HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

It is absolutely marketing talk, there's other established terms for what that means but they elected to make up other terms. Perhaps they should take the lesson from this talk where they explicitly break down this exact term and explain what they REALLY mean in common terms.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOl4E8x3fmw

⬐ rtb

> there's other established terms for what that means

Please could you expand on this?

Regarding duality - obligatory meijer reference - this time on async and observables. main point: any one design could very well be isomorphic to a whole range of options in the design space - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOl4E8x3fmw&feature=youtu.be...

⬐ enord

Also regarding duality - just because there is a proof of duality between designs it does not follow that they design the same thing at all.

Classic example from CT: In sets (well, the category of sets and maps but still...), the cartesian product is dual to the disjoint union (sum type, variant record etc.) From this, anything proven about cartesian products (which is a lot, as it is fundamental to most of set-theory) proves something about the disjoint union through the duality. What it actually proves about disjouint unions is open to interpretation on a proof by proof basis.

Which is to say: The consequences of duality are rich and powerful, but they are often non-obvious and for systems with many moving parts almost certainly non-trivial.

⬐ platz

Good point