The fixed floor

Why is removal expensive by design?

Because the window being closed opens onto the same one interior every other window opens onto. Closing it does not subtract from the interior. It subtracts from the joint structure of windows. One fewer site at which the interior is being read.

That cost is structural. It does not fall because a procedure is cheap. The cheaper an institution makes removal, the further its practice has departed from what removal is. An institution that removes often and easily is not reading the closing.

Why is removal in the hierarchy at all, if the ethic is be kind and a closed window goes out of the whole? Because a hierarchy with no last level has decided the question in advance for a case it has not read. The level is named so that it can be read, weighed, and refused at the cost it carries. Naming it endorses no instance of it. Every instance has to earn its way past four lower levels, and most never do.

So the structure is cautious about capital correction in proportion to how casually it is performed. And cautious about permanent separation for the same reason: where lower levels could have absorbed the pattern, the permanent closing is itself a contraction.

This is the short edition of Ø Applications — a summary. Where a step is compressed here, the original carries it in full. The original book (PDF) · This edition (PDF)

The same page on the420code.org: the420code.org/models/applications/02-the-architecture-of-law/