Done.

Most sites, when you first set up 2FA, show you both a QR code to scan and a long string of alphanumeric characters. These both represent the same thing - the shared secret which you use to generate your 2FA codes and the site in question uses to verify the codes you enter are correct. You should always write down your shared secret on paper and back it up securely, just like you would do with a seed phrase.

Further, you should switch away from Google Authenticator and instead use an open source authenticator app which allows you to export an encrypted database of all your 2FA codes so you never run the risk of losing access to your accounts. Aegis is a good choice, as mentioned above.

Aluminum is a terrible choice of metal. It is weak, it is malleable, it has a melting point far below temperatures reached in an average house fire, and it is not particularly resistant to corrosion.

Here is a chart of the melting point of various metals: https://www.steelforge.com/literature/metal-melting-ranges/
An average house fire can reach up to around 1000 Celsius / 1800 Fahrenheit.
Jameson Lopp has a good summary of the various metals here: https://blog.lopp.net/metal-bitcoin-seed-storage-stress-test/
The TL;DR is that the best performing and yet still affordable metal is stainless steel. You should be able to get a small square of this from any local hardware store for a few bucks.

You could always consider encrypting your off-site back up first, or using a long and complex passphrase in addition to your seed phrase. That way if that back up is compromised, your coins are not immediately lost.

Your transaction is not flagged as opted in to RBF, so you will not be able to use RBF.

Yes. First you'll need to let us know which address is the change (I would guess 1AaE9A5pF6L5J2aYa2TdeDfmCQqNfD7aEz, but I may be wrong), and also let us know which wallet software you are using. You'll also need to be aware that with the current fee rate for a fast transaction sitting at around 70 sats/vbyte, there is not enough bitcoin on that address to successfully boost the fee rate of the 3 transactions combined to the level required for a fast confirmation, and you would need to also spend additional coins from another address (which would further increase the size, and therefore price, of your CPFP transaction).

The amount of bitcoin being sent in the transaction is more or less irrelevant to whether or not it can be replaced.

If the transaction has been flagged as opted in to RBF, and has not yet received any confirmations, then yes, the transaction can be redirected to the correct wallet.

Even if a transaction has no confirmations but is not RBF enabled, then double spending those coins to a different address will be very difficulty. Once a transaction has one confirmation, the chances of reversing that transaction are essentially zero unless you operate a significant proportion of the network's hashing power.

What would be more awkward would be her explaining to me why I am still going to work every day while she is sitting on 69420 bitcoin.

Even better! Buy o_e_l_e_o-II for just 69420 BTC, and (much to the disappointment of my wife) receive an annual pass of being my plus one!

I am offering a very rare, limited edition, one of a kind, for today only, all access, all inclusive, all expenses paid, special offer!

Whoever buys my o_e_l_e_o-I token (currently listed for the low, low price of only 2100 BTC!), gets to be my plus one to Foxpup's next foxhole party!

It doesn't need to. It only needs to improve to the situation where 6.9 sats/vbyte transactions start to confirm. When miners consider CPFP transactions, they consider the effective fee rate of all the transactions they would have to mine. The combined size and fee of OP's two transactions together works out to a total fee rate of 6.9 sats/vbyte as I explained above, and so the 2 sat/vbyte transaction would still be mined at this level to permit the miner in question to also mine the 10 sat/vbyte transaction.

As long as the first transaction is not purged from the mempool (and at present it isn't as I can still find it on most block explorers), then it makes no difference how far from the tip it is when considered in isolation.

He actually chose a perfectly reasonable fee, and there are multiple times since he broadcast the transaction three days ago where it would have confirmed, it not for the unconfirmed parent.

Of all the accelerators listed on your link, the only free transaction accelerator which still works is ViaBTC. However, they only accept transactions which do not have any unconfirmed parents, and so will not accept OP's transaction.

As I stated above, the only realistic option available to OP here is for either him to perform a CPFP with his change, or the recipient to perform a CPFP.

I resent the fact that I have to buy and sell NFTs on a centralized marketplace. I would much rather swap NFTs peer-to-peer directly with other users.

The problem here OP is that you are spending unconfirmed inputs.

You transaction includes 0.00014 BTC which comes from this transaction: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/84e6a94368cc2492158a1c26fda982acfb98570915bbb83edb7a50b92ef09b3e

The above transaction has been unconfirmed for almost a month. It has a fee of only 2 sats/vbyte. Your new transaction cannot confirm until this first transaction does, which means that the 10 sats/vbyte you are paying for your current transaction is being weighed down, so to speak, by the low fee being paid for the unconfirmed transaction it is based on.

The combined size of both transaction is 338 + 519 = 857 vbytes. The combined fee is 704 + 5220 = 5924 sats. This gives a total fee rate of 6.9 sats/vbyte. Once the mempool empties down to this level, then both your transactions will confirm.

Since neither of the transactions are marked as RBF then you cannot use that to help you here. However, I notice that your new transaction has two outputs, so presumably one of them is your change. You can use that change to perform a child-pays-for-parent (CPFP) to speed things up if you are desperate for a confirmation, but if it were me I would just be patient.

Used the app store to search for apps instead of going straight to the developer's site and verifying the download.
Downloaded a fake app even though Trezor doesn't even have an iOS app.
Didn't read all the reviews calling it a scam.
Blindly entered his seed phrase in to the fake app.
And now, according to the article, he blames Apple for "betraying his trust" and says they shouldn't be allowed to "get away with this".

It always amazes me how someone can hold hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of bitcoin and yet still be so monumentally uninformed. He had to do literally everything wrong to fall for this scam. The slightest bit of knowledge or due diligence regarding any one of these steps and he wouldn't have fallen for this. But no, it's Apple's fault.

A reputable Linux distro such as Ubuntu.

But more importantly than what OS you use is to not just download random pieces of software you stumble across like this user did. If you want to download a crypto wallet or app, then make sure it is open source, visit the developer's site or GitHub directly, and verify your download's PGP signature.

They did introduce the "Detect Existing Accounts" button on the page you select your script type and derivation path for recovering BIP39 seed phrases. Hitting this button will search 13 commonly used derivation paths (listed here: https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/blob/master/electrum/bip39_wallet_formats.json), as well as scan the next account up for any non-Samourai wallets in which it detects a used address. This makes it far more newbie friendly, while still allowing users who know what they are doing to specify their own script type and derivation path manually.

Blew all my bitcoin trying to get rich (Satoshi's NFT) and ended up bagholding a bunch of stuff I can't sell.

This feels just like the ICO craze all over again!

That is the entire purpose of the seed phrase. It backs up your entire wallet.

All the private keys in your hardware wallet, not only for bitcoin but also for every altcoin it supports, are generated deterministically from your seed phrase. What this means is that given the same seed phrase, you will always generate the exact same private keys in the exact same order. The same private keys will always generate the same public keys and the same addresses, and therefore give you access to the same coins.

And did you actually use Electrum back in 2016 to make transactions, or did you make all your transaction via this shopping site and just use Electrum to keep an eye on your wallet?

As above. Did you use Electrum to actually make transactions, or did you make transactions only on the shopping site? If you used Electrum to make transactions, was it on the same computer you are trying on now, and has this computer been formatted or had Electrum deleted/uninstalled/reinstalled since then?

We still haven't explored a passphrase in conjunction with the seed phrase you have yet. Do you remember setting anything along the lines of a password, passphrase, extension words, extra words, etc., when you generated this wallet? It would be worth trying to restore your seed phrase along with any passwords you were using in 2016 as additional words as I explained earlier in the thread.

Can you open the watch only wallet and the wallet you recovered from your seed phrase and check if the addresses are same?
If they are different, then you are recovering the wrong wallet. Either you have the wrong seed phrase and need to find the right one, or you used additional words when you first set up the wallet which you also need to remember and enter. On the screen where you type in your seed phrase, you would click "Options" then check the box marked "Extend this seed with custom words" and enter the custom words on the next screen.

Look in the default data directory as suggested by nc50lc above. Otherwise you could try searching for other files named "nueva" (same as the watch only wallet).

Any transaction can be included in a CPFP transaction. It is not like RBF where the transaction must be marked as opted-in before it being made. Any unconfirmed output can be included as an input in a new transaction with or without additional inputs and used to make a CPFP transaction. As you say, it might be that the person who made the first transaction cannot make a CPFP since all the outputs from the first transaction are to other people and there is no change output, but that does not mean the transaction itself does not support CPFP.

CPFP also doesn't fit in the topic of "cancelling" a transaction. Only RBF allows you to change the outputs of an unconfirmed transaction and reroute the coins back to yourself. CPFP only allows you to speed up an unconfirmed transaction.

First follow the advice above about looking for other wallet files.

Secondly, what version of Electrum are you using? If you haven't updated it since 2016, then regardless of what wallet you open it will not sync, as older versions are prevented from syncing due to a vulnerability. This means if you are restoring from a seed phrase it will always show a balance of zero, even if the seed phrase is correct. Download and verify version 4.0.9 from here: https://electrum.org/#download

Thirdly, what happens when you restore the seed phrase(s) you have written down?
After you enter the seed phrase in Electrum, what words show up under the text box (something along the lines of "Seed Type: legacy" or "BIP39 (checksum: ok))?
When you recover the wallet, do you see any of the same addresses just with no balance, or are the addresses all totally different?
Were the seed phrases originally created using Electrum or were they imported from somewhere else?