Jamie is a friendly nut

@alexr@tilde.zone what do you mean "before saying anything"? surely they didn't say anything after that either! that's like, the whole thing with mimes!

@lindsey interesting! what makes it desirable for definitions like this to include or exclude trivial cases? my intuition is that you should be able to satisfy safety properties by just always rejecting the input; not sure about liveness but maybe it's the opposite?

@lindsey hmm maybe it's that I don't know enough about the context, but my intuition is that "safe" doesn't inherently entail "useful". it seems like the "non-triviality" you want should fall under its own separate property, maybe something we might call correctness or completeness. also, if you're discussing a class of algorithms that captures information about an arbitrary system...well what about the case where the underlying system is trivial? do we want definitions that allow for that?