Post #2668008

@mc@mathstodon.xyz Not that it doesn't go both ways, but it's funny how a set theory person trying to give a foundation for mathematics basically ignores computing? No mention of work on types, explicit mathematics, computability at all (there is a cite that doesn't appear to be referenced?). 2nd order arithmetic gets a nod at least (so transitively reverse maths). Maybe it's good work, I can't judge it on its own merits, but I'd be sceptical of anyone who wants to give "an antidote to godel"