That is the result of a myriad of security measures that they and their families take every day, including not publicly broadcasting where they are in real-time or exactly where they are going to be at a specific time, among many, many others.
And even when they have to do that occasionally (e.g. when the public knows that they are going to attend a public event), they have to take additional security precautions, to protect themselves against someone hurting them, kidnapping them or robbing them (or their families).
Even presidents/prime ministers of entire countries, who are not as rich or famous as Elon Musk, occasionally (or always) require extreme security precautions, like having bullet-proof vehicles, police escorts, streets being closed, dogs sniffing around for explosives wherever they go, and much, much more. And Elon Musk doesn't even have access to all these measures, because many of them are not available to private individuals in many countries.
But even if you could, you wouldn't want to take these increased security precautions all the time, it's just not realistic or desirable to have a police escort and/or the secret service following every rich person and closing streets everywhere they go.
> Security through obscurity is no security at all.
You say that like if that analogy holds for physical security...
Or do you think that physical security only truly exists if everyone knows exactly where you are all the time and they still can't hurt you? With regards to physical security, that's not a thing.
There are only a certain number of obstacles, and the more obstacles, the better protected you are. But there is no silver bullet, especially if you want to have a life and not live in some bunker somewhere.
Not all computer analogies hold in the real world. Cryptography doesn't give you physical protection.
That is the result of a myriad of security measures that they and their families take every day, including not publicly broadcasting where they are in real-time or exactly where they are going to be at a specific time, among many, many others.
And even when they have to do that occasionally (e.g. when the public knows that they are going to attend a public event), they have to take additional security precautions, to protect themselves against someone hurting them, kidnapping them or robbing them (or their families).
Even presidents/prime ministers of entire countries, who are not as rich or famous as Elon Musk, occasionally (or always) require extreme security precautions, like having bullet-proof vehicles, police escorts, streets being closed, dogs sniffing around for explosives wherever they go, and much, much more. And Elon Musk doesn't even have access to all these measures, because many of them are not available to private individuals in many countries.
But even if you could, you wouldn't want to take these increased security precautions all the time, it's just not realistic or desirable to have a police escort and/or the secret service following every rich person and closing streets everywhere they go.
> Security through obscurity is no security at all.
You say that like if that analogy holds for physical security...
Or do you think that physical security only truly exists if everyone knows exactly where you are all the time and they still can't hurt you? With regards to physical security, that's not a thing.
There are only a certain number of obstacles, and the more obstacles, the better protected you are. But there is no silver bullet, especially if you want to have a life and not live in some bunker somewhere.
Not all computer analogies hold in the real world. Cryptography doesn't give you physical protection.