You're reading the public-facing archive of the Category Theory Zulip server.
To join the server you need an invite. Anybody can get an invite by contacting Matteo Capucci at name dot surname at gmail dot com.
For all things related to this archive refer to the same person.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 26 2024 at 22:35):I just published my website as a freelance Applied Category Theorist! I am offering private lessons, bespoke research, and consultation, as well as soliciting funding for my study. Here is the website: https://meygerjos.com/
Please give me feedback on the website, and/or contact me if you want to work together!
Leopold Schlicht (Jul 29 2024 at 13:09):It makes me laugh how you ACT guys really seem to think that category theory is the tool to solve global challenges and save the planet. It reminds me of the quote "If the only tool you have is a hammer, it is tempting to treat everything as if it were a nail." If you would leave your small bubble for a moment you would see that this is a first-class idiocy.
It's also weird how you guys use every opportunity to mention the name of Grothendieck and suggest you are the ones continuing his vision:
Those who continue [Grothendieck's] work today still seek the unification of mathematics with politics and spirituality that he was unable to achieve.
His political activity was against mathematical research.
It sometimes seems to me you are a cult of Grothendieck-worshippers led by high priest John Baez. But you aren't a cult, are you?
Given the power of applied category theory, it would seem reasonable to restrict access to a secret society, where we vet people for moral character before allowing them to learn category theory.
Chad Nester (Jul 29 2024 at 13:21):I'd like to encourage you, and I hope that you find someone to work with.
However, I think @Leopold Schlicht has a point. In particular https://meygerjos.com/act sounds, in my own humble opinion, a bit nuts.
Chad Nester (Jul 29 2024 at 13:23):I mean, I'd like to think that what I do is "applied category theory", but I don't think I'm part of the "we" you refer to.
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 13:23):I can't wait to finally learn "what is math"
Tim Hosgood (Jul 29 2024 at 13:26):(I really don't want to get involved in this thread but just feel the need to say that Grothendieck's first name was Alexander, not Alexandre, though this is a common mispelling)
Todd Trimble (Jul 29 2024 at 13:33):Your pure-applied page quotes "Thomas Hardy". I expect you meant G.H. Hardy?
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 13:34):@Leopold Schlicht where is the secret society quote taken from? If I use part of it as a search query I don't find anything
Leopold Schlicht (Jul 29 2024 at 13:35):Tim Hosgood said:
(I really don't want to get involved in this thread but just feel the need to say that Grothendieck's first name was Alexander, not Alexandre, though this is a common mispelling)
That is true. But having spent most of his life in France, he himself used "Alexandre" in his 2010 letter.
Leopold Schlicht (Jul 29 2024 at 13:35):fosco said:
Leopold Schlicht where is the secret society quote taken from? If I use part of it as a search query I don't find anything
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 13:36):Todd Trimble said:
Your pure-applied page quotes "Thomas Hardy". I expect you meant G.H. Hardy?
Oh thanks!
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 13:37):Leopold Schlicht said:
fosco said:
Leopold Schlicht where is the secret society quote taken from? If I use part of it as a search query I don't find anything
Amazing
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 13:44):Leopold Schlicht said:
It makes me laugh how you ACT guys really seem to think that category theory is the tool to solve global challenges and save the planet. It reminds me of the quote "If the only tool you have is a hammer, it is tempting to treat everything as if it were a nail." If you would leave your small bubble for a moment you would see that this is a first-class idiocy.
It's also weird how you guys use every opportunity to mention the name of Grothendieck and suggest you are the ones continuing his vision:
Those who continue [Grothendieck's] work today still seek the unification of mathematics with politics and spirituality that he was unable to achieve.
His political activity was against mathematical research.
It sometimes seems to me you are a cult of Grothendieck-worshippers led by high priest John Baez. But you aren't a cult, are you?
Given the power of applied category theory, it would seem reasonable to restrict access to a secret society, where we vet people for moral character before allowing them to learn category theory.
Thanks for the candid feedback. I don't mean to give the impression that ACT is the tool to solve global challenges and save the planet, I simply think it has the potential to be a powerful tool for these things.
As for Grothendieck, though his political activity was indeed against mathmatical research, it came from the same place (listening with deep attention) as his mathematical work. So he became internally divided:
An example of this internal conflict, from https://www.mat.uc.pt/~picado/lawvere/interview.pdf:
My last meeting with him was at the same place in 1989 (Aurelio Carboni drove me there from Milano): he was clearly glad to see me but would not speak, the result of a religious vow; he wrote on paper that he was also forbidden to discuss mathematics, though quickly his mathematical soul triumphed, leaving me with some precious mathematical notes.
Leopold Schlicht (Jul 29 2024 at 13:47):@fosco On that page we can also learn about three big achievements of John Baez, one of which is avoiding having children.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 13:48):Chad Nester said:
I mean, I'd like to think that what I do is "applied category theory", but I don't think I'm part of the "we" you refer to.
Thanks for saying this, I understand that this is the peril of speaking for a group that you are in. I tried to be careful in the website but is there anything specific you feel doesn't speak for you or is it just the general tone of the webiste?
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 13:55):Leopold Schlicht said:
fosco On that page we can also learn about three big achievements of John Baez, one of which is avoiding having children.
...In stark opposition to Grothendieck, who disseminated children all around France, iirc
Eric M Downes (Jul 29 2024 at 14:30):@Joshua Meyers, I think if you rephrased things to be “I statements” instead of presuming to speak for others or imply projects that would require coercing others’ actions, that will be much less controversial.
Rephrasing to say something about the kinds of projects you personally feel comfortable engaging in, is principled and sane people will respect this.
Also demonstrate to your potential clients that you are capable of separating the personal from the professional. This is critically important if they are to trust you.
In particular, whether or not other people have children, is a very personal choice. That goes on a blog, which you can link to, but not your professional page.
Or at least that is my 2 cents as someone who earns a living consulting by applying math and compsci to projects I find meaningful.
Leopold Schlicht (Jul 29 2024 at 14:32):@Joshua Meyers Thank you for your calm answer to my - admittedly a bit provocative (but still honest) - feedback.
For reference here is the quote from your website I was (implicitly) referring to:
Applied Category Theory (ACT) is a very new kind of math which focuses on systems rather than optimization. Hence it is well-suited for addressing the world's most pressing issues (...) There is a shared understanding in the ACT community that we are sitting on a gold-mine — ACT is powerful stuff — but it is not clear to us how to make use of this gold-mine for good, as we are mostly mathematicians with little understanding of the world outside mathematics. Furthermore, we are very anxious about others making use of this gold-mine for evil.
Mathematics is only one field of knowledge - there's also medicine, engineering, sociology, physics, geography, computer science, and so on, most of which seem more directly useful for solving global challenges than mathematics. And even within mathematics, there is discrete mathematics, probablity theory, mathematical optimization, calculus, and so on, which also have great potential for being applied. What makes ACT so special compared to all of these other fields when it comes to solving "the world's most pressing issues"?
Honestly this exaggerated advertising of ACT seems a bit ridiculous to me. To be fair, this is something I am observing for a while in this community and it is just a coincidence that I am expressing my opinion in this thread for the first time.
Eric M Downes (Jul 29 2024 at 15:39):Leopold Schlicht said:
Honestly this exaggerated advertising of ACT seems a bit ridiculous to me.
For historical comparisons one might look to Cybernetics, System Dynamics, Complex Systems, etc. etc.
Many of their proponents and early adopters also thought they were sitting on a gold mine and capable of changing the world. And they were not wrong — those fields did have important impacts and IMO still have important and unique insights that are relevant to the world … but the historical trajectory of each also serves as a mediating lesson about the virtues of humility and not getting over-hyped.
Thankfully, underestimating the Last Mile Problem or the complexity of applied problems generally, is a very reliable way to deflate one’s ego. So such problems tend to correct themselves the more one engages outside of one’s comfort zone / bubble of fellow believers.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 15:47):Eric M Downes said:
Joshua Meyers, I think if you rephrased things to be “I statements” instead of presuming to speak for others or imply projects that would require coercing others’ actions, that will be much less controversial.
Rephrasing to say something about the kinds of projects you personally feel comfortable engaging in, is principled and sane people will respect this.
Also demonstrate to your potential clients that you are capable of separating the personal from the professional. This is critically important if they are to trust you.
In particular, whether or not other people have children or not, is a very personal choice. That goes on a blog, which you can link to, but not your professional page.
Or at least that is my 2 cents as someone who earns a living consulting by applying math and compsci to projects I find meaningful.
I see how it would make the page less controversial to rephrase things as "I statements", but that also wouldn't be completely honest, as much of what I am writing is speaking not just for myself but for many people in the applied category theory community whom I know, including some who have a lot of influence in the community.
Why is separation of the personal from the professional important for my clients to trust me? I am very skeptical of this distinction --- math is in some sense a vocation for me, not just a job.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 15:53):Leopold Schlicht said:
Mathematics is only one field of knowledge - there's also medicine, engineering, sociology, physics, geography, computer science, and so on, most of which seem more directly useful for solving global challenges than mathematics. And even within mathematics, there is discrete mathematics, probablity theory, mathematical optimization, calculus, and so on, which also have great potential for being applied. What makes ACT so special compared to all of these other fields when it comes to solving "the world's most pressing issues"?
Honestly this exaggerated advertising of ACT seems a bit ridiculous to me. To be fair, this is something I am observing for a while in this community and it is just a coincidence that I am expressing my opinion in this thread for the first time.
Glad to precipitate a first expression of your opinion!
Nowhere in the website do I compare ACT to other fields and say it's somehow more suited for addressing "the world's most pressing issues" than other fields such as "medicine, engineering, sociology, etc.". No doubt many other fields are also crucial. Within math, I do claim that it is uniquely important, because it discusses systems, and "the world's most pressing issues" are systemic rather than simply problems of optimization.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 15:55):Eric M Downes said:
Leopold Schlicht said:
Honestly this exaggerated advertising of ACT seems a bit ridiculous to me.
For historical comparisons one might look to Cybernetics, System Dynamics, Complex Systems, etc. etc.
Many of their proponents and early adopters also thought they were sitting on a gold mine and capable of changing the world. And they were not wrong — those fields did have important impacts and IMO still have important and unique insights that are relevant to the world … but the historical trajectory of each also serves as a mediating lesson about the virtues of humility and not getting over-hyped.
Thankfully, underestimating the Last Mile Problem or the complexity of applied problems generally, is a very reliable way to deflate one’s ego. So such problems tend to correct themselves the more one engages outside of one’s comfort zone / bubble of fellow believers.
Can you recommend any good books or papers on the history of "Cybernetics, System Dynamics, Complex Systems, etc. etc."? I'd love to read about that
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 29 2024 at 16:17):Category theory in the real world is just one tool amongst many, and no more of a tool than say real analysis / differential equations, statistics, rhetoric / persuasion, et cetera. Whether it will be useful at all in a particular situation will depend entirely on contextual factors.
Applied Category Theory (ACT) is a very new kind of math which focuses on systems rather than optimization. Hence it is well-suited for addressing the world's most pressing issues, which are systemic in nature.
Category theory might be useful in analysing systems in the real world, but for many issues that the world faces, the solutions to the issues are likely going to be political and sociological in nature rather than technical, which means that category theory and most other mathematics won't likely be able to help.
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 29 2024 at 16:31):One thing that is a fruitful area of research right now is applying category theory to quantum mechanics and quantum field theory. See for example this future conference at the KITP, which will be held in spring of 2025:
https://www.kitp.ucsb.edu/activities/gensym25
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 16:34):@Madeleine Birchfield Agreed!
Eric M Downes (Jul 29 2024 at 16:46):Joshua Meyers said:
I see how it would make the page less controversial to rephrase things as "I statements", but that also wouldn't be completely honest, as much of what I am writing is speaking not just for myself but for many people in the applied category theory community whom I know, including some who have a lot of influence in the community.
Are you though?
Have you asked them to speak on their behalf? Have they asked you to speak? Consent is critically important in such things.
And even if they have consented, what are your intentions in publishing a manifesto here (I mean your website)? Is it to represent people who cannot speak for themselves, to attract business … or a subtle form of self-aggrandizement?
I don’t mean these as fake questions or criticisms at all, but I do think they deserve careful self-reflection.
Why is separation of the personal from the professional important for my clients to trust me? I am very skeptical of this distinction --- math is in some sense a vocation for me, not just a job.
If you’re serious about it, you’ll need to be able to put in the work even when you don’t feel like it, because you promised someone you would, without making it personal — eg ask for what you need when problems arise with minimal emotional labor from your client / collaborator.
Your self worth must not ride on always knowing more category theory (or anything else), or on someone else’s approval. It is independent of work, allowing you to be reliable and explore uncertainty.
Let’s consider what others need to help motivate it…
Let’s say I am a business or personal coming to you, considering paying you to work on my challenging problem. In doing so I will have to reveal things my competitors could use against me. I also need to feel safe enough to admit when I don’t know things, which later might become quite important. So clients need discretion and privacy, and they highly value predictability.
Regarding the last, clients want to know that you will not suddenly decide they are “Bad” and then violate all those contracts of trust, or abandon the project for some kind of intensely personal reason they will find it very hard to predict or avoid. This is especially true in small business where lawsuits are just not an accessible expense.
When there is no separation of personal and professional, there is no demonstrated ability to do these things. It makes the calculus of whether to engage with you so much harder and forces the client to think of all kinds of potential ramifications… serious + stable + honest people will probably just default to “no”.
But equally if not more importantly, the ability to separate really forces you to get clear with yourself about what your boundaries and intentions are. About what you can actually promise and follow through with.
I dont mean you split yourself. Please remain whole!
I mean do the self-work to understand
This allows others to make decisions with fully informed consent about whether to engage with you or not.
I can recommend Brene Brown’s book dare to lead on ethical leadership as very helpful for people going into self-employment, and especially consulting where you think the stakes are high, which you seem to.
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 29 2024 at 16:51):Joshua Meyers said:
Madeleine Birchfield Agreed!
My point is that there is a big gap between "analysing systems in the real world" and the "addressing the world's most pressing issues" in that paragraph.
For example, climate science and the climate models developed in the past 40 years have been useful in analysing Earth's climate and human contributions to the climate, but getting people to change their behaviour to reduce their contributions or adapt to the changing climate has been mostly unsuccessful. The world's pressing issue here isn't modelling Earth's climate, it's getting people (including those who are preaching to others about the dangers of climate change) to change their behaviour. While category theory will enable climate scientists to build better models, it mostly likely won't convince people to change their behaviour; i.e. if people have the attitude "I know my current actions will help doom our civilization but I don't care, I don't want to give up my current lifestyle", no amount of accurate modelling of the climate will change their mind.
Eric M Downes (Jul 29 2024 at 17:11):Regarding the actual content of the fields… Cybernetics I can recommend Norbert Weiner’s book. For System Dynamics, Forester. For Complex Systems maybe … Yaneer Bar-Yam? Or you could look at Gleick’s breathless popsci book on Chaos Theory. If you can’t find those affordable reach out.
The history of each has not been as well documented as it deserves to be afaik. But if you even skim those books you will probably get the sense that these were very smart big-picture thinkers who had their own mathematical languages and their own techniques for approaching problems and they really believed these were incredibly important.
The very fact that you would need to ask for a history book means in some sense they were not successful at their revolutions.
I don’t mean they failed! I just mean that any grandiose ambitions for changing the world by changing the abstractions we use / the way we think, have not come to pass. Change is hard, and context matters, as Madeleine deftly pointed out.
Leopold Schlicht (Jul 29 2024 at 19:00):Eric M Downes said:
In particular, whether or not other people have children, is a very personal choice. That goes on a blog, which you can link to, but not your professional page.
To be fair, I think part of the criticism here should go to John Baez. Him, in a talk with the title "Mathematics in the 21st century", recommending mathematicians to "consider having fewer children" is a quite outrageous example of the woke mind virus infecting the mathematical community.
Amar Hadzihasanovic (Jul 29 2024 at 19:05):With regard to the message that started this discussion, my impression of the ACT community is that, far from being a “cult”, it is a very disjointed community which includes people that embrace the basic culture/values/aesthetics of the mathematics community at large, as well as people that embrace those of the "formal methods" CS community, as well as people who are somewhere on the programmer/hacker spectrum, as well as all sorts of people inbetween and
unclassifiable oddballs; if there's a unifying feature, it's that whoever went into ACT so far, is most likely to not be a hype-follower, as this is, by all reasonable standards, a niche field with very little "real" power; and if it seems that ACT people spend an unreasonable time promoting and justifying the "power of category theory" or what not, I think it is done because one is compelled to "justify" niche choices in ways that are not requested of the mainstream. Nobody who decides to be the millionth cog doing incremental improvements in machine learning or whatever needs to spend a second of their time justifying their field. Certainly I do not enjoy having to respond to questions about "the power of category theory" and I believe 95% of what is construed as "hype" around ACT is done begrudgingly by researchers who would much rather spend their time proving theorems.
Amar Hadzihasanovic (Jul 29 2024 at 19:10):And I think that, like other "niche" communities, this also tends to attract some people like Joshua here, who have further out-of-left-field ideas about monastic communities of mathematicians or whatever.
What I find incredibly boring is that then suddenly these out-of-left-field ideas are taken to be representative of what the whole community is like. It seems to me exactly the same mechanism by which left-wing activists which in large majority are completely reasonable people doing valuable community work are taken to also be responsible for the slightly-too-weird statements of some random student.
Amar Hadzihasanovic (Jul 29 2024 at 19:12):(Speaking of which it does not surprise me that now Leopold is bringing up the "woke mind virus")
Amar Hadzihasanovic (Jul 29 2024 at 19:14):Personally even if I find some of the things written by Joshua naive, I would much rather be a part of a community which is open to the exploration of all sorts of ideas, rather than one of boring, petty bureaucrats ready to mock any such attempts.
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 29 2024 at 19:26):Some of the hype coming out of ACT I view as largely coming from the fact that category theory is a niche field, and its practitioners need something to justify continued funding for the field, as opposed to using that funding for something like infrastructure or health care. It's the same hype phenomena that's afflicted various niche subfields of physics like string theory, AdS/CFT research, quantum gravity, etc whose actual relevance to society is very small.
Unfortunately, the hype isn't sustainable, as sooner or later people will notice the gap between the hype and the reality and conclude that the field is a failure because it cannot fulfill its own promises. See the terrible reputation of string theory these days - John Baez himself quit string theory in the mid 2000s because of the growing failures of string theory's promises.
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 19:28):, coincidence?
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 19:29):(I don't have time or energy to comment with more than shitposting here and there, so apologies in advance, also because rushing to the point will make me sound abrasive).
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 19:30):I keep reading that applied category theory is new. It's not, using category theory to do applied mathematics is instead a very old school thing to do with categories.
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 19:31):The difference with the past is IMO a critical mass of people, especially people with access to big money.
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 29 2024 at 19:32):Amar Hadzihasanovic said:
(Speaking of which it does not surprise me that now Leopold is bringing up the "woke mind virus")
I've seen plenty of people blaming a "woke mind virus" for the problems in mathematics and the sciences, but many of said problems are systemic problems which predate the woke phenomenon by decades, and would have still existed if wokeness were never a thing.
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 19:33):(If you want a date when "applied category theory" started: 1963, Linton thesis is on probability theory; and one might say that Grothendieck did applied category theory in a certain sense that became clear only recently...)
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 19:35):(on Grothendieck. He did three things: functional analysis; geometry; algebraic topology. He did them well. But he didn't do category theory[¹]. Lawvere did category theory, as at the very heart of category theory is the process that took the mind-blowing generality of sheaf toposes, removed all fat and connective tissue with a sharp knife, and gave us elementary toposes)
[¹] I cant name names, but I heard a person who I consider a category theorist, and a very old category theorist, say "Grothendieck didn't do category theory. He used category theory.
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 19:39):Going on:
math is in some sense a vocation for me, not just a job.
what's the difference between a vocation and a job, if you require to be paid (IMO, but don't take it personally, a lot) to do it? Yes: you have to pay your bills, as everyone else, and I also pride myself of paying my bills through my vocation. But this sounds much like virtue signaling, or at the very least in contrast with all the monastic lore.
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 29 2024 at 19:41):fosco said:
I keep reading that applied category theory is new. It's not, using category theory to do applied mathematics is instead a very old school thing to do with categories.
Joshua Meyers himself says in https://meygerjos.com/study that he wants to learn about the history of category theory, so he might not have been aware of the long history of applying category theory elsewhere.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 19:45):@Eric M Downes
The purpose of the "manifesto" type material on my website is to explain to the wider world what ACT is and why it is important (I don't buy that it's just "hype" I think ACT is really important). I think that to speak about a community that one is in, and/or to speak on behalf of the community (using "we"), it is sufficient to be attuned to this community and especially to its leaders, which I am, by means of many interactions in the community in the last 6 or so years. Through this attunement I do have a sense of the zeitgeist of the community, which I am simply describing as I have witnessed it. That said, I did run the website by some other people in the community who are even more attuned than me before publishing, and they didn't see any serious problems with it.
I think it's important to note that I am publishing this text under my own name, and take personal responsibility for everything I say. It's not some sort of anonymous manifesto or something. If you want to know the particular milieu of ACT I am associated with look at the about me section of the website. My main bias I think is that I am much more involved in US ACT than European ACT.
As for separation of the personal from the professional, you still didn't really answer my question. Of course it is important to be trustworthy, which includes making only agreements I can keep, keeping those agreements, keeping confidentiality when appropriate, etc. I hope that prospective clients will adequately assess my trustworthiness as part of deciding whether and how to work with me, and not trust me more or less than I deserve. However, I don't see at all what dividing personal and professional has to do with this.
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 19:46):Madeleine Birchfield said:
fosco said:
I keep reading that applied category theory is new. It's not, using category theory to do applied mathematics is instead a very old school thing to do with categories.
Joshua Meyers himself says in https://meygerjos.com/study that he wants to learn about the history of category theory, so he might not have been aware of the long history of applying category theory elsewhere.
Well, I'm surely not gonna give him 250$/hr to study that!
(And aside this: usually you sell an expertise when you have it, or did I get capitalism wro--- oh, wait)
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 19:48):Madeleine Birchfield said:
Joshua Meyers said:
Madeleine Birchfield Agreed!
My point is that there is a big gap between "analysing systems in the real world" and the "addressing the world's most pressing issues" in that paragraph.
For example, climate science and the climate models developed in the past 40 years have been useful in analysing Earth's climate and human contributions to the climate, but getting people to change their behaviour to reduce their contributions or adapt to the changing climate has been mostly unsuccessful. The world's pressing issue here isn't modelling Earth's climate, it's getting people (including those who are preaching to others about the dangers of climate change) to change their behaviour. While category theory will enable climate scientists to build better models, it mostly likely won't convince people to change their behaviour; i.e. if people have the attitude "I know my current actions will help doom our civilization but I don't care, I don't want to give up my current lifestyle", no amount of accurate modelling of the climate will change their mind.
Getting people to change their behavior is also a systemic problem. Economic systems, governance systems, educational systems, etc.
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 19:50):explain to the wider world what ACT is and why it is important
Because of course, you didn't even for a split second think about writing such a manifesto (dangerous word, by the way...) as a community wiki of people who share your zeal, or even just your commitment to popularize some aspects that inspire the work of ACTors
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 19:54):it is sufficient to be attuned to this community and especially to its leaders, which I am,
I hope you will one day realize how laughably pompous this sound, and I will refrain from commenting on point.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 19:55):Madeleine Birchfield said:
Unfortunately, the hype isn't sustainable, as sooner or later people will notice the gap between the hype and the reality and conclude that the field is a failure because it cannot fulfill its own promises. See the terrible reputation of string theory these days - John Baez himself quit string theory in the mid 2000s because of the growing failures of string theory's promises.
Could happen. Right now ACT is a promise. Maybe it will pan out, maybe it won't. I really hope it will!
In order for it to have any chance, there need to be people who have the time and energy to learn both category theory and some target domain that they want to apply it to (see Lawvere's Prophecy). This happens pretty rarely as far as it can tell.
Worst case scenario is this doesn't happen for a long time, ACT consequently doesn't fulfill its promises, and then people unjustifiably conclude that it was all just hype.
A better scenario is that this does happen, ACT still doesn't fulfill its promises, and then people justifiably conclude that it was hype.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 19:58):fosco said:
Going on:
math is in some sense a vocation for me, not just a job.
what's the difference between a vocation and a job, if you require to be paid (IMO, but don't take it personally, a lot) to do it? Yes: you have to pay your bills, as everyone else, and I also pride myself of paying my bills through my vocation. But this sounds much like virtue signaling, or at the very least in contrast with all the monastic lore.
The context where I said this was to explain why there's all this material about why I as a person am doing this work, and its spiritual and political import, which seems to blur the line between personal and professional. That was the purpose of saying it, not virtue signaling.
Leopold Schlicht (Jul 29 2024 at 20:03):@Amar Hadzihasanovic To be clear: My "cult" comment was sarcastic based on the idea of a secret society. I never intended to judge the ACT community as a whole, I only wanted to critize some weird behaviour that I repeatedly observed in this community and which I consider to be influenced by John Baez (including exaggerated advertising, Grothendieck name-dropping, recommendation to have fewer children).
So I am sorry to have used this thread as an excuse to express my general impression that built up over time, and I am relieved that even Joshua himself appreciated me sharing my thoughts. In hindsight I could have used less harsh words, but my opinion is still the same.
My use of the phrase "woke mind virus" is of course controversial. But I can tell you that this is not related to the standard left-vs-right political debate. Elon Musk explains the "mind virus" in this video as follows:
I'm pro environment, but in the limit, if environmentalism is taken to an extreme, you start to view humanity as a plague on the surface of the earth, like a mold or something. But this is actually false, the earth could take probably ten times the current civilization, you can 10x the population without destroying the rainforest. So the environmental movement has gone too far.
And promoting people to have fewer children is, for me, a perfect example of the environmental movement going too far. This has nothing to do with me being right or against left. Actually, I kind of like the idea of monastic communities you mention.
Suggesting me to be on the political right seems to me exactly the same mechanism which far-left activists use to discredit any other opinions.
And while we are on this topic, another thing I want to critize is John Baez's constant mocking of Elon Musk and their collective quitting of Twitter/X, while surely by now it's clear that this is one of the last big platforms supporting free speech.
EDIT: For those who can't read it, the linked tweet of Elon Musk reads:
The European Commission offered 𝕏 an illegal secret deal: if we quietly censored speech without telling anyone, they would not fine us. The other platforms accepted that deal. 𝕏 did not.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 20:06):fosco said:
explain to the wider world what ACT is and why it is important
Because of course, you didn't even for a split second think about writing such a manifesto (dangerous word, by the way...) as a community wiki of people who share your zeal, or even just your commitment to popularize some aspects that inspire the work of ACTors
I had an idea for what I wanted to write, so I wrote it under my own name. In this way I take responsibility for my writing. If I had instead made it a wiki that many people could edit, it would diffuse responsibility so it wouldn't be as clear that I was responsible for most of the content, or who was responsible for what exactly.
In this thread you have seen me take responsibility for my writing by responding to all of this feedback. If it was a wiki I could just shrug and tell you to go edit it yourself.
If people have other ideas about what ACT is, I recommend that they write it up under their own name and take responsibility for it as well and then we could have a conversation about the meaning of our field.
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 29 2024 at 20:10):Joshua Meyers said:
Getting people to change their behavior is also a systemic problem. Economic systems, governance systems, educational systems, etc.
Sure, you can model with category theory how people tend to change their behaviour in society, but there is still a huge gap from the model to actually trying to get people to change their behaviour. Getting people to change their behavior is also a systemic problem which doesn't lend itself easily to one-approach-fits-all technocratic solutions like what is being promised here.
Economic systems, governance systems, educational systems, etc are systems which are fraught with many complex political and sociological factors and many self-interested actors who are interested in the system for their own selfish reasons, and many actors who have beliefs for how the systems themselves should work that differ significantly from applied category theory. Most of the solutions to the systemic problems are unwieldy compromises between different factions of society which just barely work in reality but contain many aspects which each faction do not like.
I don't think that the niche field of applied category theory will itself solve the problems in most of these systems, compared to actually existing forces in society like political parties, mass media, corporations, non-government organisations, and so on. At best, applied category theory becomes one of many tools used by all sides of the never-ending fights in human society, by American corporations, Russian private military companies, the Chinese Communist Party, warlords in Africa, both the Israeli government and Hamas, et cetera, some of whom will purposefully apply category theory to prevent problems from being solved.
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 20:15):Joshua Meyers said:
fosco said:
explain to the wider world what ACT is and why it is important
Because of course, you didn't even for a split second think about writing such a manifesto (dangerous word, by the way...) as a community wiki of people who share your zeal, or even just your commitment to popularize some aspects that inspire the work of ACTors
I had an idea for what I wanted to write, so I wrote it under my own name. In this way I take responsibility for my writing. If I had instead made it a wiki that many people could edit, it would diffuse responsibility so it wouldn't be as clear that I was responsible for most of the content, or who was responsible for what exactly.
In this thread you have seen me take responsibility for my writing by responding to all of this feedback. If it was a wiki I could just shrug and tell you to go edit it yourself.
If people have other ideas about what ACT is, I recommend that they write it up under their own name and take responsibility for it as well and then we could have a conversation about the meaning of our field.
Personally, I'm not particularly irked by the lack of the "opinions my own" tag, what I'm saying is that this blade has two sides. Yes, you're writing your own opinions, but you also seem to speak on behalf of the community "you are attuned to".
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 20:16):@Madeleine Birchfield
Of course theorizing is no subsitute for action. However, at certain historical moments, sufficiently developed theory can be implemented to real effect. A relevant example of this is how Stafford Beer's management cybernetics was implemented in Project Cybersyn, which I am currently studying. Another, even more basic example is how Turing's theories were implemented in the modern computer.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 20:16):@fosco I'm writing my own opinions about the community zeitgeist
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 20:19):Joshua Meyers said:
fosco I'm writing my own opinions about the community zeitgeist
And I'm telling you my two cents: to do this without sounding ridicolous one has to have an immense maturity, scientific, philosophical and technical. This is true in and outside of category theory: to read between the lines of a zeitgeist which is literally in the process of becoming, identifying the general principles that guide you have to think half a century ahead of the most prominent minds of your generation.
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 20:21):even Lawvere didn't see category theory as a whole, and completely missed some other prophecies about its future (cherrypicking).
And Bill invented almost half of the stuff we do here.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 20:21):Why do I have to think half a century ahead to discuss the zeitgeist of today? Why do I have to read between the lines? Most of the stuff on the website was pretty much said flat out in my presence at various times by various people
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 20:23):Which prophecies did Lawvere miss?
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 20:23):Yeah, why does one have to be competent in order to talk about something knowingly?!
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 20:26):Joshua Meyers said:
Which prophecies did Lawvere miss?
For example? He never fully bought monoidal categories. He was a fierce opponent of higher category theory done in simplicial sets. But I am not delusional enough to believe I can speak on his behalf.
Now, before this conversation goes awry and before you suspect I'm just trying to provoke you, I will leave, it's bedtime. Good luck with your studies!
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 20:28):Interesting!
I hadn't yet suspected that so good timing I guess?
Kevin Carlson (Jul 29 2024 at 20:29):Most likely not too many people will see your website, Josh, and it won't cause any harm, but to be clear, this is completely non-complicated: you have no right whatsoever to assert unilaterally what "the community's" anxieties are. You are incorrect that having had private conversations with John and Jade and whoever else entitles you to this. You have an obligation to change that page.
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 29 2024 at 20:38):fosco said:
Joshua Meyers said:
fosco I'm writing my own opinions about the community zeitgeist
And I'm telling you my two cents: to do this without sounding ridicolous one has to have an immense maturity, scientific, philosophical and technical. This is true in and outside of category theory: to read between the lines of a zeitgeist which is literally in the process of becoming, identifying the general principles that guide you have to think half a century ahead of the most prominent minds of your generation.
Also, I shall add, understanding the history of the field and how its ideas and zeitgeist evolved over time to become what it currently is in the modern day.
Eric M Downes (Jul 29 2024 at 20:40):I was the one who called it a manifesto @fosco in all fairness to Joshua.
Joshua Meyers said:
to explain to the wider world what ACT is and why it is important (I don't buy that it's just "hype"
I didn’t say it was just hype. None of those other things I mentioned were “just hype” either.
I’m warning you to not let the sense of excitement and eschaton get the better of you. Those people felt the same way and they had reason to feel that way.
I think ACT is really important). I think that to speak about a community that one is in, and/or to speak on behalf of the community (using "we"), it is sufficient to be attuned to this community and especially to its leaders, …
Hmmm… something doesn’t sit right with this. It feels to me as if other motivations are at play. That is subjective, but it is my honest opinion.
If you know that I am wrong, then by all means, proceed. Otherwise, please take what I have said as a warning and opportunity for self reflection.
Of course it is important to be trustworthy, which includes making only agreements I can keep, keeping those agreements, keeping confidentiality when appropriate, etc. I hope that prospective clients will adequately assess my trustworthiness as part of deciding whether and how to work with me, and not trust me more or less than I deserve.
They will indeed assess that. You can help them by considering the things I have said in the spirit of reflection in which I wrote them.
There’s a lot of game theory here. Essentially we are looking for win-win positive sum interactions.
The way to do this effectively without a massive investment of energy is to scope the interaction appropriately.
Demonstrating that you can keep the spheres of personal and professional life separate, and critically that you can own what is yours vs. what belongs to others is signaling / proving that for you such a scoping is possible.
YOU might know that. But how do they know it? You want to show you are emotionally stable and have good boundaries. To say “I’m not hiding but neither do you have to worry or know anything about my personal life, and here is what I need to know about your business, for us to work together without surprises or emotional drama, toward specific limited goals.”
Please reflect that nowhere have I suggested self-censoring! I do not practice that either.
But honestly, do what you want. I believe you will learn the things I have suggested from experience. Unlike some others in this thread I have no political squabble to pick here, I’m just trying to help. If I am wrong and this kind of problem never occurs for you, then I am genuinely fascinated to learn what your experience will have been in another decade.
fosco (Jul 29 2024 at 20:41):Madeleine Birchfield said:
fosco said:
Joshua Meyers said:
fosco I'm writing my own opinions about the community zeitgeist
And I'm telling you my two cents: to do this without sounding ridicolous one has to have an immense maturity, scientific, philosophical and technical. This is true in and outside of category theory: to read between the lines of a zeitgeist which is literally in the process of becoming, identifying the general principles that guide you have to think half a century ahead of the most prominent minds of your generation.
Also, I shall add, understanding the history of the field and how its ideas and zeitgeist evolved over time to become what it currently is in the modern day.
What I mean is exactly that some parts of the history of category theory are obscure today, after almost a century; not only because it is complicated to trace back the actual content of the inflamed discussions that took place -at a slower pace, outside internet-, but also because history is extremely complex to unravel even having all sources in good order. Not by chance, history is something you need a degree in, before you start writing about it.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 20:42):I admit freely that there are gaps in my understanding. Hopefully over the coming years I will fill these gaps.
It would be very helpful if people would say specifically how I'm wrong, instead of just objecting in a general way to my audacity in writing anything at all about topics I have gaps in my understanding of.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 20:46):As a special case of the last paragraph, I would like to know what specifically feels inaccurate to @Kevin Carlson about my description of the community's anxieties.
Kevin Carlson (Jul 29 2024 at 21:04):I didn't say anything about your description being inaccurate. The claim is at a higher level of abstraction: you have taken on yourself a right to speak for a community that never granted you that right. Even if your claims were all descriptively accurate it would be unethical to make them in this situation.
Ryan Wisnesky (Jul 29 2024 at 21:08):if 'the consent of the community being written about' was required, then David Brooks and Ross Douthat would have to get the permission of everyone in the USA to write their NYT editorials about 'how the country feels'.
Kevin Carlson (Jul 29 2024 at 21:10):I think that's pretty obviously a straw man
Kevin Carlson (Jul 29 2024 at 21:11):There is a plausible course of events where someone from outside of ACT comes across Josh's site and believes him when he claims to be a representative of the ACT community.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 21:14):Do I claim to be a representative of the ACT community?
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 21:14):Like I would see the problem if I was agreeing to a contract on behalf of the ACT community, I would need to be a "representative" to do that, with powers delegated, etc. etc.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 21:15):But I'm just saying how the community feels in my opinion, it's actually pretty similar to the NYTimes case
Kevin Carlson (Jul 29 2024 at 21:15):Yes, you post a page titled "The Community's Anxiety" wherein you constantly refer to your own preferences as "our" preferences.
Kevin Carlson (Jul 29 2024 at 21:15):As has already been pointed out to you, when you are describing your own opinions, the appropriate pronoun is "I", and if you are describing the opinions of some people you've talked to, the appropriate descriptor is "some people I've talked to."
Nathanael Arkor (Jul 29 2024 at 21:16):Leopold Schlicht said:
And while we are on this topic, another thing I want to critize is John Baez's constant mocking of Elon Musk and their collective quitting of Twitter/X, while surely by now it's clear that this is one of the last big platforms supporting free speech.
Musk has a track recording of lying, so I don't think one of his tweets can be taken as evidence of anything. And Twitter/X censors tweets that don't align with Musk's personal views (for instance, uses of "cisgender"), which seems strong evidence to the contrary.
Nathanael Arkor (Jul 29 2024 at 21:17):(This seems the wrong place for such a discussion, but I thought someone should respond to this comment.)
Kevin Carlson (Jul 29 2024 at 21:17):You are well aware of people in the community who don't feel the way you describe--you even point out on the very page under discussion that Jade's position "made waves." The most exhaustingly interminable debates on this server are around precisely the controversial topics you describe as "the community's" anxieties. So, it's impossible to see how you could in good faith claim that you believe this is an accurate description of "the community's anxieties", unless you are intentionally gatekeeping the community to those who share your anxieties.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 29 2024 at 21:18):(I will come back to this later, not abandoning the thread but I have other stuff to do)
Kevin Carlson (Jul 29 2024 at 21:21):Joshua Meyers said:
But I'm just saying how the community feels in my opinion, it's actually pretty similar to the NYTimes case
Come on. This is an outward-facing document, intended to be read by people who may have no earlier familiarity with ACT. I am not aware of many people whose first encounter with the concept of an American is via Ross Douthat's columns.
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 29 2024 at 21:33):Ryan Wisnesky said:
if 'the consent of the community being written about' was required, then David Brooks and Ross Douthat would have to get the permission of everyone in the USA to write their NYT editorials about 'how the country feels'.
And many times the authors of the editorials in the media confuse their own opinion or the opinion of their political faction about the topic with the diverse opinions of whatever country they are in as a whole.
Ryan Wisnesky (Jul 29 2024 at 21:33):I agree, I think that Ross Douthat and many journalists could use a similar refresher, that they should say "I" instead of "we" and say "my buddies" rather than "250M Americans". that's really the point here, imo - journalistic accuracy should be just as important as mathematical/scientific accuracy, to Ross and Josh and me and everyone. I can see how consent can improve or degrade accuracy, but fundamentally, I see this as about accuracy rather than consent
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 29 2024 at 21:52):There's a spelling error on
The word "mathematicians" is misspelled in the second sentence of
John Baez has great thoughts on this question in his fundamental 2021 talk Mathematics in the 21st century (slides). He says mathematications should:
- Stop flying to conferences, eat less meat, and consider having fewer children, or adopting.
- Learn more about climate change from a quantitative perspective, and talk to people about it.
- Work on math connected to real-world problems.
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 29 2024 at 22:03):Leopold Schlicht said:
My use of the phrase "woke mind virus" is of course controversial. But I can tell you that this is not related to the standard left-vs-right political debate. Elon Musk explains the "mind virus" in this video as follows:
Then it needs a better name than "woke mind virus", since the term "woke" is laden with gender and racial connotations that don't apply here.
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 29 2024 at 22:35):Leopold Schlicht said:
To be fair, I think part of the criticism here should go to John Baez. Him, in a talk with the title "Mathematics in the 21st century", recommending mathematicians to "consider having fewer children"
John Baez's talk on one hand goes too far, and on the other hand does not go far enough.
On the one hand, in the pre-industrial era, families lived with more kids than they do today, and produced less carbon dioxide than they do today.
On the other hand, many of those people recommending having less kids are still as tied to the industrial society putting out all the carbon dioxide as any other person is. They aren't willing to go and actually cut down on the things that contribute most to the increase in greenhouse gases:
Fabrizio Romano Genovese (Jul 29 2024 at 23:05):Ok, the next time someone from this community even dares to tell me that "you do crypto, you're clearly in a cult" I'll point them to https://meygerjos.com/anxiety before punching them in the face.
Fabrizio Romano Genovese (Jul 29 2024 at 23:18):This said, honest feedback: the page is terrible. As a person running a profitable business I can tell you everyone has his own way of doing things, so my opinion is probably not universal. Yet, personally, I have a very strict policy of not hiring mentally unstable people, no matter how good they are, because that plays terribly with company culture in the long run. I know many people that think the same thing, after all "minimising stuff that can go wrong" is a popular strategy in business.
From what I've read on your site, you sound really mentally unstable and disconnected from reality, and more in the "crackpot" way than in the "lone genius" one. I'd never hire you because you don't strike me as reliable in this respect.
I also share all the criticism other people expressed in this thread, but if I have to be completely honest those are secondary issues, whereas for me the primary issue is the one above.
Disregarding vibes, from a more practical POV, if I have to pay for someone's services I want a person that is reliable, down to earth and gets the job done. Importantly , if I pay you to solve a problem, then the problem should be the focus of your attention. The idea I get from your page is the opposite of that: I see a person obsessed with Category Theory that just wants to use it no matter what. So I know that my problem will never be the focus of your attention, category theory will. That's a big no for me.
All in all, it seems to me that what you really want is getting paid to think about stuff you like and are interested in. If that's the case I'd stick with academia, which is the only field that gets close to that, modulo admin stuff.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 30 2024 at 01:38):@Kevin Carlson I think @Ryan Wisnesky makes a great point - this is about accuracy, not consent. The concern is that I am characterizing the community inaccurately. I just skimmed the conversation that I linked to to illustrate that Jade "made waves" and it is true that not all the voices in the conversation have the anxieties that I discuss. However, I don't think that it is necessary for every single member of a community to have a particular anxiety in order for it to be true that the community, taken as a whole, has that anxiety. This is similar to how it does not have to be the case that every single part of my psyche has an anxiety in order for me, taken as a whole, to have that anxiety --- I may entertain many divergent viewpoints in my mental talk, some holding the anxiety and some not holding it. That conversation is a great example of the community as a whole reckoning with these anxieties that I mention, some through holding to them (in divergent ways), some through dismissing them (again, in divergent ways) --- all different responses to the core anxieties of the community.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 30 2024 at 01:39):Madeleine Birchfield said:
There's a spelling error on
Thanks!
David Michael Roberts (Jul 30 2024 at 02:45):From https://meygerjos.com/aboutme
I circumvented the miseducation that most children are subjected to.
While I don't doubt that there are many examples in education systems that are extremely far from what many would consider ideal, this statement is a very blanket one, and presumably made in the context of education in the USA. Please be aware that other countries have very different education systems and philosophies and success outcomes.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 30 2024 at 02:45):Good point I'll add "in the USA"
David Michael Roberts (Jul 30 2024 at 02:48):I have other feelings about things I've read, but I don't think I can productively explain them here, and perhaps not anywhere. I certainly wish you luck on your adventure, whatever will happen.
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 30 2024 at 05:43):Given the power of applied category theory, it would seem reasonable to restrict access to a secret society, where we vet people for moral character before allowing them to learn category theory.
It is completely unreasonable to restrict access to a secret society. It is already 60 years too late for anything remotely approaching this. Category theory is being used all around the world for decades and you can't just say "we're going to force everybody else to forget about category theory while a group of American researchers are going to monopolise and gatekeep the knowledge".
It's like a group of real analysts saying,
Given the power of the real numbers, it would seem reasonable to restrict access to a secret society, where we vet people for moral character before allowing them to learn about the real numbers.
and they will have much more of a point, considering the centuries of historical evidence where people have used the real numbers for ill will. Nevertheless, it is impossible, since the knowledge of the real numbers is already out there in the world and cannot be suppressed.
A discussion about the ethics of mathematics is well worth having but over-the-top statements like these just detract from the point that you are trying to make. Name dropping the Grothendieck 2010 letter is also somewhat a distraction. I would just go directly to the point, state that the ACT community believes in making category theory open for everybody and the reasons why the community believes in openness.
Leopold Schlicht (Jul 30 2024 at 06:00):Madeleine Birchfield said:
Leopold Schlicht said:
My use of the phrase "woke mind virus" is of course controversial. But I can tell you that this is not related to the standard left-vs-right political debate. Elon Musk explains the "mind virus" in this video as follows:
Then it needs a better name than "woke mind virus", since the term "woke" is laden with gender and racial connotations that don't apply here.
Well, I think it's not perfect, but is there another nice derogatory term for this kind of exaggerated "political correctness" including both transgender rights and extinctionism?
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 30 2024 at 06:44):I would have just used "extinctionist mind virus" or something along those lines if I were in your position and wanted to use something derogatory, since it more accurately reflects the current topic at hand; i.e. the contents of John Baez's speech and the climate change movement writ large.
Personally I see no need to draw in an issue which is orthogonal to the one at hand and is likely to alienate potential supporters of your position. There are woke people and people who do not care about the woke issue at all who oppose the current rhetoric and actions coming from climate change activists. Conversely, there are anti-woke climate change activists. So using "woke" is simply a terrible decision that has no upsides and considerable downsides.
Also I see "political correctness" as just a synonym for "woke" which was used in the 1990s, not really related to the climate change movement and its rhetoric at all. With climate change activism there is a sense of apocalyptic fear rather than political correctness, apocalyptic fear that humans are going to go extinct; it reminds me more of the apocalyptic fear and rhetoric on some portions of the European right that mass immigration is going to cause the extinction of Europeans, and then promoting desperate unrealistic solutions to mass immigration like genociding all non-Europeans, which has many of the same distastful anti-human vibe to it as some of the climate change movement's rhetoric today. Like, yes, climate change is a huge issue that humans have to learn to adapt to and aim to reduce, and immigration is a huge issue that Europeans will have to figure out how to reduce down to levels suitable for Europe, but using extreme rhetoric about humans or Europeans going extinct will simply turn people away from their cause.
David Michael Roberts (Jul 30 2024 at 06:48):I would prefer that no derogatory terms are used in this professional space.
Joe Moeller (Jul 30 2024 at 07:08):Indeed, there are lines for what is considered tolerable speech in this space. Leopold is not being respectful, and things seem to be deteriorating.
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 30 2024 at 07:24):David Michael Roberts said:
I would prefer that no derogatory terms are used in this professional space.
This is also an option, and not using derogatory terms in the first place would make it a lot easier to convince undecided people over to one's side, who might otherwise be turned away by the nasty rhetoric.
Madeleine Birchfield (Jul 30 2024 at 07:36):Back to the original topic
Joshua Meyers said:
Kevin Carlson I think Ryan Wisnesky makes a great point - this is about accuracy, not consent. The concern is that I am characterizing the community inaccurately. I just skimmed the conversation that I linked to to illustrate that Jade "made waves" and it is true that not all the voices in the conversation have the anxieties that I discuss. However, I don't think that it is necessary for every single member of a community to have a particular anxiety in order for it to be true that the community, taken as a whole, has that anxiety. This is similar to how it does not have to be the case that every single part of my psyche has an anxiety in order for me, taken as a whole, to have that anxiety --- I may entertain many divergent viewpoints in my mental talk, some holding the anxiety and some not holding it. That conversation is a great example of the community as a whole reckoning with these anxieties that I mention, some through holding to them (in divergent ways), some through dismissing them (again, in divergent ways) --- all different responses to the core anxieties of the community.
I would ask, how representative is the nCafé comment section of the ACT community? It is possible that a small but loud minority is discussing ethics online while the majority of applied category theorists are busy working on whatever, unaware that this conversation had taken place. It is also possible that all of the applied category theorists as of 2020 have commented that thread.
Paolo Perrone (Jul 30 2024 at 08:04):@Joshua Meyers
As a member of this community, I strongly recommend you
Now I understand that you are very passionate about category theory, I am too. And you, like me, would like to tell society, please support us in doing category theory, it's not just fun to us, it's important for everyone. I'm fully with you on this. But there's a right way to do it, and overpromising, in the slightly longer term, hurts us.
Paolo Perrone (Jul 30 2024 at 08:11):Now, instead, as a moderator:
@Leopold Schlicht I do not consider the expression "woke mind virus" acceptable. Enough people here have already commented on the racial and gender aspects of the term "woke", so let me focus on calling something a "mind virus" instead: it can be read to imply that some people's political opinions should be eradicated like a virus. This goes against the standards of our community.
Now, I think you have explained what you really meant, the point you were trying to make is constructive, and of course you are entitled to having your opinions. So I'm not going to ban you or close this thread. But please refrain from using expressions like that in the future. (Not just him, everyone, of course.)
Obviously you (and others) are perfectly free to question what I said, the usage of terminology in general, and so on. But please start another thread if you wish to do so, let's not derail the topic here.
Jules Hedges (Jul 30 2024 at 11:12):What was this thread, the hell did I just read
Jules Hedges (Jul 30 2024 at 11:13):def25e3ac5342c1a.png
Anyway, here's what I had to say very recently about the field of ACT in a recent blog draft that likely will never be released
Leopold Schlicht (Jul 30 2024 at 11:15):@Nathanael Arkor
Musk has a track recording of lying, so I don't think one of his tweets can be taken as evidence of anything.
The mainstream media has a track record of lying about Musk lying (and other things), so I don't think your link to an article of RollingStone can be taken as an evidence of anything.
@Madeleine Birchfield
Personally I see no need to draw in an issue which is orthogonal to the one at hand and is likely to alienate potential supporters of your position.
Contrary to what you seem to do by constantly rephrasing my points I am not writing for the sake of getting supporters of my position, but for the sake of stating my opinion.
I do think transgender rights and extinctionism are related in the same way as cough and headache are to a virus infection. It wouldn't make sense to distinguish between the "cough virus" and the "headache virus".
@Paolo Perrone
let me focus on calling something a "mind virus" instead: it can be read to imply that some people's political opinions should be eradicated like a virus. This goes against the standards of our community.
I do want to imply that some people's political opinions should be eradicated like a virus. I bet you would agree when I say antisemitism should be eradicated.
It is crazy how the view that
is regarded as controversial nowadays. This is my position formulated in a nutshell without using any derogatory terminology.
That said, I am thankful for your kind warning, and I won't use the phrase "woke mind virus" here again. I agree that we should avoid using derogatory terminology. If there would be any neutral ism term like antisemitism for the idea I am criticizing I would have used this.
Please excuse me for adding a last statement on this issue here.
Matteo Capucci (he/him) (Jul 30 2024 at 11:21):Jules Hedges said:
def25e3ac5342c1a.png
Anyway, here's what I had to say very recently about the field of ACT in a recent blog draft that likely will never be released
I strongly agree with @Amar Hadzihasanovic when he says ACT is far more diverse and faceted than sometimes people realize. I think you're committing this mistake, Jules.
Also in the past I've been annoyed by certain pushes to define what 'application' or 'compositionality'/'category theory' mean in the context of ACT, and maybe this is a good opportunity to say that one shouldn't gatekeep those terms. As said before in this thread, it's fine to have personal opinions but a line is crossed when those are reported as widely shared in the community or even self-evident.
So, I'm glad you refrained from publishing that draft :)
Matteo Capucci (he/him) (Jul 30 2024 at 11:26):Leopold Schlicht said:
Nathanael Arkor
Musk has a track recording of lying, so I don't think one of his tweets can be taken as evidence of anything.
That said, I am thankful for your kind warning, and I won't use the phrase "woke mind virus" here again. I agree that we should avoid using derogatory terminology. If there would be any neutral ism term like antisemitism for the idea I am criticizing I would have used this.
Please excuse me for adding a last statement on this issue here.
The word your looking for is antinatalism.
Leopold Schlicht (Jul 30 2024 at 11:31):@Matteo Capucci (he/him)
The word your looking for is antinatalism.
No. We should treat root causes and not symptoms. Also, not all headaches are bad.
Nathaniel Virgo (Jul 30 2024 at 11:33):I think this thread has got to the point where a moderator should take action.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 30 2024 at 12:25):Madeleine Birchfield said:
It is completely unreasonable to restrict access to a secret society. It is already 60 years too late for anything remotely approaching this. Category theory is being used all around the world for decades and you can't just say "we're going to force everybody else to forget about category theory while a group of American researchers are going to monopolise and gatekeep the knowledge".
Right, it is unreasonable rather than reasonable, I'll tweak the wording somehow to make it correct.
Joshua Meyers (Jul 30 2024 at 12:59):Paolo Perrone said:
Joshua Meyers
As a member of this community, I strongly recommend you
- Not to speak on anyone's behalf (especially not mine)
- Not to overpromise about applied category theory's power.
I already know a few people (I'm not going to say their names) who dropped any interest in category theory because it didn't deliver what it promised. No matter what we do now, these people will think we're all crackpots. Overpromising hurts the work of all those hard-working people in our field which are doing their best to deliver. (I'm doing my best to be counted in them.)Now I understand that you are very passionate about category theory, I am too. And you, like me, would like to tell society, please support us in doing category theory, it's not just fun to us, it's important for everyone. I'm fully with you on this. But there's a right way to do it, and overpromising, in the slightly longer term, hurts us.
I am not speaking on your behalf, I am using "we" to speak on the community's behalf. A community is not simply the collection of people in it, just like a human is not just the collection of their cells, and when you say "Cecil is happy" you are not saying that every single one of their cells is happy.
I think that anyone who is in the ACT community and who has been around long enough and is connected enough to be attuned to the collective consciousness should be able to use the pronoun "we" to describe their impression of the community's feelings, just like if I know a male friend well enough I should be able to use the pronoun "he" to describe my impression of his feelings.
Of course, I understand that the people in this community are mathematicians and like things really precise, so I might have to really narrow down exactly what I mean by "we", "collective consciousness", etc. in order for it to fly.
As for overpromising about appied category theory's power, I do see the concern here. I probably will edit some of the wording, in ways such as
"We know that applied category theory is powerful stuff, capable of immense good as well as immense harm."
->
"We strongly suspect that applied category theory is powerful stuff, capable of immense good as well as immense harm.
fosco (Jul 30 2024 at 13:46):We strongly suspect that applied category theory is powerful stuff, capable of immense good as well as immense harm.
Surely it can do immense harm, but probably not in the sense you're thinking...
JR (Jul 30 2024 at 14:27):Joshua Meyers said:
Getting people to change their behavior is also a systemic problem. Economic systems, governance systems, educational systems, etc.
Do I need to change my behavior to use http versus https? Because my browser really doesn't want me to.
Joe Moeller (Jul 30 2024 at 19:53):Ok, I've moved several messages to a vault, anything related to wokeness, antinatalism, anti-trans rhetoric, including direct quote-replies to such messages. If any further messages need to be removed, let me know. If any messages ought to be restored, you're free to make your case to me.
Joe Moeller (Jul 30 2024 at 19:55):I want to apologize on behalf of the moderators for taking a while to moderate this discussion. Occasionally the nature of moderating requires waiting to act.
Notification Bot (Jul 30 2024 at 20:03):A message was moved here from #admin: moderators > Freelance ACT by Paolo Perrone.
Notification Bot (Jul 30 2024 at 20:03):A message was moved here from #admin: moderators > Freelance ACT by Paolo Perrone.
Notification Bot (Jul 30 2024 at 20:06):16 messages were moved here from #community: general > Freelance ACT by Paolo Perrone.
Notification Bot (Jul 30 2024 at 20:08):A message was moved here from #admin: moderators > Freelance ACT by Paolo Perrone.
Notification Bot (Jul 30 2024 at 20:08):14 messages were moved here from #admin: moderators > Freelance ACT by Paolo Perrone.
Notification Bot (Jul 30 2024 at 20:09):A message was moved here from #admin: moderators > Freelance ACT by Paolo Perrone.
Notification Bot (Jul 30 2024 at 20:09):A message was moved here from #admin: moderators > Freelance ACT by Paolo Perrone.
Notification Bot (Jul 30 2024 at 20:10):A message was moved here from #admin: moderators > Freelance ACT by Paolo Perrone.
Notification Bot (Jul 30 2024 at 20:10):A message was moved here from #admin: moderators > Freelance ACT by Paolo Perrone.
Paolo Perrone (Jul 30 2024 at 20:18):(Sorry about the mess with moving messages, I was on my phone. And, as Joe said, sorry we took so long.)
Notification Bot (Jul 31 2024 at 07:20):22 messages were moved from this topic to #meta: meta > moderation in response to "Freelance ACT" by Nathanael Arkor.
Zanzi (Jul 31 2024 at 14:14):Jules Hedges said:
def25e3ac5342c1a.png
Anyway, here's what I had to say very recently about the field of ACT in a recent blog draft that likely will never be released
I'm just coming here to speak up in defense of skew-monoidal infinity categories. Their time will come :triumph:
Joshua Meyers (Aug 01 2024 at 13:18):I made some minor changes to the wording in response to feedback here, mainly on the "anxiety" page, as well as adding a new page explaining what I mean by "we".
Here is a diff for the anxiety page so you can see what I changed (this diff page is not available from any links on the website and will soon be removed): https://meygerjos.com/anxiety-diff
Click on the first "we" to see the "we" page.
David Michael Roberts (Aug 01 2024 at 13:35):For what it's worth, I will point to someone who had successfully established a mathematical consultancy business, even if it is using mathematics you might not yourself be leaping to use: John D. Cook. The specifics of the mathematics and the kinds of clients it seems he might have are not the point, but the dedication and client-focused attitude that he's worked really hard to establish as part of his reputation.
Compare these endorsements https://www.johndcook.com/blog/endorsements/ to your own position https://meygerjos.com/research or https://meygerjos.com/consultation
Please take this in the best possible spirit of hoping you are successful in your mathematical career. I haven't commented publicly much on specifics, but you seem to be willing to take what seems like hard advice in good faith. I certainly offer it in such a way.
Joshua Meyers (Aug 01 2024 at 13:43):Yes I understand that I won't get as many clients this way, but I am only intending to work part-time anyway. Just a few good clients would be enough. Besides, applied category theory doesn't really lend itself to quick results, it is a long process by nature, and I don't want to either a) advertise falsely or b) end up doing "applied category theory lite" where I call it applied category theory but really it's more like "category-themed applied math".
Matteo Capucci (he/him) (Aug 04 2024 at 08:55):Joshua Meyers said:
I made some minor changes to the wording in response to feedback here, mainly on the "anxiety" page, as well as adding a new page explaining what I mean by "we".
Here is a diff for the anxiety page so you can see what I changed (this diff page is not available from any links on the website and will soon be removed): https://meygerjos.com/anxiety-diff
Click on the first "we" to see the "we" page.
You say
the attitude is well-represented in the community (especially among influential community members), such that even those who do not personally hold the attitude have to deal with it in others, and such that major community decisions commonly reflect the attitude
which still elevates you to a spokeperson of the ACT community, which you are not, despite being a member I respect.
IMO the correct to proceed would be to (1) claim things in your personal name, using I and (2) say you personally spoke with other people that share your views and concerns, without claiming they are a majority or influential, maybe linking to other people's content that agrees with what you say.
Matteo Capucci (he/him) (Aug 04 2024 at 08:58):Like, you are putting together many things different people did talk about, but the narrative seems entirely yours, especially re restricting access to ACT a la AGI doomers. I don't agree with that and I have never heard anybody else talking about it.
Matteo Capucci (he/him) (Aug 04 2024 at 08:59):Instead, I've heard (and I share) other's people concerns that this might harm the perception of the ACT community, and that you shouldn't entitle yourself to zeitgeist interpreter.
Ryan Wisnesky (Aug 04 2024 at 16:05):In psychology there is a phenomenon where one gets better results influencing people's behavior if one phrases communication in terms of "I" rather than "You": I feel bad when dinner goes cold vs you make dinner go cold by coming home late. You-messages immediately put the other person on the defensive. Similarly, with a "royal we" the audience is immediately put on the defensive: do they self-identify as part of your "we" or not? As a matter of scientific writing, unless you are referring to a group of authors of size > 1, 'we' creates more ambiguity than it clarifies. (fwiw I also find polemics off-putting in a professional context, but support free speech rabidly)
Joshua Meyers (Aug 04 2024 at 17:33):I'm starting a weeklong meditation retreat with no tech access except in emergencies. I'll address these comments afterwards. Feel free to keep commenting if you want and I'll catch up on everything after the retreat. I just did a Google search for "applied category theory" and my website didn't come up in many pages so I don't think you'll have to worry much about my website harming the perception of the ACT community. The vast majority of the traffic to my site actually seems to have been coming from this very thread