It’s my understanding that mass produced items are all basically the same. If you buy something like a toothbrush, for example, then any other toothbrush from that same assembly line is going to be basically the same and have all the same specs (with the exception with minor defects here and there), because the machinery and process to make any those toothbrushes are all basically the same.
But that can’t be the case with locks and keys. Because if every lock and key were the same then there’d be no point in having them. Anyone could just bought the same key/lock combo could use it to unlock your front door. So all or most keys and locks must be unique. So how are they mass produced in a way that preserves their uniqueness?
The utility of a lock is that it’s a clear permission barrier. If you don’t have the key and bypass the lock, it’s clear at least to you that you aren’t using a key. Which can be the difference between ordinary trespass and burglary.
2 fronts I’d say.
Also would point out, low knowledge low effort crooks, really 9/10 situations there’s an easier way to get in than the lock. Your house is far more likely to be broken in by someone smashing a window rather than picking a lock.
You would be surprised at how much opportunity based situations leads to crimes being committed and that opportunities are more important than the crime itself
While I certainly don’t want to argue about the wisdom of preventive measures towards petty crime or dangerous outcomes, i think it’s worth knowing that even trivially surpassed barriers can alter what recompense or punishment can be provided from a court of law.
For example: There was a big copyright infringement case against an AI company recently, which ended in a settlement of a few thousand dollars per registered work so infringed. Authors whose work wasn’t registered were not eligible for the same amount, because the law limits how much they can recover if a work’s copyright wasn’t registered.