This is facetious. Some protection is better than no protection.
If "every little bit helps" is true for the environment, it's also true for cryptography, and vice versa.
If "every little bit helps" is true for the environment, it's also true for cryptography, and vice versa.
No, not really.
Algorithms tend to fall pretty squarely in either the “prevent your sibling from reading your diary” or the “prevent the NSA and Mossad from reading your Internet traffic” camps.
Computers get faster every year, so a cipher with a very narrow safety margin will tend to become completely broken rapidly.
Some things must be encrypted well enough so that even if NSA records them now, even 10 years or 20 years later they will not be able to decipher them.
Other things must be encrypted only well enough so that nobody will be able to decipher them close to real time. If the adversaries decipher them by brute force after a week, the data will become useless by that time.
Lightweight cryptography is for this latter use case.
Playing close to the margin is super dangerous.