the full name is Modular Multiplicative Inverse and to compute ModInverse(2*P.y) you have to find a value that when multiplied by your value and divided by the prime gives 1.
you can read more about it on wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modular_multiplicative_inverse
look at the examples below that.
the computation uses the extended Euclidean algorithm.
here is a python example: https://stackoverflow.com/a/9758173/10401748

yes i do believe that, but price will never be completely stable because we are measuring it in fiat terms for example we say bitcoin is worth $9000 and since all fiat like dollar are tanking in the long run we will always see the price of bitcoin against them go up even if its value remains the same.
but with that said, i think the volatility will greatly decrease to the point that we can call it "stable" with mass adoption. and also when the mining reward is a lot smaller than this after a couple of halvings.

i just came here to post this exact thing since i saw it on reddit just now.

i usually don't pay that much attention to what scammers specially an idiot like CSW but this last blow was really hard. i will be closely watching it to see what result is going to come out of it, legally speaking. also one eye on the shitcoin called BSV could be fun.

i don't think we have heard the last of this scammer though. he is more like cockroach that keeps coming back no matter how many times you spray it.

it is actually not that simple. the complicated part is the part where these individual blocks are chained together using cryptography and also the part where some method is used to make the entire database immutable (which means unchangeable).

the hash algorithm isn't stored in the blocks! the blocks are hashed (or rather the header of the block) and then the hash of it is used in the next block.

this part is wrong. bitcoin blockchain is what you explained. but other blockchains could be private and centralized and not-distributed.

the signature is created using the private key, it neither contains the private key itself nor the public key. signature is simply 2 numbers called r and s.

this is wrong. blockchain is updated each time a new block is found which can be in less than a second to infinity time depending on many things such as the way difficulty of the said blockcahin works or even if it is using the same proof of work algorithm as bitcoin (some are not) and how many are mining and finally how lucky they are in finding the hash.

it is good that you are making the effort like this but i think you should educate yourself more before trying to teach others.

lets start with your title: "crypto" or cryptocurrencies are NOT better than fiat. in fact a lot of them are a lot worse than fiat and it is not because of their manipulation but because of their lack of security and the fact that you can not trust the owners to not steal your money.

secondly only decentralized cryptocurrency, that is bitcoin, is better than fiat because it is decentralized and nobody can control it. the fact that some whales may manipulate the market from time to time and some newbies panic and sell or buy out of fear doesn't change that.

as it was mentioned, it is also possible that your list belongs to a brainwallet. try this one and see if that works:
https://brainwalletx.github.io/

it is best if you download the zip file from GitHub and run that instead of the website itself. the website may be recording whatever you enter.

blockchain.com is the only cryptocurrency related project that i could find which had all the words you listed here and in a project that was indeed related to wallet creation.
have you tried contacting their support?

it is from blockchain.info (it is changed to .com now). their system is the only wallet that uses this type of terrible words that look the same (like interrupt, interrupted, interrupters,...) and is incompatible with any of the mnemonic systems.
you can see their word list and the words you posted here in this link:
https://github.com/blockchain/unused-My-Wallet/blob/master/mnemonic_words_v3.html

that's the reason why Tether has always had such a huge volume and why it keeps on printing more. everyone is lulled into feeling a false sense of security. the same feeling they had with many exchanges like MtGox with the logic that "they haven't gone down so everything must be fine". then some day you wake up to see the disaster.
in any case i think USDT is a disaster waiting to happen but its influence on bitcoin has always been greatly exaggerated.

no matter how i calculate it, i can not get 33%. the "peak" of the hashrate in the past month (according to the same site with the article) was 120 and it is currently 92. even though both numbers are unreliable it still gives us 23% drop!
https://charts.bitcoin.com/btc/chart/hash-rate#5moc

by the way 92 EHS is the same hashrate we had 2 months ago!!!

not at all. we didn't have any kind of big drops to be concerning or in coordination with any change in hashrate. we had a small drop which was partly because $10k is a psychological barrier and wasn't broken and partly because of the Satoshi related FUD.

when price goes up, miners see the increased profit so they increase their hashrate. when price goes down they see the decreased profit and if they don't see any recovery anytime soon (since bitcoin is pretty volatile) they decrease their hashrate (eg. shut down their miners).

i think the halving contributed to the current fee situation and the mempool bigger backlog but it is not the biggest reason. the main reason remains the price rise and traders flooding the network and i wouldn't dismiss the possibility of an orchestrated spam attack against bitcoin right after halving.

trust? i don't think so. both of them are pump and dump centralized shitcoins in the eyes of the community. the only reason why anybody has ever touched these altcoins has been their pumps and possibility of gaining some profit. that includes altcoin exchanges too.

that's true that a stable coin would provide a lot of what has been sorely missing but the problem is that the most important factor that is missing (before the price being "stable") is decentralization. a stable coin that is centralized is no different than fiat and the banking system! specifically Libra that was mentioned is a centralized coin. so it really doesn't matter if it is stable or not because we don't see any difference between it and fiat.

as far as i can remember the news regarding Russia was similar negative thing but in the end the reality has always been different. basically i think among the FUDs in media Russia has the third place with China being first then India.
in any case fiat is not going to collapse without the country collapsing first and when that country collapses there is no lawmaker left to outlaw anything. so the question here answers itself.

i wouldn't say bitcoin is back to where it was before since there is still at least $1-$2.5k left to get to where it actually was before the virus ruined the world and the markets all around the world. but it is positive even with all the drama going around.
the recent small drop was also because of the "Satoshi sold his coins" FUD that were all over the internet trying to scare newbies into panic selling.

that was partly what i had in mind when i asked the question above and it could become concerning, but since nothing is going on against bitcoin in countries that such companies as Amazon are located in nobody worries about these things. which is probably why BIPs such as the one you mentioned aren't pursued either.

the topic title is a bit misleading since these are not list of vulnerabilities, but these are list of historical bugs found in bitcoin clients and are already fixed.
not to mention some may not be categorized as "vulnerability" in my opinion and some don't even concern bitcoin like the lightning network related ones listed here.

you have to admit that it is very interesting that such a large scale FUD over the past 2 days has only been able to cause a very tiny drop that is not even breaking any major resistances. at least not yet anyways.
i think we can surely consider this as a very positive sign of a strong bull market currently in existence.

then we are back at my initial statement about the flaw in this question. we should first define what we mean by "using bitcoin".

in any case when i want to define full nodes i like to use democracy and voting as comparison.
you can be a citizen, walk the streets, benefit from what the government offers,... and not vote. in other words have no say in who the government is and some day someone might take the "seat of power" that you don't want. that is equal to using bitcoin but not running a node.
or you could do all that and vote so you have a say in who the government is. in bitcoin that vote takes place every second with every transaction that a node verifies and nearly every 10 minutes with every block they verify.

i tried answering this question but no matter how much i try i can not come up with a good answer. the problem is that the question is flawed! one does not have to run a full node to "use bitcoin" and if they ran a full node they may not still be using bitcoin.

for example if they were using an SPV client and were in full control of their keys they are still benefiting fully from what bitcoin offers.
but if they were running a full node and were not in full control of their keys (eg. having a 2of3 multi sig where 2 keys are  controlled by a third party such as a bank or the government and they only have 1 key) you can't say they are using bitcoin just because of running a full node.

it was 2017 not 2018.
and my advice is that these people should join the lottery more often because someone who was able to catch the price that only happened withing a very short time (which was a matter of days) and buy bitcoin there whereas bitcoin have been around for 11 years has a high chance of hitting the impossible targets so they may have a good luck in lottery