> Which is good, because it means we never need to write things like “await await await await await foo() But what your describing is the actual value proposit

> Which is good, because it means we never need to write things like “await await await await await foo() But what your describing is the actual value proposition of monad though! It's literally the construct you use to avoid excessive unwraps. Look at the type signature of bind: m a -> (a -> m b) -> m b It returns m b. Not m (m b). Not m (m (m b)). > but they aren’t straightjacketed into the ivory tower “laws” in absolutely every edge case In other words, you can't abstract over them. If you have libraries that manipulate monads, they will be incompatible or buggy, because they will assume (by design) behaviour that a non-monad will not live up to.