There is a healthy and unhealthy dosage of paranoia. An unhealthy one is spending your life afraid that everyone and everything is out to get you and your bitcoin. However, in this case it's not unhealthy and here is why. The Blockstream Jade, just like the Trezor and Seedsigner, don't have secure enclosures for private keys in the form of secure element chips. That makes them more vulnerable to physical manipulation and key extraction. One way to prevent that is to wipe the device clean after every use. If there is nothing on it, there is no sensitive data to obtain with physical manipulation.

If you generated your seed with Trezor, there is no need to worry about Electrum. Your seed isn't supposed to be imported into Electrum. You only connect the two to use Electrum as the interface instead of the Trezor Suite. Your keys remain on the hardware wallet. On the other hand, if you are planning on using Electrum as a cold wallet, then there is no need to include your Trezor in that setup. You sign the transactions on your airgapped device and broadcast them on an internet-connected computer.   

It wouldn't be an online wallet the way it was explained in the OP. He would use Electrum as a cold wallet.

I don't know if there is a difference between the DYI Jade and the built device, but the latter works with many popular software wallets. For example, Sparrow, Specter, Blue Wallet, Electrum, Blockstream Green, Nunchuk...

To OP
Foundation's Passport is overall a better device. It's one of the best (if not the best) hardware wallet you can buy right now. The Jade has one interesting feature, though, that I would like to mention. You can use it in two modes. The first being that of a standard hardware wallet, where your seed and keys are stored on the device. But you can also use Jade as a stateless signer, where it deletes all your private data when you turn it off. For that to work, you need to create a SeedQR code, and import the seed by scanning it with the camera. After you are done, you turn off the device and it's wiped clean with nothing on it.

I am not sure, but I don't think the Passport supports this option.

I have heard the term many times, but feel like it's too harsh. Any change can be considered toxic because bitcoin has a public blockchain. You would have to coinjoin or mix your coins to again gain an advantage in the privacy race before you use the change from one transaction for a different one to a different party or use case. Adding the coins to a lightning channel is another solution to mask the history of your coins.

That's good. That's what I have asked like five times already and it seems you answered it now by mistake when another user mentioned it. 

Can you provide some more information about this? Is your previous statement still true for this "partially completed product?" Can players wager real money on the live game?

I don't see the point. You have admitted to using the exploit to your advantage several times. Why would they prove you did it when you said you did? I am sure the bug is still there. What Eva is doing is what you would expect a representative to do who protects their business. They are not going to admit there is anything wrong with the product despite them knowing about it. They are not going to go into details about what is wrong. And, when you point out the faults, they will be surprised and tell you it's the first time they hear about it. It's standard marketing bullshit to look good in the public's eyes. Don't pay attention to it.

There are active users on the forum who know about the possibility of how to update old images easily but still refuse to do it. Maybe they have doubts about the code, thinking it can somehow lead to their accounts being compromised. I know several people that have seen the threads but I am not going to call them out. I don't think it's laziness because you aren't doing much yourself. It's more work to log in to the forum and solve the captchas at times than to run the code and let it do its magic for half an hour.

A lot can happen in the time you created your airgapped transaction to the moment you broadcasted it. The price can go down, which would mean that you paid less than you needed to or the value can increase, meaning you overpaid. This is important if you are paying for some goods or services. If you are sending the coins to yourself or the fiat value doesn't matter, than no need to worry about it. One more thing. There might have been a sharp influx of new transactions paying a much higher fee, making your transaction fall down on the priority list. If a fast confirmation is vital, you might not get it due to the time you spent going to the place that has public WIFI.

---

That's not what OP meant. He is talking about using a public WIFI network only to broadcast a previously signed transaction using his airgapped setup. No private keys would leak in such a scenario in the same way they wouldn't leak if the PSBT was broadcasted using a private/home network.

Broadcasting a PSBT using a public WIFI network doesn't impact the security of your wallet or bitcoins. It affects your privacy, but not security.

Each server that you connect to knows all your bitcoin addresses, your IP, and your balance. That affects your privacy.

Coinomi is far from the safest software wallet, and besides, I don't think it can connect and sync anymore to many networks. Perhaps, it's no longer working with Bitcoin either. If you have a good camera, you could try taking a picture of the QR code up close. Make sure it stabilizes and isn't blurry. After that, try to scan the QR code from the picture you took on your phone using the desktop version of Electrum. Check the settings and see if there is an option somewhere in the wallet to lower the density of the QR code to low. It might help.

You don't want to use the same address for every transaction. Remember, Bitcoin works with a public ledger. Everyone who knows your address, knows exactly how much bitcoin is on it. I guess you wouldn't be comfortable walking around with half a million dollars in your backpack, right? Using the same address is potentially even worse. People won't know by looking at your backpack what's in it. They know exactly what your address holds by looking at the data on a blockchain explorer.
 
Not much. They can broadcast it for you using an online wallet. Not sure why they would, though. Perhaps, if the transaction is meant to go to them.

Because there is a chance that the person sending the transaction will attempt to double-spend it and send those coins elsewhere and not to you (if you are the original recipient of the non-RBF transaction). Always wait for the transaction to confirm, RBF-enabled or not. Miners have financial incentives to include transactions paying more fees. That's why the original transaction can be replaced and double-spent with one paying a higher mining fee.

Electrum allows you to scan QR codes if you go to Create New Wallet > Import keys or addresses. You will then notice a camera icon on the bottom right. Click on that to activate your camera and bring the QR code in position to try to scan it. That's how it is on the desktop version.

For Electrum mobile, it works in a similar fashion. Create a new wallet > add new addresses and keys, and you will see a QR code icon on the right.
The question now is, will it recognize the format of the key you have? Tried it and see.

@JackpotRacer
Have you given up on the idea of testing the games further to see if the timer bug is still there or not? That remains the biggest concern to me personally.
Blackjack.Fun has misrepresented itself several times now, the provably fair claim is one of those times. A casino that has 2 provably fair games out of XXX hosted games shouldn't call itself that. It's good that it's gone now.

All casinos hope you don't complete the wagering requirements. That's why they are there. 40x isn't that bad. I have seen 100 or 200x.

That's also not out of the ordinary. Many casinos restrict you to a list of slots you can use your free spins on. Sometimes it's from different providers, other times it's some or all games from specific providers. Generally, they won't let you play games with the highest RTPs.

All bonuses have wagering requirements. If they didn't, you would be able to convert the bonus credits to real money, wager with it as you please and withdraw it. But you can't do that. But there is such a thing as a no wagering bonus. That applies to the winnings. A no wagering bonus requires you to wager the bonus money the casino gave you, but you don't have to wager the winnings further.

Since you mentioned Roobet, they have a 35x wagering requirement:
https://roobet.com/bonus-and-promotion-policy

I have both types of wallets. I verify the signatures of all the wallets that make that possible.

Regarding the sending and returning a test transaction, it depends on how much I intend to store in said wallet. The wallets I have for long-term hodl have been tested in such a way. I generated a new seed, recovered the wallet from seed, checked if the addresses of the old and new wallet match, and I deposited a small amount and sent it back to see if everything works as it should. But I also have wallets for other purposes where I haven't deposited and sent a return transaction that I use for smaller amounts.

The process remains the same for every version of the Electrum wallet that the developers release. The reason you verify the software is to make sure that you have a legitimate copy that was signed by the real developers of Electrum. You should do it for each new release because the legitimacy of an older version doesn't mean hat future ones are genuine. You could still end up with a fake wallet that someone else created and signed. So, before you upgrade to a newer version, go through the verification process again.

True, but that's statistics. It's a matter of trust to send them your coins now and it becomes a matter of more trust to allow them to hold your coins for a definite period. That's how I see it.

And both sides are losing here, I think. Every time I send coins to the exchange only to have them returned, I lose in fees. I am assuming the exchange does as well for the return transactions, or do they take a piece of the original deposit to cover the mining fees?

You wouldn't be on a waiting list if they had the coin you wanted in their reserve. It should be on a first come first served basis like it is now. If my deposit confirmed before yours, I believe I should have priority over you regardless if I ticked the waiting list option or not.

True, but the odds are more in my favor if I choose to wait. It's more than likely that someone will come and deposit the amount I am looking for in the next x hours. That's what's happening every day.

I don't think there is. I don't know of a way to trigger the Inspect Element feature on a mobile phone. Someone already asked about it in this thread before. Perhaps if you google it, you might be lucky and find something.

FYI, these are the 3 first search results if you google 'inspect element on Android'. Check if there is something there worth the time, but like always, be careful about downloading any weird software. I haven't checked the content or the suggestions on the below pages:

How to Inspect Element on Android Device?
How to Inspect Elements on Android?
How to Inspect Element on Android

Electrum has today posted on their Twitter profile that the wallet allows users to send the change from their transactions to their lightning channels through a submarine swap. It's a good way to preserve your privacy and not connect that change in the future to other coins and addresses by mistake. You need to select send change to lightning in the drop-down menu to use this feature.
https://twitter.com/ElectrumWallet/status/1764956987912032477

Zašto navodiš samo Zagreb kao primjer? Možda je Rikafip negdje izjavio da živi u Zagrebu pa zato. Ako je vjerovati izborniku na vrhu stranice i napisanom tekstu, iste usluge bi trebale biti dostupne i u Splitu, Rijeci, Osijeku, Slavonskom Brodu, Šibeniku, itd. Da li je ovakav PO Box moguće iznajmiti za jednokratnu upotrebu? Pretpostavljam da jeste ali ti u svom postu navodiš samo da plačaš godišnju članarinu.

Ima i kod nas ona grupa za otkup i prodaju i čovjek velike količine kupuje. Meni bi bilo neugodno držati toliku količinu casha negdje u domu ili zakopanog pod drvetom na tajnoj lokaciji. Pogotovo što je krenula sve veća globalna kampanja protiv casha. A onda treba pronać i način da taj novac ubaciš u legalne tokove jer nemaš izvora prihoda i još ako nisi državi dao njen dio u porezima...

Like I said, it would be an option for those who want to use it. Obviously, it shouldn't be the standard workflow. I don't see the problem with trusting the exchange as custodian of my coins for 12/24 hours (if I wanted to), if I already trust it as the custodian for instant exchanges. They still have the coins, only the period of time they are in possession of them changes. Many of us have and still are using mixers, and you probably know that some have options to "pay out" or provide you the private keys with a delay to make tracking even more difficult.

Sure, it would no longer be an instant exchange for users who are fine with that. Price swings could affect the final amounts, but that's already the case today. In the previous few days, we have seen bitcoin jumping between below $61k to $63k sometimes a couple of times a day. For the time it takes for your BTC transaction to confirm on-chain, you can, in theory get $2,000 less per bitcoin due to this volatility.

There is great demand for Monero. That's where this could be useful. There is also great demand for USDT now. Reserves sometimes show several tens of thousands of dollars. Then 10 mins later, it's down to 90 USDT, for example. Why shouldn't I have the option to be placed on a waiting list to prevent such situations if I wanted to? If there are no reserves for the coin I want, the exchange has to send back my deposit. I then have to deposit a second or third time if I am unlucky. That's throwing away money on fees.