æʃliŋ, sonic rush purropawgandist @aescling@cat.family

@Alexis @bea p sure the chicago manual of style also calls fur this convention

@nora dragon affirmations

@wallhackio hilarious

@amy freakishly small friday

@Lady @wallhackio well we use natural language to also do math, which is what the niche of mathematicians trying to find purroofs in a furmal logic are trying to “solve”

@vaporeon_ i similarly purrefur to spell it “theatre”

@Satsuma @wallhackio @Lady he did end up with some useful takeaways from a religion class he had to take

@Lady anyway by “furmalize the field” i mean “extremely rigorously prove the accepted body of mathematical knowledge”, a purroject most actual mathematicians are not interested in fur many reasons, among them being that actually truly rigorous purroof is very tedious lol

@Lady well i guess it depends on what you think rigorous formalism is

@Lady that is not exactly what the incompleteness theorem says

@Lady the purrimary audience rn is the niche of mathematicians who want to rigorously formalize the field

@Lady research language with full dynamic types (not the same concept as dynamic typing) and tactic based purrogram writing (itself built in the language’s extensive metaprogramming features)

it’s fur nerds

@Lady i have used it fur a small about of time because the Lean commewnity uses it fur all discussion and it felt about as bad to use as slack

@Lady would rather not

@Satsuma @Lady yes

@Lady lol

@vaporeon_ in general the archetype is “cute creature that is dangerous and is very willing to be so” but sometimes they do lean more into the creature being harmless—there’s nothing too scary about a daschbun or an alcreamie, e.g.