Thanks for the extended explanations. Much clearer now. I think you either know much more about crypto than I do, or you're really good at fooling me, or both--heh.
I wish to reply more than as following, if perhaps time will permit; you certainly put in quite some time to your explanations. I have a few quibbles and questions, and I think I learn some new things. But regardless, one thing I want made immediately clear, is I do not beat some drum for the "holy church of the One-Time-Pad" as you put it. Rather, I absolutely agree with your following paragraph:
Not trying to belabor this folks, my point is simply that, though the One-Time-Pad can indeed be proven unconditionally secure under specific conditions, and may be a good choice under those conditions, this does NOT make it the right solution for most other cryptographic applications where it's practical limitations and vulnerabilities far outweigh it's advantages.
I think I misunderstood you initially on certain points; I hope you did not misunderstand me. Let's put it this way:
Physicists argue about whether information can be truly destroyed if put beyond black hole's event horizon; let's assume it is so. I am stating, "the only physics theoretic secure way to destroy information is to throw it into a black hole. That's usually impractical, and you can hurt yourself trying. So just use a thermite block cipher, properly implemented, it's good enough. p.s., also don't try designing your own thermite containment chamber or block cipher unless you really know wtf you are doing; it you don't, it will break, and you will be badly burned."
Similarly, most people that sell the black hole data sanitization services are just snake oil peddlers. Maybe they hit the data containing equipment with a hammer a few times, and say it's compressed "like a black hole". Maybe they just throw it on the ground (hey, Earth has lots of gravity). Read ads for some things called "one time pad" or "like a one time pad" programs, does that sound familiar?
With all this duplicitous word play, I am becoming very strict about the definition of a black hole. If the matter is of lesser density than required to put it within its own Schwarzchild radius, then it is not a black hole. No, not if it's made of osmium. No, not even if it's a neutron star. These things have their own names, you know. And if a cipher does not provide one bit entropy per bit of plaintext, it is not a "one-time pad" by long-accepted definition.
I only raise Shannon to underscore this point, and not to trivialize his work as "the one-time pad guy". As I understand it, Shannon is one of the few men (only man?) in history to not only discover a new field of science, but to single-handedly lay down its entire foundation (and in extraordinary circumstances, at that).
Anyway, in reference to your other suggestion: I actually put my plaintext in the folder labelled "just random stuff, don't look here!" Then I xor the folder with itself, and throw it into a black hole. It's safe there. The one time pad I only use to sleep on, it's very comfortable iff I use each pad for one nighttime only.