I'm Keith Ghostland. I'm Linda Quinlan. And this is All Things LGBTQ. We are taping this week on Wednesday, December 2nd. Anna's off for this episode, so you will have to put up with Linda and I, which means there will be no stories about Poland. We want to start by acknowledging that All Things is produced by Orca Media in Montpelier, Vermont, which is unseeded indigenous land. All righty. So should we have headlines? Absolutely. Okay, well then I'll start. Laverine Cox and her friend were attacked while walking in the park. Colorado Gay Governor Jared Polis and Polis and his partner test positive for COVID. The election in Florida for two senators, no, in Georgia for two senatorial seats will affect LGBT people in the United States. The runoff will be determining who controls the Senate and what gets prioritized in the next few years. Deb Prine, a pioneer columnist on LGBTQ issues dies at 62. Trans women in prison. Elliot Page, the star of Juno, comes out as transgender. We'll have more about that. And the LGBTQ marching band performed during the Thanksgiving Parade in New York City for the first time ever in history. Two lesbians of color named to the White House staff if they're confirmed. Funeral home that fired Amy Stevens who died last year is to pay $250,000 to her estate. As we recall, she was fired from a funeral home as a funeral home director when she told her boss that she was transitioning. Skyler Heath, 20, a transgender woman of color was murdered in Miami and her death is being investigated as a homicide. And another transgender woman of color, Che Meshia, has been killed in Virginia. Her car crashed and she was found dead inside. She'd been shot. I don't know what to say about all of this. It's just unbelievable. John Morris is remembered as a gifted writer and trans activist. She was 94. Her son said of his mother who was a famous travel writer that she is now on her greatest journey. Trump appointed judges and conversion therapy in Florida. We'll have more about that. And Rachel Maddow and I don't know if everybody heard this, but if you haven't, you can go on MSNBC and hear how she talks about her partner having COVID. And it was very moving spot on. And if you haven't seen it, I really suggest it's worth a listen. You might want to do that. And Billy Porter is to direct a trans teen rom-com called What If. And I think that's been, Keith will have to check with Keith too, but I think that was already a movie at one time or a play. But anyway, this will be his first directorial debut. So, Chris, so, Keith, what do you have? Okay, I think What If was... It was a play, I thought. It was a theater piece and Billy Porter is adapting it so that it will go now into a digital version. So, I want to start with a trivia question, which I didn't run past Linda before we started taping. So, let's see if she knows the answer. Gaetan Dugas. That name sounds familiar. If so, why? I also want to acknowledge that today would have been Matthew Shepard's 44th birthday. And as Linda will be sharing with you, the incident recently with Laverne Cox, even though there's a lot of work that's been done about bias and hate-motivated crimes in this current era of accelerated hate speech, we still have so much more work to do. I also want to talk some about local events. I want to put a notice out again about the time health forums that will be coming up. They will be virtual events rather than being centered on geographic regions. They will be focused on issues. So, as those notices come out, look to see if there's an issue that's of interest to you, and then we'll make sure you can get connected to the virtual meetings that happens. I'm going to talk a little bit about Barry and how in their effort to recognize racial injustice, they may have just done the opposite. We're going to talk a little bit about the Vermont Legislature and all women positions of leadership in the Senate and a new woman speaker of the House. I'm going to talk a little bit about some national events. I'm going to put out that Monday, December 14th, is when the Electoral College makes their official votes for who will be the next president. I'm going to do a follow-up on that California Supreme Court. Exactly what happened, who he is, and the significance of it. I also want to talk a little bit about the U.S. Supreme Court and a recent decision that they have made and what that might portend for the LGBTQ plus community and why we should be very concerned. And then I have just enclosing a brief recognition of an international event that will be of interest to our regular viewers. So, Linda. All righty. Well, I have, oh, I wanted to tell you that Becca Ballant made the national news as head of, I saw it in the advocate, so that's pretty good. And so I have now a clip that is called Born to Be, which follows the work of Dr. Jess at Mount Sinai Medical Center for Trans-surgery. So here's the trailer. Human beings are complex. Everything, including gender, is represented by diversity.   You're fighting to feel comfortable in your own skin. And that's just like that home. And then you have to go outside and you have to like fight a whole another battle. When you see yourself, what do you see that? Maybe you be interested in changing. Not every patient wants to have a surgical transition.  You don't have to have surgery. I see a subset of the transgender population, only those patients who desire transitional surgery. Goodbye to the space. She has this internal image of herself that is very mismatched to her external appearance. We're just going to make her external face in her internal identity match. It's going to bring more to the table. It's going to bring a lot to the table, baby. Oh, yes. I mean, if they call today, they won't get an appointment for a year. Don't get on the waiting list. How could there be 400 patients? Oh my god, we need so much help. Insurance is giving me a hard time about some of the notes, not medically necessary, cosmetic, deferred, and I delay. I had to cancel two vaginal classic cases because I was definitely ill. And if we cancel them, how are we going to find time to do that surgery? We're booked six months in advance. Remember, this is a work in progress. Oh my gosh. And I love it. And I love it. And I love it. And I love it. There isn't a way for surgeons to learn now. There's no formalized training program. There are no standards. This is a new operation. We're inventing this. You're pioneering. It's amazing, Dr. Jane. I'm ready. Nervous? Yeah. Are you? I deserve any healthy and happy life, just as anyone else does. I cannot, like, I can't, I can't express how happy I am. You're going to be very grateful to have you here today. And then we have the Salvation Army. Has it really changed? They say they have that they are no longer discriminating against LGBTQ people. I don't know if we should take them at their word or not. I see Keith shaking his head. Maybe he'll have a commentary on that. But they have never said whether or not they were against or for conversion therapy. And I'd like them to answer that question. The Supreme Court and Indiana, I'm going to talk a little bit more about that. And David Dinkins, a former mayor of New York City from 1990 to 1993, was an LGBTQ advocate and he has died over the last few days. Lynn Conway, a tech pioneer who worked for IBM 40 years ago was fired when she transitioned. IBM has apologized better late than never, I guess. And so we'll talk a little bit about Laverne Cox. Well, she and a friend, and she didn't say who the friend was, were, and she started in, or she started and starred in Orange is the New Black, among other things. And she was walking with a friend in an LA park when they were assaulted. A man approached them and aggressively asked them for the time. Then asked, are you a guy or a girl?  The men, the man then started to attack the woman. They were just socially distancing walking. Laverne called 911 and the man ran away. And so as far as I know, they still don't have him or know who he is. And Debra Prince, a pioneering columnist on LGBTQ issues dies at 62. Debra Prince or Debra Price? Debra, is it Price? Yes, Debra Price, I'm sorry. And she died at 62. She had the first column on LGBTQ issues to be nationally syndicated to mainstream outlets. Her wife, Joyce Murdoch, said she died of intersyndio pneumonia, which is an autoimmune illness. And if I might add, in 2000, Debra and Joyce came to Vermont to be one of the first couples to enter into a civil union. And the then justice of the peace from Plainfield, Vermont may have been the person who officiated for them. Well, there's some local trivia that of historic value. And I assume she was a very nice person. Yes, very nice. And then there's this, the trans woman says she has been sexually assaulted 14 times in a Georgia prison. Ashley Diamond won a historic settlement in 2016. But when she had a parole violation and was sent back to prison, things were exactly the same, she said. So she's being, she's still being assaulted and refused medication she needs. Georgia is again being sued. Hello. Elliot Page, the star of Juno, comes out as transgender. Porter, Elliot's wife is a dancer and said that trans people are a gift to the world and pledges to support them through this transition. Page, star of movies like Juno and Inception, revealed their news yesterday saying I am transgender. My pronouns are he and they and my name is Elliot. Page and Porter were married in 2018. A very brave move for him. Two lesbians of color named to the White House communications staff by President-elect Biden are Karine Jean-Pierre, who is a Black, and will be Principal Deputy Press Secretary and Peely Tobah, a Latinx, will be Deputy White House Communications Director. So I'm really excited about the diverse cabinet that Biden has put together so far. It's very impressive. There are a few that I could talk about at some other point who are to Wall Street or corporation associated, but that's another story and we'll get to that at another time. And Trump appointed judges, fine conversion therapy ban unconstitutional. A federal appeals court blocked enforcement of two Florida laws banning the use of conversion therapy in minors saying that it violated free speech. So well now go to Keith who will have some local news. That's really distressing about the conversion therapy and that they were trying to base their decision on free speech versus the religious exemption which most other states have been putting in place. But let's go to Barry, our own backyard, where following the death by police of George Floyd, Councilwoman Erica Reel made a proposal that the city fly the Black Lives Matter flag in city park. There was resistance and they have been debating this issue since then. They have just decided that in a compromise move that what they would do is fly a different flag each month for the next 24 months. They then retracted that proposal and said no what they were going to be doing is flying the or displaying the Black Lives Matter flag for the month of December and then in January they are going to display the thin blue line flag. If the intent was to highlight the racial injustice inequity that was clearly demonstrated by the murder of George Floyd, this succession of flags would seem to undo that. So and I did not see where the council was taking this issue back up or if it was under reconsideration. As Linda has pointed out, the new configuration in our Vermont legislature has gotten some national recognition particularly with the nomination and what will look like the certain election of Becca Ballant as the president pro tem of the Vermont Senate. What we should keep in mind about our upcoming legislative session, they will be meeting the first Tuesday in January but they're looking at it being a virtual event that the cases of COVID are skyrocketing here. They cannot bring that many people into one place at one time to conduct all of the ceremonial processing as has been done usually. So for some of the functions, the House will be meeting at the Berry Auditorium. The Senate will continue to meet at the State House because there are only 30 members they can spread them out. But what they're predominantly looking at doing is the same protocol that they had used last year which is all of the committee work and the floor debate will be virtual events so that we can go in via the legislative website and watch all hearings as they're happening. One of the advantages to this is that all of these will be taped. So if there were two hearings that you wanted to watch they're occurring at the same time, you can watch one live, one of the taped one or you can always go back in and look at the archive tapes. What we are going to be missing though is the direct constituent interaction with legislators. You know you're not going to be able to sit in the cafeteria and have casual conversations or have an informal discussion about you know such as the older Vermonters bill that went through during the last session. You know here are the limitations on the language you're using and how the LGBTQ plus and underrepresented communities might be excluded and be able to work out some compromising outside of the formal process. However if you have testimony you want to provide they will make arrangements for you to testify virtually in the committee hearing. Also looking at the house it looks as though Jill Krowinski will be the next speaker of the house. She will again be a woman speaker this will be the I believe the fourth woman speaker in Vermont legislative history and the majority leader is they believe will be Emily Long who is from New Thing. So in the Senate both Beck is the president pro tem, Allison Clarkson is the majority leader, Cheryl Hooker as the party whip, all women in positions of leadership the same is looking to be coming true in the house as well. So Vermont is doing some very interesting things. So I'm going to let it go back to Linda and then I'll come back and talk a little bit about some national stuff and then my final international reference. All right I just have one story left that I was going to talk about which is about the Supreme Court review of an Indiana case on parenthood of homosexual couples is a case we have to watch in case it makes its way to the Supreme Court. Eight lesbian couples who use sperm donors to have children are fighting the state of Indiana to have their parenthood recognized on the birth certificate of their children. In the petition box, in the petition box versus Henderson asked whether a state consistent with the 14th amendment due process may adopt a biology based on a birth certificate system when heterosexual couples use a sperm donor the husband is always considered the father. So this will be very interesting and this is one of these cases and you know as Keith talked about too these are the cases that are going to try to start to whittle away at our rights and they're going to come up more and more and more in different states and so this is one to watch you know like if you adopt it if if you're a heterosexual couple and you adopt a child the person the adopted parents become the parents if there's a sperm donor in a heterosexual relationship even though the father didn't give the sperm he's still on the birth certificate considered the father so it would seem to me that this wouldn't that this would apply to also to gay couples but we'll see um and so we'll watch it. Keith? Actually I had that case listed to bring up talking about the U.S. Supreme Court because they are taking it up. Oh they are okay and and one of the commentaries was you know this was the case that was originally filed in Indiana in 2017 and in the past the U.S. Supreme Court has deferred taking up cases similar to this deferring to the state courts because what happens on birth certificate is a state decision however now that they have that new justice on the court. What's her name? Amy Conan Barrett. They clearly see this as an opportunity to start chipping away at those LGBTQ rights that have been granted looking at as Alito and Clarence Thomas have referenced trying to undo marriage equality. The premise in this case is called presumption of parenthood and in Vermont it should not be as much of an issue because when we redid the parenting statutes these were some of the issues that we were dealing with. However where my concern is coming from is a decision that recently came out of the U.S. Supreme Court and it was a case that was came out of New York and it was filed by the Catholic diocese and the Orthodox Jewish community particularly in Brooklyn and it was in response to Governor Cuomo's COVID restrictions that houses of worship could only have 25 people and look how that went and the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the religious freedom saying that it was unconstitutional but they also gave an indication about how future arguments may need to be crafted. They were saying that one of the reasons they were deeming it to be unconstitutional is because the governor had specifically identified homes, communities of worship rather than a public gathering restriction. Because he made it specific to houses of worship that's what they said was unconstitutional. The other case that's coming up that we really need to watch is Fulton versus the city of Philadelphia and this is the Catholic social services agency that contracts with the city of Philadelphia to look for foster parents and to place children in their homes and they have categorically refused to consider LGBTQ plus foster parents. So what the city of Philadelphia did is withdrew their federal funding because they were not in compliance with Philadelphia's non-discrimination statutes. The case before the Supreme Court is going to be if they do or not have the right to discriminate and still qualify for federal funding and we know how the current administration is supporting this piece of legislation at this court case. The other case that was argued on Monday is about the census and people know that Governor Scott appointed me to Vermont Census Commission so I've been very attentive to census related issues. This is from the current administration asking that undocumented immigrants be removed from the census count. Now the U.S. Constitution says it's a complete count of everybody. They did not qualify citizenship status or any other criteria. Everyone gets counted and that is what the reapportionment is based upon. That means if the current administration can get these undocumented immigrants removed states such as New York and California which are traditionally Democratic states would lose seats in the U.S. House of Representatives so they have a large investment in seeing that the undocumented get removed from those census numbers. Now I'm a little confused about how exactly what they're going to use for an algorithm to decide who is undocumented because we did not include citizenship questions on the current census. Maybe if you have a name they'll decide you know. Well the census is aggregate numbers. Your name is not included. Your name only shows up and I want to say it's 50 years after the fact. Until that point in time it's sealed. Nobody can get at it. So we were kind of part of the conversation was are these people who were being held for deportation or there was something already happening that identified an undocumented status so they were going to reduce an aggregate count from an aggregate count. There wouldn't be a matching of individuals. It would just be numbers minus numbers. The other concern as we get closer to inauguration is what seems to be a slash and burn strategy.  And some of the things that has been occurring is within the Department of Justice and within the intelligence community. They're taking the classified career members and making them exempt employees which means that the current administration could merely say your services are no longer required. You can leave now so that the incoming administration would lose all of that historical knowledge about how things work and what they're also going to also would lose is a clear documentation of and this are the things that were done during the current administration. So you wouldn't know what it is you needed to fix because there would be nobody there to tell you. One of the other things and this is the one that just makes you shake your head spy planes. Yeah the current admit yeah Linda loved this one we talked about this before we started taping. The current administration withdrew from the international agreement that allows all of the developed nations with nuclear weaponry to fly reconnaissance missions to track what each other is up to. So not only did the current US administration withdraw from that agreement they're in the process of dismantling the only two spy planes that can do this. I know it boggles the mind doesn't it? Well and it's at this point that the theater of the absurd comes in but the last piece that I found truly distressing is that the current administration is accelerating their youth of the death penalty. Oh yeah and they have five people slated for execution before the inauguration. One will be the first woman who has been executed in over 70 years and everyone else are men of color but what is truly insidious is they expedited a policy revision that said barring anything in state statute that would prohibit it that you are not merely restricted to using a lethal overdose you could also opt to use electrocution hanging or a firing squad. I have no further comment but to leave you on a much more happy note Sven and Nathan remember them? If I mentioned that they were a gay couple who lived at the Australia Sea Life Sydney Aquarium and two years ago they made a nest and the handlers at the aquarium gave them an egg that they hatched. Laura is now two years old happy birthday Laura but what the handlers have said is that you know Sven and Nathan were such good parents that it is practiced within the aquarium that penguins who have multiple eggs and they will only nurture one or if there's an egg that's neglected they will give it to nests that have no eggs so Sven and Nathan have just become parents again and Laura who is now two years old has her own nest and egg and is about to become a mother which will make Sven and Nathan grandparents. That's amazing. Isn't that great? I love that. And I think it was fun that we've been around long enough to follow Sven and Nathan and we may have to start a fan club. I know and Anne will be disappointed she didn't get to tell that story but you know no when she comes back you know Laura may have hatched the egg so she can then report on that so going back to our trivia question. Before you get to that I just wanted to make a comment about like you know these law you know these people going to the supreme court and you know we have to keep in mind the same thing we did you know like if you look at abortion now it's virtually impossible to get one in many states in quite a few states and it's the same whittling way of rights that you know we've seen this now we know how this works we really really really need to stay on top of this and and somehow um and I don't know how but be really aware make sure you know what's going on and fight back in any ways that we can because this is really important and it's going to be and these things are going to be going to the supreme court now for the next two knows how long so I think what they've shown us is that when it becomes an issue of public welfare or civil rights versus religious freedoms right that as a court they're going to be ruling on the side of religious freedoms which means that we have much more work that we need to be doing in our own backyard to ensure that protections are in place and that those protections when we draft them and when they're passed as legislation we've acknowledged the potential for a challenge based upon religious freedoms and we have taken steps to respond to that absolutely so our trivia question about gaitan dugas did you remember the name no would it help if I also made reference to monday december first was world aids day gaitan dugas was referenced in randy schultz's book and the band played on as patient zero now here is the back story that most people don't take the time to find out randy schultz was an investigative journalist in san francisco and when hiv and aids really became prevalent he started doing some research you know how long had this been around what was the cdc response you know what were they missing why didn't we count and he started looking at records from you know the departments of health and gaitan dugas was in the california numbers but he wasn't referenced as patient zero oh he was actually patient oh and oh referencing he was out of state he was not a california resident and what randy was trying to point out and it wasn't that he was trying to say that gaitan was the first person and this is who brought hiv and aids to our community what he was trying to show was how the cdc didn't do their work that he was able by virtue of what we now call contact tracing was able to identify gaitan in multiple samples from multiple departments of health from across the country he was what would be called a vector transmission and if randy was able to do it why couldn't the cdc and for us looking at covet contact tracing is one and our vermont department of health does it exceptionally well and it is going to be one of the primary means by which to be able to identify spread and to effectively respond to it however looking at hiv and aids the epidemic isn't over there are estimated 1.2 million people living in the us who are hiv positive current estimate is one in seven may not even know that they're hiv positive there are over 40 000 new cases diagnosed each year highest rates of infection are in the south and that might explain why this is really a crisis not only for men who have sex with men people of color latinx the indigenous communities those people who do not have access to adequate health care and resources there is a new campaign called you you and it's not the unitarians this is the undetectable untransmittable campaign what they have found is that if you are taking the hiv suppressing retrovirals once you reached an undetectable level with your blood sample you can no longer transmit this sexually which really increases the need for outreach acknowledgement of who this is impacting in ensuring that services are extended to them the new the current administration did issue a statement on world AIDS day you won't be surprised to learn that we were not included or identified in that statement and although they say oh look at how wonderful we are they've taken hiv allocated moneys and redirected it to their immigration policies separating children from their parents they have closed down federally funding hiv resources and let's not forget this is the administration that fired all of the people on the federal hiv aids commission so with that linda i'm just like overwhelmed so we'll see you in two weeks do we have any we're going to have an interview show right we have an interview show coming up on December 12th we may have our first international interview with a brazilian author we are also looking at an interview with someone connected with the opera and we may be meeting one of those new out lgbtq plus vermont representatives all right so we'll see you in two weeks personally hopefully and we'll be back and in the meantime resist


Welcome back to the Tea of the Day. Today I've got a hibiscus and lemon along with some fresh mint leaves. Oh, this sucker is very delicious, I tell you what. You're not gonna need any actual sweeteners because the very power of hibiscus is enough. I haven't had it in a long time and this is surprising me just how powerful this is.  But if you're gonna drink it, I think you could even have one of the stronger teas in here with it. You possibly could try some tarragon if you like that kind of licorice berry balance or something else, but woo, it packs a fruity wallop.


Hello, I'm Niccolò and this is joint work with Tharmo from the University of Reykjavík and Anzal Berger from the University, from the Corporate Technique. And the starting point for our work was the definition of the notion of closed-category, which was introduced by Alembar Ekelin in 1966. So these are categories which come with a unit object, typically denoted by i here, and an internal hole, a-lolly-b here. So we use this notation from renal logic to indicate the internal home or the internal function space. I'll use this logic notation. This is an ocean that appears in a lot of examples. So, for example, in categories of structure sets, such as the category of monoids and the category of posets, for example, for monoids, the unit would be just a singleton set with a three-bit mono instructor, and the internal home made V would just be the monoint of the mono and homomorphisms between A and B. And another class of examples is given by the categories that underlie inductive systems. The main example here, perhaps, is the single type from the calculus. So now i, the unit object, would be the unit type, and the internal home is just the type of functions from A to B. And in many cases, the internal home actually comes from an assumption with a tensor product of another category. But in the original definition of algebraic and Kelly, this is not required. There is no requirement for the existence of another structure. But if such a structure is present, so if both a tensor and a lolly are present, then when they are, and they are related in S way, in the right way, then actually the closed structure comes. One can prove that a closed structure comes from the mono instructor. And it can be specified in terms of the mono instructor. So this is the theorem that can be found in the original island of Kelly paper, which states that if you are a category with a unit i and two functors, so a tensor and a lolly, now related by disjunction, that is, that's natural in B, then the pair i tensor is a mono instructor on C. If and only if i lolly is a closed structure on C, and remember this assumption here holds internally. So, as I said before, there is the monodal structure in the presence of such an assumption, the monodal structure completely characterizes the closed structure. But if you want to characterize the monodal structure from the closed structure, then there is this additional requirement of the internal adjunction. What does it mean? It means that the following natural transformation here is required to be invertible. And this just states that it's just the fact that this is an isomorphism is the same. It's just an internal variant of saying this adjunction. Yeah, the fact that this is just an internal variant of this adjunction here. And so if one checks the details of the proof, we'll find out that this requirement is used for defining an inverse for the associated alpha. And in fact, in the definition of closed category, there's nothing that is matching the virtuality of alpha. So that's why this is the internal adjunction requirement. So, but raw street started looking at this mismatch, let's say let's call it a mismatch, the fact that there's something in the definition of closed monodal category that doesn't match. That is not matched by anything in the definition of closed category. So raw street started looking into this mismatch and notice that it is possible to fix it if one considers categories with less structure. So in the definition of monodal or closed categories, there's too much structure. If you remove part of it, then you get a good match. And the weaker variants of monodal and closed categories that he considers are these two. So the notion of less Q monodal categories, which was introduced by this Hungarian Algebraist Slakani in 2012. And he introduced also his own variant, like less Q variant of closed categories in his paper of 2013 to match the one that matches correctly, the definition of Slakani. And he formulated this theorem that says that now if you have a category that is equipped to put a tensor in the lolly and they're related by the same adjunction, then the pair i tensor is a less Q monodal structure on C if and only if i lolly is a less Q closed structure on C. And there is no internal adjunction requirements. So there is in the sense there is a preferred match between the two definitions. And before discussing our contribution to this, let's also have a look at the definitions of less Q monodal categories. And let's close categories. So this is the definition of a less Q monodal category. So this is just a category which comes with the unit and tensor and now three natural transformations, lambda and alpha, which have this type, these three types here. And the notable difference with the definition of monodal categories is that these are not required to be invertible. But only natural transformations in this direction that it's written down here in the slide. And this has to satisfy all the five McLean equations. So there is no way, like in the definition of monodal category to dispose of three equations and drive them from only two of them. So there's a called pentagon and triangle equation of monodal categories. In here you mean all five equations of McLean. And then there is also a notion of a less Q monodal category. This is from Street. And so again, it's a category C. We now have a unit, a loading, and we also have these three natural transformations, JINL, which have this type. And they have to satisfy five equations. So now these are, these JINL are also required to... There are structural laws that appear also in the definition of closed category by Alembert and Kelly in the original definition. But in the original definition, there are some additional requirements. So first of all, I is required to be an isomorphism. So there is an isomorphism between any object and A and I only A. And there is another requirement. So clearly here it doesn't make sense to ask for J and L to be invertible. So J in principle intuitively is just a function on the intuitive level that picks out the identity, the internal identity from A to A. And L, it's something that just performs post-composition. So take something of a function from B to C and the function from A to B and then compose them. So it doesn't, there is no reason why this two should be J and L should be invertible.  But in the original definition, one also takes something that can be derived from J to be invertible, which is this J hat, which now takes the morphism from A to B in C and returns some of it from I into A to B. So somehow it's a way of turning an external morphism into an internal morphism. And it's defined using J in this way. So we're playing first J and then was composing with the identity of F. And this is still required to be invertible as well in the original definition. Sorry, in off-close category. But while in here, neither I nor J hat are required to be invertible. So right now with the definition in place, we can continue and talk about our contribution. So first contribution in the following. So it's talking about trying to basically extend, prove or find variants of the street, street theorem, including normal conditions. So what is the normality condition? So, for example, in the, in a less Q monoidal case, we call the normality condition the invertibility of a structural law. So either raw lambda or alpha or more or multiple those. And notice that one obtained the definition of a usual definition of monoidal category by just requiring, requiring all the normality condition to hold. So all three structural laws are invertible. And then as I said before, we also managed, so we can prove a street, a version of street's theorem of the Allen Berkeley theorem, including normality condition because we managed to find the, what does it mean? What are the analog, the analog, the normality condition of the scumular categories, less scumular categories in the less Q cross setting. So, and more precisely, we have this theorem. So now in the presence of an adjunction as before. Now, don't, not only their system isomorphism between less Q monoidal and less constructors, but, but now the scumular and the scumular normality condition also correspond, is a one to one correspondence in those. So, let's be more precise, let's see the precise correspondence. So this is in this, in the less Q monoidal setting, okay, for the less Q monoidal structure. So this is the conditions for the, the normality conditions for the, for the left street closed structure. So the invertibility of raw corresponds to the invertibility of y. And the invertibility of lambda corresponds to the invertibility of j hat. So these are the two conditions of, that are usually also required in the definition of closed category. Then we managed to also find a normality condition associated to the invertibility of alpha in the, in the less Q cross setting, which is the invertibility of this L hat. Where L hat now is this, is this the final rule, is this the rival morphism, right, going from this coin here into this other concept. And, and again, of course, the, the, the invertibility of alpha is also equivalent to the invertibility of P of, so to the fact that there is an internal adjunction. So, but this, the ability of L hat, this was the missing piece somehow in what created the MIS match. So if we ask, for example, for a, if you add to the definition of closed category, also the requirement that L hat must be vertebral, then one gets a perfect match. So, with the, with the, with the definition of monolithic category. So this new definition of closed category would match precisely with the definition of monolithic category in the Allenberg, Allenberg theory. So, and notice, so how do this L hat and J hat things arise. So, these are actually interdefineable with J and L respectively. So, we saw before that J hat can be defined in terms of J, but it's also true, the opposite. So if we take J hat is primitive. And this is the scales for L and L hat that are also interdefineable. So one in principle can define, can, can have a definition and equivalent definition of left skew, closed category, not in terms of I, J and L, but in terms of I, J hat and L hat. And then talk about normality condition asking for any of these three structural law to be invertible. So, what will, so maybe I can give some intuition and what does it mean to be, for example, for the inverse of L hat, what does the inverse of the hat do. So, it takes a morphism from A into B, only C, only D, and it returns an element of this, on this co-end. So, it's an object X and two morphisms here, two morphisms here. So, the idea here is that X should be a formal weak tensor of B and C. Right, because then you have a morphism from A into X, only D. So if you think of some B tensor C here, then this is what one would expect. And again, and here, there's a way of embedding B and C into V tensor C. So it's some kind of the existence of a weak tensor that the invertibility of L hat correspond to the existence of a tensor of B and C. But interestingly, if you look at the first morphism here, this one set here, we will, we are actually allowed to eliminate the tensor only to D, not in any other object. So, in this sense, this is a weak tensor. And so, yeah, so as I said before, we can replace, we can substitute the internal adjunct requirements in the original algebraic theory and with the invertibility of L hat. And then we will have a perfect match. So if we ask for this invertibility of L hat, also in the original definition of closed-calibre. Interestingly, this condition was already identified in the past by Dey and La Plaza, and it appears in a couple of places. But then it did, we didn't manage to actually find it after the 70s in the literature. So it was kind of lost. And so the second contribution of our work is the fact that, well, nothing forbids us in principle to just swap the orientation of all the structural laws in the left-wing model category. And one will take something called the right-skim model category. So now the structural laws are all in dotted other direction. And yeah, there are still, there are some five equations analogous to the one before. But then it's more interesting what happened if you do the same thing with the left-skill closed-calibre. So you just swap all the structural laws. So we start with the definition, taking I, J hat and L hat, and just swap the orientation of those. And one will end up with the notion of a new notion of right-skill closed-calibre, which has this primitive structural laws satisfying also some five equations. And we're again also proved a theorem that it's like a right-skill variant of street theorem. Then now you can connect a joint right-skill model and right-skill closed-calibre on a category. And also there are some similar relationships between the normality conditions. But more interestingly, so we can prove a new theorem that now connects left-skill closed and right-skill closed-calibre structures. So it goes as follows. So if you have a category with a unit and two lollies. So it may indicate the lollies and the lollies are here. And together with the following condition that we call the external lambda condition, which says that there is a bijection sigma that is nothing in A, B, and C of this form. So this takes a morphine from A into B, lowly R of C, into a morphine from B into A, lowly L of C. We call this the external lambda condition. And why is lambda involved in this is because if one looks at the, because this is very much reminiscent of something that is actually of a characteristic feature of lambda syntactic calculus. So something that it actually holds in there. And if you look at what it says, it basically says that A and B can be swapped here. But if you do that, you also have to swap the lollies. And this holds in the lambda calculus where now instead of the lollies, you have the two residuals in that case. And then if you have this condition in place, then a lowly L is less than C, if not if I lowly R is less than C. And again, there are some correspondence between the normality conditions. Now for the left lolly, for the I of the left lolly is invertible. Then this is the equivalent to asking for J R of the right lolly to be invertible. And if J hat is invertible, then this is equivalent to IR being invertible. Then you have also condition for the L, so L hat is invertible if not if LR now is invertible. And moreover, if this is also equivalent to the existence of an internal, I mean something that is kind of analogous to the internal adjunction condition that we saw in the original Halle-Mercalli theorem, which is the fact that the following morphism that is the right one using L hat or using LR is actually an invertible. And if you look at what this is, this is just an internal version of our lambda condition. It's an internal version of this lambda condition. So again, it can swap A and B here, but you have to swap also the L on the left lolly R. Okay, so now let's move to the third contribution, which is examples. So in this paper, we give a very large number of examples because we need to motivate the different multi-conditionals as well. This is also the new notion of right skew close category. So in this talk, we will focus on three classes of examples. So the first is because as follows, you're starting with, for example, the left skew close category. How can you further skew it to the left using a component? Or if you start with the right skew close structure, how you can skew further to the right using a component? Then we'll see how starting from skew close category and amount on it, how to lift the skew close structure on to the class D. And the third example is the non-community greener type lambda calculus. Okay, so here we start with the left skew close category C and I lolly and a common D on it. So we want to generate, come up with a new left skew close structure on C using D. And we can do this if we ask for D to be less close as well, which means that it comes with a map E from I to D I, and then after transformation C from D of B lolly C into D B lolly D C. And it has to be coherent suitably with the data of the left skew close category and the co-logic and co-multiplication of the coordinate. And if we have this left skew, the coordinate is left closed, then you can define another left skew close structure on C where the unit is the same and now the lolly is given as follows. So it's just B lolly C, for this new lolly, it's just D B lolly C, this is the order to apply the common to B. And then we can derive, for example, this is how you derive the new structure of I in this case. So you first apply E here because we will go from I to D I. And then you apply the, you will post-compose it with the, with I applied to A. But this I is the I of the original left skew close structure. And then one can start asking how the normality condition lift to this new structure. So, yeah, so what, for example, if I is invertible, when does the new I is invertible for the new structure is invertible. Well, this is true if, for example, if A is sufficient conditions E, E to be invertible as well. And one can play a similar game, starting from a right skew close category and starting with a monad instead of a commonad and asking for it to be O plus closed. And then one will get a new right skew close structure on C, defined this way, where the lolly is defined this way. So again, now instead of applying D to B, just apply T. Okay, the second class of example, so we started with the left skew close category and the monad. And if the monad, and so now we ask when does this left skew close structure lift to the classic category of T. And this is the case if T is left strong. Alternatively, people call it this, call this internal functorality, which means that there is a natural transformation of this form. From B to C, B lolly C into T B lolly T C. There's also a pseudo-incorherent with the data that we have from the category and from the monad. And now we can find the left skew close structure on the classic of T, the classic category of T, where the unit again is the same. And now the new lolly is given by just applying T on C now. So B lolly C with new lolly is B lolly T C. This is the old lolly. This is how you define J and I for the new close structure, left skew close structure. So I is very simple. You just use I on TA. So the new I on A would be the old I on TA. And for the new J on A, you first apply I, sorry, J, so you go from I to A lolly.  But now this has to be amorphous in the class D category of T. So of T, so then you have to, this is a pure map. You just use J, which is the funter embedding C into the classic category of T on this morphism. And then you get something that is well typed. And again, one can play the same game by starting with the right skew close category and obtain the right skew close structure on the class D of T. If now T is left, it's left closed. Okay, so the last example is the non comm, is actually it's a fraud. It's a, it's a, it's a restricted variant of the non commutative linear type linear type and the calculus unit. We'll see in the second vice and restricted. So this is how it goes. So the objects of this is the categories or the objects of types is the grammar for types. You have atomic types, unit and volume, which is this function spaces here. Context are around the same as our list of types. And this is the grammar for well from terms. So variable, and then you have unit introduction and elimination and obstruction and application. So you see that this is a linear and non commutative linear variant of simple type of the calculus for you can see, for example, for application because first of all, the resources that we have in context split when how so part of them go to the for as resources for for for the for the function argument for for this T here and the second part go for the argument of the application. And they go in order right so gamma goes to the left and that goes to the right so this is why it's non commutative. But I said before this is actually a more restricted version of the non commutative linear type on the calculus with unit because we all there is an additional restriction on the on the on the unit elimination. And it is that all that now, again, this is a similar restriction that we have here so the gamma. So you have to, we have T of type I and you have type A, but the resources of T, so the context of T must come from the left most position from from the left side of the of the context here so gamma cannot appear any in any position of the context here, which is usually what you have in the usual non commutative type of the calculus. But in here, this is more restrictive. And the definition of a quality of terms is the quality and now so the morphism of this categories and now yeah what type equivalence classes or what that well for terms, model of the type of quality. So for example, this is so and this is a left skill close category. And this is how you drive out for example. So you're given in context, x of type, you only see and you want to drive this. This is just lambda y, which are typed to be lambda z and z type A, and then just apply x to the application of why to say, and this is what types. And this is a nice example because also is is a concrete presentation of the free left skill close category that is generated by the set of atomic types. And interestingly, in this example, there is a normality condition that already holds, which is liberty of J hat. And what does mean in the setting, it means that there is a bijection between close terms of type A and B, so close functions and open terms of type B with one free variable in a. So this, this is what then the disinvertibility of J hat tells us in the setting. And one also may wonder, what about the material divide, for example. Well, this is obtained by relaxing the elimination for for the unit with this more permissive rule, but now yeah the gamma in the context of T cannot appear anywhere in the in the context in the in the in the context of the conclusion here. You see before it was restricted to me on the. So, coming from being the left part of the context but now gamma can be anywhere in the context. And then and if you add this rule. So which gives them the ability to buy and associate the left skill close structure. One gets the full non-community bring up type lambda calculus within it. So what one usually called more community than the calculus within it. Okay, so this concludes my talk so we continued working on. Cleaner variants of unimpercated theories that was something that raw streets started working on. And we prove that there is a relation between less humanoidal structure and less to close structure also with partial conditions with partial normality conditions. And. And also we for example we demonstrated that. That is also interesting to consider. Right skew violence of this of more than a close category in particular close categories so what to do with analysis this notion comes out naturally. And we we justify these notions with with a with a big number of examples. And what we like to do next so first we like to come to come up with a number of examples. That are relevant to the semantics of problem of programing languages. I mean the must be so we show that several examples involving more than a couple of minutes. So we believe that this is a good path for for future work. And we also would like to continue what we've done already. And we presented it. Two years ago at MSP. And which is in where we developed the proof theory of. Of of less Q monodal categories. And we would like to also do similar analysis proof to retic analysis of. Also less Q and or partially not partially normal monoidal and what are also closed monoidal closed by closed and symmetric monodal. Okay, so this concludes my talk. Thank you for listening.


Hello and welcome to NewsClick. Today, we are joined by defence analyst D. Raghunandan. To discuss today's announcement made by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the anti-satellite mission that was carried out, which, according to Mr. Modi, has made India into a space superpower. So welcome, Raghunandan. Firstly, I would like to ask you that there has been some sort of confusion, some amount of confusion that has been created post Modi's announcement about the kind of satellite that was shot down, because Modi in his speech said that this was a peaceful test operation, but there have been media statements and statements made by ministers which are saying that this was some sort of spy satellite. So can you offer some clarity on this? It's very simple. This is an anti-satellite missile test by India. There is no way India would have tested this weapon against a satellite belonging to any other country. It has to be one of our own satellites and obviously also it would have to be a satellite which is still in orbit, but which is not serving any other practical function. Otherwise, you are just bringing down a useful satellite. So they would have brought down one of the satellites which has outlived its primary function, but which is still in orbit so that it becomes a suitable target. So why this sort of confusion? Absolutely no idea. And also this is being presented as a major technological achievement. So how difficult is it to carry out such kind of an operation? Two things about that need to be kept in mind. It's correct that India is the fourth country after the US, Russia and China to have achieved this. But equally, India is the fourth or fifth country if you include the Europeans to achieve space-faring abilities. So one thing goes with the other. You need to have a launch vehicle which has sufficient range to reach low earth orbit and because these are targeted missiles aiming to destroy an object somewhere in space, they are very similar to anti-missile missiles, missiles which are designed to shoot down missiles. And there is again only a handful of countries who have that capability. So this is part of the same process and judging by the height which India is said to have achieved, the PM's announcement said we have shot down a satellite at 300 kilometers altitude. I think any of the Agni medium range missiles, a family of that rocket system would have been used for this ASAT as well because the rough altitude range is about right. The US ASAT weapons and the Chinese ASAT weapons have slightly higher altitude capabilities of between 550 to 800 kilometers. It doesn't matter too much. So like you said, this is being portrayed as a major achievement of the BJP government, but an anti-satellite program was actually started during the UPA tenure. And as you pointed out, the Agni missiles in 2012 itself, the then DRDO chief Dr. Vijay Kumar had said that after Agni Fai's launch, India had all the building blocks in place for an anti-satellite mission. So what do you make of all of this? So Prime Minister Modi has been, shall I say, very fortunate in having been Prime Minister at a time when several space programs of India have achieved fruition, but which was started about a decade or so ago. And if you remember some time ago, India had the successful Mangalyan launch to Mars, which also happened during his tenure, but which had been started by an earlier, during the term of an earlier government. The fact is agencies like ISRO and the three services which were involved in this have been carrying out this mission or this program over the past close to a decade. China successfully conducted its first anti-satellite test in 2007. And roughly just a month after that, India, which had been particularly concerned about this new Chinese capability, announced that it would also start a similar program, which was formally launched in 2010. And as you said, V.K. Saraswath, who was then the coordinator of this program and who is now a member of the Niti IO, made the declaration, the formal program was launched, which consists of ISRO and the three services. So, are there any other international implications of this test being carried out? There are three important implications, I think. The first is the fact and Prime Minister Modi has also underlined this in his announcement, saying that this test is not aimed at any other country. He reiterated India's commitment to oppose the weaponization of space and reiterated India's commitment to all international treaties. And this is an important declaration to make because there is bound to be international concern at this new capability by India. There was a time when the other space powers were actively considering and acting a multilateral agreement, somewhat akin to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which would have said, henceforth no country will start an anti-satellite program. This test has now pre-empted that at least as far as India is concerned. But India will still need to reassure other countries that it does not mean to weaponize space, that it is not aimed at any other country. And I think ruling party spokespersons and spokespersons of the BJP Parivar, the wider Parivar, in their public statements would be well advised to tone down their jingoistic and militaristic chess thumping, which they have been doing because that will only cause disquiet in the international community. The second implication is with regard to space debris. When any country blows up a satellite, it will result in a thousand pieces floating around in space. When China in fact blew up its first satellite, it resulted in about 2,500 to 3,000 pieces of debris in space, some of which were believed to have resulted in damage to and destruction of a Russian satellite. So this is something that India needs to be very worried about. India is a signatory to a multilateral agreement which aims to protect space from space debris and we need to work on as well as convince the international community of adopting Indian best practices to make sure that any tests or actions of this kind do not result in space debris which poses a problem to others. And lastly of course, the goal of keeping space free of weapons is of paramount importance that India does not take the next step, which is actually to mount a permanent station in space which would then be used to target missiles. I hope we don't go that far. Thank you Raghu for joining us today and thank you for watching NewsClick.


Like 15 second cooldown Yeah I see what this team does, I think they're just gonna sit back I'm gonna look for a fucking MDE into combat A little bit scared of running the same way Yeah It's so gross man, literally the spell right at the end and his global is still faster than mine Great position actually It's fine, I'm just gonna keep the eyes, you can just wait I just wanna do this until the eyes are up basically Or until the rope finds me because he has better stealth I'm gonna try to sub the mage next time Yeah I'm gonna stay middle then Yeah, I think he will be on one of the sides maybe this one He's here, I'm subbing Got him, you can get no one, you can get me This man is half, I added some damage to him as well He just wants to delay this mage I'll sub him after I in 15 Oh, lots of the best mage, but maybe it's fine Alright, shoot at the deep Nice, nice Just play for eyes, I think I'm subbed, bro You fine?


Craig says, I have a Microsoft 365 family plan and I wish to share the suite with my parents. However, they are two users on two PCs but with only one Microsoft account. Can this be done? If I let one of them keep the existing, well, Mike, I've not finished the question yet. Okay. If I let one of them keep the existing account and create a new account for the other, one of them will lose stuff? No. No. So, if you can use a Microsoft account for as many of the licenses that you want. Okay. It doesn't matter. You can log in. Well, on a family account, it's five. Correct. You're five. You can use them across anywhere you want, right? Right. But you can use the same account for all five. It doesn't matter. Exactly. Because the thing is that that account is going to show you, like when you go in and open up word, it says recent documents. Okay, as an example. It's going to show you the recent documents from that user on any of those devices that is logged in as that person. So it makes sense for them to use one Microsoft account if they're both using, working with the same documents. You know, if they're both doing the same thing. That just makes sense. If you want to create them a separate account, well, that one other account is going to be empty until they start working it. And then you're going to also have to work on sharing the documents across. So just use one account. Yeah. So yeah, so I have, with my primary account, I have downloaded the desktop applications and it's my login on three different machines. Yeah. And I want it to work that way. So when I'm on the road with my Surface Pro, I see exactly the same content that I see on my two workstations. And that's intended purpose there. So it's nice. I don't have to change things. Like, you know, if you have a centralized printer for people that still print things, I do two or three times a year. Tax is being one of them.  Like have access. She knows my logins to the computer and will come down when she needs to use. She's a Mac user though. So, you know, try to keep those separated. But when she needs to get stuff done, she comes down to my system. She has all done. But anyway, it's perfectly normal to have multiple computers with that same account. To Mike's point, you've got five different logins. You could have five different computers. You could pay to have more than that. But five with that single login, nothing wrong with that. As long as that's working for, you know, for your parents to be sharing their content. Yeah, if I gave another login to my parents, is just for Mike, oh my God. It would be like the end of the world.  Yeah, yeah. Well, she just did this document for me yesterday and it doesn't show up anymore.  I just want to know when we're going to get to the Star Trek thing, you know, do the, you know, computer, computer. Hello, where are my files? You can do that with Cortana now, can't you? Yeah, I guess technically you could. Yeah, you can, yeah. Well, it depends on your login, too. If you've got a, if you've got an MSA login, Cortana's not very bright. If you have a full Office 365 login, it gets, he, she, it gets a lot smarter. Okay, so now Hal just opened up another Pan and Worms here. Yeah, so MSA versus what you called it an Office 365 login is actually a worker school account, right? Right, right. Okay, so if anybody's going to set up a second account, I would, I would literally avoid doing anything with MSA. Stay away from MSA as far away as you possibly can, if at all possible, because the event, they told us 10, eight, nine, 10 years ago that MSA was going to go away. And MSA is still here, but who knows if they're ever going to get rid of it, you know? Because they've still got a couple of billion accounts out there is something that are based on Outlook.com and Hotmail.com and all that other kind of fun stuff. So it just blows my mind and some people will be like, well, I don't have a worker or a school and it won't authenticate because they don't have a, you know, an Azure. Well, when you buy 365, it gives you that Azure backend. So that automatically, whatever users you put into there is a work or slash school account. I just think that Microsoft, the wording, they could do better with the whole non-clamenture of, you know, what the, you know, the wording of those accounts and what they actually are. Yeah. There's a lot of things they could fix the wording. Yeah.