Why is a plan "mode" needed? I really hate reading plans in conversation UI. One line in AGENTS.md is always better, and you can customize it to fit your document convention. From the communication perspective, the planning process is most about creating clarity and alignment, on things like scope, constraints and decisions, among people (and agents now), often requiring multiple rounds. The planning tool built in Codex or Claude Code is not persisted, version-controlled, nor well accessible. In practice, My AGENTS.md contains an instruction about writing a document before starting implementation. Usually I won't read that document, because I don't want to micromanage agents. That document mostly serves a historical purpose like ADR, helping me find out what agents missed, made mistakes on or misaligned on, if needed.

every tax can be expaned to a infinite series of rent.

However, the bank is happy to extend the loan infinitely for people with enough assets. It's questionable that whether such loans are cash flow neutral.

Most back and shoulder pains are caused by bad habits. Cutting something from your body doesn't help a lot. Go to gym or physical therapist first.

kind of a bold claim without evidence, but sedentary lifestyle does seem to play a role. what does not matter for most people is nebulous objectives like "mobility" or "good posture".

but yea, everyone should lift weights for various reasons, not just to reduce the chance of random pain.

A free-to-read PDF host site is valuable enough. Most academic publishers have a pay wall.

I guess they want to use the email CC concept showing the agent is a side assistant.

I'm interested in how to integrate formal verification with existing software libraries. For example, https://github.com/verus-lang/verus integrates proof with macro in Rust. What's the plan for Bend?

It looks like a Transformer encoder post-trained on classification and regression tasks. The encoder-only model is less noticed in recent years, but this product finds a nice application for it.

In imperative languages, it's a leaky abstraction not reducing the cognition overhead, compared with the plain loop.

If the contraint is not in the signature, and cannot trigger a test failure with typical implementation, it doesn't exist.