That should work, although I'd prefer to use it as a secondary disk in another system, and not boot from it.
Your problem is the 4 GB RAM in combination with 11 GB chainstate. Add HDD, and it's a very bad combination.
As far as I know, reindexing chainstate requires almost as much writing to disk as a full fresh sync. It only saves writing 580 GB blocks. I wrote 4.58 GB to disk with 8 GB RAM during IBD. Remove the blocks, and you're left with 4 TB. And that was with twice the ram, so you'll need to write more than 4 TB. That's 4+ TB reading and writing more or less random access on a HDD. If it takes a month, that's 1.5+ MB/s on average, which could very well be the best the HDD can do with random reads and writes. This is why I prefer to put chainstate on SSD.
Progress will get worse once you're further ahead, see my graph.

I think this should work, and it's definitely worth a try. If it doesn't work, nothing is lost and you'll start a fresh sync.

That's the dumbest thing I've read today. Of course privacy coins are being used by criminals, just like anything else in life is used by criminals. Cars, internet, delivery services, you name it, and it's used by criminals. But we're not banning cars, internet and delivery services because they also have legitimate uses.

The phrase "money laundering" is often used incorrectly when it comes to mixers. The correct word would be "obfuscating", which is at most a small part of laundering. Or just for privacy which is a human right and not nefarious at all.
To launder money, you'll need a car wash in Albuquerque. Which we're not banning either.

Usually, the mnemonic is your backup. If your partner doesn't have one, what happens if his hard drive (or phone) breaks down? Multisig is only safe if you're absolutely sure you won't lose any of the keys.

I recently did an IBD on a laptop with 8 GB RAM:

Because of the lack of RAM, the IBD wrote 4.58 TB to disk. So it's possible, but comes at a price.

This assumes OP is willing to enter both private keys on the same system. That kinda defeats the purpose of each having a separate private key.

I noticed OgNasty and Vod both dislike theymos, and both for different reasons.

It's unnecessary though: Binance doesn't have to keep their entire XMR balance in one UTXO. I don't know if they do it already, but if they'd keep their balance in many different UTXOs, they shouldn't be limited by waiting for confirmations.

That shittopic was locked by a moderator after I reported it (4 days ago). None of OPs BS has anything to do with Meta. Go troll somewhere else.

Trolls should be banned.

Could it be because Monero UTXOs are only spendable after 10 confirmations? With Bitcoin, you can spend your change up to 24 parents deep. With Monero, you'll have to wait each time. So if Binance has one large address for all their Monero, they can at most process a few transactions per hour.

You were saying?

Here's an unexpected result:
Of course, 1 random doesn't mean anything, but still, I didn't expect 95% of the picks to be better than random.

Thanks again for your flawless timing! Is it 1 or 2 weeks to 5 years party?

If you have the redeem script, you may even be able to use coinb.in (offline and air-gapped of course, running from a Linux LIVE DVD from RAM for security).

I'm out of ideas, good luck

Coinomi removed BSV support a long time ago.

Maybe a variation of this post may work in Electrum. Or have you searched a bit on how to do this in Bitcoin Core? That may even be easier.
I found some posts about it on Bitcointalk, but always found multisig annoying to deal with. I've used it, but it doesn't feel intuitive like normal private keys.

This is non-standard. Is this a key created by Garda, or did you just hit the keyboard a few times?
A normal private key looks like this:

First: I've never used "Guarda". I checked the website, all it does is ask for a password and claims to create a wallet from that. That's as insecure as it gets.

I'd say start with Electrum. See if you can recover your multisig wallet there.

Step 1 would be to decide which secure new wallet you're going to use. You'll need to know where to send your Bitcoins.

Is it a private key, or a seed phrase?

A 2 of 2 multisig wallet requires signatures from 2 private keys.

The keys should be different. Basically, one of you creates and signs a new transaction to transfer the Bitcoins, after which the other person has to verify and sign the transaction to make it valid. After that, it can be broadcasted.

Can you manually export the transaction and email it to the co-signer, so he can import and sign it? Again, I don't know "Guarda", but this sounds like the easiest solution.

That's the risk of leaving your coins on a centralized exchange. "Not your keys, not your coins" is nothing new.

I've never trusted them, but who's there to tag?

Only if they panic sold, but if they did, they weren't really holders in the first place. That's why I think this is a good thing: if Monero can drop 35% because of the actions from one untrusted exchange, someone has far too much power of it. After Binance delists Monero, that power is gone.

Imagine having the knowledge to do some insider trading with this! You'd make millions shorting Monero. My assumption is always that someone is manipulating something.

What's the point in knowing the exact phishing domain name? Just watch out, even if it's not on a list of phishing domains, it can still be a new one. Users now have to rely on other sources than Bitcointalk to find the real sites.

As a rule of thumb: if you can post the mixer's URL, chances are it's a phishing site. But being word filtered still doesn't guarantee the site is real.