That's not for old Trezor devices, it's for old and discontinued Ledger hardware wallets.

I personally don't have the answer to that question, but you might want to check with Coin-Keeper about that. He says he has several Trezor wallets (both brands). According to one of his posts from last year, you can store additional data on that Micro SD card besides the encrypted secret. I just hope that data wont interfere with the decrypting process in any way.

Whether or not they can is not something I can answer, but they have already said they are not going to bother to fix this vulnerability.

https://donjon.ledger.com/lsb/017/

The moment these wallets were discontinued and their support ended, was the time people should have stopped using them. It's the same as with Windows XP that someone mentioned above. I know that mocacinno has one Ledger HW.1. @mocacinno don't use it anymore.
Just like other hardware wallet vulnerabilities, this one also requires physical access to the device and knowing the PIN code or knowing how to bruteforce the PIN code. 

You can find plenty of cheap hardware wallets. But if your requirement is open-source with big list of supported altcoins and preferably with an open-source secure element, then you are out of luck. Trezor is working on creating the first almost fully open-source secure element, but I haven't heard any news on that front for months. Foundation Passport seems interesting to me. It's airgapped, open-source, but you won't be happy seeing a price of $250 for Batch 2.

Ratimov originally made a list of 80+ hardware wallets but he is not keeping it updated it seems. This list by FatFork is regularly updated. It's in Croatian but you can see what is available out there and it has links to official websites/stores and price information. Like I said, don't expect the cheap models to to meet all your requirements. Ledger offers more support for altcoins than any of the other popular brands, but it's not open-source. Trezor is, but their altcoin support list is shorter.

I think it's more than just a partnership. If you do an internet search for "Trust wallet", Google tells you that its parent organization is "Binance Holdings Limited". Then if you go to Binance's official website and visit the About page, you will see the ecosystem section towards the top. Check out what is located at 9 o'clock - the Trust Wallet. And in the description it says: "The official wallet of Binance".

Spam and low-effort posts can be fought by signature campaign managers as well as the administration. If the managers didn't count and paid for meaningless posts, the participants would have only a few choices: they can either improve to get paid or leave the campaign, which would also result in them posting less. The third option is to keep posting the way they did in the past, but if it wasn't good enough in weeks #1, 2, 3, chances are their posting quality will be considered insufficient in the weeks after as well.

I did a software BIOS update the other day on a DELL laptop and noticed something interesting. A few days earlier, I failed to get the installation running and I wasn't sure what was wrong. And when I tried it a few days later, it worked flawlessly. The reason being that my laptop was charging at the time. I guess DELL won't allow you to perform BIOS updates unless your device is on a charger, just in case you run out of juice. Or the remaining battery capacity has to be above a certain percentage.

Would be a cool addition to a battery-powered hardware wallet to have some sort of meter that wouldn't allow you to perform firmware upgrades if the battery is below 50% or 20% depending on how long the process usually takes and how much power it wastes. With on-screen instructions to charge your battery fully and try again. Of course that wouldn't be easy to do since there are so many different types of batteries with different run times. 

I seriously doubt their mechanisms for determining this risk score will be public so that people can check some type of list and determine for themselves if the coins they have are considered tainted and dirty by ZKSnacks.

I wonder how they would rate bitcoin that comes from ChipMixer or our signature payments for that matter?

No problem, just don't think of crypto faucets as free money printers. Casinos have taken various precautions to prevent players from abusing them. They are a good way to get some free coins to try out some new games or to practice on them. But faucets are not going to fill your pockets and help you win significant amounts. As you can see from the table in OP, you can often claim just a few cents per round. 

I have heard someone mention that but never gave it too much thought as I didn't consider it something worth worrying about. A few weeks ago I did play around with a Native Segwit address and tried changing one of its characters in order to see if the wallet would still consider it valid. But I never managed to find a validly invalid address. I will check out those sources to see if they offer more information on what would need to by mistyped to trick the system.

You are thinking about converting your bitcoin to stablecoins now after a 70% price crash? That's something that should have been done much earlier, at $60, $50, or even $40k. Better yet, don't swap your Bitcoin for centralized stablecoins at all because you never know what might happen to them when you wake up tomorrow morning.

You shouldn't put "everything you have" into anything, no matter how much of a sure bet you think it is. Invest what you can and what isn't essential to your personal well-being or the future of you and your family.

Diversify with different assets outside of crypto. Invest in precious metals, oil, gas, water, real estate, stocks. 

Yes, but does their value increase when Bitcoin is falling? Do they move independently from Bitcoin or do they rise when Bitcoin rises and fall when Bitcoin falls? In the months following the ATH of $69k when Bitcoin fell to below $20k, how did those alts perform? Has their value increased or did they crash alongside of Bitcoin? That's all you need to know about diversification.

Don't forget about the Luna and Terra UST scenario. So yes, your alt can go x100 or x0.

I wish the screenshots you posted in OP actually make sense and show different amounts because those two that are there now, don't.
It's of course essential that you pay attention to the amounts being traded. If you are supposed to receive $500 for your BTC, then that's the amount you have to receive. Releasing the coins for anything else is your own fault. It's the same as if you were to leave the store having only received $20 change, while you should have been given $50. Pay attention to your money.   

I don't remember ever hearing the term "blockchain observer". Even though the list contains others sites and not just blockchain explorers, maybe you wanted to say "explorers".

Theymos once sold 1xBit advertising space on Bitcointalk. Maybe you should stop using Bitcointalk as well. The decision was reverted after several members complained and informed him about the awful reputation that casino has. The point is, theymos didn't know what was going on in terms of scamming players even though those things were happening in front of his nose and on the forum he administers. I seriously doubt blockchair representatives browsed Bitcointalk or other sources to check 1xBit's reputation before giving them a place to advertise.

I am sure the marketplace where the bidding takes place gets a cut. And there is also the Ethereum transaction fees that aren't exactly small. However, it's a small investment compared to what you can get back if you trick someone into purchasing your stupid monkey with sunglasses and a colorful hat.

I agree with that. Signature campaigns and altcoin bounties. Even if they are not as popular as they once wore, bounty campaigns still attract plenty of users. Especially those in third-world countries where even $5 to $10 more a month means a lot. They are willing to sacrifice their time and not earn anything in 9/10 campaigns if there is one that will pay them something that can be exchanged and traded for a reputable cryptocurrency.

There have been various cases and issues with Blockchain.com throughout the years that I don't know where to start. I wouldn't touch it with a stick, and I see no reason to use it as a wallet even for a short term when there are better alternatives out there, like the mentioned Electrum wallet. Synchronization issues, funds disappearing, deposits not showing up, are just some of the things we can expect from Blockchain.com. Spare yourself the trouble please because you can.

Not necessarily. You will find that many Bitcoiniers don't use Facebook, Instagram, and many popular Google services. Twitter is different because you can call yourself whatever you want over there. But even if you have social media accounts, you are not going to be called Queentoshi and I wouldn't be Pmalek on Facebook. Your name is your name and your Bitcointalk personality doesn't and shouldn't be connected to it.   

But do we really know that is him?

Luckily, I have not experienced such issues and wouldn't want to either. What you witnessed is just one of the dangers of using centralized exchanges, especially one that isn't that popular. You never mentioned the name. Can you tell us what exchange did that to warn the community to stay away from it?

Centralized exchanges can do pretty much anything. Freezing and locking people out of their funds is just one of those things. What's even worse, by accepting their terms of service, you knowingly/unknowingly agreed to all the nasty things that they can do to you. Things are eve worse when using centralized stablecoins because they can be frozen even in your private and non-custodial wallets.

There is so much market manipulation on the NFT marketplaces that it's impossible to know if that monkey NFT actually changed hands and went to a new owner or if the same person "sold" it to themselves in order to get a better chance of selling it in the future. You transfer $3.3 million from one of your accounts to a different one, and in a few weeks or months you put the same digital item up for sale with a nice discount and pocket whatever someone is willing to pay for that crap. 

If Bayern offers such an amount, I think Juventus would accept it. The numbers being quoted in media are mostly in the €60-70 million range. It's unlikely that anyone would activate de Ligt's €120 million release clause in the current market conditions.

The sum of €90 million might be a rumor, but it's not a rumor that Bayern is seriously interested in the player. Their Sports Director Hasan Salihamidzic was in Turin a few days age to hold face-to-face talks with the Juventus management. That says enough about how serious Bayern is. Hasan played in Juventus for 4 seasons and that's probably one of the reasons why he decided to pay them a visit. 

Here he is at the airport: