The paranoid won't agree with the parent post, but it's true.
Also remember that the facial recognition systems are all proprietary and far from effective such that it makes the notion of interoperability practically impossible.
You have more to worry about with the NSA snooping all telecom/data traffic and bank transaction clearing.
How much does the university pay for all kinds of other legal compliance? How many lawyers on staff?
There's no doubt this is a ridiculous compliance issue. But the average slashdot reader continues to buy new DVD's and pay absurd monthly video content fees that directly support the RIAA. Dog forbid I mention watching less television or consuming fewer media conglomerate products.
There is no doubt there are bad people that would like to do bad things to others in the world, but why anyone takes this kind of propaganda seriously is beyond me.
It's more than likely the amount of funding he gets is directly proportional to the amount of fear mongering produced.
Because the average voter may just as well listen to an hours worth of candidate commercials. That's what they are getting. They are making decisions based on commercials. That's a **bad** decision making model. This group lays the problem out nicely. http://www.opendebates.org/theissue/
Some slightly modified version of the following would be better. Let's get the candidates campaign people on stage too. They'll end up in powerful positions within the Administration.
In 1988, the League of Women Voters withdrew its sponsorship of the presidential debates after the George H.W. Bush and Michael Dukakis campaigns secretly agreed to a "memorandum of understanding" that would decide which candidates could participate in the debates, which individuals would be panelists (and therefore able to ask questions), and the height of the podiums. The League rejected the demands and released a statement saying that they were withdrawing support for the debates because "the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter.
It is a fraud. And still, people watch this theatrical event and act like it means something. No wonder this country is such a mess.
using this type of environment could affect the call center metrics average handle time, after call wrap up, etc)
There is no answer you can give that *improves* the metrics they cite. That's a polite way of rejecting your idea. You are entirely missing the point of a Call center. To answer calls. That does not mean offer help, because that takes too much time. The productivity metric is calls per hour, not satisfied customers/knowledgeable Reps per hour.
If you want to advance in this organization then figure out a way to tweak the company's productivity metrics to make it look like they are doing more work. Ignore the customer entirely when coming up with schemes. Executive management treats most customers with contempt, so you'll look like you fit right in.
Chances are excellent the Reps have an informal community anyway.
For production quality operating systems there is *nothing* better than release when ready. Given the sheer number of packages and diversity of platforms, all the Debian volunteers do a great job.
It remains the corner-case user who needs the latest and greatest release of any given package.
As an fyi, I've been running Lenny for at least 6 months as a clean-install desktop with no issues. Upgrading from stable to Lenny had issues for me. I've got two servers running Lenny without show-stopper bugs right now.
Lenny's got a really nice KDE4 in an unofficial repo at deb http://kde4.debian.net/ . I encourage users to check it out. Don't enter bugs against these packages in Debian though.
Parent's explanation is really accurate. Most of the comments are re-spun pablum carefully constructed to blame no one.
Most posts have also failed to note the inherent problem in the math used to come up with these packages.
"Risk" was ignored in order to make the financial package models work. Real-world "risk" includes events way beyond the deviations used to make the investment vehicles work. The quants don't have enough data to model out very far from the center, so they can't even quantify it.
A simpler way to say it: quant reports made their way into a meeting of people who are experts at blame shifting their failures and taking credit for others successes.
While everything was going great, it was because they sponsored the financial product. When the wheels came off the whole scheme, they blame Research for not making the risks known. In both cases they believe they are in the right and deserve every dollar/perk they get.
This personality is poisonous and at the same time presents the illusion of creating wealth.
The cover of the book may not be strong enough such that after sticking the book to 4x4mm patch, the book just falls off. The book will be on the floor with a ~4x4mm scar. The cover just isn't strong enough to defy gravity on a mere 4x4mm of glue.
A "spiderman" scenario suffers from the same complications. Except we're talking scarred fingertips. Ewww!
This kind of moderating is a special pet peeve of mine.
UAC is first and foremost a masterful artifice disguised as security. It's a blame shifting mechanism. OS compromise? It's your fault.
Someone within that organization that dreamed up a system that doesn't provide privilege separation in order to *perfectly* shift the blame to the user.
Another part of that organization sold it as sudo-like and some of the moderators probably believe it is. This kind of belief is the unshakable variety, like Intelligent Design.
I can pretty much guarantee the Federal standard would be a nightmare.
The worst of K street will have second crack at the legislation. The Cheney administration would have first crack at it and take another opportunity to sodomize legal history and Constitutional law. Both houses of Congress have more or less abdicated their responsibility in providing checks, so it gets Fugly fast.
I think most would agree that surveillance probably began under the conditions you describe.
1. The crux of the problem is the relentless acquisition of power and influence that creeps into what could, in principal, be a good program. Maybe the power-mongering doesn't happen at first, but history has repeatedly shown stuff like this is turned against citizens. There is no reason to believe there would be an exception here.
2. The Office of the President currently operates under the notion that their powers shall be unconstrained by any other branch of government, tradition and legal history be damned.
Mix #1 and #2 together and publish it on Slashdot and the conspiracy minded come flying out to condemn it all.
The rest of the political/legal world generally agree that the Cheney administration views executive powers as unlimited. Therefore, they would probably agree that it's likely the office of the President would willfully sodomize any survielance(sp?)law with signing statements and executive orders.
Finally, I think it's the case that most Americans know there is "something wrong" with the way the Executive branch has been operating. Media coverage like this is a kind of indirect measurement.
Obviously, you never heard any Grimm's Fairy Tales as a youth, nor read even a retelling of the Odyssey, nor of Greek Mythology, nor even Hurlbut's Story Of The Bible.
You lumped reading, which is a mentally stimulating activity. You know like, sit still, concentrate for an extended period of time, and create the images you are reading? Watching TV does none of those things.
It's also important to note that reality has a certain level of violence to it that children must learn to cope with by getting assistance from their parents. TV portrays violence as a kind of excitement. I'm not okay with that. You shouldn't be either.
There's not as much violent/sexual media as you think and it actually is very controllable.
Yes, there is. You are just desensitized to it. Turn off the TV for 90 days and then turn it back on. You'll have an entirely different response.
hile playing in the flowers a hawk can come down and snatch a field mouse and eat it up or a cat might get hit by a car someday.
Those examples are real, interactive life. Those are all opportunities where you get to be a parent and the child learns to interact/deal with the world around her/him. *Nothing* on TV is any of those things.
lot of the media we expose them to is highly sexualized and violent
Which is exactly why we sold our TV when our daughter was very young. We are all better off for buying a 12" TV that stayed in a cabinet. This is much harder for adults than it is for the kids. Until you do it for a few months, you won't understand.
Discontinue the cable and stick that money in the bank.
Is she some kind of Amish freak? No. She watches enough TV at her friends house and then comes home and complains that it wasn't fun.
and I feel like I'm just supposed to talk to my daughter until she accepts this as normal
It may be all around us, but it isn't normal or appropriate for children. Most adults just get passive about it and use some kind of complicated thinking to call PBS kids shows "good TV." TV is crack for kids. It's passive gratification and flashing pictures. Stick to your guns on this issue and change your way of living. Getting rid of the TV is a great start.
What exactly is wrong with giving your kid a way to experience/talk about death? Pets will die, relatives may die, you know real life stuff. If this guy has put that into a context that speaks to kids, maybe make it funny, then more power to him.
Now, that's different than teaching them the 7 stages of grief before first grade or talking about death OUT of context of their narrow life experience.
A book like this and others that normalize things like the human body (grossology) are great to have on the shelf. Your kid will pick it up. As you know, they pick *everything* up. If it speaks to them, then they'll have questions. If not, they'll just put it down and forget about it.
I work in a shop that's got win32 on the brain and use Strawberry Perl extensively. The CPAN support is really great. Not perfect, but generally great.
I don't really understand why Perl is so not-hot. It may be ugly for higher-end programming types, but I'm not much more than a script writer and get great results with perl on win32.
Microsoft has so many scripting options it's impossible for me to keep track. wsh? vbs? asp? monad?.net? Perl's got it all with modules providing relatively simple variations on Perl themes.
I hate to break it to you, but the privacy you strive for is long gone. Even if you go to a cash-only, thriftstore lifestyle, there's still lots of data being collected on you and then resold.
The kind of privacy you are discussing, is the commercial kind. I don't consider it as important as the other stuff. Just don't do anything meaningful on these social sites and you should be good to go.
I'm going to do exactly as suggested and be sure I'm recorded at multiple places at the same time doing all kinds of dumb things. I'll get knighted by the queen of Applestan and visit the Great Wall after that. I miss San Francisco. I think I'll go there next.
Myth #2 suggests making your customers wait. That might work in super-mega-corporate land where your customers are literally married to you and queues in Tech Support are "profitable."
I would *deserve* to be fired if I made a customer wait. Of course, that sense of urgency doesn't work in super-mega-corporate entities either.
The myth about going to DC to be more efficient is painful too. If a manager in a workplace would entertain a crackpot ideas like that, I'd leave.
Some CEO celebrating his righteousness after the fact doesn't get any media traction. The average person knows the system is rotten through-and-through so no one really cares.
Simplifying the issue into "naked shorts are bad" does the whole financial system a disservice. The system is so tightly coupled that removing the ability to short sell actually has removed some of the opacity to the marketplace. Shorts generally fortell future price declines.
Naked shorts are the simplest problem. The murky and totally unregulated derivatives markets are a far bigger issue. You'll note that they aren't seriously discussed at all. These are the assets that are impossible to price and equally impossible to sell.
The spin on this is so strong, that it turns my stomach. The fear mongering perpetrated on this country is criminal.
I am still bitter as hell about how both my Senators and Representative voted for the %@$#! Bailout.
It didn't stop them from voting against the desires of their constituents. According to the email one of them sent out as a reply to my comments, most of her constituents were against the Financial Patriot Act and yet she still voted for it.
They will need to end all these loopholes to pay down the insane deficit.
Ahh, Ireland is a more recent example of what's been going on since the 70's. One of the totally legal tax scams no one cares to mention is when an American subsidiary of a conglomerate operates at a perpetual loss. American management uses the "operating loss" excuse to keep wage low. Samsung, Panasonic, Sony, Acer, etc. They get to reap the rewards of participating in the most vibrant economy in the world for rock-bottom dollar.
The problem with tightening these rules is that the average international corporation pays tax consultants to figure out the lowest operating cost method. If the U.S. doesn't provide the lowest operating costs, then they just re-organize to different parts of the world. Those clever corporations would, for example, issue bonds under one corporation then use them to fund another subsidiary. The bond-issuing corporation "fails" bondholders and equity participants lose everything and the other subsidiary that got the money lives on. The finance world is using that scam right now to "fail" everything over to the Treasury.
It's the equivalent of tightening your grip with a palm full of sand. I don't know a good way to fix it that won't be gamed in a couple of months after the legislation goes into effect.
Putting some messages in envelopes and passing them around the room is a good one.
I'd work on a failure story of some kind. Losing an envelope with part of the message is a good one. You're the guy that fixes things when messages are lost.
Start a message at one end of the room and have the students relay the message until it gets to the last student where it will be a total mess.
Your job includes making sure computer messages gets from Los Angeles, CA to New York, NY exactly the way it started.
You also might want to figure out a game to explain how literal and dumb software is. Part of your job includes baby sitting the stupid software. That's how I explained my job when I'd get alarms on my phone to my kid. You may want to ask the class to volunteer the "class clown" for the hamming-up the role of stupid software.
If you do it right, you have talked a little about hardware, software and troubleshooting with a few minutes to spare.
Facts for the Conspiracy Theorists
on
Fossett's Plane Found
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
As someone that's hiked that area long ago, when they mentioned the search would begin on the John Muir Trail between Dorothy and Shadow Lakes. That is a *heck* of a lot of VERY rugged forest area above 8000ft. It's not like there's a long snow-free time up there, or a whole lot of people at any given time either.
That they were able to find the wreckage is awesome. That's one great reason why we pay taxes people.
Prior searches focused on land east of the Glass Mountains. Another *huge* area.
As an FYI, the area has all kinds of omnivores. I can't see how a pilot could survive that either. There's no place to land a plane! Let's say he does the TV-movie thing and tried some kind of bail out. Bailing out, much less walking out without intimate knowledge of the area are both very low probability events in that region.
You guys should get out more, especially the conspiracy nuts. It's a beautiful area of our country. If that's too far away, visit a nearby National Park.
Slashdot Mirror
The paranoid won't agree with the parent post, but it's true.
Also remember that the facial recognition systems are all proprietary and far from effective such that it makes the notion of interoperability practically impossible.
You have more to worry about with the NSA snooping all telecom/data traffic and bank transaction clearing.
Reality check: this is peanuts.
How much does the university pay for all kinds of other legal compliance? How many lawyers on staff?
There's no doubt this is a ridiculous compliance issue. But the average slashdot reader continues to buy new DVD's and pay absurd monthly video content fees that directly support the RIAA. Dog forbid I mention watching less television or consuming fewer media conglomerate products.
There is no doubt there are bad people that would like to do bad things to others in the world, but why anyone takes this kind of propaganda seriously is beyond me.
It's more than likely the amount of funding he gets is directly proportional to the amount of fear mongering produced.
why is it better to hear no debate
Because the average voter may just as well listen to an hours worth of candidate commercials. That's what they are getting. They are making decisions based on commercials. That's a **bad** decision making model. This group lays the problem out nicely. http://www.opendebates.org/theissue/
Some slightly modified version of the following would be better. Let's get the candidates campaign people on stage too. They'll end up in powerful positions within the Administration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_forum_debate
Sadly, I'm no troll.
The "debate" is an artifice constructed by the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is run by both parties. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_on_Presidential_Debates
In 1988, the League of Women Voters withdrew its sponsorship of the presidential debates after the George H.W. Bush and Michael Dukakis campaigns secretly agreed to a "memorandum of understanding" that would decide which candidates could participate in the debates, which individuals would be panelists (and therefore able to ask questions), and the height of the podiums. The League rejected the demands and released a statement saying that they were withdrawing support for the debates because "the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter.
It is a fraud. And still, people watch this theatrical event and act like it means something. No wonder this country is such a mess.
You've got executive issues.
using this type of environment could affect the call center metrics average handle time, after call wrap up, etc)
There is no answer you can give that *improves* the metrics they cite. That's a polite way of rejecting your idea. You are entirely missing the point of a Call center. To answer calls. That does not mean offer help, because that takes too much time. The productivity metric is calls per hour, not satisfied customers/knowledgeable Reps per hour.
If you want to advance in this organization then figure out a way to tweak the company's productivity metrics to make it look like they are doing more work. Ignore the customer entirely when coming up with schemes. Executive management treats most customers with contempt, so you'll look like you fit right in.
Chances are excellent the Reps have an informal community anyway.
For production quality operating systems there is *nothing* better than release when ready. Given the sheer number of packages and diversity of platforms, all the Debian volunteers do a great job.
It remains the corner-case user who needs the latest and greatest release of any given package.
As an fyi, I've been running Lenny for at least 6 months as a clean-install desktop with no issues. Upgrading from stable to Lenny had issues for me. I've got two servers running Lenny without show-stopper bugs right now.
Lenny's got a really nice KDE4 in an unofficial repo at deb http://kde4.debian.net/ . I encourage users to check it out. Don't enter bugs against these packages in Debian though.
Parent's explanation is really accurate. Most of the comments are re-spun pablum carefully constructed to blame no one.
Most posts have also failed to note the inherent problem in the math used to come up with these packages.
"Risk" was ignored in order to make the financial package models work. Real-world "risk" includes events way beyond the deviations used to make the investment vehicles work. The quants don't have enough data to model out very far from the center, so they can't even quantify it.
A simpler way to say it: quant reports made their way into a meeting of people who are experts at blame shifting their failures and taking credit for others successes.
While everything was going great, it was because they sponsored the financial product. When the wheels came off the whole scheme, they blame Research for not making the risks known. In both cases they believe they are in the right and deserve every dollar/perk they get.
This personality is poisonous and at the same time presents the illusion of creating wealth.
I don't really care how "super" the glue may be.
The cover of the book may not be strong enough such that after sticking the book to 4x4mm patch, the book just falls off. The book will be on the floor with a ~4x4mm scar. The cover just isn't strong enough to defy gravity on a mere 4x4mm of glue.
A "spiderman" scenario suffers from the same complications. Except we're talking scarred fingertips. Ewww!
This kind of moderating is a special pet peeve of mine.
UAC is first and foremost a masterful artifice disguised as security. It's a blame shifting mechanism. OS compromise? It's your fault.
Someone within that organization that dreamed up a system that doesn't provide privilege separation in order to *perfectly* shift the blame to the user.
Another part of that organization sold it as sudo-like and some of the moderators probably believe it is. This kind of belief is the unshakable variety, like Intelligent Design.
I can pretty much guarantee the Federal standard would be a nightmare.
The worst of K street will have second crack at the legislation. The Cheney administration would have first crack at it and take another opportunity to sodomize legal history and Constitutional law. Both houses of Congress have more or less abdicated their responsibility in providing checks, so it gets Fugly fast.
I think most would agree that surveillance probably began under the conditions you describe.
1. The crux of the problem is the relentless acquisition of power and influence that creeps into what could, in principal, be a good program. Maybe the power-mongering doesn't happen at first, but history has repeatedly shown stuff like this is turned against citizens. There is no reason to believe there would be an exception here.
2. The Office of the President currently operates under the notion that their powers shall be unconstrained by any other branch of government, tradition and legal history be damned.
Mix #1 and #2 together and publish it on Slashdot and the conspiracy minded come flying out to condemn it all.
The rest of the political/legal world generally agree that the Cheney administration views executive powers as unlimited. Therefore, they would probably agree that it's likely the office of the President would willfully sodomize any survielance(sp?)law with signing statements and executive orders.
Finally, I think it's the case that most Americans know there is "something wrong" with the way the Executive branch has been operating. Media coverage like this is a kind of indirect measurement.
Obviously, you never heard any Grimm's Fairy Tales as a youth, nor read even a retelling of the Odyssey, nor of Greek Mythology, nor even Hurlbut's Story Of The Bible.
You lumped reading, which is a mentally stimulating activity. You know like, sit still, concentrate for an extended period of time, and create the images you are reading? Watching TV does none of those things.
It's also important to note that reality has a certain level of violence to it that children must learn to cope with by getting assistance from their parents. TV portrays violence as a kind of excitement. I'm not okay with that. You shouldn't be either.
There's not as much violent/sexual media as you think and it actually is very controllable.
Yes, there is. You are just desensitized to it. Turn off the TV for 90 days and then turn it back on. You'll have an entirely different response.
hile playing in the flowers a hawk can come down and snatch a field mouse and eat it up or a cat might get hit by a car someday.
Those examples are real, interactive life. Those are all opportunities where you get to be a parent and the child learns to interact/deal with the world around her/him. *Nothing* on TV is any of those things.
Warning: Rant from a crazy parent.
lot of the media we expose them to is highly sexualized and violent
Which is exactly why we sold our TV when our daughter was very young. We are all better off for buying a 12" TV that stayed in a cabinet. This is much harder for adults than it is for the kids. Until you do it for a few months, you won't understand.
Discontinue the cable and stick that money in the bank.
Is she some kind of Amish freak? No. She watches enough TV at her friends house and then comes home and complains that it wasn't fun.
and I feel like I'm just supposed to talk to my daughter until she accepts this as normal
It may be all around us, but it isn't normal or appropriate for children. Most adults just get passive about it and use some kind of complicated thinking to call PBS kids shows "good TV." TV is crack for kids. It's passive gratification and flashing pictures. Stick to your guns on this issue and change your way of living. Getting rid of the TV is a great start.
What exactly is wrong with giving your kid a way to experience/talk about death? Pets will die, relatives may die, you know real life stuff. If this guy has put that into a context that speaks to kids, maybe make it funny, then more power to him.
Now, that's different than teaching them the 7 stages of grief before first grade or talking about death OUT of context of their narrow life experience.
A book like this and others that normalize things like the human body (grossology) are great to have on the shelf. Your kid will pick it up. As you know, they pick *everything* up. If it speaks to them, then they'll have questions. If not, they'll just put it down and forget about it.
I work in a shop that's got win32 on the brain and use Strawberry Perl extensively. The CPAN support is really great. Not perfect, but generally great.
I don't really understand why Perl is so not-hot. It may be ugly for higher-end programming types, but I'm not much more than a script writer and get great results with perl on win32.
Microsoft has so many scripting options it's impossible for me to keep track. wsh? vbs? asp? monad? .net? Perl's got it all with modules providing relatively simple variations on Perl themes.
I hate to break it to you, but the privacy you strive for is long gone. Even if you go to a cash-only, thriftstore lifestyle, there's still lots of data being collected on you and then resold.
The kind of privacy you are discussing, is the commercial kind. I don't consider it as important as the other stuff.
Just don't do anything meaningful on these social sites and you should be good to go.
I'm going to do exactly as suggested and be sure I'm recorded at multiple places at the same time doing all kinds of dumb things. I'll get knighted by the queen of Applestan and visit the Great Wall after that. I miss San Francisco. I think I'll go there next.
Myth #2 suggests making your customers wait. That might work in super-mega-corporate land where your customers are literally married to you and queues in Tech Support are "profitable."
I would *deserve* to be fired if I made a customer wait. Of course, that sense of urgency doesn't work in super-mega-corporate entities either.
The myth about going to DC to be more efficient is painful too. If a manager in a workplace would entertain a crackpot ideas like that, I'd leave.
Some CEO celebrating his righteousness after the fact doesn't get any media traction. The average person knows the system is rotten through-and-through so no one really cares.
Simplifying the issue into "naked shorts are bad" does the whole financial system a disservice. The system is so tightly coupled that removing the ability to short sell actually has removed some of the opacity to the marketplace. Shorts generally fortell future price declines.
Naked shorts are the simplest problem. The murky and totally unregulated derivatives markets are a far bigger issue. You'll note that they aren't seriously discussed at all. These are the assets that are impossible to price and equally impossible to sell.
The spin on this is so strong, that it turns my stomach. The fear mongering perpetrated on this country is criminal.
I am still bitter as hell about how both my Senators and Representative voted for the %@$#! Bailout.
It didn't stop them from voting against the desires of their constituents. According to the email one of them sent out as a reply to my comments, most of her constituents were against the Financial Patriot Act and yet she still voted for it.
"speak to citizens and receive feedback" Lies.
They will need to end all these loopholes to pay down the insane deficit.
Ahh, Ireland is a more recent example of what's been going on since the 70's. One of the totally legal tax scams no one cares to mention is when an American subsidiary of a conglomerate operates at a perpetual loss. American management uses the "operating loss" excuse to keep wage low. Samsung, Panasonic, Sony, Acer, etc. They get to reap the rewards of participating in the most vibrant economy in the world for rock-bottom dollar.
The problem with tightening these rules is that the average international corporation pays tax consultants to figure out the lowest operating cost method. If the U.S. doesn't provide the lowest operating costs, then they just re-organize to different parts of the world. Those clever corporations would, for example, issue bonds under one corporation then use them to fund another subsidiary. The bond-issuing corporation "fails" bondholders and equity participants lose everything and the other subsidiary that got the money lives on. The finance world is using that scam right now to "fail" everything over to the Treasury.
It's the equivalent of tightening your grip with a palm full of sand. I don't know a good way to fix it that won't be gamed in a couple of months after the legislation goes into effect.
Putting some messages in envelopes and passing them around the room is a good one.
I'd work on a failure story of some kind. Losing an envelope with part of the message is a good one. You're the guy that fixes things when messages are lost.
I would add a game of telephone.
Start a message at one end of the room and have the students relay the message until it gets to the last student where it will be a total mess.
Your job includes making sure computer messages gets from Los Angeles, CA to New York, NY exactly the way it started.
You also might want to figure out a game to explain how literal and dumb software is. Part of your job includes baby sitting the stupid software. That's how I explained my job when I'd get alarms on my phone to my kid. You may want to ask the class to volunteer the "class clown" for the hamming-up the role of stupid software.
If you do it right, you have talked a little about hardware, software and troubleshooting with a few minutes to spare.
As someone that's hiked that area long ago, when they mentioned the search would begin on the John Muir Trail between Dorothy and Shadow Lakes. That is a *heck* of a lot of VERY rugged forest area above 8000ft. It's not like there's a long snow-free time up there, or a whole lot of people at any given time either.
That they were able to find the wreckage is awesome. That's one great reason why we pay taxes people.
Prior searches focused on land east of the Glass Mountains. Another *huge* area.
As an FYI, the area has all kinds of omnivores. I can't see how a pilot could survive that either. There's no place to land a plane! Let's say he does the TV-movie thing and tried some kind of bail out. Bailing out, much less walking out without intimate knowledge of the area are both very low probability events in that region.
You guys should get out more, especially the conspiracy nuts. It's a beautiful area of our country. If that's too far away, visit a nearby National Park.