I’m well aware of who I am addressing. It seems you’re implying we should make special allowances for people depending on how popular they are. My entire point is that I won’t take someone at their name; I completely reject the idea of the “celebrity” programmer. Redux is pretty neat; IIRC it was a state store influenced by Elm and implemented in about 50 lines of JavaScript. But there are plenty of developers — even popular open-source contributors — who don’t have the same anti-intellectual position of rejecting CT because it isn’t “pragmatic”.

my point is exactly not how popular he is but how accomplished he is and how condescending he could be (since he is so popular and accomplished) and how gracious he is being to you. it's like those movies where someone is starting a fight (giving cause) with a person 10x their size and then the bigger person gracefully declining to batter - it should make you reconsider who's the protagonist...

So yes, you are exactly giving special treatment to someone you perceive to be of greater merit owing to their popularity.

Your position is that I should not argue against Dan Abramov because you perceive him to be relatively accomplished. This is an embarrassing point of view.

Burn your idols.

> who don’t have the same anti-intellectual position of rejecting CT because it isn’t “pragmatic”

Where are you getting anti-intellectualism, rejection of category theory, or a defense of pragmatism at the expense of either of those things? Who is this directed at?

Reading back up this thread, you're the only person referring to those, unless I'm missing an edit somewhere.

You had me worried for a moment; I also couldn't find where I had read that, so I thought either I had misquoted him or he had edited something.

But, no. Here it is: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18783434