For me it’s probably speech therapy and everything pertaining to that. I’m yet to encounter someone on here who is one apart from me (in training).
What about you?
If it was general public I’d say D&D or Linux, for sure. On Lemmy, I guess I would say Pathfinder 2e and Kubernetes.
Hong Kong. I live there. There are a few of us here and there, but outside of the c/hongkong I’ve seen like 2.
Hey, I have very vague memories of being there. There are some photos of me being there, but honestly I can’t even recognize the kid in the photo that is supposedly me lol. I have an uncle from HK, he’s in the US now, just as with most of my relatives on the paternal side are also in the US. Me on the other hand was from mainland China. I still have relatives on the maternal side in mainland China, they’ve been on the US immigration waitlist for a decade now, and honestly, with current politics, they might never get approved lol. (And I’m not sure they want to come, they have better jobs than my parents ever did when they left… well see when the time comes. My cousins would probably exceed age 21 by then, so they can’t come with the aunts and uncles.)
The most I remember about HK is the 纜車 and 輕鐵. Also HK TV Shows are like 10x better than anything of the mainland stuff lol.
Computer programming.
Joking! There’s no way in hell that’s true around here. I’m pretty sure some of you guys could code The Matrix.
My specialist subject would probably be 90s UK Indie bands.
I work in Web dev so there’s that. But also the roman empire and etymology.
We live in a tiny house in the forest.
my niche would probably be blue jay, chipmunk,and squirrel, behaviour. I spend a lot of time with a lot of forest animals. But those three consume about 80% of that time.
Me.
Also, my cat.
Graded Modal Dependent Type Theory, but that’s mostly because only “dozens of” people know it exists.
What kind of grading do you give there? I guess the modal part is about the contexts for the type theory, but it has been some time I have looked into it.
I think “graded” in the name is there in contrast to “quantitative” type theory, which doesn’t have modalities/quantities at the type-level.
The “modal” is borrowed from modal logic. If you pick the correct semiring, you can recover linearity and affine-ity and the other substructural logic pieces.
The quantitative semiring I’ve been working with is
0, 1, ?, n, +, *, which I think will let me use static analysis to do very precise non-strictness and precise/early resource tracking/release. (But, my progress is so slow, that if this were an academic project, I don’t think I’d be getting any more grant funding.)I see, having modalities on type level makes sense as a grading, alike the grading of e.g. polynomial rings.
So you are going along the line of linearity and affine-ity? What kind of stuff are you working out?
https://gitlab.com/bss03/grtt is my published code. But, I have far more intuitions that I need to write code for than finished code.
While evaluating something well-typed under a context, the heap: does not need to contain a value for a binder with modality 0, must contain a single, strict value for a binder with a modality 1, must contain a single, lazy closure for a binder with a modality of ?, must contain multiple references to a shared, strict value for a binder with a modality n, must contain at least a single reference to a strict value for a binder with a modality of +, must contain at least a single reference to a lazy closure for a binder with a modality of *. Since the typing rules propagate the modalities to subterms precisely, we should be able to identify the exact point a closure must be forced to a value (or dropped) before runtime. That’s in addition to being able to compile linear functions to heap updates, eliminating at least some allocations.
There’s some similarities with both the exact-use-count and relevant-or-erased semirings, but I think some things (e.g. around sums) are hard/awkward/impossible to type and the ?/+/* modalities make some make things easier while still allowing the abstract machine to know exactly when to “optimize the heap” based on a runtime flow that “activates” a particular static analysis.
Of course, it’s still MLTT “compatible” – anything that would type-check in MLTT should type-check in my variation of GRTT by “simply” using the
*modality everywhere – so you get full proofs-as-programs and a total language.I’m probably a bit off in the weeds, but it still makes my brain buzz to think about and occasionally I’ll make progress. I’ve been a little bit distracted with https://gitlab.com/bss03/nested which should allow me to write the abstract machine as a fold, but as proven to be place I can also put a lot of programming time into (again, with sporadic real progress).
Interesting. Do you have some specific goal in mind? Like, implementing a language/library for the GRTT stuff.
Sure, eventually, I’d like a language with Haskell-ish syntax to compile to Linux x86_64 and webassembly and use the language to make better software. If my language existed today, I’d probably work on writing my own ActivityPub software, and improve/port https://github.com/NARBEHOUSE/Ben-s-Software- because my father might want it soon.
Maths. There are at least a few of us though.
Bread baking might also be a contender, based on recent data.
I always liked making bread when I was younger, but I hadn’t made any in about 10 years and tried a bread maker recently that someone gave us.
Why do I feel like it’s so much harder to make in a bread maker. Just throwing it on a pan seems so much easier for me.
New things are hard? And not all bread makers are well designed imo (my biggest personal complaint was with one that wanted to be too compact).
Though take this with a grain of yeast, I have limited mechanized bread maker exposure as well.
What’s your favourite bread recipe if you have one?
By far lion house rolls.
Hello, what branch of math are you specialized at? Algebra, Analysis, or Geometry?
Combinatorics! Especially algorithmic stuff.
Oh, is algorithmic complexity part of combinatorics, or am I missing the mark? I would love to hear more about the kind of combo you do!
Sometimes! Counting is combinatorics, occasionally counting the steps can be a quite interesting, combinatorial task. Other times combinatorics is about playing a game, like a rubix cube, and trying to find clever ways to win.
So, for me, lots of playing with abstract systems. Some code, some proofs, and a surprising amount of linear algebra.
Ohh, playing with abstract systems, sounds nice! Also who can forget linear algebra in any math >.>
Smart metering solutions
Probably volleyball. I’m not an expert, but I did play and I feel like most of you don’t know anything about it. I’m sure there are exceptions.
I feel like most of you don’t know anything about it (volleyball).
That is true, but I didn’t mean to make it so obvious.
I frequently tripped on my robe and my beard. I believe I was not an asset to my team.
Fandoms here are scarce so I’m gonna go and say I probably know more about Five Nights at Freddy’s than the average Lemmy user
Education: Specifically how to work with and teach people with special needs.
My hometown: History, legends and geography.
Diving: A lot about physiology, gases, underwater species.
Unimportant fun facts: No idea why but I tend to remember all the useless stuff i read
Chemistry, physics, engineering, safety systems, and AI.
Telecommunications network operation
You and me both mate.
Picture related
Wireless telecoms is no better. Out installation on the right, the competitions on the left.
I don’t think the average lemming scuba dives as there’s a pretty small scuba community here.
