3 ms·
Maybe so. I'm not sure what the TM means, at any rate. But to my mind there's a clear distinction between the sort of stuff John Baez does, which could reasonab
by consilient 3y ago
Maybe so. I'm not sure what the TM means, at any rate. But to my mind there's a clear distinction between the sort of stuff John Baez does, which could reasonably be called "applied", and the sort of stuff Jacob Lurie does, which absolutely is not. And there's good and valuable work in both clusters.
- catgary 3y agoMaybe! I just think I was exactly the sort of industrial scientist who would be the market for something like CatLab.jl, or a lot of papers that intersected with my new-found industrial domain, and I just never found anything compelling. I feel like I wasted a fair bit of time trying to get anything out of it, so I’ve been left pretty skeptical of anything coming of California or Oxford. The lenses stuff is quite good and I think it would have been well-published/cited in PL theory even without the ACT branding.