You just commented a minor logically fallacy here. People are unwilling to accept infinite risk and the question of if a segment of broader is secure depends o

You just commented a minor logically fallacy here. People are unwilling to accept infinite risk and the question of if a segment of broader is secure depends on the risk of crossing that segment. They might have better targets, but if a given segment isn’t secure that’s an inherent issue even if people happen to choose somewhere else. In the other direction, if some segment is effectively impossible to cross that’s irrelevant. You don’t need other segments to reach an arbitrarily high standard just high enough to either get people to give up on the idea or fail often enough you’re dealing with the issue. IE one guy with a backpack per decade isn’t failure.