It does make sense that the tables are for Monero-exclusive applications. Loaded GUI's lead to user confusion and thus errors.

Think absolute beginner: "I installed that secure app you recommended and bought and happily transacted and now you say that wasn't secure?!"

According to my recent test, the premium was 4.7 percent compared to spot rates, hence their pricing is not competitive and Bitrefill remains without a serious contestant. There you'd only pay the ~0.5% fee for going through an instant exchange in order to have your XMR arrive as BTC.

EDIT: Now, a day later, I did another test and got percentages from 1.8 - 2.0 % which is much more reasonable.

Hint: To quickly get the hidden fees of any purchase, execute units like this: ./units.sh '<xmr-cost-at-checkout> XMR' '<EUR|USD|...>' or ./units.sh '<xmr-cost-at-checkout> XMR / <value-in-fiat> <EUR|USD|...>' '%' for the total percentage asked.

Curiously, most ended up preferring a less readable XMR ID, leaving many common and given names available.

Maybe this is because nowadays we tend to assume the good ones online to be taken - so it's actually a great idea that you point that out! Let's see how it affects the trend.

Personally, when I opened the link yesterday, I wondered if I was looking at a product for 4-year olds: Big round shapes, bright colors, ... and nothing that would give me a clue about what I am actually looking at.

I might simply not be in it, but who's the target audience here?

Oh. XMR.ID is not an email service.

Names simply resolve to Monero destinations to simplify payments for the sender.

The two formats whatever@example.org and whatever.example.org were chosen by the designers of OpenAlias, the set of definitions XMR.ID builds upon.

The animations in the website's screenshots-section show XMR ID's in action.

Note that the email address requested at signup is used by the system to send further instructions.

Address reuse NOT being a problem in Monero is the reason this service can be provided in good faith.

Why is Monero address reuse not discouraged?

You can find further details in this Monero Stackexchange thread.

The time required depends on where you start. Someone who knows how to register a domain but has yet to read up on OpenAlias will probably need about an hour or two (if we do not take into account the hassles associated with DNSSEC with many registrars).

Then the cost of a privately registered domain starts at around 15 dollars per year, whereas the same is roughly the one-time price of a permanent XMR ID with two domains secured against each other (meaning that both, DUKETHORION.xmr.id and DUKETHORION.xmrid.com will return the same Monero destination). Wallets can opt to verify this.

Manipulation of any record would immediately trigger a notification to all affected users, leaving me with nothing but a destroyed reputation.

The most granular use I can think of is telling someone in-person to load your XMR ID on their device and then confirming what you see.

Coupled with a client that stores the result in a local address book - and compares it with the current DNS responses every time - even senders can be sure that they are still working with valid information.

(An extension to the official Monero client supporting this is in the works.)

It's from monero.graphics. It could use an extra dot, I agree :)

The theme resonated - especially in the context of OpenAliases - as I consider more personal and memorable Monero destinations an important factor in the context of building parallel economies, human to human, thus making Monero "greater" through use.

When one opens a camera application (like millipixels), the screen should show what the camera points at and capturing color photo and video of that content should be possible. It should run in a stable manner (meaning no anticipated crashes) and the required changes should be accepted into the postmarketOS edge branch.

As for devices, please refer to the linked wiki-page. It names one Shift device and one OnePlus device (and a variant of it). If only one device were to be chosen, it should be Shift.

I understand your concern about cost - maybe the company could be bothered to sponsor a device for this development.