I personally don't want much of anything for protection. I think it's a persons own responsibility to calculate the risks and take them if they wish. You just have to be willing to accept the consequences of your actions. I know for allot of people this goes back to discussions on SAR and making it easier and safer to be found.
There are allot of people that are for removing all junction signs from the wilderness. I wouldn't go that far because I think it would make more people rely on GPS markers to find junctions. There are too many use trails out there also that would just get confusing. I think the level of junction marking that we currently have is good the way it is.
I'd say that in my own experience the notion of adventure by going into the unknown is so much greater. I myself many times now have taken to cross country, done some technical climbing and generally traveled into very remote areas with no experience and no safety net at all. I never carry any sort of locator and no one ever has my itinerary or schedule. If I simply fell and broke my leg in some of the places I have been it would be all over. This certainly made for a better sense of adventure. Is it foolish? I'd say only if your not willing to accept a slow and agonizing death alone in the wilderness. I was and am so I wouldn't say it's foolish.
I'm not sure where I would draw the line in the idea of placing so much added safety it puts people out there that have no business doing so. The Half Dome cables and trail were built in a different era. One that wanted to promote love of the out doors. I don't think there are many other examples of this sort of construction putting people where they should not be. In the Sierra anyway.
