2025/02/06

Newest at the top

2025-02-06 03:52:48 +0100r-sta(~r-sta@sgyl-37-b2-v4wan-168528-cust2421.vm6.cable.virginm.net) (Quit: Client closed)
2025-02-06 03:52:47 +0100 <r-sta> argh! people talk here in indirects. despite spacetime developments. very rude.
2025-02-06 03:52:04 +0100Inst__(~Inst__@2601:6c1:786:fb0:b0d9:e54c:aa23:7982) (Client Quit)
2025-02-06 03:51:56 +0100 <Inst__> "Axiomatic Method and Category Theory", Andrei Rodin, awesome
2025-02-06 03:51:52 +0100 <r-sta> anyone!?
2025-02-06 03:51:49 +0100 <r-sta> makes sense?
2025-02-06 03:51:42 +0100alfiee(~alfiee@user/alfiee) (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2025-02-06 03:51:40 +0100 <r-sta> "if not, you just get a cursor"
2025-02-06 03:51:34 +0100 <r-sta> "if the nother type is the same as the first, this supports recursion and leads to traversability"
2025-02-06 03:51:23 +0100Inst__(~Inst__@2601:6c1:786:fb0:b0d9:e54c:aa23:7982)
2025-02-06 03:51:16 +0100 <r-sta> "i can deconstruct your type into a value, some structure data, and another type with the rest of the data"
2025-02-06 03:51:03 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2025-02-06 03:50:28 +0100 <r-sta> previously had, geti+seti = traversable, but now have only this in a special case where the deconstructed thing is the same type as the thing you deconstructed.
2025-02-06 03:50:02 +0100 <r-sta> the best i can come up with is that, the view is not returning the type for the thing deconstructed, as the thing not-deconstructed. this means you cant go on to continually apply the deconstruction. ie, through a non, type equality, that the geti,seti paradigm is abstracted over, to settings where repeated deconstruction might not occur
2025-02-06 03:49:59 +0100anpad(~pandeyan@user/anpad) anpad
2025-02-06 03:48:33 +0100 <r-sta> assuming i now have to come up with this... any suggestions?
2025-02-06 03:47:52 +0100 <r-sta> and i dont have a type abstraction which supports this
2025-02-06 03:47:51 +0100 <r-sta> its like "no, you view only one element"
2025-02-06 03:47:32 +0100 <r-sta> which comes from just wanting to recurse as usual
2025-02-06 03:47:18 +0100 <r-sta> and you have to not try to do that
2025-02-06 03:47:17 +0100 <r-sta> "how do you expect me to deconstruct the square with the corner missing!! oh no!!"
2025-02-06 03:47:05 +0100alfiee(~alfiee@user/alfiee) alfiee
2025-02-06 03:46:39 +0100 <r-sta> something like "things that can be piecewise deconstructed, by repeated deconstruction. vs things that only support one view"
2025-02-06 03:45:37 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-02-06 03:45:33 +0100Inst__(~Inst__@2601:6c1:786:fb0:b0d9:e54c:aa23:7982) (Quit: Client closed)
2025-02-06 03:45:29 +0100 <r-sta> im totally stuck doing everything just on one element, it doesnt follw any of the usual tail recursive patterns
2025-02-06 03:45:07 +0100 <r-sta> ie, where the branches are traversable by virtue of their deconstructability
2025-02-06 03:44:49 +0100 <r-sta> and this is completely messing up all my types. which work on eg, trees with lists as branches
2025-02-06 03:44:47 +0100 <Inst__> Thanks for the rec, best of luck.
2025-02-06 03:44:23 +0100 <r-sta> like a square with a square corner missing is not a square
2025-02-06 03:43:51 +0100 <r-sta> so i think my problem is that if you deconstruct a n-d binary grid, that it creates a view to the reconstructed version, where there is no intermediate type to hold the deconstructed thing. its not an n-d euclidean binary grid, when one of the cells is being viewed
2025-02-06 03:43:13 +0100 <Inst__> Ah, survivors of the Soviet attempt to find a mathematical grounding for Dialectical Materialism?
2025-02-06 03:43:03 +0100 <r-sta> ...
2025-02-06 03:42:52 +0100 <sclv> has a good book about lawvere in that regars
2025-02-06 03:42:31 +0100 <sclv> andrei rodin
2025-02-06 03:42:30 +0100 <r-sta> one simply doesnt ought...
2025-02-06 03:42:06 +0100 <Inst__> Oh, have a good one, found him when I was trying to do dialectics, and got censored off RedNote for asking about basing dialectics in mathematical logic
2025-02-06 03:41:53 +0100 <r-sta> what, a topos?
2025-02-06 03:41:44 +0100 <sclv> and yes, he is
2025-02-06 03:41:17 +0100 <sclv> i’m aware
2025-02-06 03:41:07 +0100 <Inst__> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lawvere
2025-02-06 03:41:05 +0100 <Inst__> i recently found this guy, you might find him interesting
2025-02-06 03:40:56 +0100 <sclv> ?
2025-02-06 03:40:44 +0100j1n37(~j1n37@user/j1n37) (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2025-02-06 03:40:30 +0100 <Inst__> Sclv:
2025-02-06 03:39:55 +0100Inst__(~Inst__@2601:6c1:786:fb0:b0d9:e54c:aa23:7982)
2025-02-06 03:38:37 +0100tavare(~tavare@user/tavare) tavare
2025-02-06 03:38:37 +0100tavare(~tavare@150.129.88.189) (Changing host)
2025-02-06 03:38:37 +0100tavare(~tavare@150.129.88.189)
2025-02-06 03:37:22 +0100mankyKitty(uid31287@id-31287.helmsley.irccloud.com)