those addresses.

Since the third party will have the private key anyway, you might as well make a online wallet without the option of exporting the private key to the customer and just generate all the vanity addresses from the same private key and keep it secret from all the customers. This would have the same security and save a lot of processing power.

I always found these security questions funny. I know first names of many pets from multiple families. And by now, a family holiday would probably be documented with pictures on Facebook
You can also more often then not, ask people those security questions and they would very gladly tell you, even if you are a stranger to them.
You need to use something that is considered atleast kind of secret in the first place, something that you won't just show to anyone or tell anyone.
However the most useful thing is to just make a password with your family, that would be the most reliable and quite simple way. Or as with the will, use the multisig with the person you are leaving the funds to and your lawyer, if your lawyer is hip to that.

To be honest, if Litecoin was going to surpass Bitcoin or even Ethereum, it would have done so by now. It is an old altcoin, created 6 years ago. Some of the better privacy coins might stay in use for some while, but I think that the nature of Bitcoin will be that it might fork when benefits are clear and obvious. By the nature of blockchains, it doesn't really make too much sense for multiple of them to exist at the same time. Altcoins simply don't have the support to make too much hardforks probably, since people might just want to make a new one instead and profit more.

Acting all smart eh? Not a smart move if you can't bear the consequences.
You just might get half of your loved one in that case. No legs, no arms, no ears, no eyes. He/she might end up wishing he/she was dead instead.

When you make a usb with a live boot OS on it, you can make a different partition on it on which you can keep files that you want to carry on when you boot up that OS next time. It is called persistent, as it survives the reboots, unlike the other changes you make to the live boot OS. The whole partition should be encrypted for security and privacy.
Electrum is apparently preinstalled on TailOS, as you can see here https://tails.boum.org/doc/anonymous_internet/electrum/index.en.html

I don't know how you got to that conclusion I literally just bashed Ethereum on how it is inferior as a currency in every way. I hope you didn't confuse and thought I was talking other way around. I meant that Ethereum is too centralized, too big of a blockchain, too buggy and doing controversial changes like the DAO fork. But if you understood correctly and still reached the same conclusion, then good. As I said, good luck with that

I know, it is what I meant to say. I just assumed that like in RSA keys, if you start with one public key and change just the exponent of it in order to change the hash, then it's private keys of all of these new keys would have the same factors and be able to calculate the private exponent for all these public keys.
Assuming that during key generation factors are not discarded and just private exponent kept.
I made a lot of assumptions here based on my understanding of RSA keys and how you could generate different hashes for public keys with same module by just changing the public exponent, so that the owner of private keys could generate a private exponent corresponding to the new public exponent. I assumed it is a similar process and that all of these public keys would be (visibly) connected in such a way. Am I correct?

You know you don't have to buy a whole bitcoin right? You can divide it in 100 million chunks that we call satoshis. There is no such thing as having money to buy some other coin, but not bitcoin. You can buy 1 cent worth of bitcoin if you wish. Only if you think that price will fall, then it is expensive.
If Bitcoin falls, I really don't see why some PAX coin would survive. Bitcoin is more developed, secure and adopted then all the other coins combined.
Most of these coins are there just because people can't accept that they missed out on a great profit from early on, but there is still profit left to be made in bitcoin, there is no reason why it would come this far and crash now.
I really don't think there is a real decentralized coin with lower risk then Bitcoin. You are free to invest in whatever you want, but I am just telling you that you will get burned. Don't be greedy, see the market as it is.