And once more: the story is about 1BTC funds. The approach is different to store 1BTC and 100BTC or 1000BTC. I do not think that to have a copy of the private key (encrypted one) in the cloud is a bad idea. It makes sence.
I don't understand why we should have a different approach when you store money, but even so, there is a big difference in leaving them totally unprotected and doing a lot of things that aren't really helping and sometimes make thing worse. Besides, even this 1-100
BTC difference makes no sense as long as we don't have a clue who the user is and how much that means for him.
Yes, it is not secure, yes it has the risks...
Then why do it?
It like if you have a 500$ car you leave the doors open and when you have a brand new one you lock it and here you go, it's safe, although you have left it in a field 10 miles from home with the windows opened. Yeah, it's safe, if nobody takes it, if nothing happens! and you don't store things securely based on the fact that nothing unusual will happen, you try and protect yourself from those things!
Going through multiple steps that each pose risks is accentuating the problem not solving it.
So, let us not be so paranoic and give the topic creator the practical solution.
I would call this not practical but more like, do a lot of things to make it look complicated and secure when it's not.
Imagine that someone is expected to be arrested and put to prison. Probably by mistake. But knowing that all his computers, usb drives, papers, assets, disks, etc would be confiscated, the better solution is to convert the assets to crypto and save the keys online. And retreive the keys after 3-5 years...
Yes, it is the fantasy flow, but who knows....
If you store them with google drive... you're better with a piece of paper in the cookie jar.
: 
