Markdown for LLMs

Power against immunity

The source Markdown for this article. Copy it into your assistant or download it as a text file.

# Power against immunity

## Intention

I want to name the bound of the effect-conflict resolution policy explicitly.

## Incorrect form and why it stays silent

```text title="Incorrect form"
effect_conflict_policy Temporary { mode provisional_effect; }
```

Conflict resolution requires a pinned semantically active policy with anchors. There is no executable declaration for it in current v1; a rejection and a working conservative outcome are shown, not an invented policy.

## Correct form

```law
language "law.core" version "0.2";
package recipes.a.r16 version "0.1.0";
namespace "urn:recipe:a-positions:16";

entity Person;
relation registered(p: Person);
relation done(p: Person);
relation sign(p: Person);
relation competent(p: Person);
relation valid(p: Person);
rule Grant strict { for p: Person; when registered(p);
    then power Permit { holder p; exercise sign(p); valid_when competent(p); effect create(valid(p)); };
}
relation protected(p: Person);
rule Protect strict { for p: Person; when registered(p) and protected(p);
    then immunity Shield { holder p; against p; protected_effect valid(p); window [@2026-09-01, @2026-09-10]; };
}
```

## Frozen execution scene

| Facts and snapshot | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| policy absent; 2026-09-05 | `truth(valid(entity_ref("urn:recipe:a-positions:16:p")))` | `truth_status == NEITHER;` / `UNRESOLVED_NORMATIVE_CONFLICT` |
| the event remains; 2026-09-05 | `truth(sign(entity_ref("urn:recipe:a-positions:16:p")))` | `truth_status == TRUE_ONLY;` / `COMPUTED` |

```law
test "missing policy leaves conflict unresolved" {
    given {
        context {
            legal_time @2026-09-05;
            decision_time @2026-09-05T09:00:00+05:00;
            knowledge_time @2026-09-30T09:00:00+05:00;
            timezone "Asia/Almaty";
        }
        assert registered(entity_ref("urn:recipe:a-positions:16:p")); assert competent(entity_ref("urn:recipe:a-positions:16:p")); assert sign(entity_ref("urn:recipe:a-positions:16:p")); assert protected(entity_ref("urn:recipe:a-positions:16:p"));
    }
    evaluate truth(valid(entity_ref("urn:recipe:a-positions:16:p")));
    expect truth_status == NEITHER;
    expect evaluation_status == UNRESOLVED_NORMATIVE_CONFLICT;

}
```

```law
test "attempt survives without effect" {
    given {
        context {
            legal_time @2026-09-05;
            decision_time @2026-09-05T09:00:00+05:00;
            knowledge_time @2026-09-30T09:00:00+05:00;
            timezone "Asia/Almaty";
        }
        assert registered(entity_ref("urn:recipe:a-positions:16:p")); assert competent(entity_ref("urn:recipe:a-positions:16:p")); assert sign(entity_ref("urn:recipe:a-positions:16:p")); assert protected(entity_ref("urn:recipe:a-positions:16:p"));
    }
    evaluate truth(sign(entity_ref("urn:recipe:a-positions:16:p")));
    expect truth_status == TRUE_ONLY;
    expect evaluation_status == COMPUTED;

}
```

## Counterfactual

Mutation: `relation valid(p: Person);` → `relation valid(p: Person);
effect_conflict_policy Temporary { mode provisional_effect; }`; rejection LDC-E1321. Additional counterfactuals are shown as separate scenes.

## Boundary

A successful provisional_effect pin is not claimed. By default the event is kept, the effect is not created, and a query for the effect names a conflict. Direct priority between rules is a different mechanism, not an implementation of the profile policy.