I can get you a 113 MB text file with all known titles, it will tell you this:

I guess it's #4. #3 would mean many more people would lose much larger amounts.
So backup your data, factory reset your phone, and start over.

I really hate it when companies try to hype their product by showing a picture of an insignificant corner of the device. If they need that, it makes me think the device itself isn't impressive enough.

Many Bitcoins haven't moved in 10 years, and ignoring the ones that are lost, many of those must belong to long-term HODLers. I haven't owned Bitcoin for 10 years yet, but I don't like moving funds either.

I've seen many lithium batteries that still work after 10 years, although they lost maybe 40% capacity. I've also seen lithium batteries break phones because they inflated. It's convenient to have a battery in a hardware wallet, but adds a risk factor.

Take a look at the receiving address, and "CTRL-F bc1qs9gxwj6497yk" on that page, then scroll down. That highlights when the address received funds, when it sent funds, and when it sent funds to itself. Some of the transactions are consolidating, but at high fee. Some are splitting inputs. Both actions are a waste of transaction fees.

It's just a guess because I can't think of any other reason to create such transactions.

Is there any possibility to know some (most) of your seed words, without knowing all of them? I guess not, so this is the least likely scenario.

It's possible.

It's possible.

It's possible.

Option 5: someone had access to your phone for a moment, and swept your funds.

Good point, opening small channels is problematic. Small custodial amounts work fine.

You can't obfuscate addresses like this, it's trivial to find.

Your topic would have been more clear if you kept windice out of it. This transaction has nothing to do with your previous transactions.
It also means my first post still applies:
Weird. It looks like someone was testing his malware backend.

Now it's correct But do you really mind for small amounts? It's a trade-off between convenience and risks, and with LN, I choose convenience. But I wouldn't risk more than (say) $50.

Short answer: yes.
But I never went through the trouble of actually testing if I can recover LN funds from Electrum just from the private key, without cooperation from the other end. It seems like much more work (and thus risk) than using a custodial wallet. Or just trusting Electrum does what it should do.

You're contradicting yourself:

First, you say your Bitcoin was sent to the address above. Then you say it's from a website you've used, while you say you've never sent funds to that address. It doesn't add up. How do you know which website the address belongs to?

But why? There's no point in denying a user to read someone's post history if he clicks on it.
If there's anything that needs patching, is that you can't Merit a post on an ignored board. That's an actual flaw that confused many (established) members.

If you don't want to see your own avatar: remove it! Why would the rest of us have to see it if you don't even want it?

I'm confused: you said you "originally" created the seed phrase in Bluewallet. Does that mean you imported your seed phrase elsewhere? Which wallet did you use, and how can the website you sent funds to have anything to do with that?

OP had less than 0.001BTC in a hot wallet. That's a totally acceptable amount to risk losing, and I assume OP has most of his funds in cold storage already.

The interesting part is the receiving address: bc1qs9gxwj6497ykmj5txdk7aax0c6psyr62fwcuv6: it received many more transactions, all within 24 hours. It looks like someone targeted many wallets at once.
Update: It gets weirder: many of those transactions are sending his own inputs to his own address: this transaction for example. I have no idea why.

I trust 12 seed words. You should look elsewhere, changing to 24 words will only give you a false sense of security.

If you doubt your storage media, just create a new backup once in a while. Even $10 per year is enough to add a different brand stick to your collection annually.

From what I've seen, the code is altered to create known private keys, even when used offline. Read my crazy idea (which I never attempted).

It could have been a trusted site back in the days, until it got sold.

Complain to their webhost (after which they'll move) or domain name registrar. It might work.

It's really bad that 2 scamsites have been making victims for many years. Related reading: here.

It's Cloudflare. Theymos has been making small adjustments for their hiccups for years now. It's like a big magic black box that decides whether or not you get to use (large) parts of the internet.

Anyway, I'm glad that it works again

Have you seen time.txt yet? It happened more often:

My guess: Satoshi just turned off his Bitcoin node (or his entire PC) for some reason. It wasn't that important to keep running back then, and there were not thousands of other miners like now.

It's the law of diminishing returns: far too many people have interests in keeping the current system, and replacing it would make their existing investments worthless. If your country started later, it could skip all those steps.
Don't they still use checks in the US? We stopped using them decaces ago.

I've seen that message too in the past few weeks, and I still get that message when I use Shift-reload (a hard reload) in Firefox. When I do the same in Chromium, everything works fine.
My guess is that a hard reload doesn't cache anything, and somehow Cloudflare doesn't like that. Could it be you've disabled all browser cache?

Thanks again for your flawless timing! I'm just curious if you found the (allegedly) missing flux capacitor again.

There's no way for the sending wallet to know how an address was generated. It could be a "burn waste" address with only a valid checksum, it could be someone created it offline. Either way, it looks the same from the sender's perspective.