If the price hadn't have the correction in the past couple of days then it might have caused the correction plus a panic sell to create a bigger dip but since we already had the drop now the chances of any further drops is a lot smaller and panic sellers are already out of coins to sell so I wouldn't expect any major effects on the market from this news. It is also possible that this is already priced in.
What people are going to do with the bitcoins they receive is not going to affect the price that much.

Have you tried the links provided here:
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/2977003/the-latest-supported-visual-c-downloads
it also says the Visual C++ 2019 redistributable will affect the program written in previous versions. It sounds like installing that one is enough.

Like all the previous cycles when price reaches the ATH price of the previous cycle there is a big sell off where panic sellers start selling their bitcoins no matter when they bought those coins. It is always like a psychological resistance that causes a panic sell. So far we had a moderately small drop and it was expected which adds one more thing similar to all the previous cycles and solidifies the speculation that the same trend is being repeated over the past 2 years.

This bold part is the problem with this theory, it is a wrong assumption. It can work for something like a popular stock, a precious metal, etc. These things aren't being adopted, their demand is more or less the same as it has ever been.
On the other hand bitcoin adoption (ie. demand) is increasing so the theory has to become a lot more complicated to account for that increasing demand.

It is not "lagging". Bitcoin is one of a kind and in that sense is offering a very unique utility as a censorship resistant currency that could be used globally with highest security available while being very fast (your transaction reaches the entire world in matter of seconds and is settled on the ledger in 10 minutes on average).

You have to keep in mind that "usefulness" is not defined as creating vaporware such as what tokens are doing these days fooling people into thinking it is "usage"!

First of all when you compare two things you have to compare them correctly. For example a useless blockchain that nobody uses will obviously process 100 tx/day easier than a useful blockchain that handles 300k-500k tx/day. Secondly speed is not about how fast a tx goes into a block, it is about security that the said block offers. 1 confirmation in bitcoin that takes 10 minutes on average has a security that is leaps ahead of 100 confirmation in an altcoin's chain.
Finally it is about centralized versus decentralized. Both shitcoins that you named here are fully centralized and are in control of the company that has created them. Exactly like PayPal so if you want to compare these two you must compare them with PayPal and Visa not with bitcoin.

Users don't care about circulating supply if something is indeed useful. I promise you that if some day an actually useful alternative cryptocurrency came along we would all be using it regardless of its price and supply.

Sadly we only have one choice when we are choosing in category of secure decentralized currencies.
If we were looking in the category of centralized pump and dump coins with potential of big profit in short term then we have about 20k-50k choices.

Again production/creation aka mining cost is not determining the price of any cryptocurrency least of which bitcoin. You seriously have to read more about Proof of Work algorithm and specifically the part about difficulty adjustment and also you have to compare the amount of coins miners have in total versus the total market volume.

And again bitcoin is a currency (I don't talk about cryptocurrency in general) and a currency can be used as a commodity but its nature won't change because of that usage.

^ The main issue with this is that the casino after seeing the player seed and knowing that it has lost can avoid revealing its own seed and instead claim the coins with the timeout to avoid loss. Then there is the problem with the locktime too, who will it favor? If it is equal time for both parties then a race condition can happen where 2 conflicting transactions spend the same output. If it is not equal then it is unfair because the one who is capable of spending the output sooner will always have the upper hand and will always win no matter what.

When Fed prints more fiat, it is tanking the value of fiat. It is NOT increasing value of bitcoin.

For example if we assume bitcoin value stays stable (like when it reaches mass adoption) and you could pay your rent with 0.01 bitcoin or with 5000 USD, when they tank the fiat value with inflation you still pay your rent with 0.01 bitcoin  but now you pay 10000 USD for instead and obviously bitcoin "price" has gone up against USD in that scenario without gaining any "value" just because of inflation.

In the coming year we will see a huge bitcoin price rise and most of it like always will be due to mass adoption but part of it will also be because fiat is tanking.

It is called cryptocurrency and it is a currency first and a commodity second.
Also so far nothing has changed about things that affect the price and production cost is still not among them. The adoption is the main reason and the main defining factor for the "bounds to what price can do".

Not really, they are all seeing the historical performance of bitcoin and speculate repetition of the same patterns in the following year. The same thing that the rest of us also see and have predicted long before they even came in.
So they are getting in bitcoin now that price is just about to break out and before it is too late so that they will be able to ride the upcoming rise like what we had the entire 2017 to a much higher price.

Have you tried contacting the developer of Electrum? They definitely know and remember a lot more about the very early versions when Electrum was in beta phase and about things that have significantly changed about the wallet creation that are not backward compatible.
You can create a new issue here: https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/issues

I don't see the significance of QR code here, QR is just another form of encoding data like hexadecimal or base64 but it creates a picture. It also has a checkusm which you could have added to the string encoding too (like what base58 has). It also adds a challenge since you have to now be able to read the QR code with another device with camera whereas reading plain text or raw data is so much simpler.

I think you mean BIP-38

That sounds like you are facing the Buffer Overflow Exception which only happens when the program can not put its data in your memory (you run out of memory). Check how much free memory you have and see if Electrum is getting enough when you try to run it.

All popular Linux distributions include GPG by default, specifically Ubuntu (also I have used 14, 16 and 20 and they all had it).

You can use the -symmetric command and defined an algorithm to be used in the encryption
You will be asked to enter your passphrase and confirm it again.
The algorithms you can use are: 3DES, CAST5, BLOWFISH, AES, AES192, AES256, TWOFISH, CAMELLIA128, CAMELLIA192, CAMELLIA256
For more info: https://tutonics.com/2012/11/gpg-encryption-guide-part-4-symmetric.html

Unless there is something I am missing about the communication protocol, that must just be ambiguity in the explanation of what is being received.

How can this be possible?
Does this mean just the list of nodes that 4.2.2.4 sends back in response to getaddr? But these aren't nodes that are connected to 4.2.2.4, these are nodes that 4.2.2.4 knows about and were either connected to at some point or received their information in an addr message.
What else am I missing?

If by "visible at blockchain" you mean you can see it on a block explorer then it is simply impossible to not-see it in your wallet also as long as there isn't any issue with your connection.
Could you post these 5 transactions (their txids) and a screenshot of your history tab?

"best" is so subjective and in some cases there aren't any other options so you'll have to use the only available one. For example when trading most of the garbage tokens on etherum network, your only option is the token swaps because nowhere else would list them ever.

There is also two more factors to consider: decentralized option and fees.
If decentralization and lack of KYC is your goal then you have to look for decentralized exchanges and P2P trading methods. But in these methods the prices aren't that good and profit margin shrinks a lot. Also most of the DEXes aren't actually decentralized, they are just called "decentralized" while they either are fully centralized (like Binance DEX) or semi decentralized where the company still has some control and also charges fees!!!
If decentralization is not your concern and you have no issue with KYC then centralized exchanges are the option you want although they are very risky as they get hacked a lot and they shut down user accounts regularly! But the prices are better so the profit increases and the liquidity is also higher. The total fee you end up paying (compared to semi DEX) could potentially be lower too.

1 transaction can pay to multiple addresses. The only explanation I can think of is that 2 of your addresses received their payments from a single transaction which means you see 4 transactions in your history but 5 coins in your coins tab and correct balance in each address.

This is not possible. If you send from an address from your wallet to an address from your wallet, your balance will not change (except for the small fee deduction) but you will see the transaction in the history tab.
If nothing changed at all, it is possible that you never actually sent that transaction. Either previewed it and then discarded the tx or saved it locally.

Make sure you are calculating what you received and what you've sent correctly. It is easy to make a mistake since you've already made multiple transactions here which are hard to follow.

M and N can both be as small as zero meaning no signature is required and in 0of0 no public key is included in it. This is pointless but it is possible.
Additionally the maximum number of keys in this setting depends on where the script is placed and also depends on the type (hence size) of the public key.
If the script is used as redeem script and pubkeys are compressed the maximum is 15 but if they are uncompressed it is 7. This is due to limit on size of the data that can be pushed to the stack (here the redeem script) to maximum of 520 bytes.
If the script is used in pubkey script itself (raw multisig) then the number can go as high as 20.

P.S. Standard rules will prevent some of these combinations.

This past weeks are literary the first time that bitcoin has ever tried to break $20k and it has only tried once to break it. So far we had 2017 which was a bubble and the attempt was to break $19k not $20k although none of them could be called "resistance". Then we have the past 2 months where $19k was broken and later a new ATH was set at $19918 and the only reason why price came down is because it is a psychological resistance.
These 1 or 2 attempts can't be called "always"!