Do not, under any circumstances, type your seed in to a website.

If you have the need or desire to use the tools on this site, download a copy of the site, transfer it to an airgapped computer (a computer without internet access and without the capabilities to ever have internet access again - no network cables, no WiFi adapter, etc.) Typing your seed in to a website is just asking to have it, and therefore all your bitcoin, stolen.

Further to that, what you are describing OP gives me serious cause for concern. You say you want to "use your wallet elsewhere" without your Electrum wallet file. This means you don't have your own computer with you, and are instead restoring your wallet on a computer belonging to someone else in order to access your wallet. You absolutely should not do this. Can you be absolutely sure the computer you are using doesn't have a keylogger installed? Or a screen recorder? Or one of thousands of possible viruses or malware? Typing your seed in to someone else's computer is just as risky as typing it in to a website, and you run the risk of all your coins being stolen.

Your seed should remain offline and on paper at all times. It should only touch an electronic device in a dire emergency (when you have irretrievably lost your wallet file or password). If you want to securely carry your bitcoin with you, then buy a hardware wallet.

To expand on that, a 1-input-1-output transaction (for example if you are sending all the coins in a single UTXO to another address, and there will be no change left over) is in the region of 192 bytes. A 1-input-2-output transaction (the scenario described above, where whatever is not spent is sent back to you under a new address), is in the region of 226 bytes. So the additional change output will add around 34 bytes to your transaction, or even less if you are using SegWit.

That site is a known scam site. It has shown up on several posts in the last few months from newbies being tricked by scam mixers. As far as I can tell, every mixer on that site except ChipMixer is either a scam or has shutdown. It seems they throw ChipMixer in as well to try to give a false sense of legitimacy since it is so well known, but then rate it lower than a bunch of their other scam mixers.

To OP, I would suggest you check out this thread: 2019 List Bitcoin Mixers Bitcoin Tumblers Websites. Pay particular attention to the "Scam Mixers" section.

Leaving someone positive trust is not the same as adding them to your trust list. Leaving satoshi positive trust is fine. Adding an account which has been inactive for years, is unlikely to ever be active again, and hasn't even left a single feedback to your trust list is bad practice. (Incidentally, the trust system didn't exist until around 2.5 years after Satoshi's account was abandoned.)

Leaving positive trust = I think this person is unlikely to scam
Adding to trust list = I trust this person's feedback on others

To answer OP, having someone on your trust list means that you trust their judgement on other users. If they are no longer around to judge other users, then their ratings become less relevant as time goes on. Many scammers start off by building some positive trust before scamming. If someone isn't around to react to new events and change their ratings, then eventually I would remove them from my list. I don't have a time limit set in stone, but it would be in the region of a few months rather than a few years.

He is now at +13. It seems after becoming DT1 he added another red trusted user who had left him positive feedback to his list, artificially boosting his own score even further.

In addition to the banned and red trusted members who are now on DT2 thanks to him, there are three users who have left zero ratings except the positive they have left to ekiller, and two users who have left <5 ratings including the positive they have left to ekiller.

I'm all for decentralizing DT1 as much as possible, but this reeks of trust abuse.

I'd be very surprised if simply deleting your account prompted Coinbase (or any other exchange) or actually delete all the data they stored about you, including everything from KYC documents to IP address, activity, and trades.

If you live in the EU, you could put in a request under GDPR for them to delete your data, but it's anyone's guess as to whether or not they actually complied. Given stories like Coinbase illegally selling clients' data to third parties or Bitfinex and BitMEX ignoring laws forbidding them from allowing to trade in certain US states, exchanges don't really seem to care much for laws which impact their profits.

The only guaranteed way to keep your documents safe is to not distribute them across the internet.

No one tell them that Lauda is still on DT.

LeGaulois made this thread a few weeks ago, where it was pretty much unanimously agreed that these threads don't really belong in the Press section either. They are not from notable sources, and half the time they are neither about bitcoin nor are they news (often just same vague price speculation or something about blockchain technology in general). Since that thread, I've been reporting them for deletion as and when they show up in the Press section, and looking at my reporting stats I've had 26 threads from that section trashed in the last 2 weeks, which is pretty significant given it usually only gets around 3 new topics a day.

I have noticed, however, that several of these users are now realizing their threads in Press are getting trashed and are instead spilling over in to Bitcoin Discussion. Example: goozij20. It's not a huge deal, since whenever I report their threads in Bitcoin Discussion they get trashed there as well.

I'm of the opinion that users like the one I linked to there should be banned. They are not here to contribute in any meaningful way. They are simply here to spam whichever two bit "news" site is paying them.

Probably the simplest method is through observation of you using it. They would also be able to detect it through scanning for what it is transmitting, be that NFC, RFID, WiFi, or whatever. Microchip detectors exist for scanning animals which have been chipped; no reason an attacker couldn't use it on a person.

They don't actually need to know where it is to disable it though. As I said before, a signal jammer would do the trick. An EMP or even just a strong magnetic field could be also be used to disable it.

I assume the same way they would attack anyone they know is storing bitcoin but they don't know how or where: Physically.

Don't see why not, but I would assume something like that could be fairly easily countered by an attacker using a cell phone jammer or similar device.

Yes, which I why I specified moving money to a different business or bank. Exchanges and web wallets already move bitcoin between customers' wallets without actually moving any bitcoin. With fiat this happens between institutions as well - balances are transferred and settled without moving assets. It isn't possible to settle bitcoin balances between institutions without actually moving bitcoin, unless you end up with a system of ever escalating "IOU"s or something equally nonsensical.

Unfortunately, you are almost certainly right.

My point wasn't that cash is never involved, it was that banks don't need the ability to print physical cash to be able to create money out of nothing.

True, but they don't need to be able to create bank notes in a fiat system. If I take a loan for $10,000 for example, the bank in question just creates both a credit and a debit of $10,000 in my name. Their bottom line doesn't change, but they've created $10,000 of new credit. If I spend or otherwise transfer that new money to a business or another bank, then again, things are just settled electronically, usually without any movement of actual assets. This isn't possible with bitcoin. Sure, they can "credit" my account with 1 BTC without actually moving any bitcoin, but as soon as I spend or transfer that bitcoin to a business or other provider, then they have to actually take that bitcoin from their reserves and send it to the other party.

Given that they would actually need to transfer the bitcoins held in their reserve, coupled with the fact there would be no lender of last resort to bail them out in the event of a bank run, a fractional reserve system would have to keep a much higher fraction in reserve than they traditionally do with fiat.

There is a big difference between a name mismatch because someone has misspelled their name by a letter or two, and a name mismatch because you have used a completely fabricated name that does not resemble your own name in any way. In the case of the latter, I'd be very surprised if Bittrex changed the name on the account for you, since there will be no proof the account actually belongs to you and hasn't be hacked or stolen from someone else. The only way to know is to contact their support.

Having said all that, is it worth it? Exchanges are notoriously poor at keeping KYC documents safe and secure. Even the biggest exchanges aren't trustworthy in this regard. Binance was hacked for thousands of users' KYC documents, and Coinbase were actively selling client data to third parties. You'll have to decide whether or not it is worth it for you, but I wouldn't be sending my documents to a faceless stranger at a company with unknown security practices for $150.

You don't easily forget at the moment. Are you willing to bet all your bitcoin that you won't forget in 1, 5, or 10 years? Or suffer some head trauma or injury? Or a stroke? Or an aneurysm? Or an infection? Or any number of other things which can affect your memory.

Leaving out a word or two is brute forceable. If you've converted your whole phrase to numbers, leaving out a number or two could change the entire sequence beyond what is brute forceable, rendering you unable to ever recover your coins. If you are going to use a method like this, I would highly recommend you either tell a close relative about it, or write down the steps and store them separately to your encoded phrase.

Agreed.

Look at what happened to the Yobit spammers when theymos stepped in. All signatures removed, Yobit signatures banned for 2 months, all spammers wearing the signature banned for 14 days. Yobit was contributing huge amounts of spam, and the problem with that campaign literally ceased overnight. I know we've had this conversation before (and I don't want it to seem like I'm blaming you in any way) but if we subjected all campaigns to the rules you have laid down here (Signature Campaign Guidelines), I firmly believe spam would drastically reduce. Once word starts spreading that signatures are removed and both users and campaigns are banned when their participants spam, campaigns would be forced to actually moderate themselves and monitor their participants, and spammers would be forced to actually write something useful or just give up altogether.

Without a clear statement of intent regarding this from theymos, plus some more mods who will focus on banning the offending campaigns, then it always feels like we are just swimming against the tide with spam.

He didn't create anything; he used code created by others to launch a scam in order to steal money from the gullible.

It is trivial easy to pump and dump a coin if you have a large social media following. McAfee, also an idiot, can do it with a single tweet.

I disagree. He is a great scammer, but he is not intelligent. He has been caught in his own web of lies countless times. He makes provably false claims and is technically incompetent. He thinks Satoshi is the kind of person who would file a nonsense copyright claim for bitcoin. He sues people and loses. He is an idiot.

Suggested reading: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Craig_Wright

The forum currently has 1250 BTC in cold storage, plus an undisclosed amount in hot wallets. It also takes in around $500,000 a year on ad revenue. Forum funds are not a hurdle to employing more moderators.

I agree with you here. Reporting is a thankless and often mind-numbing task. Some sort of recognition such as reporter badges or some other perk would be great. I also think it would be great to remove the 4 second cooldown for a small handful of regularly reporting users who would not abuse it. There is no point in making life more difficult for someone who wants to give up their time for nothing to report en masse.

Password managers are generally an encrypted database of all your passwords. In addition to automating all the work involved in your set up of manually storing them to a word document, good password managers such as KeePass have a number of additional features which make them superior, such as generating truly random passwords, allowing key files to be used, keeping passwords encrypted even while KeePass is open to protect against memory dumping, protecting against key loggers and clipboard loggers, and so forth.

Be careful of falling in to the trap of assuming you are immune to hacking because you use 2FA. Sure, 2FA makes things more difficult, and it is generally a good idea to use 2FA, but no system is immune to being hacked. Weak 2FA (such as SMS or email) is fairly easily hacked through social engineer or password resets. Stronger 2FA (such as Authy) still isn't immune to the user entering their code on a fake page, as has happened to users of a number of crypto exchanges in the past.

LoyceV has a tool which should do what you are looking for here: "Show All" on long topics.

As theymos says in the thread linked above, you can also just use the search box from within the thread you're interested in to only search within that thread.

There are two additional ways to protect your mnemonic phrase from thieves or attackers.

The first is to stop someone from finding it. This means storing it somewhere safe. Lots of people use safe deposit boxes at banks. A safe in your own house which is bolted to the ground/wall or encased in concrete will be hard to steal from, but is an obvious target for an attacker. There are many places you could hide a mnemonic phrase that would almost never be found by a thief in your house. A small piece of paper can be hidden behind an electrical socket, in a light fitting, under the floorboards or carpets, inside a vent, etc. You could write it on the underside of a chest of drawers, a bookcase, or even the bottom of a door.

The second way is to stop the thief from realizing what it is or deciphering it if they do find it. Numbers or foreign words are one option. Other users have described writing a story containing their words, using their own code, swapping words around, shifting all the words by x number of places in a dictionary, and so forth.

All of these are great, but you run in to two problems. One is that of inheritance as bitmover has discussed above. The other is that of you forgetting how to access your seed yourself. Will you remember the system you used in a month, a year, or a decade? Recovering from your seed isn't something you do every day like type in a password. Can you remember a phone number you dialed once or twice ten years ago?