I have this notion that the proof irrelevance modality ought to be logically equivalent to the composition of two distinct monads — just enough to cause it to not be idempotent — but I can't prove one direction of the equivalence I expect to hold.
I have this notion that the proof irrelevance modality ought to be logically equivalent to the composition of two distinct monads — just enough to cause it to not be idempotent — but I can't prove one direction of the equivalence I expect to hold.
-
(no subject)
Still watching "Hell on Wheels". The characters motivations frequently make no sense at all, but at least they killed off the by-far most annoying…
-
(no subject)
Watched some more "Hell on Wheels". Second season got dark fast.
-
(no subject)
Tried watching ep 1 of "Hell on Wheels", which my dad recommended. It has a vaguely Deadwood feel, although the dialogue doesn't obviously sparkle…
- Post a new comment
- 0 comments
- Post a new comment
- 0 comments