[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Grothendieck [2]: https://hn.algolia.com/?q=Grothendieck
These days, some nerds prefer to ask AI to confirm their "precious" intuitions of why schemes might be needed in the first place. To fix the problems with certain basic geometric notions of old timers? They are then so spooked that the AI instantly validates those intuitions without any relevant citations whatsoever that they decide not to comment
But still leave warnings to gung-ho nerds in the form of low-code exercises
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Syzygies/log_folders/maste...
And ahem ahem singularities https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2025/11/05/the-inverse-... )
I rather think that because of the very low career prospects in research, quite a lot of people who are good in this area rather left research and took some job in finance or at some Silicon Valley company, and thus might actually at least sometimes have a look at what happens on Hacker News. :-)
See pages 9-10, 14 https://web.archive.org/web/20250818144653/https://aitp-conf...
The amount of people I know who would love to learn this material is even many, many magnitudes larger (just to give some arbitrary example: some pretty smart person who studied physics, but (for some reasons) neither had any career prospects in research nor found any fullfilling job, who just out of boredom decided that he would love to get deeply into Grothendieck-style algebraic geometry).
I believe that the masses don't have a deep understanding of Schemes because of enemy action by the sufficiently advanced stupidity (aka loneliness) of the intelligent :)
Some (ex-)academics get triggered by the so-thought foolhardy Buzzard & his undergrads, but B+Co are, at least, not being that kind of imbecile https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/server/api/core/bitstreams/012...
https://github.com/ramonfmir/lean-scheme
Their interest is "pro" and they are not a hypothesis
(& I'd NOT bet against that they understand deeper than Sturmfels and his students)
Schemes (like cat theory) have become a sort of religion-- it's sad because Grothendieck himself might not have understood them intuitively.. and it won't be the first time.. Feynman didn't understand Path Integrals, nor Archimedes integration!! BECAUSE they were all loners whose first resort was WRITING LETTERS
Ps: as with Jobs.. I hesitate to call Buzzard a full-time salesman
If you want to hang out in meatspace: do you have a public key?
https://web.archive.org/web/20250115224532/http://www.dam.br...
https://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2014/12/can_one_explain...
https://liorpachter.wordpress.com/2014/12/30/the-two-culture...
(2014)
With someone actually trying in 2002, using TFB for inspiration & M2 as a very early Jupyter/sage
https://web.archive.org/web/20250000000000*/https://mast.que...
(These bloggers as well as creator of M1 may want to chip in a dozen cts)
(I studied schemes 10 years before, but I quit maths in 2000 so this book wouldn't have helped me. It seems like a good introduction, looking at the TOC. Grounded on actual geometry, not just category theory like other textbooks).
Also, the racoon ?!