Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by reinman 1455 days ago
Categories are chains of morphisms

If you don't get that, maybe you missed something in your training

And yes it has everything to do with AI (not categories per se but the article)

2 comments

Categories are objects and morphisms with identities and composition, subject to some coherence laws characterizing identities and stating the associativity of composition. Category theory studies categories and related constructions, such as functors, natural transformations, adjunctions, (co)limits, universal properties, etc.

> And yes it has everything to do with AI

No, category theory is not about AI. My training was certainly sufficient for me to refute that connection, and the way you keep referring to my "training" rubs me the wrong way.

Categories are about composition. Crafting is also about composition - using inference rules. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_theory

The classic schematic representation of X Y Z shown on the above wiki page is basically a crafting rule to create Z. That is, if the AI knows about a "path" (think back to your homotopy training) from X and Y to Z then it can craft a Z from X,Y if it needs to

> it has everything to do with AI

Could you elaborate on this? What does it have to do with AI?

Do you have any Prolog background? Inference rules? Armstrong's axioms etc.?
For the laymen's in the audience such as myself can you answer the question.
(repost from similar question above)

Categories are about composition. Crafting is also about composition - using inference rules. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_theory

The classic schematic representation of X Y Z shown on the above wiki page is basically a crafting rule to create Z. That is, if the AI knows about a "path" (think back to your homotopy training) from X and Y to Z then it can craft a Z from X,Y if it needs to

Yes this is exactly reverse to how we normally think about the caller/callee relationship

I usually just upvote. But I'd like to take the time to thank you for responding. Have a good one.
HN skepticism is warranted and deserves decent answers