What's done is done.

I think this wouldn't have happened if the changes in core were not pushed so agressively.

I don't have account in any platform, so no buying opportunity for me.

The problem is that betting in a bad outcome incentivices you to exert your influence, even if extremely small, to make that pad thing happen.
If you are predicting a hurricane you have no inflence at all (I think), so no harm.
If you are predicting a war, you may have miniscule influence (which given enough people can grow to be non-insignificant. Also some people actually have more than miniscule influence in such events (and they can also bet on these markets).

Basically the problem is the similar the fixing matches in sports betting.

There are almost no sell orders on robosats. Few people selling, many people buying there.

What triggered you?

You are almost correct. The incorrect part is that if the soft fork chain has more hash rate, the old clients will have to discard their bip110 non-copmlient blocks and they will accept the aoft form chain. That is exactly because it is a soft fork - blocks mined by the new rules are seen as valid by the old clients.

I don't think anybody gives up revenue.

It is not known in advance whether miners will or will not implement bip110. The bip110 nodes will sever the connection to the non-bip110 nodes after bip110 activates not at the point of activation, but as soon as the first non-bip110 complient block gets mined.

Hard fork means that new blocks are invalid by the old rules. Bip110 is a soft fork.
In case of a chain split you will not lose any coins on any side of the split. If you don't make any transactions you can wait and see which chain will be the one accepted by the people. No risks here.

I am wondering something. If the mining pool coordinators are the ones setting the block template, are they the ones determining the signaling bits, not the clients?

Yeah, I know.

It's a soft fork.

This is not a hard fork. Also you can "fork yourself" and you have money in both branches, so no risk for you actually (you can wait as long as you want and see who wins).

Ligntning network itself has the "you need money to receive money" problem. Incoming channels aren't free. And the first amount you receive is usually very small thay ecxludes 0 confirmation channels also.

I would use it just to see it works, but where I live nobody accepts it.
Also most logocal yhing i hear is that at first it is a store of value. Then it becomes a medium of exchange (prices are in local fiat currency but paent is in bitcoin of equal value). Then it becomes unit of account (the prices are set and displayed in bitcoin) when the local currency collapses.

You send them lightning invoice each month and they pay it. Why would you need specific technology for that?

I have the zombie channels even immediately after resetting the graph. Zero zombie channels may not be achievable, but is 40000 normal? And if it is, then why does Zeus itself warn me about it? It warns me, suggests I clear the graph, I clear the graph and it warns me again :)

Zeus reports around 40000 zombie channels, no matter how many times I reset the graph.

Related, is it normal that Zeus (embeded) reports high zombie channel count? It suggests clearing express graph data, but this doesn't help.