[Karellen]

> At some point you reach diminishing returns, where the amount of time / effort / capital you're putting in to eliminating fraud outstrips the losses from the fraud itself.

That's not quite what I got from the article. I read it as the more friction you put in place to prevent fraud, the harder it is for legitimate transactions to happen. Therefore, it's not so much about the cost of the fraud, but the opportunity cost of legitimate transactions which don't happen in the zero-fraud environment.

[jimkleiber]

I appreciate how you phrased this. It has me thinking about how it might be similar for privacy and security in terms of information or even physical security. Yes, one can be super secure and safe from harm if one puts tons of locks on everything, but it also keeps out people who we might want to let in.

Actually, now I'm thinking about it emotionally as well. Best way to prevent myself from getting hurt is to close off as much as I can. Also the best way to prevent myself from feeling joy and all the other things I want to feel.

So thank you for this reminder.

[mertd]

Emotions are a little different though. The more you know how deep the lows can go, the more you appreciate even the smallest highs. There is a little utility in getting hurt.