I'm willing to take the risk of having all my information in one place for the convenience that I receive in return. There can be safeguards put in place to prevent the nuclear scenario you present. I can think of several:
1. two-step verification
2. limits on the amount of accounts that can be auto-updated at once
3. notifications of account updates
What is? The three branches of government, and the true reason? That's not a copout, it results from some rather deep thinking by those who suffered under alternative forms of government.
> I'm willing to take the risk of having all my information in one place for the convenience that I receive in return.
Yes, however the topic is not your personal preferences, but which choice has the greatest risk.
> There can be safeguards put in place to prevent the nuclear scenario you present.
"Prevent"? No. They can only decrease the risk.
> 1. two-step verification
> 2. limits on the amount of accounts that can be auto-updated at once
> 3. notifications of account updates
These all fall before a keylogger or a social-engineering attack.
My only reason for posting was because the OP didn't understand why the present seemingly inefficient system represents an advantage.
Please don't imply that I don't know the way the US system of government is set up and why it was designed that way. I know this subject better than most.
>Yes, however the topic is not your personal preferences, but which choice has the greatest risk.
But it is a question of my personal preference. If I'm willing to accept the risks and am willing to pay for this then the option should be available to me. Or are you saying that a an adult shouldn't be able to make these types of decisions?
>OP didn't understand why the present seemingly inefficient system represents an advantage.
But don't you see, the current system isn't an advantage, it is an old and inefficient way of doing things! There is clearly room for improvement here.
> Please don't imply that I don't know the way the US system of government is set up and why it was designed that way. I know this subject better than most.
Yes, and on top of that, you really understand contemporary computer security issues. You've certainly proven that.
>> Yes, however the topic is not your personal preferences, but which choice has the greatest risk.
> But it is a question of my personal preference.
If it was simply a question of personal preference, you wouldn't have asked for the advice of others in a public forum.
You can't have it both ways -- you've posted in a public forum, asking for someone to explain why address changes are difficult. I explained it. Now you're insisting you're an expert, don't need anyone's advice, and in any case, it's all a matter of personal preference.
Knock yourself out. But I suspect long-term, your war against reality isn't going to go very well.
>I explained it. Now you're insisting you're an expert, don't need anyone's advice
I never said that I'm an expert or that I don't need advice. I merely defended myself against a personal attack by you (accused me of not thinking deeply and not knowing basic things about the US government structure).
The point of the OP was that I noticed a problem, couldn't find a solution and wanted to see what thoughts others had on the issue. You came in with a personal attack and an answer that stopped at the first hurdle- "this would be difficult to secure." Yes a solution would have to answer a tough security question, but I don't think this is a hurdle that can't be overcome.
Maybe it is an issue of age, but when I'm encountered with an inefficient system I prefer to figure out how it can be changed/improved rather than saying "it is reality, deal with it."
> I merely defended myself against a personal attack by you (accused me of not thinking deeply and not knowing basic things about the US government structure).
I did nothing of the kind. Both claims are false. Locate where I accused you of not thinking deeply, or of not knowing the structure of the U.S. government.
The reasons for the above are legion. First, there is no "you" -- I'm conversing with a nickname, not a person. You're personally quite immune from anything I might choose to say to a nickname.
Second, I didn't accuse you of anything. If I say "It's raining today", is it implicit in my remark that you are ignorant of that fact, and therefore my having mentioned the rain is an accusation of your ignorance? You need to think about how you communicate online.
I'm willing to take the risk of having all my information in one place for the convenience that I receive in return. There can be safeguards put in place to prevent the nuclear scenario you present. I can think of several:
1. two-step verification 2. limits on the amount of accounts that can be auto-updated at once 3. notifications of account updates