You've clearly misunderstood my comment on several levels.
I never said people should use custodial solutions instead. But given how you managed to misunderstand my simple comment its not a stretch to think that self custody might be quite a complicated process for people even without some half baked ideas on hpw to roll your own setup like the original post.
Given how you managed to misunderstand the original post you clearly misunderstand what's even being said.
They said to use two wallets, one hot for keeping a small amount to spend.
One cold(cold literally means disconnected from the internet) for storing larger amounts.
you can have 100 separated wallets if you're gonna open that veracrypt drive and keepass on the same computer you use to argue with stranger over the internet it doesn't help you much
clearly there is deniability and at rest security in mind with veracrypt+keepass but accessing that is problematic and the author glances over a large part of a threat model for self custody with everything missing (or omitted) in the post. so i don't think i'm missing anything, i completely understand and see the missing parts of his setup
trusting the machine you are using is a big assumption and should generally be avoided as much as possible (just look at the recent bybit hack). having separate machine only for bitcoin wallet stuff and not connecting it to the internet is basic opsec for setups like this.
