Experiencing your feed without numbers is such a fundamentally different thing. You evaluate every bit of content, not in the context of external approval (how many Likes or the numerical influence of the creator), but simply in the act of its consumption. but for all organic usage, let's make it a numbers-free space. Compensation (stock or cash) based on increased usage and engagement targets has to be somehow changed. I'm not sure what that exactly looks like, but I am certain that as long as this isn't fixed, even with the implementation of the first four planks, we’re still going to be facing the same challenges
Seems like `Publisher.handleEvents(receiveSubscription:receiveOutput:receiveCompletion:receiveCancel:receiveRequest:)` is Combine’s `do` equivalent. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/combine/publisher/3204713-handleevents
Brent Yorgey’s guide to the “Catsters” Category Theory lecture series
Introduction Terminal and Initial objects Terminal and initial objects 1 Terminal and initial objects 2 Terminal and initial objects 3 Products and Coproducts Products and coproducts 1 Products and…
A dependent type is a type that is parameterized by a value. Lots of languages have types that are parameterized by other types, like `List`, but those are not dependent types. Dependent types are parameterized by instances of types.
SE-0156’s note about merging `class` and `AnyObject` reference-type existentials
Whenever I mentally parse `protocol SomeProtocol: SomeOtherProtocol`, it’s meant to imply `SomeProtocol` adds additional requirements onto another protocol, namely `SomeOtherProtocol`’s. What’s odd about class-constraining protocols is that it’s been a weird historical inconsistency in Swift where the term to the right of the `:` _isn’t_ a protocol and instead a reserved word. All reference types implicitly conform to `AnyObject`, which, being a protocol, makes it a more consistent way of class constraining than remembering the special `: class` trick. This merging of concepts was lightly mentioned in [SE-0156](https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blame/93abb54833e2d9ee7ee842882f6104a867de3069/proposals/0156-subclass-existentials.md#L134) (link to specific line).
Shit sucks sometimes but it is pretty cool to be alive in NYC right now, seems like everyone I meet is pouring their hearts and souls into music, photography, or a new business idea, and it’s special to see how careers grow and friends help each other along the way. I am frustrated with myself beca
This piece reminded me of a [recent addition](https://github.com/jasdev/thoughts/commit/4103afc7ee992e86b52ecfe28b14549ef1287e5a) to my Daily List, “write for yourself and Distillations.” By keeping Twitter usage ephemeral, it might be easier to [keep stock](http://snarkmarket.com/2010/4890) on my own domain.
Grothendieck views the mathematician and the problem as complimenting each other, the mathematician using the problem’s natural structure in its solution, rather than striking it with a foreign, invasive method. My view is that any problem that has resisted repeated direct attack from problem solvers, should naturally be of interest to theory builders. If you can’t solve a problem directly, then grow a crystal of theory around the problem and then hope that the solution you are looking for can be located somewhere inside the crystal. This is hard because the same person needs to know about both category theory and the problem domain, which is quite a heavy demand on a human brain.
Andrej Bauer raises a question whether Hask is a real category. I think it’s a legitimate question to ask, especially by a mathematician or programming languages researcher. But I want to look closer at how a (probably negative) answer to this question would affect Haskell and its community.
The Either monad specifically only models early exit on Left without resumption. You’d need something more powerful like Cont to be able to resume. There are Haskell libraries that provide extensible effects using free monads
The Either monad specifically only models early exit on Left without resumption. You'd need something more powerful like Cont to be able to resume. There are Haskell libraries that provide extensible effects using free monads, like https://t.co/rsvEbVULPs— Joe Groff (@jckarter) July 21, 2019
As one astute tweet put it, “1999: there are thousands of websites, all hyperlinked together. 2019: there are four websites, each filled with screenshots of the other three.” I just let the ideas fly. People did relate, usually, although—importantly, I think—sometimes they didn’t. That was okay, and expected. I was just saying things. Long live the blog. Long live straightforwardly sharing what’s in our hearts.
Maybe, to a more advanced civilization, our trash and ruins would just be invisible, the way so much of what we call nature is invisible to us. The concept of nature, in a sense, is a way to describe or categorize what is outside the scope of human agency or immediate understanding, and that scope is always shifting, frequently in unintended directions.
I've written a property wrapper/Publisher which emits an event before wrappedValue is mutated. Would something like this be considered acceptable for use as the willChange Publisher? https://t.co/hMgUXdw3vx— Dalton (@daltonclaybrook) July 18, 2019
Nifra - A State Of Trance Episode 922 Guest Mix [#ASOT922]
Subscribe to the A State of Trance YouTube channel: http://bit.ly/SubscribeASOT
Follow the ASOT Episode playlist: https://ASOTRadio.lnk.to/PLYA
Watch the full ASOT922 episode here: https://youtu.be/dVVB12GeqTg
Connect with A State Of Trance
▶https://www.instagram.com/asotlive
▶https://www.facebook.com/astateoftrance
▶https://www.twitter.com/asot
▶https://www.soundcloud.com/astateoftr...
▶https://www.astateoftrance.com
#Nifra
#ASOT922
#ASOT
anyway those are my unstructured thoughts about the group chat. shoutout to the group chat!! hopefully i get to be in one one day
there is nothing more joyous than seeing a conversation bloom and meander and twist and blossom in a safe and intimate group chat among friends. it feels to me like a unique type of mediated communication that i struggle to find an in-person analog to. that wild, freeform energy of people you love all sharing and expressing and listening and hearing all at the same time is so exciting!! it feels like this explosion of simultaneous and related thoughts that all still coalesce and move together maybe it's similar to a group of people all talking together in-person! but so many in-person practices and etiquettes don't really translate to the group chat, so it feels more sudden and energetic in a way like in the group chat, it feels like there's a talking over each other but in a way that is responsive and doesn't feel rude! and in the group chat, you don't navigate that anxiety of "do i speak now, do i not, is what i'm gonna say gonna be ignored" as much, in my opinion i think it's partially because in speech, there is a limit where truly only one person can be talking at a time. in the group chat, through text, everyone can be constantly talking and listening all at the same time and there is a brilliant energy to that!! anyway those are my unstructured thoughts about the group chat. shoutout to the group chat!! hopefully i get to be in one one day
