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.
Yes, I am a bit less excited by the fact that I tried DMing and Mailing Jakob Hansen and I did not get any reply. I would really like to collaborate on this, since I'm working on something with a lot of overlap, but a different POV.
I hope so! I really do not know them, I am not even sure they are connected with the ACT crowd. But they really should, I can bet this kind of work is going to be of capital importance in a few years
Cohomology (and other techniques relying on internal logic) are the key insight, imho, for network optimization given what you want to put on the net
E.g. you can ask questions such like "I want this thing to hold, give me all the network topologies for which this is true", or "Given a network topology, find me the biggest subobject of my assignment for which this thing that I want is true".
I can definitely imagine real life applications of this. I think that network analysis software, n years from now, will rely on this sort of machinery.
Rongmin Lu said:
They're not on here, but I've seen Ghrist around on Twitter interacting with the ACT crowd. He's an algebraic topologist interested in applications.
He followed me back on Twitter, but didn't answer to my DMs. Most likely he forgot DMs exist, as I often do. Then I tried mailing him, I hope he'll reply
Rongmin Lu said:
Yeah, there definitely seems to be potential. They seem to be able to model lying, which is something.
You say "lying", I say "sybil nodes in a consensus protocol". You see what I'm hinting at? :slight_smile:
;)
Lol