Interconnectivity allows for incredible things, and there is no reason to conclude that it does so at the price of safety and security.

That is patently and dangerously false. While it absolutely allows for incredible things, there are a million reasons to conclude that it does so at the price of safety and security.

1. Internet of things -- connecting cameras, fridges, industrial controllers, etc. to the web, resulting in a larger target surface and a multitude of botnets, including Mirai, that cost governments and private companies billions a year.

2. Nuclear plants, other critical infrastructure -- while it is convenient to connect the critical infrastructure to the web, it is absolutely silly to do so. Convenience should never dictate putting citizens at risk, especially when the risk is deadly power outages or nuclear meltdown.

3. Hospital networks -- I get it. Paper reports are a pain in the ass. There is an acceptable level of convenience for hospital networks. But when we have heart monitors and IV pumps connected, at least by proxy, to the Web, that's ridiculous.

etc.

Eating Olives can be fatal

Don't know if this is an attempt to downplay the risk of widespread power outages or what..

Nukes kinda invalidate any and all defenses, so going that far this has been senseless.

Yes it's a security oversight to place critical infrastructure on the WEB, but there is no Impenetrable Fortress that exists from an EMP, and clearly the Ukrainian Example was Hacked Despite being an Intranet so it seems as long as it's a Computer it's a security oversight.

Agree with the No Impenetrable fortress defense. There isn't one, but that does not give us an excuse to put them in a hay hut. And I also wasn't necessarily referring to nukes, more non-nuclear EMP devices, which are becoming more of a threat and are much more difficult to detect and defend against.

As for your arguments about Rome never falling... That seems like a stretch. Especially a semantic one. Interesting though.