Web wallets are much worse. Just use Bitcoin Core, or other similar software. Web wallets have many more attack vectors than local software.

I've never seen Stake or Primedice require documents for large withdraws/wins, have I missed something? I've never played on either site and I'm not familiar with that but this isn't something I would expect them to do.

I think that hardware wallets happen to be very much so in the spotlight right now. Let's not forget that there was also an Electrum vulnerability found and patched recently. I believe that part of this has to do with how long hardware wallets have existed compared to their software counterparts, and how much time people have spent researching them.

Personally, I trust hardware wallets more than software wallets still. I'm not sure they're inherently insecure, but I don't believe they're perfect either. I think as far as security versus convenience, they rank pretty high up there on my list.

No offense, but if you don't already know how to be creating an exchange, you probably shouldn't be trying to do so. It's a very difficult undertaking that requires a lot of knowledge of programming and cryptocurrencies.

I've seen them be more responsive on their subreddit, I think it's /r/ledgerwallet. You'll have better chances of finding someone else that's had the same problem too.

A full, unpruned Bitcoin node which is maintaining a transaction index, in addition to lightning node software (lnd, c-lightning, etc.). It can be done for around $100 or less by using a raspberry pi and an external hard drive to store the blockchain, although I'm not sure if I'd recommend it because running a node, especially the initial sync is very demanding.

Provably fair only means that the user can prove that the game was fair. There could be / are other ways to do this other than the standard client & server seed model (some only work for specific types of games, i.e. lottos). However, what you mentioned is the most common and regarded as better than most because it is much easier to verify.

You should create a new Electrum wallet, one that is not based on your old private key. This new wallet will have a seed instead, which makes backing up your wallet much easier. (You should not re-use that private key from Multibit, it's poor security practice and a new Electrum wallet would be a better idea). Just go through the standard steps of creating a new Electrum wallet (File > New > etc.)

Then, follow the instructions in that video to sweep your old multibit wallet into your new Electrum wallet. You do not need to worry about compressed/uncompressed private key formats because a sweep creates a new transaction instead of importing the private key from your old multibit wallet into Electrum. Imagine taking your cash out of one wallet and placing it in another instead of carrying around both wallets.

Feel free to post any further questions

Ledger support for nano might push me to buy some. I think ledger adding support for cryptos is a big deal for a lot of them.

I wouldn't say it would be "negated", by this point, Bitcoin would be very dead. Nothing could bring it back at this point, a hard fork to another algorithm wouldn't even be able to save it if this happened first.

I do believe that coins would be stolen from the large addresses first. Also, in doing that, Bitcoin would very quickly lose a lot of value. Once people know that their keys can be cracked, Bitcoin has failed. Hopefully we can hard fork to a quantum-proof algorithm before we get to that point.

I'm not sure there is a way to, because I don't think the ledger displays the contract data being sent.

You're probably majorly trading security for convenience there. I wouldn't trust any wallet that ran as a browser plugin/extension.

The problem with quantum computing is you can't ignore it forever. Once it gets fast enough, an attacker could find your private key from your public key in the time between you broadcasting your transaction and it being confirmed, then performing a double-spend with a higher fee. Once it gets to that point, there would be no way to safely transact anymore.

Sounds like you're talking about hibernation. It's not quite a full reboot, but basically during hibernation the computer saves everything in memory to the hard disk, then shuts down. When it powers back on, it loads the saved data back into memory and the computer is just like it was before hibernation.

Yes, it's generally a bad idea to use the same port number as another coin. Many clients will automatically try to connect to the incorrect port, or they may try to connect to the correct port but reach the client of another coin.

Hardware wallets are somewhere between airgapped computers and encrypted wallet files. They certainly add a level of convenience, especially for all of the coins the support.

Also, a ledger nano s for example is much cheaper than any laptop/very cheap desktop you'd find, I don't think it's fair to assume that everybody would have an old computer lying around.

Thus "Small UI suggestion"

Small UI suggestion,

Change "Withdraw now" to "Withdraw later" or some other variation of "later" when the batch withdraw method is selected instead of instant. "Now" gives the impression that the withdraw will be sent immediately, like the instant method but the batch method does not work that way.

I ordered mine straight from the website and iirc it did come in a shrink-wrapped box. However, Ledger does not use a tamper-proof seal, because the hardware does the tamper checking.