WHYYYYY

higher observational type theory? sucks

why does it suck? i don' understand it.

Зафиксирую: HoTT is intensional even though it usually takes FunExt as an axiom or as a theorem, since it doesn't have UIP. UIP holds in set-theoretic models aka "types as sets" of ITT/HoTT, but not in simplicial/cubical-sets models (aka types are indeed 8-grpds, where every model deals with higher paths in its own fashion). In MLTT identity types are inductive type families (thus intensionality and 8-grpd structure) and UA allows to calculфte path spaces of higher inductives. ERR implies UIP since it allows to get definitional equality from an inhabitant of identity type (aka there is a witness of equality between term p of identity type Id_A(a,b) and refl(a)) . In homotopical interpretation UIP trivilizes higher paths ---> UIP + FunExt = extensionality and ERR also implies FunExt. Done.

от меня отписался некий сергей

сергей, вы гей

In my biased opinion, this is not going well by the grandiose standards I apply to everything.

he just like me fr fr

(за исключением того что он умный а я нет)

в принципе играет он настолько же странно как я

Я КУПИЛ КНИГУ НА НЕЙ НАРИСОВАН БУБЛИК

> How do I order this book in Canada?

ну ты дебил сука

> потом ко мне приезжает девушка и я уезжаю в израиль

many such cases

BACK TO THE ROOTS

(мое понимание HoTT находится на уровне 90х годов)

удивительно что люди писали статьи в 1996 году.

> Whatever you like. I’m not about to spend time arguing about language at that meta of a level!

But I will.

повесили в студенческом кафе картину Якоба, которую он сделал в Непале

музыка на фоне:

-Dude, I love you. I don’t know the fuck who you are. But… you’re crazy. I am inspired by you. 1AM and you’re still studying… like wtf
-Thanks, I guess. How many drinks have you had?