They will probably contact the real-life folks that were the basis for the character played by Liam Neeson in Taken.
"I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you are looking for ransom I can tell you I don't have money, but what I do have are a very particular set of skills. Skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you let my daughter go now that'll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you, but if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you and I will kill you."
- Liam Neeson, Taken.
> In 2011, a self-proclaimed counter-terrorism expert was convicted of wire fraud after claiming the film was based on a real-life incident in which his daughter was killed. William G. Hillar, who pretended to be a retired Green Beret colonel, claimed to have spent more than 12 years lecturing US government agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation on security issues. However, records revealed he had actually been a radar operator in the Coast Guard Reserve between 1962 and 1970, and had never been in the US Army. Nevertheless, his website claimed Taken was based on events involving him and his family. Hillar, who admitted the charges, was sentenced to 500 hours of community service at Maryland State Veteran Cemeteries. He also agreed to repay $171,000 in speaking fees that he had received from various organizations to which he had presented himself as an expert in terrorism and human trafficking.[29]
> the latter is falsified by the fact we can reason about code despite the Halting Problem
i think wokwokwok's point holds true in practice.
Our patience and working-memory is far more limited than what is essential to accurately model all the necessary details of even moderately complex algorithms in our head.
One of the main reasons to limit code-complexity to improve readability/maintainability.
(did you just take the lord's name in vain?)