I think there's still a category theoretic expression of this, but it's not necessarily easy to capture in language type systems.

The notion of `f` producing a lazy sequence of values, `g` consuming them, and possibly that construct getting built up into some closed set of structures - (e.g. sequences, or trees, or if you like dags).

I've only read a smattering of Pi theory, but if I remember correctly it concerns itself more with the behaviour of `f` and `g`, and more generally bridging between local behavioural descriptions of components like `f` and `g` and the global behaviour of a heterogeneous system that is composed of some arbitrary graph of those sending messages to each other.

I'm getting a bit beyond my depth here, but it feels like Pi theory leans more towards operational semantics for reasoning about asynchronicity and something like category theory / monads / arrows and related concepts lean more towards reasoning about combinatorial algebras of computational models.

You'd want to have the alteration reference existing guides to the current implementation.

I haven't jumped in headfirst to the "AI revolution", but I have been systematically evaluating the tooling against various use cases.

The approach that tends to have the best result for me combines a collection of `RFI` (request for implementation) markdown documents to describe the work to be done, as well as "guide" documents.

The guide documents need to keep getting updated as the code changes. I do this manually but probably the more enthusiastic AI workflow users would make this an automated part of their AI workflow.

It's important to keep the guides brief. If they get too long they eat context for no good reason. When LLMs write for humans, they tend to be very descriptive. When generating the guide documents, I always add an instruction to tell the LLM to "be succinct and terse", followed by "don't be verbose". This makes the guides into valuable high-density context documents.

The RFIs are then used in a process. For complex problems, I first get the LLM to generate a design doc, then an implementation plan from that design doc, then finally I ask it to implement it while referencing the RFI, design doc, impl doc, and relevant guide docs as context.

If you're altering the spec, you wouldn't ask it to regen from scratch, but use the guide documents to compute the changes needed to implement the alteration.

I'm using claude code primarily.

Although we are disagreeing, I hope that this is not in an antagonistic sense - I do find this conversation interesting because it's not often the opportunity arises to discuss this topic.

As someone who was raised American, went to American schools, lived and breathed American culture for over the decade I went from child to adult.. moving away and living and breathing Canadian culture has been an enlightening experience.

Getting back to the topic..

These rebuttals really fall flat to my ears. They sound like technicalities that are constructed to paper over the underlying reality. My feelings on this topic aren't from propaganda, but from having experienced how people feel, act, and behave when I was growing up in America.

It's only after I moved to Canada that I realized that most Americans have to live in fear of police. Police are able to break laws at whim, and abuse people's rights, and the mechanism for resource is so inaccessible to the average person that it might as well not exist. I thought this was normal and didn't detract from "freedom" when I was growing up.

Now, this happens in Canada too, but on average they are _less_ able to abuse people. They still do, but the government and society does a better job of ensuring consequences in more of those situations.

The institutionalized pipeline to slavery that exists in America doesn't exist in Canada. Now, this one is something that affected me less on a personal level, because that institutionalized pipeline is targeted largely at black people, and I'm not black.

That said, if I was black, and in America.. the processed plant flower I'm lighting up and enjoying this saturday in my basement would be very much a direct threat to my freedoms. That would be enough, in many parts of America, to brand me as a dangerous threat to society. And it would be enough for my freedoms to be taken away by the state, and then for my labour to be rented out to private companies against my will.

This is not a hypothetical circumstance. This is a reality that tens of thousands of Americans live. This is on the ground reality.

But really for me, the emotional aspect is how people just live in less fear of the government here. Their government, on average, abuses them less. It's less capricious. It's less mean to them. It doesn't step on them as much as the American government steps on Americans.

But you do have to live and breathe it to understand the change in mentality.

> But the one thing we do best is individual liberties

This is a cultural mythology. An earnest review of the evidence shows that America is, in real terms of delivering liberties to its people, at the back of the pack of the cohort of first world nations.

> It’s why we’re where we are in the grand scheme of human history and Canada is basically just our suburb enjoying all of the benefits (national security with next to no defense budget, unlimited free trade a short truck ride away) while avoiding the cost.

I'm not too concerned about the place of Canada in "human history". The human suffering it seems to entail to gain that acclaim seems not really worth it.

You're entirely right about your other points though. Canada has benefited greatly from the US's economic engine. In fact, I think part of the reason Canadians enjoy more freedom than Americans is because of this.

It's adjacent to the American market, but segregated enough to make it a much smaller market. This has historically made it less interesting for powerful commercial interests to come meddle in Canadian political affairs and laws, and over time that means Canada has been able to protect its individual liberties better.

That pressure to undermine freedoms through loopholes, creative interpretation, and just straight up ignoring some of them.. that hasn't been as high in Canada, and that's definitely a circumstantial reality having to do with its proximity to the USA.

Full Time Employee

In a society where having a job is, for that vast majority not in the non-gilded classes, the only mechanism by which a person can secure their core needs.. losing a job is indeed a pitiable situation for most.

If we've built a society that when it "pivots" leaves swathes of people smeared out as residual waste, I'd argue we should feel bad.

We've certainly reached a point of technological advancement where many of these consequences at the individual level are avoidable. If they're still happening, it's because we've chosen this outcome - perhaps passively. But the clear implication of would be that we're collectively failing ourselves, as a species that tends to put some degree of pride in our intelligence.

And we should feel bad about that failure. It's OK to feel bad about that failure. We tend not to improve things we don't feel bad about.