1. 5
  1.  

  2. 2

    subtext from the same author looks interesting but nothing to really test

    1. 2

      I see statements like:

      We are skeptical of “expressive power” and “terseness”, which are often code words for making things more mathematical and abstract.

      which seems to conflate things that strike me as unrelated, as well as expressing a misunderstanding of mathematics. And this:

      Computer Science rejects simplification as a result because it is subjective.

      which seems just false (both in the notion that CS reject simplification, and in the notion that CS considers simplification subjective).

      When I see statements like that, I wonder who is writing, and who the intended audience is, because it’s not clear we’re even using words to mean the same things.