While that is an excellent book, I would say that it focuses on type theory from a somewhat more theoretical perspective than (say) TAPL which is more on type _systems_ from a programming languages perspective. Both are great reads though.

> By forcing you to make a decision without context.

Not the OP, but what would be the point to that? In any practical scenario there is always context, isnt it? I guess I don't quite get what we are trying to measure here.

What exactly is an "evangelical atheist" ?

At one point in the history of the Internet, it was synonymous with Redditor.

I don't think the OP is talking about usefulness at all, that is on a completely different dimension I would say.

> Not everybody has a body of beliefs that guides him.

Not the OP, but this got me curious. How does one reason about things if you have no axioms (i.e. "body of beliefs")? Are you using some non-axiomatic systems of reasoning or just saying that some people don't reason at all ?

Sure, axioms are the basis of our abstract thinking. But simply beeing aware of that basis allows you to change your perspective/abstraction towards stuff.

You dont have just one body of beliefs, you try to have a qualified take on all of them. This is where your question revolves around. Whats "a body of beliefs"? And is it open or closed?

Its the difference between aproaching realitiy heuristically (and never reaching a final answer, thus constantly revising your thinking) and just picking one set of beliefs/axioms/ideology and call it holistic, like religion does.

Its the way of the sceptic and imho the only way we should think ... or at least be aware of the heuristic nature of thinking.

I think I am confused by your comment in the context of Larry Sanger: are you suggesting that rationalwiki is incorrect and that Larry did not say any of the things quoted?

Only thing I know is a group of limp wristed keyboard warriors hate some people write a wall of text and try to "rationalize" why. The facts don't matter, only the tone does and it's full of impotent anger.

This is a natural product of how power works on the internet. Barring an algo that downgrades time spent, the people with the most power are proportionally the people who do the least things elsewhere.

I was clued into this when the BLM protests happened. When I poked into all the names of the protesters I could find who were present on-site, very few of them had day jobs.

That seems like a very interesting collection :) Do you have any recommendations for unusual or particularly interesting ones?

(I didn't notice the reply until now.)

I like Conor McBride's writing style. But a lot of the files are stuff I want to look at someday but don't have time to read or need more background before reading. I need to sort them out in Zotero, they aren't curated.

One thing that I did discover is that PhD theses are a great resource. They tend to have more exposition of background information - perhaps because they're intended for a wider audience. Papers often assume you've been working in the field for a while and will assume you're already familiar with notation, terms, and results from the field.

I'm reading through Jesper Cockx' thesis, because I'm interested in how pattern matching is translated to eliminators, and Sebastian Ulrich's thesis, because I want to know how Lean4 works. My current goal is to learn how dependent typed languages are implemented and write a self-hosted dependent typed language, but I have little spare time and keep getting side-tracked.

Given that the "First Amendment" is purely a US thing, and applies only to the Government curbing speech, I am not sure how much of this really applies anywhere else and in any other context?

Not altogether sure what this has to do with the article and/or the raid?

I vaguely remember doing similar things with Matlab, but it has been a while and I don't recollect fully.