Weren’t there “sleeper accounts” registered years ago that became active in the current wave?

Which does not invalidate my point about new accounts, but yes. Its important for new accounts, so once a sleeper account is banned, its not that easy to just create thousands of new accounts while everyone is focusing on the current active ones. And if, as I suggested, mass adoption per account is not possible, then the attacker has less to attack.

Edit: They need to make sure that sudden editing many packages in short time, with probably the same or similar lines should be automatically reported. They need some automated checks in place, at the very least. This would be a very suspicious behavior if many accounts are not active, and then suddenly all of them do something.

Even experienced people will just update as if nothing could happen.

Then you can't fault the system, if you are this reckless.

Adopted packages should have to use a different name and the current name being blocked so it WILL get attention when some tries to update their system.

This would break all dependencies of this package. The point of adoption is to keep it working and stable. I'm highly against force changing the name, that is not a solution (at least not one I am happy about).