I've done my bit to improve the Wikipedia article on HoTT, but the more I understand univalence, the less I have the feeling people are even close to produce anything practical and I hardly like anyone in the field (Bauer seems cool, no-homo, but Vladi is an ass and probably Steve Awodey too, and even if I strike up a chat with Mike Schulman, he responds flippant).
I like it from a philosophical perspective, though, I think. But I'm more on the practical side of math (although my friends would claim something else.) Btw. the guy who wrote the comprehensive intro book is also related to all things HoTT, from the CV page, but the book doesn't feature it.>>8011136>do you use a software
I could give an autistic answer to that, but let's not.
I just took the first screenshot and enlarged the canvas in photoshop so that the others fit in. It's quick. But I don't know what the guy above me did, who recommended the book posting the intro.