That's trivially true, but the proper response to bad security is good security, not shutting down the whole system.
Although until 9/11 the intent usually was either to get to a non extradition country, or demand something from some nation state primarily.
The source above shows a clear decrease in airline fatalities through the years but I suspect that’s due more safety improvements through autopilots, better sensors, and more redundancy than the decrease in hijackings.
This is nothing to justify the massive surveillance.
2. Delete information after use.
Approximately, the digital equivalent of having a human rifle through filing cabinets to get to that one folder that is actually important.
To this day, the only reliable way to achieve this has been printing things on paper, especially if put in individual folders do that even OCR efforts take some human work.
Time spent by human hands are, in a way, the only somewhat fair currency to measure privacy in.
But often the risk of personal harm outweighs the benefits. And in the case of digital assets the question is when, not if this personal data will be exfiltrated. And when it is, that is often more inconvenient than any potential convenience benefits.
The photos themselves are pretty useless anyways. A database of images will only ever be searched by an ML algorithm for which signatures should be good enough anyways, or manually, based on highly specific timestamps, by some form of police.
Not sure why you see that as useless; it's basically the moral takeaway from Hamlet. There are many situations where it's best to not join in 'the game'.