To this day, banks are using two factor authentication (2FA) as a way of
securing your bank account, i.e authorising who can log in, send payments, and whatever else you can do with a bank account these days. The fact that they even offer this should have you questioning the true security of banks, it's often said that security specialists have a stronger, and more secure network at home, than many of the workplaces they work in, even government based ones.
Plus, the fact is that you can take control of your money completely, without actually making it any less insecure, in fact you can make your money more secure with Bitcoin. This is something that I've tried explaining over the years to anyone who said that I wouldn't be as qualified as a multi billion pound bank securing my money, but despite trying to explain, they never really grasp the idea of storing your money inside an address that was generated offline, the fact that you can get air gap computers, use non digital ways of key generation, and there's a whole lot of headaches when you try, and explain it this way. However, bringing up the issue with 2FA with SMS, and the fact that banks are still using this today, could be a way of explaining the security flaws in traditional banks, and how they could actually make it more secure by securing the money themselves inside Bitcoin, whether or not they intend on using it as a currency or a reserve doesn't matter for this point (ignoring volatility).
This is part of the reason that a hardware key is such a good 2FA method, because it is by design a second factor, and cannot possibly be part of a single point of failure (unless you do something stupid like leave it permanently plugged in to your laptop).
This is something I'm actually incredibly passionate about; compartmentalization either via physical breaks, i.e completely different computers or virtualisation via Qubes OS. You could potentially come up with a decent 2FA method via Qubes OS, and depending on your threat model that could suffice. However, I would always recommend physical isolation whenever possible. You could go as far to say that a device on the same network, could become a problem if your trying to use two factor authentication, though I think I'll leave that for another day.
*Hand Raised.
It almost always comes down to convenience. I'll use the cliche saying of; the human is the point of failure. That's true for almost every thing I can imagine, there are ways to secure your Bitcoin, accounts or whatever you want, however the vast majority, even those that are security conscious ignore it, simply due to it being not convenient.
It all comes down to the risk associated, and your personal threat model as I mentioned above. If you are a pretty low target, aren't someone famous, then your unlikely to be targeted, and that might be a reason to lower your threat model. That's just one of the examples I could think of off the top of my head, but I'm sure there's plenty more.
I think each, and everyone one of us at some point has ignored some sort of security concern, this might be due to laziness, not fully understanding the issue at hand or simply because you didn't deem the risk high enough to take action.
I absolutely second the idea of a hardware key though. It's specifically designed for it, and it somewhat removes the inconvenience that you might run into with other methods.
