Is the commitment that licenses the Hume move continued existence of a bounded system, or continued complexity-generation?

Can the Hume move be stated with only the thin commitment, leaving the wager as a later, independent adoption?

Which named configuration on this page fails to exist under the thin commitment?

What makes civilizational self-destruction the same kind of prediction as bridge collapse, rather than a classification of sentence type?

Does the §IV self-destruct prediction inherit §VII's specified horizon, or is it a different clock?

Can one ruled-out configuration, horizon, and observable be filled from this page?

Persist-as-what: the office, the population, the language, or an object the analyst selected?

When regime-persistence and complexity-generation trade off, which one do the constraints bind?

Which one question moves from ethics to engineering, and which one stays?

For one apparent value clash, what persistence metric would settle it, and what would remain if both configs persist?

Does the weak claim need the Hume-to-cliché genealogy, or only the §IV split?

Is there a configuration Harris ranks one way and the weak claim the other?

What observable on this page shows Bentham undermining persistence rather than merely making the strong claim?