5 ms·

This is such a great page, i love it and came across it multiple times while studying the matter. I still would vote to learn it from Milewski though. Learning

This is such a great page, i love it and came across it multiple times while studying the matter. I still would vote to learn it from Milewski though. Learning this is a journey and the author of ct-illustrated is, i think, still in the middle of it. Milewski has made that trip multiple times already. The book and his blog are great places. https://github.com/hmemcpy/milewski-ctfp-pdf https://github.com/hmemcpy/milewski-ctfp-pdf Book https://bartoszmilewski.com/2014/10/28/category-theory-for-programmers-the-preface/ https://bartoszmilewski.com/2014/10/28/category-theory-for-p... Blog

revskill 2y ago
I don't understand what bartoszmilewski talked about, so his book seems useless to me. But at work i use category theory for all of my domain model.
- iman453 2y ago
  Would you be willing to share more about your domain modeling and how category theory helped?
  - Krei-se 2y ago
    He can abstract more models in general frameworks (This is true for every job). He just is hesitant taking the leap to go all Camus and derive money from absurdism ;)
- Krei-se 2y ago
  Oh, i can solve this: You will understand his work better once you step out of the narrow category of your work domain model.
  - revskill 2y ago
    He uses math term to explain the math. No way i will use that method to understand the subject.
    - Krei-se 2y ago
      Yeah, but that's kinda the point i made in my original post: You can work towards the general math terms while translating your domain model into higher abstractions, but this will have consequences on your personal life. You can see this clearly in the ct-illustrated author that interweaves his struggle while learning the matter and wrote a journal about both his life and the topic. As Milewski teaches the subject, he is in a position to match both personal life, work and the topic into one book, so this is the goal, but it will entail you leaving the narrow perspective of your work. He can talk from math to math, but you have to - similar to the author of ct-illustrated - find your own way from translating your specific model into a more general one. If you want a handle to start: Think of a line that extends into + and - infinity: It will create a circle. Even though a circle is a 2 dimensional object, it's made of infinetly many distinct 1-dimensional lines. The same is true for your work: Even though it is made out of a distinct countable number of interwoven objects in your domain, this structure is part of a bigger abstraction. Doing more work, like drawing more distinct new objects will not take you onto the more general abstraction, but thinking about what all your domain models have in common. Try to work less, be lazy and the underlying mathematical models will appear in a language you already speak. In your case: Abstraction your work domain model into multiple clients (1 employer --> multiple employers in a similar line of work) will a) lead into your termination b) show how you can abstract your work away from 1 source of income and purpose into multiple ones. Good luck!
      - Koshkin 2y ago
        A circle is a 1-dimensional manifold (which, indeed, could be embedded in a space that has more dimensions). This follows exactly from your own (correct) image of it as being created from (i.e. being locally homeomorphic to) straight lines. But the entire thing ("the territory") always turns out to be more than the set of parts it is "built from," and if you ignore this, not only you are bound to lose the forest for the trees, your understanding of the whole may end up being completely wrong.
        Krei-se 2y ago
        Would you like to elaborate more on the territory part? As far as i understood you talk about emergence of properties beyond the sum of the elements but might be mistaken. Im fine with links to libgen.is or lengthy pdfs if necessary. I'm currently working on trees for a nested controller approach and constructing / deconstructing differing branches. So even though i don't feel stuck right now i'm always willing to take hints for taking another path.
codethief 2y ago
> I still would vote to learn it from Milewski though I've read the first dozen chapters of Milewski so far, and while I really enjoyed the first couple chapters, his style of not giving precise definitions or statements, nor using precise notation becomes really annoying after a while and makes the book practically useless as a reference. He seems to think everything is easier to understand when it's written in lighthearted, imprecise prose. No, not all.¹ ¹) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41756286 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41756286
- Iwan-Zotow 2y ago
  You might want to look at https://www.artima.com/shop/modern_mathematics https://www.artima.com/shop/modern_mathematics
  - codethief 2y ago
    Thanks!
- xiande04 2y ago
  Yep, this is precisely the problem I had with Milewski. It would have been nice if he included examples and definitions in a standard format.

revskill 2y ago

I don't understand what bartoszmilewski talked about, so his book seems useless to me. But at work i use category theory for all of my domain model.

iman453 2y ago
Would you be willing to share more about your domain modeling and how category theory helped?
- Krei-se 2y ago
  He can abstract more models in general frameworks (This is true for every job). He just is hesitant taking the leap to go all Camus and derive money from absurdism ;)
Krei-se 2y ago
Oh, i can solve this: You will understand his work better once you step out of the narrow category of your work domain model.
- revskill 2y ago
  He uses math term to explain the math. No way i will use that method to understand the subject.
  - Krei-se 2y ago
    Yeah, but that's kinda the point i made in my original post: You can work towards the general math terms while translating your domain model into higher abstractions, but this will have consequences on your personal life. You can see this clearly in the ct-illustrated author that interweaves his struggle while learning the matter and wrote a journal about both his life and the topic. As Milewski teaches the subject, he is in a position to match both personal life, work and the topic into one book, so this is the goal, but it will entail you leaving the narrow perspective of your work. He can talk from math to math, but you have to - similar to the author of ct-illustrated - find your own way from translating your specific model into a more general one. If you want a handle to start: Think of a line that extends into + and - infinity: It will create a circle. Even though a circle is a 2 dimensional object, it's made of infinetly many distinct 1-dimensional lines. The same is true for your work: Even though it is made out of a distinct countable number of interwoven objects in your domain, this structure is part of a bigger abstraction. Doing more work, like drawing more distinct new objects will not take you onto the more general abstraction, but thinking about what all your domain models have in common. Try to work less, be lazy and the underlying mathematical models will appear in a language you already speak. In your case: Abstraction your work domain model into multiple clients (1 employer --> multiple employers in a similar line of work) will a) lead into your termination b) show how you can abstract your work away from 1 source of income and purpose into multiple ones. Good luck!
    - Koshkin 2y ago
      A circle is a 1-dimensional manifold (which, indeed, could be embedded in a space that has more dimensions). This follows exactly from your own (correct) image of it as being created from (i.e. being locally homeomorphic to) straight lines. But the entire thing ("the territory") always turns out to be more than the set of parts it is "built from," and if you ignore this, not only you are bound to lose the forest for the trees, your understanding of the whole may end up being completely wrong.
      - Krei-se 2y ago
        Would you like to elaborate more on the territory part? As far as i understood you talk about emergence of properties beyond the sum of the elements but might be mistaken. Im fine with links to libgen.is or lengthy pdfs if necessary. I'm currently working on trees for a nested controller approach and constructing / deconstructing differing branches. So even though i don't feel stuck right now i'm always willing to take hints for taking another path.

codethief 2y ago

> I still would vote to learn it from Milewski though I've read the first dozen chapters of Milewski so far, and while I really enjoyed the first couple chapters, his style of not giving precise definitions or statements, nor using precise notation becomes really annoying after a while and makes the book practically useless as a reference. He seems to think everything is easier to understand when it's written in lighthearted, imprecise prose. No, not all.¹ ¹) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41756286 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41756286

Iwan-Zotow 2y ago
You might want to look at https://www.artima.com/shop/modern_mathematics https://www.artima.com/shop/modern_mathematics
- codethief 2y ago
  Thanks!
xiande04 2y ago
Yep, this is precisely the problem I had with Milewski. It would have been nice if he included examples and definitions in a standard format.