I edited my application earlier, but it's better to post my question here:
It looks like I'll have to install an app on a smartphone. I prefer a website for several reasons:
1. Smartphones are inconvenient to use for finances.
2. I can't easily use a VM or wipe my smartphone.
3. I don't want to install VPN software on my smartphone.
4. I never install unknown software on my devices.

If I can review without a smartphone, I'll gladly apply. If not, my review ends with "I'll never use such a service". I don't even install software from my bank.
On second thought: I can experiment with Mullvad VPN on an old tablet, and wipe it afterwards. It won't run very smooth, but it should work. Still, I prefer a desktop computer for anything other than "coffee money".

Does that mean someone else can access my account just by accessing the same phone number?

"The future of finance". And people keep falling for it.

This attack could just as well have happened by email. The main problem isn't the QR-code, the problem is giving a phone access to a bank account that can send $20,000.
Here, banks are more and more moving towards mobile usage. Until now, I've been able to avoid it, but they're replacing more and more dedicated hardware devices by a code on an app. It's cheaper for the bank, but they sacrifice security for convenience.

I've seen this in the past: it was possible to make blockchain.info show transactions that didn't exist anywhere else, and would never confirm. But that's a bug/exploit on the website, not on Bitcoin.
What are you trying to accomplish?

How about 9428367110839506348425063820855586539232765? Looks random, right? Except that it's part of the first million decimals of pi.

The same with seed phrases: you can create one based on a Shakespear book. The seed will look random, but it's created deterministically. You can only tell it's not random once you find the source.

That's what I used to do: reboot from Linux Live DVD, and work offline. But it became annoying and time consuming to leave my normal system and reboot several times (for instance because of an incompatible Electrum version or too low transaction fees when signing offline). I now have a spare laptop for this, which makes it a lot easier.
The laptop doesn't have to be brand new, any cheap second hand laptop will do after you wipe it. Just make sure it has enough RAM, it's nice to be able to boot Knoppix "toram" and work without the (external) DVD drive.

That introduces another risk factor: if your public key gets changed, you're funding someone else's Bitcoin addresses.

The way I see it: a second hand laptop costs about the same as a new hardware wallet.

Reading into this, I realize there will be more complications. For instance, I often link to a topic by using an absolute URL instead of a relative URL (update: and even relative links get stored as absolute links after posting). All those links need to be replaced to avoid sending users from the .onion forum to the clearnet forum. The image proxy should also get a .onion entry.
Unfortunately, it's not as straight forward as I initially expected.

Bump: 4.1 sat/vbyte should be enough for a fairly quick confirmation now. Just make sure to enable RBF, in case fees go up again and you can't wait.

The shorter v2 addresses can't be used anymore, now 56 characters (v3) is the default.

As always: "not your keys, not your coins address" applies here too.

You know what they say: "the wish is the father of the thought". 63+4=69 Lol.

It's (obviously) not forbidden, but as a Newbie, I stayed away from any Reputation drama. Bitcointalk looked like a scary place where users got tagged for the smallest things they did. Staying out of that is what earned me the nickname "Switzerland".

Even easier: you can just ignore certain topics.

I don't think users should adjust their posting behaviour for people who use a notification bot. Bots should adjust to posts, not the other way around.

Some people never throw anything away That only works if you don't buy too much unnecessary stuff, otherwise you'll turn into a hoarder. I'd say a box in a garage is a good place, usually those places store decades worth of items that "may come in handy some day", so it doesn't stand out.

---

---

The biggest risk is probably someone going through old junk looking for a few washers to fit something.

That's a search engine, not a browser.
Never mind, it's a browser too nowdays! I learned something new But it's a Windows beta, so not really useful for the rest of us.

I'm sure you've discovered it by now, but you should never run pirated software on any system that should remain secure. Even better if you can find an open source alternative for it.

I was flabbergasted years back, when I discovered Chrome "conveniently" uploaded all my stored passwords to Google.

I'll quote myself here: Can the forum get a .onion domain for Tor users? That doesn't stop DDOS entirely, but at least it leaves an option without Cloudflare.

Correct. Windows has been "the place to be" for malware for decades. Last year, 95% of all malware targeted Windows, even though it's market share is only 30% nowadays.

Thinking you're safe would be the biggest mistake. It's a lot safer, but even if it's a lot smaller, there's always a risk. So assume you're not safe, and act accordingly.

There is, if they're willing to read it.

See Writing a welcome message, which hasn't been implemented in 5 years.

I believe that spammers like this aren't here to contribute anything to Bitcointalk. They can't be helped by showing them the rules, they can only be banned. It's common internet netiquette not to spam on any forum.

Pruning without sacrificing security means you'll have to download about 500 GB, it just takes only 6GB on disk. And indeed, as far as I know that is as safe as running a full node.

Yes. But your node could just as well be broadcasting someone else's transaction.

This has been the problem with "smart" contracts ever since Ethereum's DAO "hack": the contract isn't as smart as they want you to believe, and the users don't even understand how it works.

With normal contracts, you have to be a lawyer to fully understand what's in there. With smart contracts, you need to be a security engineer to understand it.
That's ironic: the sole purpose of a smart contract was be to make it trustless. If it's trustless, fraud wouldn't be possible.

As a user, I stay away from "smart" contracts. Don't send your money into something you don't fully understand!