The bridges are the problem because they represent a vector by which hackers can gain access to large amounts of stored value. I really don't buy that. We've

The bridges are the problem because they represent a vector by which hackers can gain access to large amounts of stored value. I really don't buy that. We've seen our fair share of malware that exists to break into bitcoin wallets to steal people's cryptocurrency. The problem isn't the bridges. The problem is that security is really frickin hard. Mix in the fact that there's a real monetary reward for hacking the system, and it's no great surprise that we see these types of breeches happening over and over. All the "bridges" do is provide an attractive target. Bitcoin's approach to this has been to make security the problem of the user. "Air gaps" and "warm/cold wallets" and all that BS. But individual users are not even remotely equipped to deal with this type of complexity. This is why the financial world has moved more and more toward very simple, basic two-factor security (something you have/something you know, e.g. chip-and-pin), while placing all the hard security requirements on the infrastructure itself. And that's still not stopped hackers from stealing billions by hacking credit card terminals, the underlying networks, and even the banks themselves. Fundamentally it's a bloody hard problem. And the tooling and education surrounding the use of cryptocurrencies is not up to the challenge. Not even close.