I think Torn Mind's approach is 'perfect being the enemy of good'. He's factually correct, and safe deposit boxes are imperfect, but if you look at any solution to any problem, you'll find fault with it. Entropy's a motherfucker, and everything decays into chaos. You pick the best solution to whatever based on convenience, cost, and risk aversion, and hope for the best. There's a non zero chance anything you do will fail regardless of how much money and time you throw at it.
The danger is fixating on those problems. You spend your life obsessing over details, and waiting for life to fuck you over one more time. Don't worry about it. None of this shit matters anyway. Once you're dead it'll all be forgotten, and even huge events will be forgotten aside from history geeks.
While it was fine letting people take the floor to guess at what I was thinking, it's clear that there is a virtual stoning session progress and the actual line of thought of the article needs to be highlighted. In addition, you seem to be imagining things and misreading things very heavily.
The issue raised in the article and broadcasted in my post is simple:
Safe deposit boxes are not safe for high value items that exceed the limits outlined in the contract to rent such a box.
You guys simply raise OTHER ISSUES not related to this one at hand.
Two, neither I nor the article proposed any imperatives to NOT store them.
Three, this is not personal to me because I have nothing to store in such a location. Did I ever say that someone stole shit out of MY safe deposit box. Because genius, I never said that. Maybe because I am an empath, I can sound like it's personal, but lost watches or lost cash of another are not my losses to bear.
Fourth, I suggest testing your "don't give fuck" imperative to whatever your sacred cows and if you're political, whoever is your favorite politician. Go WhistlinDiesel on some of your vehicles or something or run over a pedestrian. Because your words, not mine are "none of this shit matters anyway". And please, do write a letter to Mr. Poniz saying that he shouldn't give damn and pay lawyers for his watches stating your exact words. You say them to me, I expect to follow through and say it to the two VICTIM'S faces. And if not, I'll mail your forum post to them.
One of the first distinctions I learned as an economics undergrad was the distinction between normative(what ought to be) and positive statements(what is). What is evident is one is fiercely trying to allege I made a normative statement(Just store them in the house) when nowhere in the record did I mention to do that. In fact, the only thing I said was "TAKE BETTER INVENTORY", and to clarify, that meant taking pictures of the stored items. It is clear you do believe I uttered a normative statement, a statement not in existence in my post, thus you spend the majority of your post pontificating and implicitly shredding my character. Implied accusation #1: I'm a pickyune fault finder. Implied accusation #2: I want "perfection". Implied accusation #3: I'm obsessive over "details".
Here I am, just posting it more like trivia and just pointing out the lack of preserving evidence can leave one unable to recover. You think I take this more seriously than I actually do.
It's not like I said "DON'T STORE HARD DRIVES IN SAFE DEPOSIT BOXES BECAUSE THEY'LL STEAL IT". But I think that's what you thought I said, not what I actually said. Whereas I implied that because a hard drive is a low value item, it's fine in a safe deposit box.
.
You also missed all the multiple points of the article. There's more than the three that follow, but it would get messy and incoherent just listing them with no explanation. One is that high value items are at risk of other humans taking it for themselves for gain. Two is that the takers and the banks themselves avoid legal consequences. Related to two, there is no substantial regulation of safe deposit boxes and common law contract law(outlined in the likes of
Restatement of Contracts) severely limits the amount on can recover. Victim 2, a woman, had items valued in the millions...but her final recovery, 2,460 in compensatory and 150k in punitive damages.
Entropy is a law regarding the nature of matter. Look at the units of measurement of entropy, and tell what relevance does it have? Yes, in matters of matter and energy, there is "disorder". But this isn't physics, chemistry, or any other related field, genius.
I'll put it this way. Would you give cash to anyone who says they'll pay you bank? What difference is that compared to monkeys in a bank who oversee storage boxes?