Pedro Amorim

@chrisamaphone@hci.social I really like the idea of adding artistic creativity to research. Something I have been enjoying quite a bit is drawing my slides by hand, as this gives me an excuse to draw :) Here are some of my illustrations from recent presentations

@jonmsterling I didn't follow the erdos problem story that closely. Why is it fake?

@jonmsterling @MonniauxD @albertcardona @elduvelle I wonder what happened in the 80s that caused much of our public infrastructure to start getting shittier lol Speaking of which, looking at inequality indices during the 80s is also quite revealing

@danielgratzer@mathstodon.xyz disappointed that PLS does not stand for Programming Language Stuff smh

@jonmsterling What's the issue with doing this style of reasoning inside a topos that has access to a local state monad? @carloangiuli @totbwf

@olynch @danielgratzer @bentnib https://arxiv.org/pdf/1208.3596 section 2.1

@olynch Recently I have given a lot of thought on social media design decisions. When I was a teenager in Brazil in the late 2000s, Brazil didn't really do facebook, we mainly hung out on orkut, a defunct google-bought social media platform. It had some features that I think were accidentally really good: (i) It had a limit on the number of friends you could have on a single account (ii) There was no algorithmic/infinite feed (iii) Most content was softly gated behind "communities". Think facebook groups, but slightly different. In a way your "making the site dumber" was baked into the platform. Point (i) shines light on the poor scalability of most of the benefits of social media. It is definitely awesome to be able to easily catch up with childhood friends who now live thousands of kilometers away from me. But, I don't think any single person should have unfettered access to the "freely broadcast my every thought to 100s of thousands/millions of people" button. By capping how many connections you can have, it keeps things at a human-scale. As for (ii), I agree that algorithmic feed is horrible in basically every aspect, especially when we take into account what it's doing to kids who grow up on this stuff. Contrary to you, however, I do think that it would be a good idea to ban it, though I don't think that it's currently feasible.

@maxsnew by the category of subgroups displayed over groups do you mean the Grothendieck construction of the presheaf on the category of groups that maps every group to its subgroups?