Is there such a thing is being too secure?

One thing that I seem to notice about a few computer security geeks (including me at one point) often try to get you to adopt an unrealistic amount of computer security. Well guess what? If people did what they said, there would be no issue with malware anymore.

On one online forum, I found someone talking about doing all of the following things. Here are some of the things he recommended doing, along with some of my objections.

Have a router which is focused on security. (Costs quite a pretty penny)

Have a firewall that prompts you to allow or deny all traffic. (So you would have to make all of the decisions. Go ahead if you want to spend hours learning what to allow and what to deny.)

Have your computer set to download all updates automatically. (Bad updates can be released, like the Patch Tuesday bad update that prevented some Windows 7 machines from booting.)

Have high end antivirus software. (Which most users don't need because it contains too much stuff that they don't use and may be a resource hog, slowing down the computer.)

Always have the latest Operating System available for your platform. (I know some Windows XP users who would object to this, so I'm not even gonna comment on this.)

Always have the heuristics on your antivirus set to maximum if possible. (This means that your antivirus program will be so sensitive that it will detect quite a few false positives. And if it detects a critical system file as malware, it's game over.)

Never connect the the internet. (This prevents most malware infections as well as prevents infections from spreading. Of course, this also means no internet, which means that the normal user would not be able to enjoy their computer.)

Did you read down the list of just 7? At that point I just had to stop. Really, are you going to do all of that and more? So, is there such a thing as being too secure? Your call on that. Thanks for reading, be sure to sound off in the comments.