In the first part of this talk, I made the case that theory is useful because it allows us to find (or at the very least, have the correct toolkit and language to explore) solutions to real-world problems. In this part, we are going to look at some examples of such problems and develop mathematical language to be able to discuss them more abstractly. I’ve put the term “real-world” in quotes in the title, because I’m going to be talking about these problems in a lot of generality. However, I want to stress that specific instances of these problems are actually relevant in industry, and I think it’ll be easy to see why once I start talking about them.

The year 2024 was a really bizarre year for me, writing wise – while I had work come out in a relatively high-profile venue, and I finally started blogging again, I didn’t produce much in terms of “literary work”, and definitely did not write any creative works that I would consider to be publishable, which kinda sucks. I made some progress on some essays I hope to finish this year, wrote a few poems, and… I think that was it???? I was very academically focused in 2024 though, so it makes sense. I did do lots of academic writing, created some didactic/informational texts, and wrote some more informal stuff on this blog, so maybe in terms of pure wordcount I wrote more than I do most years. So I guess I still wrote, but the form and content of what I was writing shifted.

I write across multiple genres, but my main genre is Creative Nonfiction, which writers typically refer to as “CNF” for short. Unfortunately, I always end up having to explain what CNF is to people, because the common view of nonfiction seems to be that it’s entirely comprised of informative texts and academic essays (with maybe the occasional memoir slipped in).

Earlier today I was thinking about this, and I thought it would be really funny to place various types of “nonfiction writing” on a graph with labelled axes to prove my point. I present to you the “Nonfiction Spectrum”. On one axis, we have how “accessible” or easy to understand the text is; on the other, we have how “artistic” the presentation of the text is.

Here’s another roundup of some interesting things I’ve come across lately and would like to talk about! As always, I’m sure there’s some great stuff I read but cannot for the life of me remember.

This one is extremely late, since I’ve been incredibly busy and finding time to write has been hard. I think I looked at some of this stuff back in… November? October? Oops. I’ve decided I want to keep these to only 4–5 items per post, so more posts should be coming shortly! There are definitely other things I’ve looked at that I want to talk about.

I just finished a blog post where I discuss things I’ve recently learned about how to read research papers. I almost included this as a point in that post, but I think it’s important enough to warrant its own article.

Here’s the idea: you absolutely should not be reading the sections of a research paper in order.

It took me a while to learn this one – I can’t remember if I first read this advice somewhere, if someone told it to me, or if I reverse-engineered it from advice I got about how to write papers. It doesn’t matter which one came first, really – my point is that I only found this out in a roundabout way through googling and trial and error and harassing people with questions.