Viewing profile — hither_shores

> misleading manner by labeling speculative ethical behavior as “EA” when it’s neither effective I agree that they're ineffective, but I don't see any evidence that the MIRI types …

I don't know about "EA rationales", but rule utilitarianism is unpopular among philosophers largely because it's believed to collapse into act utilitarianism. The phil101 caricatur…

> what precisely has the EA movement done to reduce, even marginally, the risk of a nuclear war? Nothing that I'm aware of. In general I think that most of the current "longtermist…

When did I say it did?

> Consequently, we should divert money away from the welfare of people living today and towards efforts that maximize the likelihood of a galaxy filled with colonized planets. If t…

If by "EA the organization" you mean the Center for Effective Altruism, it came out of the Oxford philosophy department.

> Haskell is basically a category theory framework. Haskell probably draws more from category theory than any other mainstream language, but in absolute terms that's still not very…

> You could rephrase Lisp as a Unityped system, but I seriously doubt it would be consistent. It's not. (x -> x) is always inhabited, so if you have a fixed point combinator (x -> …

No, it isn't. A star-autonomous cartesian category is just a preorder. Chu(Set, n) is star-autonomous but not a preorder, and therefore not cartesian. Or more concretely: cartesian…

There's not really a connection here, the category of vector spaces isn't cartesian closed.

> Was Tolkien right leaning himself, I would be surprised by that but I honestly don’t know. Yes, but the small-c conservative Catholic sort of right-wing. He would have hated reac…

> But some sets of data and some operations on them that fulfill some formally stated requirements are just an abstract algebra, aren't they? Not quite. A variety of algebras (whic…

> Addition is move and multiplication is also a move. a + b move from 0 a step then b steps. a * b is move a step b times. By "move" do you mean adding 1? If so, then no. Consider,…

> It's mentioned later, but the "math friendly" versions satisfy the axioms of a group and a field, which only works if the modulus is a prime. The integers mod n >= 1 are always a…

> Imagine I want to test a function that operates on quite large application state but not all app state is necessary for that function If not all app state is necessary for that f…

> Whether or not a particular email address is verified or not isn't something that's generally known at compile time Yes, obviously. What is knowable at compile time is the stuff …

> sendToEmail sends to any kind of Email. That's my point, you don't need a combinatorial explosion of behaviors for every possible most-specific-type, you can just reuse existing …

newtype ArbitrarilyLabeled x = ArbitrarilyLabeled x forgetLabel :: ArbitrarilyLabeled x -> x forgetLabel (ArbitrarilyLabeled x) = x What's the "global meaning" of `ArbitrarilyLabel…

Java and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race

> You'll need sendToUnverifiedEmail(email: UnverifiedEmail) and sendToVerifiedEmail(email: VerifiedEmail), and have code to get the right type to pass to the right function the in …

Yes, but the mapping doesn't change the relationship between the units of measure, which is the actual meaning as far as the type system is concerned. It's just a change of names.

> this is a classic case of not needing more types but needing proper names. Those are types.

> but I don't think e.g. Haskell98 can do it out of the box in an analogous way? This is basically the runtime representation of `data Email = Verified { email :: string } | Unveri…

> That you introduce more coupling is a tradeoff. That the program (sometimes) gets harder to change is a tradeoff. You don't introduce more coupling, you document the coupling tha…

> since the shared libs have generics and I'm always casting things. This indicates to me that you're trying to write code that isn't correct (not doesn't work , but rather only wo…