boris_m

What's a page?

Languages like Java are awful in that respect, as they make it super hard to declare new types.

People expect for a type to contain some logic, but it doesn't have to. e.g. a configuration is a type that contains other types that contains yet other types. But I have never seen it done like that in languages like Java.

Touching. Thanks. And feel free to create some Github issues or write to me if you have some feedback.

Just pushed an update which allows you to look at some popular instances and favor them, I think it would make it much easier to start.

This is the first version, here are some servers you can add, if you don't know any: mathstodon.xyz - math mastodon.art , sunny.garden - art c.im - general

They are not 2 sets they are two diagrams, depicting the same set. You can present it like this or in the way you mentioned.

Relevant chapter from the book: https://abuseofnotation.github.io/category-theory-illustrate...

Author here. It was backwards, I fixed it when I saw the comment. Feel free to report any other mistakes you see on https://github.com/abuseofnotation/category-theory-illustrat... or email.

These kind of articles are sooo dumb. Those tech CEO's are acting like complete idiots.

1. You can measure productivity in a precise way only in some mindless repetitive jobs e.g. are Twitter employees more productive now that they are in the office. How do you measure that (if you measure it in profits, app quality etc. I'd say that they are much less productive)

2. Each person is different. I may be 10% more productive at home than in the office, and my coworker may be 20% less productive. Why do I have to be in the office because of some stupid statistic?

3. Fine, let's say people who work at home have lower productivity. But working from home enables you to hire people from all over the world as well as people who cannot go to the office for various other reasons. I'm not a big tech CEO, but somehow it seems to me that the best candidate in the world, working at 90% of their capacity will still perform better than the best candidate who happens to live in your city and is willing to travel.

4. Working from home is also linked to a better well-being, which means less turnover, better working environment etc.

5. Most importantly: the fucking planet is dying, because of carbon emissions and you want to just dismiss the obvious and already implemented solution for reducing those by letting people not travel to work, just because of some 10% profit increase.

It was mainly a demonstration of a pattern, yes, implementation was a secondary consideration. But there are ways to make this approach work as well.

No, I mean to reimplement the "framework".

1. Change the "div" "span" etc. to be just "createElement('div'..."

2. At the "render" function, do "reactDOM.render" instead of "replaceChildren"

What is the role of the "root node" in Elm?

Yes, you can use the same convention in React (or rather use React with the same convention), this is mentioned in the description actually.

As far as "prop drilling" goes, I never understood what is the problem that some people have with it.

If you just put your state in one object its just one more param that you have to pass to components. Do we really need a big-ass framework just because of one extra param.

Also, by passing state explicitly, you get a clear visibility over which component needs what. And it also allows you to restrict which component uses which parts of the state.

This is a reference implementation, you can easily implement it by using React or any other virtual DOM lib. All components would work as well.

Character limit

Discussion on Mastodon, from which the idea came: https://mathstodon.xyz/@zens@merveilles.town/110369866152393...

"...without even knowing Euclidian geometry."

Will probably edit it, as many people complained. The focus here is useful predictions, in the sense of predictions that have utilitarian value, but string theory doesn't make any predictions at all, which is another issue altogether.

Especially for you:

https://abuseofnotation.github.io/category-theory-illustrate...

Especially for you:

https://abuseofnotation.github.io/category-theory-illustrate...

Category theory is order theory and abstract algebra.

Ha, not in this specific way, no. Maybe I will do some videos, though.

My version of this is a bash script that opens the article in lynx:

https://github.com/boris-marinov/bin/blob/main/wiki

Haha, thanks for the feedback, I actually didn't spend so much time polishing these, most of the content is draft.

Otherwise, with solving and creating problems, I was thinking about tech that is overdesigned and crammed with features to the point where it's useless. And also about a particular xkcd comic...

Timeless is probably a bit strong as a word, but actually why not - books, tables and chairs, bottles and plates, have all have been there since the dawn of civilization.

But pretty great to see other people thinking about the same ideas. Do share if you have more feedback.

If every piece of technical literature had to be applicable for all use cases, there would not be such thing as technical literature.

Sorry, I coudn't parse most of that, perhaps you can include an example?

Equating content management systems with SUV-s doesn't do justice to CMS-s or your argument in general, considering the multitude of environment and other issues with SUV-s.

Also, car's simplicity is only an illusion. Anything is simple when other people fix and maintain it for you.

The concept of “the sphere of possible existences” is not the same as the world (which is an a priori regulative idea) but denotes the infinite possibility determined only by the lack of contradiction.

If we look at the example, the lack of contradiction is one condition, but there is another one - totality.

The sentence "the whole sphere of possible existences, the mortal occupies one part, and the immortal the other." contains the assumption that all objects in the universe are either mortal or immortal, which is questionable e.g. what about the things that are not alive in the first place? e.g. is a chair mortal or immortal?

This issue is not present in the dichotomy between reality and negation e.g. the dichotomy between "mortal" and "not mortal" - here it is easy to sort all possible objects to mortal, e.g. a chair is clearly not mortal. In my view this is the difference between reality and negation.

Happy to read your thoughts on the subject.

On how did I became interested in Kant - you can read my other post about Kant for the story (linked at the bottom.)

For the font, other people complained that it is too non-standard, maybe I have to do a separate version for text.

Didn't know about the drugs.

Haha, sorry about the typeface. It is my design, work in progress, so I would welcome any feed back you have (why does it suck?)

Otherwise I haven't disabled the reader view, I don't even know how this is done.