You think that? if 1 person dies from exposure, okay maybe he doens't have an immune system. if 100,000 people die, crap, we better do something about this.
tell me how the % is relevant.
It's about tolerance. If the existing percentage affected is in line with other similar scenarios, there is going to be a certain amount of tolerance. For example, in any given year the number of people that die from the flu is 3,000 to a high of about 49,000 people. Yet there is not a public rampage about this and no significantly increased amount of funding is being diverted to quell flu outbreaks and advance research because as long as the numbers fall within the norm, it is meeting the tolerance level around that issue. That doesnt mean that the issue is forgotten, it just means it is not a primary focus because it is under control.
This also applies to account security. Each year x number of accounts are broken into. If what Blizzard is experiencing is similar to x, then Blizzard is at parity to what other account issuers are experiencing and because this number is shared across many categories and account types, there is going to be a certain amount of tolerance that goes along with it. The reason for this is simply because achieving 100% security is simply not possible.
Anyone using the internet that has any sort of account should be aware of this. If you as the individual are not accepting of this, your tolerance is below the social norm. The only way to insulate yourself more is to remove yourself from the equation.
The social norm is dictated by a constant tug-of-war between companies, technology and customers.