when just dealing with the root principle, reasoning gets interesting and easier not harder the dialog goes: I think the limit should be X, for Y reason. then people can discuss X, and Y and the real tradeoffs. i find X>0 but <100 to be the generally most compelling direction because i acknowledge the principle of some utility value in such a diminimus limit. i am no technical expert, so would totally be open to hearing arguments for 134 would be better because Y arguments. real rational discourse increases the fidelity of all participant’s maps of the world, and helps them decide what actions to take. which is why intended or inadvertent obfuscation is gay, sterile activity i’m about productive rational discourse. i lean into disagreement becuase that is where i learn the most. i want to know when im wrong so i can stop being wrong.