Only if people are stupid enough to fall for it again.

Don't invest in throw money at BS that's only created to make the creator rich. That includes:

Are you sure about that? Altcoins, ICOs, Forkcoins, "stable" coins, Defis and NFTs are created for only one reason: make the creator rich. So gullible greedy people lost their money, and the manipulators must have earned a shitload. They'll abandon the drained project and come up with something new. I can't wait to see what the next money grabbing hype is.

Use Report to moderator. In this case, because there's only one post with a spam link, I typed:

For others, I've used:
Or:

The harm is done by spambots that create many accounts to spam useless posts for backlinks.

I don't see how this can easily be abused for phishing. That's much easier by using a fake visible link: google.com.

There was a time when every HTML link in the internet was blue underlined. Those were the days
Most sites remove it because it looks better without all the bling.

It's because ninja-edits are assumed to by fixing typos. It's not important enough to store.

My assumption is that Admin reads (most of) the suggestions in Meta, but doesn't have the time to implement the majority. A detailed response is rare.

Yes. That's how any backup works. It's probably best to shut down Bitcoin Core before you start making your backup, you shouldn't copy it while it's being written to.

How did that happen? For what it's worth: I prefer a laptop over the hassle of getting a UPS.

When restoring a backup, I wouldn't want to keep incomplete newer block files while restoring older files. If you have enough disk space, you can rename the damaged directory before restoring your backup. If you need it again, at least you still have it.

If your wallet isn't corrupted, you shouldn't replace it. Your backup won't have the latest transaction Labels.

If you're a month behind, you'll only need to sync a few GB. If that's acceptable, you don't need very frequent backups.

I only backup data I can't reproduce. That's my wallet.dat. Any other data I'll just download again if I have to. It would be a different story if I'd have a bandwidth limit.

I don't think think that's appropriate feedback. First, your reference link is off-topic (kuddos for proper use of the Anchor though).
Someone's opinion on address reuse doesn't warrant negative feedback. See:

How did you go from cryptocoinex saying he has nothing to hide to the worst criminals benefiting from him? Many people (including myself) have posted different addresses on Bitcointalk, that's okay. Many people say they have nothing to hide, which I'm sure is incorrect. Everyone has things they prefer to keep private. Don't take it too literal.

You should I'm surprised there are still people owning (almost) a full Bitcoin without knowing how it works. Short version: think of it as banknotes: you give a 100 dollar banknote to pay 70, and you get back 30.

At 10 sat/byte: yes. Someone made a lot of transactions at slightly higher fee than yours.

Why? Did you tell them to invest without telling them about the risks?

I called it more than a month ago:
That goes for both the website as well as the card buyers. Banks get into trouble if they issue cards without knowing who uses them.

This has been a while:

Bitcoin's price drop may have triggered some panic selling: that was about 100 vMB in transactions at 10 sat/vbyte.

Thanks again for your flawless timing! My timing is off by 2220000000000 nanoseconds

Where did those Bitcoins they sold come from? I guess from people who were hoping to make a profit by "investing" in their shitcoin? How come so many people are still so gullible/greedy after all those years of ICO scams and premined shitcoins?

According to this post, someone earned hundreds of millions of dollars from shorting by manipulating UST and it's "backing". I don't know if it's true.

It's not only caused by greed, from what I understand the mechanism could only work if Bitcoin's value went up.
Say you have $10, and you buy Bitcoin to guarantee your made-up stable coin keeps it's value. If Bitcoin goes to $100, you have $90 to spare (and potential profit), but the moment Bitcoin drops, you're short on money. You could improve this by buying $20 in Bitcoin to guarantee the stability of $10 in your stable coin, but if Bitcoin drops more than 50%, you're short on money again. You could go further and keep $100 in Bitcoin to guarantee $10 worth of stable coins, so that you can handle a 90% drop in price, but that would mean you'll be forced to sell 90% of your Bitcoin just to keep $10 worth of stable coins alive.
I can't think of any logical way for this to work.

This actually makes me consider shorting it: there's an upper limit to the risk, but it's quite likely to drop to nothing, which would give a decent profit.

Wasn't the voting (signaling) done by miners in the blocks they mined? Adding nodes won't help for that, and adding miners is very expensive.

And nobody involved at some moment thought it might be a bad idea to create a "stable" coin backed by something that will drop if you sell a lot to keep the value up?

I'm pretty sure it's just a spammer pretending to be affiliated. If Dave wanted to share his business relations, he could easily just post it on his own website.

I usually report wallet recovery spam when I see it.

On the other hand, many people on the internet want to help you with information. The tricky part is filtering out the scammers from the honest information.

To me, this feels perfectly fine and logical
If you roll a dice, the first bit is either a 0 or a 1, and both have 50% chance. The same for the second bit. It doesn't matter if the bits from from 1-4 or from 5-6. I can extrapolate from there

A dice is slightly faster than a coin, because it produces 2 bits most of the time.