Hi, author here. Thanks for the feedback! I'll take a look at the article tonight and go through the comments and update the post based on the comments.
Thanks for the feedback! I'll likely be editing part 1 to include the feedback so far from the commenters as well. If there's a specific statement or analogy that felt especially confusing, please point it out and I'll clarify it in the post.
Thanks for the feedback, I totally agree that monads are not containers. From an OOP perspective, they have some properties that make them, in some sense, sorta like containers, e.g., they contain a value like the Maybe monad. I still agree that they are not simply containers. I can clarify this in a revision to part 1 soon.
Thanks for the feedback! I didn't expect my post to garner a lot of attention. I am totally ok with rewriting part 1, potentially to make it more concise to prevent confusion (wow, this post is super long, monads must be complex!) is what I'd like to avoid.
I can reproduce the double line issue in part 2, this was my mistake and I missed it as part of my editing process. I'll delete part 2 while I make the corrections.
Thanks for the feedback! I can definitely rename the post soon as a first step, although this may require rewriting a chunk of the article to more accurately reflect the fact that List is a monad, and not "a" list.
I could make this distinction in part 3 (not written yet) although I want to balance not misleading readers, but not overcomplicating it too early on.
Hi, I completely agree. "A" list isn't inherently a monad, and that is where my metaphor starts to fall apart a bit (my post title furthers this issue.)
I can clarify this earlier in part 1 or 2 instead of in to-be-written part 3.
I also wonder if "Kitty Litter/Zeolite" was read without context in the white-paper, i.e., any type of kitty litter rather than specifically the inorganic kind.
I could _maybe, maybe_ see self-hosted GitHub runners inside of VMs running on developer machines. The VMs would have to be re-created after every request however.
I don't think this is a great idea, however, as now CI is dependent on my flaky laptop's wifi/internet connection/IP address, has the potential to be contaminated by something running on my machine, build logs can be modified, environment shape/architectures are all different and can't be easily controlled, I now have access to all of the CI secrets and can impersonate the CI, etc.
How much better is the turn taking relative to two humans, when, for example, ordering a pizza? Human to human interaction has a non-zero false turn taking false positive score in my experience.