/sci/ - Science & Math

not rewarding the failing (and Sad!) NYT a click, especially not for such useless articles
I'm guessing it's a 3000-word screed about what is essentially "gender is a continuous variable between 0 and 1 rather than a discrete value".

>>12084354
Are you a bigot or something? Gender is at the very least a complex vector in infinite dimensions.

>>12084354
I skimmed it, couldn't even find anything of substance, not gonna waste my time looking harder

It's a NYTimes article that claims to contain useful and accurate math, it's per definition worthless.

did she really get a math degree, and waste her time writing this? Jesus, she jusf proved the opposite of what she was trying to promote...

>>12084338
>another person putting their expertises in something they shouldn’t
Why do people do this? This is why I actually advocate for geneds Atleast where you go see shit and what’s up with other majors. Make the math majors take a physics class etc

>>12084338
K. 1 gender + 1 gender = 2 genders. WOW MATH IS AMAZING.

God I fucking hate category theorists

>>12084338
I thought eugenia was redpill. Category theory is STILL based tho

>By relating personal stories, historical examples and mathematical analogies, Cheng manages to write a book that people will buy despite specialising in an obscure corner of mathematics no one gives a shit about.

>>12084517
How dare those old evil white men have a preference for young women!

>>12084338
That’s pretty based. Seems like she’s not saying much more than the fact feminism can’t exist as just a negation to maleness (which fourth wave seems to have forgotten) but with categories. Thanks for showing me, will read it.

>>12084517
what's the under-25 rule?

>>12084354
Well said

>>12084733
If she's under 25, you're a pedo

>>12084737
So famous men can't fuck up and coming models anymore? Doesn't seem sensible.

>>12084338
>one man - one penis = one woman
how did I do?

>>12084819
XY exists in more than a penis, now cut the rest of the body into 6 parts and bury it where nobody will find it.

>>12084827
shit, so it's not that easy? who would have possibly known

>>12084338
1 + 1 = 79

>>12084819
Finally, a proof that woman = 0

>>12084840
with magic of believing anything is possible, bigot.

41%

Bow did we go from mental disorder we're just trying to treat humanely, to it being "no they really are X instead of Y"?

>>12084338
So I see that Jazz finally got the nose job.

>>12084517
Why even bother dating when you’re these guys? You can just look for any girl you like in your current city on social media and send a message whenever your want to fuck

>>12084737
What's a pedo?

>>12085336
>Non male

>>12084338
I once saw this bitch speak. This privileged whore is what is wrong with modern mathematics and is proof that the cancer of politics and seep into anything, even mathematics. The only solution is a genocide.

>>12085336
woah so this is how the world works

>>12084338
>This is retarded...right?
you have no idea how stupid can the ideas of supposedly intelligent people be. sometimes they are retard-tier, just put in a sophisticated jargon
>>12084354
this

>>12084338
I didn't read the article, but I would boink her.

>>12085336
I was at a conference when she presented this.

>>12084368
What are you a bigot?!
>assuming there exists a fucking norm on the space of all genders
YOU DONT FUCKING DECIDE ON THE NORM YOU CIS TRASH

>>12085336
Where are the Jews in this diagram?

>>12084517
>>12084733
>>12084749
lol

>>12084503
I agree.
But category theory is great.

Here's the archive to stave nytimes from clicks
https://archive.is/IJ0PE

>>12085739
this is a sad graph. I wish men were better than this honestly.

>>12085739
there's a reason this graph ends at 50
past 50 the age of men women are attracted to lowers, while the age of women men are attracted to increases
the graph is homophobic anyways though because it assumes that everybody is straight

>>12085818
>I wish men were better than this honestly.
so you could exploit them well passed the wall? too bad so sad. clock is ticking. time is almost up to find chad.

>>12085830
no, I just want a man who would love me for life, not ogle a 22yo when we're both 40. it seems men are incapable of this

>>12084473
true if Gender is a functor and + is overloaded to fmap +
>>12085826
whatever you say schizo

>>12085844
well, i wanted a girl who would reciprocate the love and care i give her till the day we die. but that doesn't seem to exist. all i ever get paired with are sexy succubi.

>>12085844
Love and sex are distinct, you melodramatic cow. A man can love his wrinkly wife while satiating his carnal desires with a harem of 22-year-olds.

>>12084338
How can category theory tell us about gender?
what are the objects? what are the morphisms?

>>12085865
not her, but it doesn't work like that. monogamy is maximizing pair bonding.

>>12085874
It has worked like that for the elites of civilizations throughout history across every continent. Rulers almost always had a wife and many concubines.

>>12085879
and those marriages have a shit track record for a reason.

>>12085886
>Lifelong partner and 10+ children is a "shit track record"
Read a book puritan. If a man wanted to marry, they would go to some landowning father and request permission to marry their 15 year old daughter. Usually a payment was involved. If the father accepts, the woman is now the wife and is expected to bear many children. Additionally, a man could choose concubines with which to have children with. This happened usually once the wife could no longer bear children. These concubines were always acknowledged as second fiddle to the wife, and their children as below the wife's children. This worked. It still works. It will always work. Did you think the "woman are property" meme was just a meme? No, it's a call to return to biblical marriage. There is no evidence for "shit track record".
In fact, the modern sense of marriage where the woman, at the very edge of her childbearing age, can pick from dozens of suitors and can refuse to have children and can divorce the man for half he is worth, has a much shittier track record. Return.

>>12084338
>1+1=2

Story checks out.

>>12085336
lol wtf is this

>>12085934
i'm not saying now is better, monogamy is at an all time low but you were talking about rulers, so:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/8/130830-kings-execution-royalty-henry-kim-jung-un-north-korea/
quite a lot of stories of betrayal like these. the point is if you view romance as a kind of pair bond then monogamy is the only way to optimize it. you only have so much time and monogamy optimizes the effort you put into another.

>>12085336
the memes write themselves

>>12085934
seems like the total happiness of the couple is better in the modern scenario, vs being owned in the other scenario. you'd like to think you'd be the rare concubine owner, but you'd be the serf if you're on 4chan in modern times

>>12085980
you'd think that but the modern dating market is a complete disaster as i'm sure you're aware. very rare to find a truly loving couple, most are just in there temporarily because of sexual desire. i know one, and unlike most of the people on this secret laotian fingerprinting forum i actually have a lot of irl frens.

>>12084338
no you biggot. women can do math... if they are jews or asians

>>12084368
Gender is just like eigenstates in a silver space. It can be a superposition, such as traps. It is only us who decide to use as observables male and female. I suggest in the future we use observables "gay" and "not gay". I detect OP is gay with probability 100

>>12085718
Rich non-white males and Rich non-white non-males.

>>12086119
look white to me desu.

be nice

itt: brainlet tourists who don't understand a single bit of category theory
stick to the racebait threads, pol

>>12085980
>you'd like to think you'd be the rare concubine owner, but you'd be the serf if you're on 4chan in modern times
Literally anyone could have a concubine. Not just rulers. Serfs too. It was better.

>>12084338
>>As Cheng puts it: “If we object to the idea that ‘men are better,’ it’s not that helpful to declare instead that ‘women are better.’ It pits men and women against each other and sets up a prescriptive framework rather than a descriptive one.”
That part seems reasonable.
(I skipped to the end)

>>12084368
I like you fren

>>12086135
there is little practical value with this subject

>>12084338
Of course an Asian would use math.

>>12086318
topology, algebra

But just studying category theory for the sake of it, lmfao.

anytime i see 'gender' in a headline, i close the tab

>>12086318
look at this brainlet who wants applications

>>12086264
Do you think anyone here actually cares about what she wrote? About whether or not it's reasonable?
Or is gender talk just retarded liberal fuckery in their mind, not matter how sensible it may be?

>>12085336
Reminds me of a talk on categorical music theory I saw once.