Update

21st_century.md

@@ -28,6 +28,8 @@ Literally in your living room, in your pocket there is constantly an annoying re
 
 **Emotions are already illegal**, for example hate -- so called [hate crime](hate_crime.md) and [hate speech](hate_speech.md) are something very similar to [thoughtricme](thoughtcrime.md) described in the famous dystopian novel [1984](1984.md). So now you can't for example criticize anything because criticizing means hate, so criticism is already illegal (with the exception of criticizing straight white males for example). How did they achieve to literally make an emotion illegal? It's simple, they took advantage of the fact that people are absolute cretins and idiots incapable of thinking -- the word "hate" sounds negative, so they said: we can remove a negative thing by making it illegal, isn't this great? Everyone said: YES YES PLEASE MAKE BAD THING ILLEGAL, THAT WILL FIX EVERYTHING. The few who said it was maybe a bad idea were labeled [Hitler](hitler.md) -- bro, do you literally support hate? Don't you want to remove hate from the world? So shut up. And so this is how they can ban anything that has any negative connotation, i.e. in the [future](future.md) they will also ban all other negative emotions, such as sadness, anger, boredom and so on. If you're depressed you'll be committing the sadness crime, and this is how we solve depression. The whole world will be happy because it will be illegal to feel bad. Isn't it brilliant? Why haven't anyone invented this simple methods before? You just write on a piece of paper: "BAD THING = ILLEGAL" and it's solved, so you can literally remove cancer and wars like this too probably, you just say "bad thing disappear" and everything is solved. So people now think of the future in terms of banning everything, imposing more and more restrictions, surveillance, [censorship](censorship.md) and punishments in hopes of achieving more freedom, peace and happiness.
 
+People are already **punished for crimes they haven't committed yet** as was predicted by dystopian sci-fi movies such as Minority Report. Despite trying to make it look like our society wants to wipe all [stereotypes](stereotype.md) off the Earth, crime predicting stereotypes are now built right into [law](law.md) itself: for example if you watch [child pornography](child_porn.md), you are automatically labeled a "future child rapist" and punished, even if you NEVER came close to hurting anyone and if you never would (for some reason though it is not assumed that any other kind of porn makes you a future rapist of whatever is the subject of the porn, it kind of doesn't make sense but people don't care anyway). Similarly there is now an extra tax on USB drives because it's assumed the drive will be used to [pirate](piracy.md) digital works, so when you're buying a hard drive, you are literally automatically committing the future crime of piracy and get a fine right away :D
+
 In 21st century if you buy something there is only about 0.03% chance it will work. There is probably some law that says that if you buy something it should work, but in practice there are no laws because even if you could probably sue the seller, it would mean investing $100000000 and about 10 years of every day going to the court to get your $100 back, and the result isn't guaranteed anyway because for your investment you'll be able to afford maybe 3 lawyers while the corporation will have about 100 to 100000 lawyers, it's very unlikely you would beat that, so you just won't do it, you will just keep buying the thing over and over and praying it works. The exact breaking rates are fine tuned by special departments so as to not make people give up on buying the thing completely, but to make them buy as many of them as possible. This is basically completely optimized [capitalism](capitalism.md). Even if the thing works when you buy it, it will at best last maybe 3 days or 3 and a half days. It's similar with [work](work.md) (slavery) -- in theory there is some kind of minimum wage you should be paid but in practice you'll be very lucky to even be paid anything -- again, you could in theory sue your employer for not paying you but you can't really do it -- if you come naked or in bad clothes to the court you'll be automatically ruled guilty and since you have no money because the employer didn't pay you, you can't afford the required $1000000 suit, so you can't sue anyone -- so laws de facto only exist so that law makers have a job, they can't be used (well they can, but only by corporations). { I personally have this experience with computer mice -- I bought many mice this way because they just never worked, eventually I just gave up and stopped playing shooter games, I realized it's better to learn living without a working computer mouse, otherwise I would just spend all my life savings on them. Lol also recently I got a paddle board for birthday, it exploded in a week. ~drummyfish }
 
 { Sorry I just realized the previous paragraph is maybe written about 3 to 5 years ahead -- I sometimes do that because I see into the future and I don't want to rewrite this too often. Anyway it still falls under this century. ~drummyfish }

anarch.md

@@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ To make Anarch no advanced [bullshit](bullshit.md) was used such as multiple mon
 
 The repo is available at for example at https://git.coom.tech/drummyfish/Anarch. Some info about the game can also be found at the [libregamewiki](lgw.md): https://libregamewiki.org/Anarch. The 1.0 version was released on 1st December 2020, it was officially in the making since September 2019, but we may also see the inception of the game to be the start of [raycastlib](raycastlib.md) development in 2018.
 
+{ Mmmm OK so it has happened, someone's already milking it at Switch Store for $5 under the name "ROBOT ANARCHY", with some AI generated poster and shit :D Seems like no backlinks to the original project. Of course it's all fine both by my license and life philosophy, just found it funny. Remember you can get it gratis and with all freedom from me. ~drummyfish }
+
 ```
 h@\hMh::@@hhh\h@rrrr//rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr@@@@hMM@@@M@:@hhnhhMnr=\@hn@n@h@-::\:h
 hMhh@@\\@@@\\h:M/r/////rrrrrrrrrrrrrrr//r@@@@@MMh@@hhh\\\=rMr=M@hh\hn\:\:h::\@\:

bloat.md

@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ For a quick overview let us average some data over time -- the table that follow
 | 2021  | 2173                   | 4096, 1000, 64000                 | 780, 920                 |8192, 3100, 60000, 4G GPU (FC6)     | 221865               | 161706    |
 | 2022  | 2280                   | 4096, 1000, 64000                 | 780, 920                 |8192, 3300, 125000, 2G GPU (CODMWF2)| 248477               | 191785    |
 
-One of a very frequent questions you may hear a noob ask is **"How can bloat limit software freedom if such software has a [free](free_software.md) (or "[FOSS](foss.md)") [license](license.md)?"** Bloat [de-facto](de_facto.md) limits some of the four essential freedoms (to use, study, modify and share) required for a software to be free. A free license grants these freedoms legally, but if some of those freedoms are subsequently limited by other circumstances, the software becomes effectively less free. It is important to realize that **complexity itself goes against [freedom](freedom.md)** because a more complex system will inevitably reduce the number of people being able to execute freedoms such as modifying the software (the number of programmers being able to understand and modify a trivial program is much greater than the number of programmers being able to understand and modify a highly complex million [LOC](loc.md) program -- see [freedom distance](freedom_distance.md)). This is not any made up reason, it is actually happening and many from the free software community try to address the issue, see e.g. [HyperbolaBSD](hyperbolabsd.md) policies on accepting packages which rejects a lot of popular "legally free" software on grounds of being bloat ([systemd](systemd.md), dbus, zstd, protobuf, [mono](mono.md), https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=en:philosophy:incompatible_packages). As the number of people being able to execute the basic freedom drops, we're approaching the scenario in which the software is de-facto controlled by a small number of people who can (e.g. due to the cost) effectively study, modify and maintain the program -- and a program that is controlled by a small group of people (e.g. a corporation) is by definition [proprietary](proprietary.md). If there is a web browser that has a free license but you, a lone programmer, can't afford to study it, modify it significantly and maintain it, and your friends aren't able to do that either, when the only one who can practically do this is the developer of the browser himself and perhaps a few other rich corporations that can pay dozens of full time programmers, then such browser cannot be considered free as it won't be shaped to benefit you, the user, but rather the developer, a corporation.
+One of a very frequent questions you may hear a noob ask is **"How can bloat limit software freedom if such software has a [free](free_software.md) (or "[FOSS](foss.md)") [license](license.md)?"** Bloat [de-facto](de_facto.md) limits some of the four essential freedoms (to use, study, modify and share) required for a software to be free. A free license grants these freedoms legally, but if some of those freedoms are subsequently limited by other circumstances, the software becomes effectively less free. It is important to realize that **complexity itself goes against [freedom](freedom.md)** because a more complex system will inevitably reduce the number of people being able to execute freedoms such as modifying the software (the number of programmers being able to understand and modify a trivial program is much greater than the number of programmers being able to understand and modify a highly complex million [LOC](loc.md) program -- see [freedom distance](freedom_distance.md)). A more bloated program won't run on simpler (older, cheaper, homemade, ...) computers, effectively limiting the freedom to use the program, forcing the user to run it on a mainstream (unethical, expensive, spying, abusive, consumerist, power hungry, shitty, ...) computer etc. This is not any made up reason, it is actually happening and many from the free software community try to address the issue, see e.g. [HyperbolaBSD](hyperbolabsd.md) policies on accepting packages which rejects a lot of popular "legally free" software on grounds of being bloat ([systemd](systemd.md), dbus, zstd, protobuf, [mono](mono.md), https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=en:philosophy:incompatible_packages). As the number of people being able to execute the basic freedom drops, we're approaching the scenario in which the software is de-facto controlled by a small number of people who can (e.g. due to the cost) effectively study, modify and maintain the program -- and a program that is controlled by a small group of people (e.g. a corporation) is by definition [proprietary](proprietary.md). If there is a web browser that has a free license but you, a lone programmer, can't afford to study it, modify it significantly and maintain it, and your friends aren't able to do that either, when the only one who can practically do this is the developer of the browser himself and perhaps a few other rich corporations that can pay dozens of full time programmers, then such browser cannot be considered free as it won't be shaped to benefit you, the user, but rather the developer, a corporation.
 
 **How much bloat can we tolerate?** We are basically trying to get the most for the least price. The following diagram attempts to give an answer:
 
@@ -58,9 +58,9 @@ One of a very frequent questions you may hear a noob ask is **"How can bloat lim
        "richness"
            A
    shiny   |    :                :
-  bullshit | NO :      YES       : NO
+  bullshit | no :      YES       : NO
-           |    :                :                         ____... .
+           |(may:                :                         ____... .
-   luxury  |    :                :             ___________/
+   luxury  | be):                :             ___________/
            |    :                :    ________/
            |    :              __:___/        \__________
     very   |    :         ____/  :                       \______
@@ -74,7 +74,6 @@ One of a very frequent questions you may hear a noob ask is **"How can bloat lim
    nothing +-----------------------------------------------------> internal complexity
            trivial  simple   solo        big        huge       gigantic
                           manageable
-
 ```
 
 The **path of [degeneracy](degenerate_software.md)** drawn in the graph shows how from a certain breaking point (which may actually appear at different places, the diagram is simplified) many software projects actually start getting less powerful and useful as they get more complex -- not all, some project really do stay on the path of increasing their "richness", but this requires great skills, experience, expertise and also a bit of lucky circumstances; in the zone of huge complexity projects start to get extremely difficult to manage -- non-primary tasks such as organization, maintenance and documentation start taking up so many resources that the primary task of actually programming the software suffers, the project crumbles under its own weight and the developers just try to make it fall slower. This happens mostly in projects made by incompetent [soydevs](soydev.md), i.e. most today's projects. { Thanks to a friend for pointing out this idea. ~drummyfish }
@@ -104,7 +103,7 @@ The following is a list of software usually considered a good, typical example o
 - Desktop environments such as [KDE](kde.md) and [GNOME](gnome.md). The concept of a [desktop environment](de.md) itself is often considered bloat.
 - [Windows](windows.md): one of the best examples of how software should NOT be done.
 - [Blender](blender.md): quite useful [FOSS](foss.md) 3D editor which however integrates things like a whole video editor, game engine, several renderers, scripting language with text editor and so on.
-- [CMake](cmake.md): gigantic [build system](build_system.md) that currently sits on top of a sky-high sandwich of other build systems, its number of dependencies is bigger than the number of retards in observable universe (known as *[drummyfish's](drummyfish.md) number*).
+- [CMake](cmake.md): gigantic [build system](build_system.md) that currently sits on top of a sky-high sandwich of other build systems, its number of dependencies is bigger than the number of retards in observable universe { Here I slipped and committed the evil [egoism](egoism.md) masked as joking by adding: "(known as *[drummyfish's](drummyfish.md) number*)". I don't want to censor or delete it and mask my weaknesses, the best I can do is probably leave this comment here. ~drummyfish }
 - [D-Bus](dbus.md)
 - [Docker](docker.md)
 - [Electron](electron.md): [GUI](gui.md) [framework](framework.md) infamous for its huge resource consumption.
@@ -121,33 +120,33 @@ The following is a list of software usually considered a good, typical example o
 - [Neural networks](neural_network.md) aka "AI" that is forced into everything nowadays.
 - ...
 
-Some of these programs may be replaced with smaller bloat that basically does the same thing (e.g. produces the same output) just with less bullshit around, for example Libreoffice with [Ted](ted.md), [Godot](godot.md) with [Irrlicht](irrlicht.md), Firefox with [badwolf](badwolf.md) etc., however many times the spectacular pompous results these programs produce just cannot essentially be reproduced by anything minimal, wanting to achieve this is really a beginner mistake, the same as wanting to achieve the "Windows experience" on a GNU system. You will never be able to make an Unreal Engine style graphics with a minimalist game engine, just like you won't be able to shoot up your school with well written poetry (in both cases the former is something bad that however most Americans want to do, the latter is something truly good they should want instead). To truly get rid of bloat one has to become able to use truly minimal programs; this means unlearning the indoctrination that "bigger results are better", one has to understand that minimal results themselves are superior AND in addition allow using superior programs (i.e. minimal ones).
+Some of these programs may be replaced with smaller bloat that basically does the same thing (e.g. produces the same output) just with less bullshit around, for example Libreoffice with [Ted](ted.md), [Godot](godot.md) with [Irrlicht](irrlicht.md), Firefox with [badwolf](badwolf.md) etc., however many times the spectacular pompous results these programs produce just cannot essentially be reproduced by anything minimal, wanting to achieve such a result is then a mistake in itself, committed usually by beginners and minimalist newcomers, the same as wanting to achieve the "Windows experience" on a [GNU](gnu.md) system for example. You will never be able to make an Unreal Engine style graphics with a minimalist game engine, just like you won't be able to shoot up your school with well written poetry (in both cases the former is something bad that however most Americans want to do, the latter is something truly good they should want instead). To truly get rid of bloat one has to become able to use truly minimal programs; this means unlearning the doctrine that preaches "bigger results = better results", one has to understand that minimal results themselves are superior AND in addition allow using superior programs (i.e. minimal ones).
 
 ## Medium And Small Bloat
 
-Besides the typical big programs that even normies admit are bloated there exists also a smaller bloat which many people don't see as such but which is nevertheless considered unnecessarily complex by some experts and/or idealists and/or hardcore minimalists, including [us](lrs.md).
+Besides the typical big programs that even normies admit are bloated there exists also a smaller bloat which most humanoids probably don't identify as such but that is nonetheless still considered unnecessarily complex by experts and/or idealists and/or hardcore minimalists, including [us](lrs.md).
 
-Small bloat is a subject of popular [jokes](joke.md) such as "OMG he uses a unicode font -- BLOAT!!!". These are good jokes, it's nice to make fun out of one's own idealism. But watch out, this doesn't mean small bloat is only a joke concept at all, it plays an important role in designing good technology. When we identify something as *small bloat*, we don't necessarily have to completely avoid and reject that concept, we may just try to for example make it optional. In context of today's PCs using a Unicode font is not really an issue for performance, memory consumption or anything else, but we should keep in mind it may not be so on much weaker computers or for example post-[collapse](collapse.md) computers, so we should try to design systems that don't [depend](dependency.md) on Unicode.
+Small bloat is a subject of popular [jokes](joke.md) such as "OMG he uses a [Unicode](unicode.md) font -- BLOAT!!!". These are good jokes, it's healthy to make fun out of one's own idealism. But watch out, this doesn't mean small bloat is only a joke concept at all, it plays an important role in designing good technology. Having categorized something as *small bloat* doesn't necessarily imply us having to completely avoid and reject the thing or concept, we may just try to mitigate the impact, for example by making it an optional choice. In context of today's PCs using a Unicode font is not really an issue for performance, memory consumption or anything in these terms, but we should keep in mind it may not be so on much weaker computers or for example post-[collapse](collapse.md) computers, and using Unicode implies someone has to make and maintain the Unicode standard, which IS a tedious, difficult and resource hungry task for humans, so we should try to design systems that don't [depend](dependency.md) on Unicode if at all possible.
 
-Also remember that relatively small libraries for things that are easily done without a library, such as [fixed point](fixed_point.md) arithmetic, are also bloat.
+Also please remember that relatively small libraries for things that are easily done without a library, such as [fixed point](fixed_point.md) arithmetic, are also bloat. This is a case of [pseudominimalism](pseudominimalism.md).
 
 Small/medium bloat includes for example:
 
-- [floating point](float.md) (complex standard with design issues, requires special hardware for acceleration, [fixed point](fixed_point.md) is better)
+- [floating point](float.md) (complex standard with design issues, tricky, requires special hardware for acceleration, [fixed point](fixed_point.md) is better)
-- config files (and other unnecessary file I/O that requires a file I/O library, not all computers have file systems, configs should be part of source code)
+- config files (and other unnecessary file I/O that requires a file I/O library, not all computers have file systems, configs should be part of source code if possible, as done by [suckless](suckless.md))
-- [directories](directory.md) (just have all files on the same level and prefix their file names to organize them)
+- [directories](directory.md) (introduces different types of files to handle, potential issues with traversals with symlinks getting stuck in infinite loops etc., just have all files on the same level and prefix their file names to organize them)
-- library [linking](linking.md) ([header only](header_only.md) libraries are better)
+- library [linking](linking.md) ([header only](header_only.md) libraries are better, treat libraries simply as text files automatically prepended to source code; where dynamic linking would be very highly beneficial solve the situation e.g. by using a service [daemon](daemon.md))
-- any [GPU](gpu.md), [OpenGL](opengl.md) (complex hardware and specifications, not all computers have complex GPUs, [software rendering](software_rendering.md) is better)
+- any [GPU](gpu.md), [OpenGL](opengl.md) (complex hardware and specifications, power hungry hardware, not all computers have complex GPUs, [software rendering](software_rendering.md) is better)
-- [Unicode](unicode.md) (big specification requiring special libraries and big fonts, [ASCII](ascii.md) is better)
+- [Unicode](unicode.md) (big specification requiring special libraries, big fonts and enormous human effort to maintain, is tricky to handle, [ASCII](ascii.md) is better)
 - [antialiasing](antialiasing.md) (just ignore [aliasing](aliasing.md), use low resolution textures etc.)
-- 64 bit architectures (they only exist to allow ungodly amounts of RAM, 32 bits completely suffice for any computation, many times even 16 or 8 bits are enough)
+- 64 bit architectures (they only exist to allow ungodly amounts of RAM, 32 bits completely suffice for any computation, many times even 16 or 8 bits are [enough](good_enough.md))
-- [proportional font](proportional_font.md) (fixed width font is better)
+- [proportional font](proportional_font.md) (complicated rendering and typesetting, takes more space, fixed width font is better)
 - [linking](linking.md), build systems/scripts, [makefiles](make.md), directories and multiple source code files (just using a compiler or a few-line building shell script, single file source code, [header only](header_only.md) libraries and [single compilation unit](single_compilation_unit.md) programs are better)
 - [infix notation](infix_notation.md) ([postfix notation](postfix_notation.md) is better)
 - any [GUI](gui.md), [window managers](wm.md) (pure text mode is better)
-- [operating system](os.md) ([bare metal](bare_metal.md) is better)
+- [operating system](os.md) and usual features such as [multitasking](multitasking.md), multiple users, [virtual memory](virtual_memory.md), file permissions etc. ([bare metal](bare_metal.md) is better)
 - [multithreading](multithreading.md), [parallelism](parallelism.md), [virtual memory](virtual_memory.md), ...
-- [encryption](encryption.md), [security](security.md), [memory safety](memory_safety.md) (just don't care and/or don't handle sensitive data with computers connected to the internet, don't live in a shitty society)
+- [encryption](encryption.md), [security](security.md), [memory safety](memory_safety.md) (just don't care and/or don't handle sensitive data with computers connected to the internet, don't live in a [shitty society](capitalism.md))
 - [X11](x11.md) (just pure screen drawing is better)
 - [database](database.md) software (plain files are better, see [flatfile](flatfile.md))
 - [C](c.md) (something in between C and [brainfuck](brainfuck.md) would is likely ideal, e.g. [comun](comun.md) or [Forth](forth.md))
@@ -165,20 +164,21 @@ Small/medium bloat includes for example:
 - [mouse](mouse.md) (keyboard is better)
 - [TCP](tcp.md) ([UDP](udp.md) is probably better)
 - [vim](vim.md) (things like [ed](ed.md) are probably better?)
-- sound (picture is usually enough)
+- sound (picture or even just text is usually enough)
-- high resolution (640x480 is probably the maximum you'll ever need, lower resolution takes less RAM and makes rendering faster)
+- high resolution (640x480 is probably the maximum you'll ever need, lower resolution takes less RAM, makes rendering faster, eats less power, ...)
 - [true color](true_color.md) (256 colors, e.g. [332](332.md) palette, is better, even 1 bit displays suffice for most things), high [FPS](fps.md) (25 is more than enough), high resolution ([320 x 240](320_240.md) is more than enough) etc.
+- raster displays (segmented LCD may suffice)
 - [GNU](gnu.md) Unix utils (things like [busybox](busybox.md) or [sbase](sbase.md) are probably better)
 - [data types](data_type.md) (untyped or single type is better, everything can be just a [number](number.md))
 - [package managers](package_manager.md) (just don't use them, install just a few programs manually, or at least make package managers as simple as possible)
 - [electricity](electricity.md) ([mechanical](mechanical.md) computers may be just fine)
-- [computers](computer.md) (pen and paper or counting with [rocks](rock.md) is better)
+- [computers](computer.md) (pen and paper or counting with [rocks](rock.md) or brain is better)
 - anything [wireless](wireless.md) ([wifi](wifi.md), mice, ...)
 - ...
 
 ## Non-Computer Bloat
 
-The concept of bloat can be applied even outside the computing world, e.g. to non-computer technology, [art](art.md), [culture](culture.md), [law](law.md) etc. Here it becomes kind of synonymous with [bullshit](bullshit.md), but using the word *bloat* says we're seeing the issue from the point of view of someone acquainted with computer bloat. Examples include:
+The concept of bloat can be applied even outside the computing world, to non-computer technology and even non-technological subjects such as [art](art.md), [culture](culture.md) or [law](law.md). Here it becomes kind of synonymous with [bullshit](bullshit.md), but using the word *bloat* says we're viewing the issue through the lens of someone acquainted with computer bloat. Examples include:
 
 - [clothes](clothes.md)
 - decorations (body, house, ...)
@@ -188,6 +188,8 @@ The concept of bloat can be applied even outside the computing world, e.g. to no
 - having electricity at home
 - ...
 
+See also life [minimalism](minimalism.md).
+
 ## See Also
 
 - [harmful](harmful.md)
@@ -197,4 +199,4 @@ The concept of bloat can be applied even outside the computing world, e.g. to no
 - [shit](shit.md)
 - [cyclomatic complexity](cyclomatic_complexity.md)
 - [freedom distance](freedom_ditance.md)
-- [software gore](sw_gore.md)
+- [software gore](sw_gore.md)

capitalist_software.md

@@ -1,14 +1,14 @@
 # Capitalist Software
 
-Capitalist software is [software](software.md) that late stage [capitalism](capitalism.md) produces and is practically 100% [shitty](shit.md) [modern](modern.md) [bloat](bloat.md) and [malware](malware.md) hostile to its users, made with the sole goal of benefiting its creator (often a [corporation](corporation.md)). Capitalist software is not just [proprietary](proprietary.md) corporate software, but a lot of times "[open source](open_source.md)", [indie](indie.md) software and even [free software](free_software.md) that's just infected by the toxic capitalist environment, even just subconsciously and very indirectly through infected [culture](culture.md) -- this infection may come deep even into the basic design principles (e.g. tolerance of [high complexity](bloat.md), [dependencies](dependency.md), [OOP](oop.md) etc.), even such things as [UI](ui.md) design, terminology used in the program, priorities and development practices and subtle software behavior which have simply all been shaped by the capitalist pressure on abusing the user. It is for example known that social media "[apps](app.md)" made by [corporations](corporation.md) are designed to induce psychological addiction, they will for example use bright colors and even make the colors brighter as one scrolls through comments as that psychologically rewards the user -- this undesirable and highly harmful kind of design is then culturally standardized, people accept that "this is how programs look and behave", and such standards subsequently have to be adopted by any program that wants to be popular (or, as a normie will usually always it: "intuitive").
+Capitalist software is [software](software.md) that late stage [capitalism](capitalism.md) produces and is practically 100% [shitty](shit.md) [modern](modern.md) [bloat](bloat.md) and [malware](malware.md) hostile to its users, made with the sole goal of benefiting its creator (often a [corporation](corporation.md)). Capitalist software is not just [proprietary](proprietary.md) corporate software, but a lot of times "[open source](open_source.md)", [indie](indie.md) software and even [free software](free_software.md) that's just infected by the [toxic](toxic.md) capitalist environment, even just subconsciously and very indirectly through infected [culture](culture.md) -- this infection may come deep even into the basic design principles (e.g. tolerance of [high complexity](bloat.md), [dependencies](dependency.md), [OOP](oop.md), [update culture](update_culture.md) etc.), even such things as [UI](ui.md) design, terminology used in the program, priorities and development practices and subtle software behavior which have simply all been shaped by the capitalist pressure on abusing the user. It is for example known that social media "[apps](app.md)" made by [corporations](corporation.md) are designed to induce psychological addiction, they will for instance use bright colors and even make the colors brighter as one scrolls through comments as that psychologically rewards the user -- this undesirable and highly harmful kind of design is then culturally standardized and copied even to hobbyist programs, people accept that "this is how programs look and behave", and such standards subsequently have to be adopted by any program that wants to be popular (or, as a normie will usually describe it: "intuitive").
 
 { Seriously I don't have enough brain to understand how anyone can accept this shit. ~drummyfish }
 
 Capitalist software largely mimics in technology what capitalist economy is doing in society -- for example it employs huge waste of resources (computing resources such as RAM and CPU cycles as an equivalent to natural resources) in favor of rapid growth (accumulation of "[features](feature.md)"), it creates hugely complex, interdependent and fragile ever growing networks (tons of library of hardware [dependencies](dependency.md) as an equivalent of import/export dependencies of countries) and employs consumerism (e.g. in form of mandatory frequent [updates](update_culture.md)). These effects of course bring all the negative implications along and lead to highly inefficient, fragile, bloated, unethical software.
 
-Basically everyone will agree that corporate software such as [Windows](windows.md) is to a high degree abusive to its users, be it by its spying, unjustified hardware demands, forced non customizability, price etc. A mistake a lot of people make is to think that sticking a free [license](license.md) to similar software will simply make it magically friendly to the user and that therefore most [FOSS](foss.md) programs are ethical and respect its users. This is sadly not the case, a license if only the first necessary step towards [freedom](freedom.md), but not a sufficient one -- other important steps have to follow.
+Basically everyone will agree that corporate software such as [Windows](windows.md) is to a high degree abusive to its users, be it by its spying, unjustified hardware demands, denial of control, forced non customizability, price etc. A mistake a lot of people make is to think that sticking a free [license](license.md) to similar software will simply make it magically friendly to the user and that therefore most [FOSS](foss.md) programs are ethical and respect their users. This is sadly not the case, a license is only the first necessary step towards [freedom](freedom.md), but not a sufficient one -- other important steps have to follow.
 
-A ridiculous example of capitalist software is the most consumerist type: [games](game.md). AAA games are pure evil that no longer even try to be good, they just try to be addictive like drugs. Games on release aren't even supposed to work correctly, tons of bugs are the standard, something that's expected by default, customers aren't even meant to receive a finished product for their money. They aren't even meant to own the product or have any control over it (lend it to someone, install it on another computer, play it offline or play it when it gets retired). These games spy on people (via so called [anti-cheat](anti_cheat.md) systems), are shamelessly meant to be consumed and thrown away, purposefully incompatible ("exclusives"), [bloated](bloat.md), discriminative against low-end computers and even targeting attacks on children ("lootboxes"). Game corporations attack and take down fan modification and remakes and show all imaginable kinds of unethical behavior such as trying to steal rights for maps/mods created with the game's editor (Warcraft: Reforged).
+A ridiculous example of capitalist software is the most consumerist type of them all: [games](game.md). By now AAA games are essentially distilled [evil](evil.md) that no longer even tries to provide good entertainment, only to be addictive like drugs. Games on release aren't even supposed to work correctly, tons of bugs are the standard, something that's expected by default, customers aren't even meant to receive a finished product for their money. They aren't even meant to own the product or have any control over it (lend it to someone, install it on another computer, play it offline or play it when it gets retired). These games spy on people (via so called [anti-cheat](anti_cheat.md) systems), are shamelessly meant to be consumed and thrown away, purposefully incompatible ("exclusives"), [bloated](bloat.md), discriminative against low-end computers and even targeting attacks on children ("lootboxes"). Game corporations attack and take down fan modification and remakes and show all imaginable kinds of unethical behavior such as trying to steal rights for maps/mods created with the game's editor (Warcraft: Reforged).
 
 **But how can possibly a [FOSS](foss.md) program be abusive?** Let's mention a few examples:
 
@@ -24,6 +24,6 @@ A ridiculous example of capitalist software is the most consumerist type: [games
 - Setting up **discriminatory, fascist and toxic centralized development communities** that de-facto own and control the software and use discriminatory practices and censorship, e.g. with [codes of conduct](coc.md). This allows to bully and "cancel" developers who are, for political or any other reason, unwelcome.
 - **Even free software may behave in unethical ways**. For example a company that profits from gambling may create a completely "FOSS" game for children that however teaches them gambling so that when they grow up they'll be more likely to become their victims.
 
-The essential issue of capitalist software is in its goal: profit. This doesn't have to mean making money directly, profit can also mean e.g. gaining popularity and political power. This goal goes before and eventually against goals such as helping and respecting the users. A free license is a mere obstacle on the way towards this goal, an obstacle that may for a while slow down corporation from abusing the users, but which will eventually be overcome just by the sheer power of the market environment which works on the principles of Darwinian evolution: those who make most profit, by any way, survive and thrive.
+The essential issue of capitalist software is in its goal: profit, or rather creating some kind of capital. This doesn't have to mean making money directly, profit can also mean e.g. gaining popularity, political power or control over some industry. If the whole world is absolutely dependent on an operating system you make and you possess the power to remotely shut down any country with the press of a button, you can just make money by blackmailing countries, letting them send you money so that you don't press the button, there is no need to charge money for your operating system. And this goal of profit/capital making goal goes before and eventually against goals such as helping and respecting the users. A free license is a mere obstacle on the way towards this goal, an obstacle that may for a while slow down corporation from abusing the users, but which will eventually be overcome just by the sheer power of the market environment which works on the principles of Darwinian evolution: those who make most profit, by any means available (even unethical or illegal), survive and thrive.
 
-Therefore "fixing" capitalist software is only possible via redefinition of the basic goal to just developing [selfless](selflessness.md) software that's good for the people (as opposed to making software for profit). This approach requires eliminating or just greatly limiting capitalism itself, at least from the area of technology. We need to find other ways than profit to motivate development of software and yes, other ways do exist (morality, social status, fun etc.).
+Therefore "fixing" capitalist software is only possible via redefinition of the basic goal to just developing [selfless](selflessness.md) software that's good for the people (as opposed to making software for profit). This approach requires eliminating or just greatly limiting capitalism itself, at least from the area of technology. We need to find other ways than profit to motivate development of software and yes, other ways do exist (morality, social status, fun etc.). In fact it has already shown that people naturally make software for free, selflessly, in their spare time, and that corporations have to actually STOP them from doing it -- see all the countless cases of corporations killing mods, clones and rewrites of their software. The only thing needed to make people create selfless software is to stop bullying them for doing it.

corporation.md

@@ -4,9 +4,11 @@ Corporation is basically a huge company that doesn't have a single owner but is
 
 NOTE: Besides corporations there also exist non-corporate companies -- privately owned ones -- but these are basically the same, it's just that instead of ten assholes they are owned by one asshole, so anything that will be said about corporations here will apply to any kind of big company. And just like with the startups, any kind of small company is aspiring to become a big company (and if it isn't, it will be eliminated by competition), so all in all everything here will apply to any kind of company whatsoever.
 
+**Corporations' interests are in conflict with people's interests** -- this is not a controversial statement, probably everyone agrees with it, nothing is more clear than that corporations WANT and NEED to do evil and that there must exist countless "protection" mechanisms so that people don't get absolutely destroyed and exploited like farm animals. Why, when we would hardly accept for example a court judge or sports referee having even a slight conflict of interests, do we accept the fact that our whole society is almost 100% controlled by entities with such an enormous [conflict of interests](antivirus_paradox.md) with having a society that's good for the people to live in? Why do riots start when it's found a football referee might have made a biased judgment during a game of kicking an inflated ball, but we see practically no opposition to the fact that an entity responsible for our health and literal lives of our families has DIRECT interest in people being sick, that those making software our lives depend on have direct interest in programming it so that it [intentionally breaks](artificial_obsolescence.md), that those ensuring people be fed have direct interest in food being expensive and people NOT being able to make their own food? It is of course because in sports and courts we by definition expect fairness, and so we get upset if it's not upheld, but we do NOT expect [capitalism](capitalism.md) to establish a good society -- as capitalism [by definition](name_is_important.md) focuses on capital ("profit"), NOT the people -- and so we don't even get upset when we don't see happy, free people living good lives under capitalism -- unlike in [socialism](socialism.md), which by definition focuses on the people, capitalism only focuses on maximizing profit on the detriment of everything else, and that is exactly what's happening.
+
 The most basic fact to know about corporations is that **100% of everything a corporation ever does is done 100% solely for maximizing its [own benefit](self_interest.md) for any cost, with no other reason, with 0 [morality](morality.md) and without any consideration of consequences and collateral damage**. If a corporation could make 1 cent by raping 1000000000 children and get away with it, it would do so immediately without any hesitation and any regret. This is very important to keep in mind. Now try to not get depressed upon realization that corporations are those to whom we gave power and who are in almost absolute control of the world.
 
-**Corporation is not a human, it has zero sense of morality and no emotion.** The most basic error committed by retards is to reply to this argument with "but corporations are run by humans". This is an extremely dangerous argument because somehow 99.999999999999999999% people believe this could be true and accept it as a comforting argument so that they can continue their daily lives and do absolutely nothing about the disastrous state of society. The argument is of course completely false for a number of reasons: firstly corporations exclusively hire psychopaths for manager roles -- any corporation that doesn't do this will be eliminated by natural selection of the market environment because it will be weaker in a [fight](fight_culture.md) against other corporations, and its place will be taken by the next aspiring corporation waiting in line. Secondly corporations are highly sophisticated machines that have strong **mechanisms preventing any ethical behavior** -- for example division of labor in the "[just doing my job](just_doing_my_job.md)"/"[everyone does it](everyone_does_it.md)" style allows for many people collaborating on something extremely harmful and unethical without any single one feeling responsibility for the whole, or sometimes without people even knowing what they are really collaborating on.
+**Corporation is not a human, it has zero sense of morality and no emotion.** The most basic error committed by retards is to reply to this argument with "but corporations are run by humans". This is an extremely dangerous argument because somehow 99.999999999999999999% people believe this could be true and accept it as a comforting argument so that they can continue their daily lives and do absolutely nothing about the disastrous state of society. The argument is of course completely false for a number of reasons: firstly corporations exclusively hire psychopaths for manager roles -- any corporation that doesn't do this will be eliminated by natural selection of the market environment because it will be weaker in a [fight](fight_culture.md) against other corporations, and its place will be taken by the next aspiring corporation waiting in line. Secondly corporations are highly sophisticated machines that have strong **mechanisms preventing any ethical behavior** -- for example division of labor in the "[just doing my job](just_doing_my_job.md)"/"[everyone does it](everyone_does_it.md)" style allows for many people collaborating on something extremely harmful and unethical without any single one feeling responsibility for the whole, or sometimes without people even knowing what they are really collaborating on. Saying corporation is like a human because it contains humans is like saying a human is like water because he's in big part composed of water.
 
 Somehow people are surprised when they see let's say a game company make huge hypes and promises of revolutionary new games and then delivering a completely different, absolutely shitty product (e.g. Warcraft Reforged, GTA "definitive" edition, Cyberpunk and countless other scams) -- "How can this company be so evil and lie so blatantly? Don't they know lying is bad? How can they promise something they can't make? Don't they care about their customers? Don't they think this will make people sad?" Of course not, lying is profitable and there is no one who's to blame in the company -- the [marketing](marketing.md) department's task is to just maximize hype and attention, their job is only to make promises and they know it's the developer's job to deliver on those promises, and on the other hand the developer's job is to just do what he can and not care about marketing and PR, from his point of view unrealistic promise is the marketing department's fail. I.e. both are just doing their job, they don't even have any other choice (else they get fired), no one is responsible, no one feels any guilt. This is a corporation using human intelligence while removing human conscience.
 

cpp.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # C++
 
-C++ (also C--, C卐卐 or crippled C) is an [object-obsessed](oop.md) [joke](jokes.md) language based on [C](c.md) to which it adds only [capitalist](capitalist_software.md) features and [bloat](bloat.md), most notably [object obsession](oop.md). Most good programmers such as [Richard Stallman](rms.md) and [Linus Torvalds](linus_torvalds.md) agree that C++ is hilariously messy and also tragic in that it actually succeeded to become mainstream. The language creator [Bjarne Stroustrup](stroustrup.md) himself infamously admitted the language sucks but laughs at its critics because it became successful anyway -- indeed, in a retarded society only [shit](shit.md) can succeed. As someone once said, "C++ is not an increment, it is excrement". C++ specification has **over 2000 pages** :D
+C++ (also C--, C卐卐 or crippled C) is an [object-obsessed](oop.md) [joke](jokes.md) [language](programming_language.md) based on [C](c.md) to which it adds only [capitalist](capitalist_software.md) features and [bloat](bloat.md), most notably [object obsession](oop.md). Most good programmers such as [Richard Stallman](rms.md) and [Linus Torvalds](linus_torvalds.md) agree that C++ is hilariously messy and also tragic in that it actually succeeded to become mainstream. The language creator [Bjarne Stroustrup](stroustrup.md) himself infamously admitted the language sucks but laughs at its critics because it became successful anyway -- indeed, in a retarded society only [shit](shit.md) can succeed. As someone once said, "C++ is not an increment, it is excrement". C++ specification has **over 2000 pages** :D You could fit several novels in that space.
 
 C++ source code files have the extensions `.cpp` or `.cc` (for "crippled C").
 

determinism.md

@@ -22,4 +22,12 @@ In theoretical [computer science](compsci.md) non-determinism means that a model
 
 **Determinism does NOT guarantee [reversibility](reversibility.md)**, i.e. if we know a state of a deterministic system, it may not always be possible to tell from which state it evolved, or in other words: a system that's deterministic may or may not be deterministic in reverse time direction. This reversibility is only possible if the rules of the system are such that no state can evolve from two or more different states (see [bijection](bijection.md) and [reversible computing](reversible_computing.md)). If this holds then it is always possible to time-reverse the system and step it backwards to its initial state. This may be useful for things such as [undos](undo.md) in programs. Also note that even if a system is reversible, it may be computationally very time consuming and sometimes practically impossible to reverse the system (imagine e.g. reversing a cryptographic [hash](hash.md) -- mathematical reversibility of such hash may be arbitrarily ensured by e.g. pairing each hash with the lowest value that produces it).
 
-**Is [floating point](float.md) deterministic?** In theory even floating point arithmetic can of course be completely deterministic but there is the question of whether this holds about concrete specifications and implementations of floating point (e.g. in different programming languages) -- here in theory non-determinism may arise e.g. by some unspecified behavior such as rounding rules. In practice you can't rely on float being deterministic. The common float standard, IEEE 754, is basically deterministic, including rounding etc. (except for possible payload of [NaNs](nan.md), which shouldn't matter in most cases), but this e.g. doesn't hold for floating point types in [C](c.md)!
+**Is [floating point](float.md) deterministic?** In theory even floating point arithmetic can of course be completely deterministic but there is the question of whether this holds about concrete specifications and implementations of floating point (e.g. in different programming languages) -- here in theory non-determinism may arise e.g. by some unspecified behavior such as rounding rules. In practice you can't rely on float being deterministic. The common float standard, IEEE 754, is basically deterministic, including rounding etc. (except for possible payload of [NaNs](nan.md), which shouldn't matter in most cases), but this e.g. doesn't hold for floating point types in [C](c.md)!
+
+## See Also
+
+- [chaos](chaos.md)
+- [randomness](randomness.md)
+- [pseudorandomness](pseudorandomness.md)
+- [free will](free_will.md)
+- [karma](karma.md)

free_will.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
 
 Free will is a logically erroneous egocentric belief that humans (and possibly other living beings) are special in the universe by possessing some kind of soul which may disobey laws of physics and somehow make spontaneous, unpredictable decisions according to its "independent" desires. Actually that's the definition of *absolute* *indeterminate* free will; weaker definitions are also possible, e.g. *volitional free will* means just that one's actions are determined internally, or for the purposes of law definitions based on one's sanity may be made. But here we'll focus on the philosophical definition as that's what most autism revolves around. The Internet (and even academic) debates of free will are notoriously retarded to unbelievable levels, similarly to e.g. debates of [consciousness](consciousness.md).
 
-{ Sabine nicely explains it here https://yewtu.be/watch?v=zpU_e3jh_FY. ~drummyfish }
+{ Sabine nicely explains it here [https://yewtu.be/watch?v=zpU_e3jh_FY](https://yewtu.be/watch?v=zpU_e3jh_FY). Amlux recently published an excellent commentary on determinism and free will: [https://inv.nadeko.net/watch?v=opjVNbCvaGw](https://inv.nadeko.net/watch?v=opjVNbCvaGw) which even has a text version: [https://pantsuprophet.xyz/writings/essays/along-for-the-ride.html](https://pantsuprophet.xyz/writings/essays/along-for-the-ride.html). ~drummyfish }
 
 Free will is usually discussed in relation to **[determinism](determinism.md)**, an idea of everything (including human thought and behavior) being completely predetermined from the start of the universe. Determinism is the most natural and most likely explanation for the working of our universe; it states that laws of nature dictate precisely which state will follow from current state and therefore everything that will every happen is only determined by the initial conditions (start of the universe). As human brain is just matter like any other, it is no exception to the laws of nature. Determinism doesn't imply we'll be able to make precise predictions (see e.g. [chaos](chaos.md) or [undecidability](undecidability.md)), just that everything is basically already set in stone as a kind of unavoidable fate. Basically the only other possible option is that there would be some kind true [randomness](randomness.md), i.e. that laws of nature don't specify an exact state to follow from current state but rather multiple states out of which one is "taken" at random -- this is proposed by some [quantum](quantum.md) physicists as quantum physics seems to be showing the existence of inherent randomness. Nevertheless **quantum physics may still be deterministic**, see the theory of hidden variables and [superdeterminism](superdeterminism.md) (no, Bell test didn't disprove determinism). But **EVEN IF the universe is non deterministic, free will still CANNOT exist**. Therefore this whole debate is meaningless.
 

future_proof.md

@@ -1,22 +1,23 @@
 # Future-Proof Technology
 
-[Future](future.md)-[proof](proof.md) technology is [technology](technology.md) that is very likely to stay functional for a very long time with minimal to no [maintenance](maintenance.md), even considering significant changes in state of technology in society. In a world of relatively complex technology, such as that of [computers](computer.md), this feature is generally pretty hard to achieve; today's [consumerist](consumerism.md) society makes the situation even much worse by focusing on immediate profit without long-term planning and by implementing things such as [bloat](bloat.md), intentional introduction of complexity, [obscurity](obscurity.md), [dependencies](dependency.md) and [planned obsolescence](planned_obsolescence.md). But with good approach, such as that of [LRS](lrs.md), it is very possible to achieve.
+[Future](future.md)-[proof](proof.md) [technology](technology.md) is that which is very likely to stay functional for a very long time with minimal to no [maintenance](maintenance.md), even assuming significant changes in state of technology and society as a whole. In a world of complex, ever changing technology, such as that of [computers](computer.md), this feature is generally not easy to achieve, but [today's](21st_century.md) [consumerist](consumerism.md) society makes all yet much worse by focusing on immediate profit without long-term planning and by actually aiming to MITIGATE long lasting technology via [planned obsolescence](planned_obsolescence.md), by introducing [bloat](bloat.md), intentional complexity and [obscurity](obscurity.md), incompetent developers, unnecessary [dependencies](dependency.md) and [update culture](update_culture.md). With good approach, such as that [we](lrs.md) are advocating, future-proof technology is absolutely possible to be achieved. It doesn't have to be the case that programs rot like food.
 
-A [truly good technology](lrs.md) is trying to be future-proof because this saves us the great cost of maintenance and reinventing wheels and it gives its users comfort and safety; users of future-proof technology know they can build upon it without fearing it will suddenly break.
+A [truly good technology](lrs.md) is trying to be future-proof because that of course saves us the high (and unnecessary) costs of maintenance and reinventing wheels and by this gives its users comfort from being an ever updating slave and safety from the threat of losing their tools; users of future-proof technology know they can build upon it without fearing it will suddenly break.
 
-Despite the extremely bad situation not all hope is lost. At least in the world of [software](software.md) future-proofing can be achieved by:
+Despite the godawful situation in the mainstream not all hope is lost, at least for those staying away from the mainstream. At least in the world of [software](software.md) future-proofing can be achieved by:
 
-- [Free (as in freedom) software](free_software.md) -- making your source code available, legally modifyable and shareable is a basic step towards making it easy to repair, backup and adopt to new technology (e.g. compile for new CPU architectures etc.). 
+- [Free (as in freedom) software](free_software.md) -- making source code available, legally modifiable and shareable is a basic step towards making it easy to repair, backup and adopt to new technology (e.g. compile for a new [CPU](cpu.md) architectures etc.). 
-- Building on top of already well established, time-tested and relatively [simple](kiss.md) technology such as the [C language](c.md) or [comun](comun.md). Choosing to use the older standards with fewer features helps greatly as the less-feature-rich versions of languages are always more supported (for example there is many more C89 compilers than C17 compilers) and can even be relatively simply reimplemented if needed. Another example is e.g. [OpenGL](opengl.md) -- you should use the oldest (simplest) version you can to make a program better future proof.
+- Building on top of already well established, time-tested and relatively [simple](kiss.md) technology such as the [C language](c.md) or [Forth](forth.md). Choosing to use the older standards with fewer features helps greatly as the less feature-rich versions of languages are always better supported (for example there are many more C89 compilers than C17 compilers) and can even be relatively simply reimplemented if needed. Another example is e.g. [OpenGL](opengl.md) -- you should use the oldest (simplest) version you can settle for in order to make a program more future proof.
-- Minimizing [dependencies](dependency.md) to absolute bare minimum and offering alternatives and [fallbacks](fallback.md) in cases where you can't avoid introducing a dependency (e.g. you should always offer an option for [software rendering](software_rendering.md) in any program that by default uses [GPU](gpu.md) for 3D graphics). Dependencies are likely the single greatest cause of software death because if one of your dependencies dies, you whole project dies, and this goes [recursively](recursion.md) for all of the dependencies of the dependencies etc. This usually means software [libraries](library.md) but also goes for other software such as [build systems](build_system.md) and also [hardware](hardware.md) dependencies such as requiring GPU, floating point, special instructions etc.
+- Minimizing [dependencies](dependency.md) to absolute bare minimum and offering alternatives and [fallbacks](fallback.md) in cases where you can't avoid introducing a dependency (e.g. you should always offer an option for [software rendering](software_rendering.md) in any program that by default uses [GPU](gpu.md) for 3D graphics). Dependencies are likely the single biggest cause of software death because if one of your hard dependencies dies, you whole [project](project.md) dies, and this applies [recursively](recursion.md) for all of the dependencies of the dependencies etc. This usually means software [libraries](library.md) but also goes for other software such as [build systems](build_system.md) and also [hardware](hardware.md) dependencies such as requiring [GPU](gpu.md), [floating point](float.md), special CPU instructions etc.
-- Practicing [minimalism](minimalism.md) and reducing complexity which minimizes the maintenance cost and therefore raises the probability of someone being able to fix any issues that arise over time. Minimalism is necessary and EXTREMELY important, [bloat](bloat.md) will make your program very prone to dying as it will depend on a big community of programmers that maintain it and such community will itself always be very prone to disappearing (internals disagreements, stopped funding, lose of interest, ...).
+- Practicing [minimalism](minimalism.md) and reducing complexity which minimizes the maintenance cost and therefore raises the probability of someone being able to fix any issues that arise over time (see also [freedom distance](freedom_distance.md)). Minimalism is necessary and immensely important, [bloat](bloat.md) makes a program very prone to dying as that will depend on a large community of programmers that maintain it and such community will itself always be very prone to disappearing (internals disagreements, stopped funding, loss of interest, ...).
-- Making your program [portable](portability.md) -- this ensures your program can be adapted to new platforms and also that you use abstractions that untie you from things such as hardware dependencies.
+- Making your program [portable](portability.md) -- this ensures your program can be adapted to new platforms and also that you use [abstractions](abstraction.md) that untie you from things such as hardware dependencies (be careful with abstraction though, too much of it is bad as well).
-- Generally just avoiding the hyped "modern" "feature-rich" ([bloated](bloat.md)) technology arising from the consumerist market.
+- Generally just avoiding the hyped "[modern](modern.md)" "feature-rich" ([bloated](bloat.md)) technology arising from the consumerist market or mainstream places such as [GitHub](github.md). Stick to ancient software.
+- Aiming to [finish](finished.md) the program, avoiding [update culture](update_culture.md), practices and mindset of "modern" software developments.
 - ...
 
-Just **think**. To see how likely your program is to die in short time just ponder for a while: what parts is it composed of and how likely is each of them to continue functioning and be fixed if it breaks? It's really like with a house or car. Notice that probability of breaking increases with complexity and probability of fixing decreases with complexity (because a fix has a higher cost -- it needs more time, energy, skill and so on). Is your program written in a simple language for which there already exist 10 compilers and which can be implemented again in a month if needed? Then the program is not likely to die by compiler or anything that may kill a compiler, such as a different operating or a new CPU architecture. Is it written in a 5 year old language that's still changing under your hands, has a single compiler and which itself relies on 100 highly complex libraries? Chances of death are great, it is certain your program will break with the next update of the language, or the one after that, you'll have to be around to fix it, and then a month later and then another month and so on until you die, for every program you have written in this language. Does your program only need two libraries, both of which can easily be replaced by something else by only rewriting 10 lines of code? Then your program likely won't die because of these libraries! Does your program use 10 very convenient but complex libraries, each of which additionally uses 10 other libraries itself? In a simplified way you can see your program depending on 100 other libraries now, if a chance of one such library breaking during one year is 1%, the chance of your program breaking in one year is 1 - 0.99^100 ~= 63%; if it doesn't break this year, then the next or the one after that -- yeah, someone will likely fix a library that breaks, but maybe not, projects get abandoned out of burnout, boredom, in favor of new ones etc., and a fix of your dependency may also come with the need for you to be around and update your own program because of API change. Does your program depend on piece of consumerism hardware that in 2 years will stop being supported? Or some specific operating system or Internet service posing similar dangers? This is additional thing on your list to watch, else your program dies. If your program is broken without you being around, how likely will it be fixed by someone? How many people in the world will be capable and willing to fix it? If the program is simple, likely any average programmer will be able to fix it and if the fix takes 10 minutes of time, someone will most likely do it just out of boredom. If your program is 100 thousands lines of code long, requires knowledge of 10 specific framework APIs and its inner architecture just to modify anything of importance, average programmer won't be able to fix it, he won't even attempt it -- if there is someone able to do the job, he won't fix it unless someone pays him a lot of money. Your program is basically dead.
+Just **think**: in order to reveal how likely your program is to live a short life just ponder for a moment: what parts is it composed of and what are the probabilities of any one stopping to work? How easy will it be to fix the ones that break? It's like with a car or a house. Observe that probability of breaking increases with complexity and effort required for a fix increases with simplicity (because a fix has a higher cost: needing more time, energy, skill and so on). Is the program written in a simple language already supported by 20 compilers and which can be reimplemented in a month if needed? Then it's likely not endangered by the threat of compiler death or death of anything that would kill the compiler itself such as a different [operating system](os.md) or a new CPU architecture. Is it written in a 5 year old language that's still changing under your hands, has a single compiler and which itself relies on 100 highly complex libraries?  The bells already toll for your program, it's almost certain it will break with the next update of the language, or the one after that, you'll have to be around to fix and update, and then a month later and then another month and so on until your own death, for every program you have written in this language. Does your program only need two [libraries](library.md), both of which can easily be drop-in replaced by something else? Congratulations, your program won't die by the hand of a library! Does your program use 10 very convenient but highly complex libraries, each of which additionally boasts a dependency on 10 other libraries itself? In a simplified way you can see your program depending on 100 other libraries now, if a chance of one such library breaking during one year is 1%, the chance of your program breaking in one year is 1 - 0.99^100 ~= 63%; if it doesn't break this year, then the next or the one after that -- yeah, someone will likely fix a library that breaks, but maybe not, projects get abandoned due to financial issues, burnouts, boredom, developer conflicts, in favor of new ones etc., and a fix of your dependency may also come with the need for you to be around and update your own program because of [API](api.md) change. Does your program depend on a piece of consumerism hardware that's planned to be replaced ("modernized") in two years? Or some specific operating system or Internet service posing similar dangers? This is additional danger on your watch list. If your program is broken without you being around, how likely will it be fixed by someone else? How many people in the world will be capable and willing to fix it? If the program is simple, likely any average programmer can do it in 10 minutes, someone will most likely do it just out of boredom. If your program is 100 thousands [lines of code](loc.md) long, requires knowledge of 10 specific framework APIs and its inner architecture looks like a space station, average programmer won't ever be able to fix it, he won't even attempt it -- if there is someone able to do the job, he won't fix it unless someone pays him a fortune. Your program is basically already dead.
 
-Please take a look at the table below, maybe you'll be able to extract some patterns repeating in software development [history](history.md):
+Below is a table showing how the newest, hyped technology is usually the one to avoid:
 
 | technology          | description                                                                                         | born           | dead                          |
 | ------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------- | ----------------------------- |

google.md

@@ -1,14 +1,14 @@
 # Google
 
-Google (also Goolag) is one the very top and most [evil](evil.md) [big tech](big_tech.md) [corporations](corporation.md), as well as one of the worst corporations in [history](history.md) (if not THE worst), comparable only to [Micro$oft](microsoft.md), [Apple](apple.md) and [Facebook](facebook.md). Google is gigantically evil and largely controls the [Internet](internet.md), pushes mass surveillance, personal data collection and abuse, [ads](marketing.md), [bloat](bloat.md), [fascism](tranny_software.md) and [censorship](censorship.md). Like every company, Google tries to grab [monopolies](monopoly.md) wherever it can so as to exploit them to their full potential, and at this it's succeeding over and over again.
+Google (also Goolag or Jewgle) is one the very top and most [evil](evil.md) [big tech](big_tech.md) [corporations](corporation.md), as well as one of the worst corporations in [history](history.md) (if not THE worst), comparable only to [Micro$oft](microsoft.md), [Apple](apple.md) and [Facebook](facebook.md). Google is gigantically evil and largely controls the [Internet](internet.md), pushes mass surveillance, personal data collection and abuse, [ads](marketing.md), [bloat](bloat.md), [fascism](tranny_software.md) and [censorship](censorship.md). Like every company, Google tries to grab [monopolies](monopoly.md) wherever it can so as to exploit them to their full potential, and at this it's succeeding over and over again.
 
 Google's motto used to be **"Don't be evil"**, but in 2018 they ditched it lol xD
 
-Google raised to the top thanks to its [search engine](search_engine.md) launched in the 90s. It soon got a **monopoly on the Internet search** and started pushing ads. Nowadays Google's search engine basically just promotes "content" on Google's own content platforms such as [YouTube](youtube.md) and of course censors sites deemed politically incorrect.
+Google raised to the top thanks to its [search engine](search_engine.md) launched in the [90s](90s.md). It soon got a **monopoly on the Internet search** and started pushing ads. Nowadays Google's search engine basically just promotes "content" on Google's own content platforms such as [YouTube](youtube.md) and of course censors sites deemed politically incorrect.
 
 **If you are relying on Goolag for your search, you are missing on a huge part of the web**, you will simply never see links to huge parts of the web which currently include e.g. [Kiwifarms](kiwifarms.md), [Metapedia](metapedia.md), [Encyclopedia Dramatica](dramatica.md), [Infogalactic](infogalactic.md), [Incels wiki](incels_wiki.md), [8kun](8kun.md) and many others, including thousands and thousands of [small noncommercial sites](smol_internet.md). You are literally using crippled "search engine" if it can even be called so anymore, you're seeing a tiny bubble of preapproved content.
 
-Besides heavily biasing web search results towards Google's own and friendly platforms, Google also **heavily censors** the search results and won't show links to prohibited sites unless you literally very specifically show that you want to find a prohibited site you already know of, for example you won't find results leading to [Metapedia](metapedia.md) or Encyclopedia Dramatica unless you literally search for the url of those sites or long verbatim phrases they contain -- this is a trick played on those who "test" Google which at is mean to make it look as if Google actually isn't censored, however it is of course censored because the only people who will ever find the prohibited sites and their content are people who already know about it and are specifically searching for it just to test Google's censorship. Nowadays it also has to comply with censorship laws in various regions, e.g. that of [EU](eu.md) and its "personality protection", "IP protection" and what not, which basically just removes anything that would be of actual interest to you, so probably just ditch this shit forever now, use something that doesn't comply with laws. { EDIT: tho Google also seems to refuse to give some URLs no matter what, e.g. https://infogalactic.com. Just tested it. ~drummyfish } If you intend to truly search the Internet, don't rely on Google's results but search with multiple engines (that have their own index) such as Mojeek, Yandex, Right Dao, [wiby](wiby.md), [YaCy](yacy.md), Qwant etc. (and of course search the [darknet](darknet.md)), also check out [metasearch engines](metasearch_engine.md) like [SearxNG](searxng.md). Google will forever stay the most popular search engine by [social inertia](social_inertia.md) despite the fact that it is 100% useless now, but you can personally choose to not use.
+Besides heavily biasing web search results towards Google's own and friendly platforms, Google also **heavily censors** the search results and won't show links to prohibited sites unless you literally very specifically show that you want to find a prohibited site you already know of, for example you won't find results leading to [Metapedia](metapedia.md) or Encyclopedia Dramatica unless you literally search for the url of those sites or long verbatim phrases they contain -- this is a trick played on those who "test" Google which is meant to make it look as if Google actually isn't censored, however it is of course censored because the only people who will ever find the prohibited sites and their content are people who already know about it and are specifically searching for it just to test Google's censorship. Nowadays it also has to comply with censorship laws in various regions, e.g. that of [EU](eu.md) and its "personality protection", "IP protection" and what not, which basically just removes anything that would be of actual interest to you, so probably just ditch this shit forever now, use something that doesn't comply with laws. { EDIT: tho Google also seems to refuse to give some URLs no matter what, e.g. https://infogalactic.com. Just tested it. ~drummyfish } If you intend to truly search the Internet, don't rely on Google's results but search with multiple engines (that have their own index) such as Mojeek, Yandex, Right Dao, [wiby](wiby.md), [YaCy](yacy.md), Qwant etc. (and of course search the [darknet](darknet.md)), also check out [metasearch engines](metasearch_engine.md) like [SearxNG](searxng.md). Google will forever stay the most popular search engine by [social inertia](social_inertia.md) despite the fact that it is 100% useless now, but you can personally choose to not use.
 
 Google has created a malicious [capitalist](capitalist_software.md) mobile "[operating system](operating_system.md)" called [Android](android.md), which they based on [Linux](linux.md) with which they managed to bypass its [copyleft](copyleft.md) by making Android de-facto dependent on their proprietary *Play Store* and other programs. I.e. they managed to take a [free](free_software.md) project and make a de-facto [proprietary](proprietary.md) [malware](malware.md) out of it -- a system that typically doesn't allow users to modify its internals and turn off its malicious features. Android is also one of the ugliest pieces of software ever made, requiring hugely specific and expensive computer setup just for its compilation. With Android they invaded a huge number of devices from cells phones to TVs and have the ability to spy on the users of these devices.
 

homelessness.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Homelessness
 
-Homelessness (sometimes also houselessness) is the state of having no permanent residence such as a house, flat or other kind of accommodation. Homeless people are colloquially called *hobos*. In our society one typically becomes homeless as a consequence of losing the [capitalist](capitalism.md) game of self interest and so becoming poor, unable to afford a place to stay, for which homelessness is further associated with poverty, poor health, [depression](depression.md) and other misfortune. Nonetheless homelessness actually means [freedom](freedom.md), no longer having to care about unimportant things with which a common [wage slave](work.md) is constantly preoccupied, being able to travel freely, not having to be a [slave](work.md) anymore, and thus as a form of asceticism this seemingly undesirable fate is in fact voluntarily chosen and practiced by the wisest among people. No more bills to pay, no more insurance or contracts, no crippling mortgages, headaches induced by managing property, no paper work, going insane from broken computers, car maintenance, house maintenance, garden maintenance, no more uncomfortable suits, suicide inducing TV [ads](marketing.md), no longer being chained to the place of work, not having to talk to idiots every day or attend annoying family celebrations, not having to get up early and spend whole day stressed out sucking dicks of the overlords, no need to take sleeping pills to fall asleep early so that the next day you can jump up with the sound of alarm clock to slave until exhaustion for a millionth time, no worry about being canceled, discredited, defamed, sued, ... no more [bullshit](bullshit.md), only a world awaiting you, traveling and observing, good things waiting to be done, out of your free will. Yes, indeed, being homeless is recommended by [LRS](lrs.md).
+Homelessness (sometimes also houselessness) is the state of having no permanent residence such as a house, flat or other kind of accommodation. Homeless people are colloquially called *hobos* (not to be confused with [homos](gay.md)). Our society imposes the punishment of homelessness (as a replacement for more primitive punishments such as exile) on those who have lose the [capitalist](capitalism.md) game of self interest (or simply refused to participate) and so have fallen into poverty leading to inability of paying for a place to stay, for which homelessness is further associated with poverty, poor health, [depression](depression.md) and other misfortune. Homelessness is capitalism's death sentence: the homeless is either required to repent by accepting yet much amplified levels of inhumane slavery to pay all the "debts", or simply starve or freeze to death or end up as a hunting game for neonazis (in capitalism the homeless can be freely killed because they have no relatives so no one will notice or sue anyone, people also generally applaud killing the homeless). Nonetheless homelessness actually presents the highest [freedom](freedom.md) one can achieve (even if it might not last long), no longer having to care about unimportant things with which a common [wage slave](work.md) is constantly preoccupied, being able to travel freely, not having to be a [slave](work.md) anymore, and thus as a form of asceticism this seemingly undesirable fate is in fact voluntarily chosen and practiced by the wisest among people. No more bills to pay, no more insurance or contracts, crippling mortgages, headaches induced by managing property, no paper work, going insane from broken computers, car maintenance, house maintenance, garden maintenance, no more uncomfortable suits, suicide inducing TV [ads](marketing.md), no longer being chained to the place of work, not having to talk to idiots every day or attend annoying family celebrations, not having to get up early and spend whole day stressed out sucking dicks of the overlords, no need to take sleeping pills to fall asleep early so that the next day you can jump up with the sound of alarm clock to slave until exhaustion for a millionth time, no need to swallow cancer inducing antidepressants to be able to withstand being yelled at every day, no worry about being [canceled](cancel_culture.md), discredited, defamed, sued, ... no more [bullshit](bullshit.md), only a world awaiting you, traveling and observing, good things waiting to be done, out of your free will. Yes, indeed, being homeless is recommended by [LRS](lrs.md).
 
 ## Homeless Tips
 

iq.md

@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ TODO: smartest man?
 
 Most people are called a genius nowadays -- any recent so called "genius" (such as [Steve Jobs](steve_jobs.md)) is in fact most likely of below average IQ; just barely above mediocre idea someone comes up with by chance will be celebrated as that of a genius, **real genius ideas will be met with hostility**; real genius ideas are too good and too far ahead and unacceptable to normal people. Furthermore success in [business](business.md) requires lack of intelligence so as to be unable to see the consequences of one's actions. Your cat watching you solve Riemann hypothesis will not even know what's happening, to it you are a retard wasting time on sliding a stick over table, on the other hand the cat will judge a monkey capable of opening a can of cat food a genius. Society is composed solely of idiots, they can only see if someone is a tiny bit better at what they do than them, and those they celebrate, if you are light years ahead of them they don't even have the capacity to comprehend how good you are at what you do because they can't even comprehend the thing you do. This includes even [PhD](phd.md)s and people with several Nobel Prizes, everyone except the few supporters of [LRS](lrs.md) are just blind idiots playing along with the system, some lucky to succeed in it and some not. This is why shit technology is prospering and [LRS](lrs.md) is being overlooked. It's just another confirmation our ideas as superior.
 
-Consider this analogy (yes, analogies are good): in a race you can only see those who are plus or minus 20 meters away from you, you can assess everyone else's position only by someone else telling you, so if someone is 50 meters ahead of you, you can know but only by someone ahead of you telling you that someone ahead of him told him he saw him there way up in the front. Now since there are many fewer of high IQ people, they have lower probability of being recognized, simply because there are few people capable of recognizing them -- in mainstream places like Universities you still likely will be recognized as there are smart people around, and the knowledge of your genius will be chain propagated to the mainstream monkeys, but if you're a genius outside a mainstream place, the chance is almost zero you will be recognized (and if you're smart you will probably also not try to be recognized, only retards do that). With this mainstream will simply lack information about your intelligence, they will only see a question mark above your head -- they know you're not average, because averages get recognized very quickly, everyone can assess those -- so now they know you're either really smart or really dumb, and since you don't fit the false, twisted idea of mainstream pseudogenius (being rich, famous, ...), they will conclude you belong to the latter class, i.e. that you're a retard. Note that the same effect manifests also with the pseudogenius, just in the opposite way -- the dumbest people, like [CEOs](ceo.md), are too far away from the average (now towards lower values), so the mainstream isn't sure about their intelligence; here however the CEO applies manipulation, he has the money to pay for a biography book that paints him as a genius, he can pay someone to write him speeches so that he appears to say smart things, he pays people to invent things signed by his name, or he simply steals them with the power of money (Edison, Jobs, ...) etc., so he ends up being taken for genius, despite actually being dumber than many animals (even a dog has enough brain cells to feel for example empathy, something way too complex for a CEO).
+Consider this analogy (yes, analogies are good): in a race you can only see those who are plus or minus 20 meters away from you because people of vastly different performance, you can assess everyone else's position only by someone else telling you, so if someone is 50 meters ahead of you, you can know but only by someone ahead of you telling you that someone ahead of him told him he saw him there way up in the front. Now since there are many fewer of high IQ people, they have lower probability of being recognized, simply because there are few people capable of recognizing them -- in mainstream places like Universities you still likely will be recognized as there are smart people around, and the knowledge of your genius will be chain propagated to the mainstream monkeys, but if you're a genius outside a mainstream place, the chance is almost zero you will be recognized (and if you're smart you will probably also not try to be recognized, only retards do that). With this mainstream will simply lack information about your intelligence, they will only see a question mark above your head -- they know you're not average, because averages get recognized very quickly, everyone can assess those -- so now they know you're either really smart or really dumb, and since you don't fit the false, twisted idea of mainstream pseudogenius (being rich, famous, ...), they will conclude you belong to the latter class, i.e. that you're a retard. Note that the same effect manifests also with the pseudogenius, just in the opposite way -- the dumbest people, like [CEOs](ceo.md), are too far away from the average (now towards lower values), so the mainstream isn't sure about their intelligence; here however the CEO applies manipulation, he has the money to pay for a biography book that paints him as a genius, he can pay someone to write him speeches so that he appears to say smart things, he pays people to invent things signed by his name, or he simply steals them with the power of money (Edison, Jobs, ...) etc., so he ends up being taken for genius, despite actually being dumber than many animals (even a dog has enough brain cells to feel for example empathy, something way too complex for a CEO).
 
 { The short story *Country of the Blind* by H. G. Wells is a nice story about this phenomenon of too much competence being seen as a lack of competence, illustrated on a story of a completely healthy man who finds himself in a village of people who are all blind. ~drummyfish }
 
@@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ Below are some traits and types of intelligence, things we frequently see in hig
 - **Emotional and social intelligence, having higher life goals, resisting low instincts, focusing on the spiritual and intellectual before the material**: the intelligent shows high empathy and understanding of others, he can see through lies and propaganda easily, he has the ability to accept suffering, give up comfort and safety, he is able to [love](love.md) those who hate him for seeing the deeper reasons for why they are so, he can forgive, he is humble, never [worships any people](hero_culture.md), never seeks fame or success, never respects anyone's authority, despises prizes, medals and honors, he loves animals and other life forms and adopts higher life goals such as [selflessness](selflessness.md). For this he always tends to [socialist](socialism.md) and [altruistic](altruism.md) thinking, adopting [pacifism](pacifism.md), [communism](communism.md), [veganism](veganism.md) etc. A retard is closer to an animal: preoccupied with satisfying immediate needs (see e.g. [consumerism](consumerism.md), various addictions etc.) and self interest (typically being a [capitalist](capitalism.md), [fascist](fascism.md) etc.).
 - **Creativity, non-conformance, critical thinking, questioning everything**: a genius is special by finding solutions in places where no one thought of looking before rather than by hard [work](work.md) (that he may do too, but it's not what's exclusive to the genius), i.e. solutions that were missed not for being difficult to achieve but rather too unconventional or dangerous by being in conflict with established ways. A chimp will just learn norms and values of society; a genius will always question them and will reject those that make no sense (in our society practically all), so he will become a hated noncomformist accepting controversial things such as [pedophilia](pedophilia.md). It's not a voluntary rebellion, his brain is physically incapable of NOT seeing what's actually good and what's bad, he naturally questions absolutely everything, including things like basic ethics and opinions of respected authorities. An idiot on the other hand is a conformist, tribalist, often a soldier or worker more similar to a machine mindlessly performing orders and dancing as he's told.
 - **Elevated sense of humor**: almost universally the intelligent love smart humor and are good at creating it, they can make fun of themselves easily and make jokes even where it's seen as inappropriate, e.g. dark humor during funerals, high quality [trolling](trolling.md) and offensive [jokes](jokes.md) inserted into serious speeches, lectures, books, papers, making fun of taboos and so on. Again don't confuse this with cheap crap "humor" by wannabe celebrities who just think it's funny to laugh constantly and non-stop shit out streams of words just to keep saying something, sweating to stay in the center of attention, which they think makes them a master stand up comedian. Being able to spot the difference is also part of having higher IQ. It's extremely simple to entertain a retard because he buys cheap jokes such as puns, pop-culture references, sex jokes, parodies of famous people etc., he can't tell if humor is good or bad so he can easily keep consuming mass-produced humor such as Netflix shows, which to the smart equals torture.
-- **Seeing patterns, observation skills, high awareness**: nowadays we would almost say "being autistic" or obsessed about details other people ignore or filter out, such as numbering of roads, train schedules, font choice in restaurant menus to give a few examples. Intelligence is very much about pattern recognition, and this includes all kinds of patterns, be they visual, social, mathematical, [historical](history.md) etc. Learning to recognize patterns is conditioned by consciously noticing them, acknowledging them and thinking about them. Again this will lead to seeing hidden truths and the individual being labeled "conspiracy theorist" or even getting diagnosed with schizophrenia (or autism, OCD or whatever).
+- **Seeing patterns, observation skills, high awareness**: nowadays we would almost say "being autistic" or obsessed about details other people ignore or filter out, such as numbering of roads, train schedules, font choice in restaurant menus or how often you take a shit to give a few examples. Intelligence is very much about pattern recognition, and this includes all kinds of patterns, be they visual, social, mathematical, [historical](history.md) etc. Learning to recognize patterns is conditioned by consciously noticing them, acknowledging them and thinking about them. Again this will lead to seeing hidden truths and the individual being labeled "conspiracy theorist" or even getting diagnosed with schizophrenia (or autism, OCD or whatever).
 - ...
 
 ## Quick IQ Estimates

kiss.md

@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ Apparently the term *KISS* originated in the US Army plane engineering: the plan
 **Examples** of KISS "[solutions](solution.md)" include:
 
 - Using a [plain text](plain_text.md) file instead of a dedicated [bug](bug.md) tracker (TODO.txt), note taking program etc.
+- Using [pen and paper](pen_and_paper.md) to take notes instead of a phone.
 - Creating website in plain [HTML](html.md) instead of using some complex web framework such as [Wordpress](wordpress.md).
 - Using solar panels directly, without a battery, if it's [good enough](good_enough.md).
 - Implementing a web left-right sweeping image gallery with HTML [iframe](iframe.md) instead of some overcomplicated [JavaScript](js.md) library. { Example stolen from [reactionary software](reactionary_software.md) website. ~drummyfish }
@@ -25,7 +26,7 @@ Apparently the term *KISS* originated in the US Army plane engineering: the plan
 - [Beatboxing](beatbox.md) to produce a back track for rap songs, as opposed to using (or even paying for) some kind of music software.
 - Using hammock instead of bed -- it is much simpler, cheaper, portable and has an extra swinging feature for which it is considered by many to even be superior in terms of comfort.
 - The [Elo](elo.md) rating system is considered KISS in the context of other rating systems such as [Glicko](glicko.md). While there are many systems objectively more accurate than Elo, Elo remains the most widely used one probably thanks to its simplicity.
-- In the world of [coffee](coffee.md) so called *Turkish coffee* without any milk and sugar is probably the most KISS option, you just put coffee ground in a mug and pour hot water on it. Compare this to Espresso with milk and sugar which needs a quite complex and expensive machine. { Yeah, I drink the most KISS coffee, though sometimes I also use French press -- that one is still quite simple. ~drummyfish }
+- In the world of [coffee](coffee.md) so called *Turkish coffee* without any milk and sugar is probably the most KISS option, you just put coffee ground in a mug and pour hot water on it. Compare this to Espresso with milk and sugar which needs a quite complex and expensive machine. { Yeah, I drink the most KISS coffee, though sometimes I also use French press -- this could perhaps be considered a runner up. ~drummyfish }
 - ...
 
 Compared to [suckless](suckless.md), [Unix philosophy](unix_philosophy.md) and [LRS](lrs.md), KISS is a more general term and isn't tied to any specific group or movement, it doesn't imply any specifics but rather the general overall idea of simplicity being an advantage ([less is more](less_is_more.md), [worse is better](worse_is_better.md), ...).

log.md

@@ -0,0 +1,185 @@
+# Logarithm
+
+*For computer logs see [logging](logging.md).*
+
+Logarithm (from Greek "logo arithmos", roughly "ratio/word number", often shortened to *log*, *lg* or *ln*) is a very important [mathematical](math.md) [function](function.md) telling us to what [power](power.md) a [number](number.md) has to be raised to in order to obtain another number; i.e. in terms of mathematics it is the inverse function to exponentiation. Logarithms are enormously important and useful: for example they allow fast and efficient multiplication and division of numbers (see e.g. [sliding rule](sliding_rule.md)), solving certain kinds of equations but also, very notably, they introduce **logarithmic scales** -- a type of alternative measuring scales (to the traditional linear scales found on rulers etc.) in which steps are not spaced by constant distance but by constant ratio, and it turns out this is exceptionally handy for measuring and plotting various values (such as loudness, earthquake intensity etc.). This is because in nature it often happens that the step to "the next level" is not an additive constant, but rather some ratio of previous step (or imagine a video [game](game.md) where leveling up each subsequent level takes more and more experience, let's say three halves of that required for the previous one). So dealing with logarithms sort of takes us from the realm of additions and differences to one where multiplications and ratios rule.
+
+Human senses are known to perceive logarithmically (and this is exploited in lossy [compression](compression.md) algorithms) -- one of the best examples are musical tones: what we hear as an increase in pitch by one semitone is actually a frequency that's 12th root of 2 TIMES increased frequency of the previous one. [Interestingly](interesting.md) some studies even suggested that "logarithmic thinking" is possibly even more natural to us and only at school we're forced to adopt the traditional "linear thinking". However it might be, the first confrontation (normally during high school) with the mathematics of logarithms usually scares people off and average [IQs](iq.md) never fully grasp them (because they "don't need it [in real life](irl.md)"), but they're really not hard, just require some getting used to. To anyone dealing with math in any way (including [programmers](programming.md)) logarithms are absolutely required basic knowledge, don't try to avoid them.
+
+Logarithms were introduced in 1614 by John Napier (white male).
+
+## Details
+
+There are different kinds of logarithms distinguished by their **base**: every logarithm has a base, so we have a "base 10 logarithm", "base 2 logarithm" etc. (one note here: *base* in this context does NOT signify the numeral system base, it's just a name for the number that gets raised to some power). The base is written as a subscript; here we'll write base *N* logarithm simply as *logN* (log10, log2 etc.). You may see logarithm written without the base, which either means some [implicit](implicit.md) base is assumed (often 10 or [e](e.md), see below) or that the base doesn't matter.
+
+So logarithm is not a single function but rather a class of functions. Alternatively you MAY imagine logarithm as a single function of two arguments: the input number *x* and the base. However conventionally we prefer to view logarithms with different bases as different functions of one argument, perhaps because it rarely happens we need the base to be variable (quite often the base doesn't even matter and it's only a convention of choosing one).
+
+Now finally for the **definition** itself: base *N* logarithm of number *x* gives number *y*, which we write as
+
+*logN(x) = y*
+
+so that the following holds:
+
+*N^y = x*
+
+NOTE: Don't confuse the function *N^x* with *x^N* (variable in exponent vs variable in base); inverse function of the former is logarithm *N* whereas the inverse of the latter is *Nth [root](root.md)*. These are similar and even the graphs of logarithm and Nth root look similar, but they aren't the same.
+
+So answering the question "What's the base *N* logarithm of number x?" means answering **"N to WHAT power gives x?"**. Of course we know that both *N* and *y* don't have to be just integers, but can be any [real number](real_number.md) (including fractions, negative numbers etc., however excluding both being zero!), so logarithm is a **continuous function**, but we also know that (in the realm or real numbers) the operation of raising anything to a power can't ever yield a negative number (and neither [zero](zero.md), unless the base itself was zero), so **logarithm is only defined for positive numbers**.
+
+NOTE: there exist generalizations such as [complex](complex_number.md) logarithms and it's also possible to have logarithms with bases smaller than 1, but for the sake of simplicity we'll now assume only real number logarithms with a base greater than 1 (which, however, may still be a non-integer).
+
+A small graph will make the best demonstration:
+
+```
+    ^ y
+  4 +
+    |
+  3 +
+    |                  ___...''' log2(x)        
+  2 +            _---''
+    |        _.-'
+  1 +      .'              _____ log10(x)
+    |     / ...----''''''''
+----+---|'''|---|---|---|---|--> x
+   0|  :1   2   3   4  
+    | ::
+ -1 + :
+    | :
+```
+
+Here we can see *log2(x)* and *log10(x)* plotted, things to observe are mainly these:
+
+- Graph of function *logN(x)* is a graph of function *N^x* flipped by the 45 degree axis because logarithm is an inverse of that function (it switches the *x* and *y* axes).
+- Both go through the point [1,0]. **All logarithms give value 0 for input 1** because any number to 0 gives 1.
+- **Logarithm with base N gives 1 for input N** because *N^1 = N*.
+- Similarly both turn from negative to positive *y* after the point *x = 1*. Again this is logical: to get values smaller than 1 we have to raise *N* to a negative power (which makes it a reciprocal fraction).
+- Both get closer and closer to minus [infinity](infinity.md) as they're approaching *x = 0* from the right. This represents the fact that raising *1/N* to higher and higher powers gets us closer and closer to zero, but we never get there.
+- The functions are always increasing, but increase ever more slowly.
+
+By bases some important logarithms are:
+
+- **log2** (base 2): Important to programmers (since computers work in [base 2](binary.md)), *log2(x)* for example says how many [bits](bit.md) we need to represent *x* different values, or how many times we can split number *x* in halves, which is important for computing [time complexity](complexity.md).
+- **log10** (base 10), so called **common logarithm**: Important because in real life we often use base 10.
+- **ln** (base [e](e.md)), so called **natural logarithm**: How some nice mathematical properties (for example nice [derivative](derivative.md)). This is often the default base for a logarithm (i.e. if you see just *log*, it's usually implied *e* is the base).
+
+And here is a small table of some logarithm values to further aid making a picture of it all (*ln(x)* is natural logarithm):
+
+| *x* | *ln(x)*  |*log2(x)* |*log10(x)*|
+| --- | -------- | -------- | -------- |
+| 0   | ?        | ?        | ?        |
+| 0.5 |-0.693147 |-1.000000 |-0.301030 |
+| 1   | 0.000000 | 0.000000 | 0.000000 |
+| 1.5 | 0.405465 | 0.584963 | 0.176091 |
+| 2   | 0.693147 | 1.000000 | 0.301030 |
+| 2.5 | 0.916291 | 1.321928 | 0.397940 |
+| 3   | 1.098612 | 1.584963 | 0.477121 |
+| 3.5 | 1.252763 | 1.807355 | 0.544068 |
+| 4   | 1.386294 | 2.000000 | 0.602060 |
+| 4.5 | 1.504077 | 2.169925 | 0.653213 |
+| 5   | 1.609438 | 2.321928 | 0.698970 |
+| 5.5 | 1.704748 | 2.459432 | 0.740363 |
+| 6   | 1.791759 | 2.584963 | 0.778151 |
+| 6.5 | 1.871802 | 2.700440 | 0.812913 |
+| 7   | 1.945910 | 2.807355 | 0.845098 |
+| 7.5 | 2.014903 | 2.906891 | 0.875061 |
+| 8   | 2.079442 | 3.000000 | 0.903090 |
+| 8.5 | 2.140066 | 3.087463 | 0.929419 |
+| 9   | 2.197225 | 3.169925 | 0.954243 |
+| 9.5 | 2.251292 | 3.247928 | 0.977724 |
+| 10  | 2.302585 | 3.321928 | 1.000000 |
+
+One of the most important properties of logarithms, which you absolutely MUST burn into your brain right now, is that **logarithm of a product equals sum of logarithms** and **logarithm of a quotient equals difference of logarithms**, i.e.:
+
+*logN(a * b) = logN(a) + logN(b)*
+
+and 
+
+*logN(a / b) = logN(a) - logN(b)*
+
+Why is this awesome? Well, because now if we can somehow quickly compute logarithm of a number -- for example with the help of precomputed tables, or even just [approximately](approximation.md) reading it off of the function plot -- we can very quickly multiply or divide numbers simply by looking up the logarithm of each and then adding them or subtracting them (which is not as time consuming as doing multiplication or division) and then mapping the logarithm of the result back. This can be used both by [computers](computer.md) and humans to [optimize](optimization.md) the speed of calculations; in fact this is how the [sliding rule](sliding_rule.md) works. This way raising a number to a power or finding its root can also be simplified to multiplication or division. (NOTE: someone smart could say we might as well have a precomputed table for multiplication, but that would be a much bigger table due to the fact that we'd need a value for any TWO input numbers, logarithm has just one).
+
+Other important formulas with logarithms include these:
+
+- *logN(a^b) = b * logN(a)* (simplifies exponentiation to multiplication)
+- *logA(b) * logB(a) = 1*
+- *logB(x) = logA(x) * 1/logA(B)* (allows **transforming logarithms between bases**)
+- *logN(N) = 1*
+- *logN(1) = 0*
+- *N^logN(x) = x*
+- *logN(N^x) = x*
+- ...
+
+To get back to the **logarithmic scales** for a moment: these are scales whose value at each step increases not by a constant added number, but by multiplying the value of the previous step by some fixed fraction. In graphs such scale may be used on the *x* or *y* axis or both, depending on the need -- imagine for instance we were about to plot some exponentially increasing phenomenon, i.e. something that over each period of time (such as a year) grows by some fixed PERCENTAGE (fraction). Example may be the [Moore's law](moores_law.md) stating that the number of [transistors](transistor.md) in integrated circuits doubles every two years. Plotting this with linear scales we'll see a curve that very quickly shoots up, turning steeper and steeper, creating a very inconvenient, hard to read graph. If instead we used logarithmic scale on the *y* axis (number of transistors), we'd get a nice straight line! This is because now as we're moving by years on the *x* axis, we are jumping by orders of magnitude on the *y* axis, and since that is logarithmic, a jump by order of magnitude shift us a constant step up. This is therefore very useful for handling phenomena that "up closer" need higher resolution and "further away" rather need more more space and bigger "zoom out" on detriment of resolution, such as the map of our Universe perhaps.
+
+## Programming
+
+It won't come as a surprise that we'll find the logarithm function built in most of the popular [programming_languages](programming_language.md), most often present as part of the standard math [library](library.md)/module. Make sure to check which base it uses etc. [C](c.md) for example has the functions *log(x)* (natural logarithm), *log10(x)* and *log2(x)* under *math.h* -- if you need logarithm with different base, the simple formula given somewhere above will serve you to convert between arbitrary bases (also shown in an example below).
+
+Should you decide for any reason to implement your own logarithm, consider first your requirements. If integer logarithm [is enough](good_enough.md), the straightforward "[brute force](brute_force.md)" way of searching for the correct result in a for loop is quite usable since the number of iterations can't get too high (as by repeated exponentiation we quickly cover the whole range of even 64 bit integers). In C this may be done as follows:
+
+```
+int logIntN(int base, int x)
+{
+  int r = 0, n = base;
+
+  while (n <= x)
+  {
+    n *= base;
+    r++;
+  }
+
+  return r;
+}
+```
+
+If we don't insist on having the base a variable, the function will probably [get faster](optimization.md), and especially so in the case of *log2* where multiplication can be replaced by a bit shift:
+
+```
+int logInt2(int x)
+{
+  int r = 0, n = 2;
+
+  while (n <= x)
+  {
+    n <<= 1;
+    r++;
+  }
+
+  return r;
+}
+```
+
+As always, [look up tables](lut.md) may help create extremely fast versions for the price of some memory.
+
+Mainstream way of implementing [floating point](float.md) logarithm is probably through [Taylor series](taylor_series.md) such as (for natural logarithm):
+
+*ln(x) = 2 * ((x-1)/(x+1) + 1/3 * ((x-1)/(x+1))^3 + 1/5 * ((x-1)/(x+1))^5 + ...)*
+
+Here this formula is used to implement a somewhat workable floating point natural logarithm and general base logarithm (a bit dirty due to hardcoded constants, but can be a start):
+
+```
+double logFloatE(double x)
+{
+  double r = 0;
+
+  if (x > 2) // for larger values precision decreases
+    return logFloatE(x * 3.0/4.0) - logFloatE(3.0/4.0);
+
+  x = (x - 1) / (x + 1);
+
+  for (double i = 1; i < 8; i += 2) // 8 arbitrarily chosen
+  {
+    r += x / i;
+    x *= x * x;
+  }
+
+  return 2 * r;
+}
+
+double logFloatN(double base, double x)
+{
+  return logFloatE(x) / logFloatE(base);
+}
+```
+
+If you have the *pow* function at hand, you can probably implement floating point logarithm also through [binary search](binary_search.md) with delta.

lotr.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Lord of the Rings
 
-Lord of the Rings (LOTR) is a an [epic](epic.md) fantasy book trilogy by J. R. R. Tolkien (1892-1973), one of the greatest ever made, released in 1954, followed by very well made movies in 2001, 2002 and 2003; the books are legendary not just for having started the whole modern fantasy genre, but simply for their sheer gigantic volume of lore and detail, including additional books, detailed geography of the fantasy world, its [history](history.md), mythology and several [constructed languages](conlang.md), into which the author, a university professor, poured his whole life and heart. Unfortunately for their immense popularity the works have been seized and absolutely raped by [capitalism](capitalism.md), nowadays they have become a vehicle for propaganda -- it's incredibly sad but true; the rape began in 2012 by filming the Hobbit movies (a short children book was made into a whole trilogy of movies, for more moneis, furthermore extremely badly made), and continues today by yet much worse consumerist, absolutely disgusting McDonalds style crap stuffed with lesbians and [liberalism](liberalism.md) and shit. The original books are still [proprietary](proprietary.md), but their entering to [public domain](public_domain.md) is at least on the horizon -- unlike most modern fantasy works, Lord of the Rings should enter the public domain relatively "soon": in 2044. Besides the main LOTR trilogy Tolkien also wrote several related works, such as *The Hobbit* (the prequel, more of a children book, but still very good to read) and *The Silmarillion* (kind of "Bible", recounting history and mythology of the world, origin of the races etc.).
+Lord of the Rings (LOTR) is a an [epic](epic.md) fantasy book trilogy by J. R. R. Tolkien (1892-1973), one of the best literary works ever made, released in 1954, followed by very well made movies in 2001, 2002 and 2003; the books are legendary not just for having started the whole modern fantasy genre, but simply for their sheer gigantic volume of lore and detail, including additional books and stories, detailed geography of the fantasy world, its [history](history.md), mythology and several [constructed languages](conlang.md), into which the author, a university professor, poured his whole life, heart, knowledge and wisdom. Before Tolkien's work fantasy books were very different, not as popular, usually just shorter fairytales and stories for children based off of real history or existing mythology and stories; Tolkien took it all much further by inventing his own "universe" to set his stories in, with very realistic, deep history (in the sense that reading Silmarillion for example you could really accept it's a mythology recorded by a REAL civilization, including blank spots, contradicting witness testimonies, exaggerated narration and so on), historical figures, battles, epic songs in languages of the fictional people and so on, and this is what every new fantasy basically copies ever since. Unfortunately for their immense popularity the works have been seized and absolutely raped by [capitalism](capitalism.md), nowadays they have become a vehicle for propaganda -- it's incredibly sad but true; the rape began in 2012 by filming the Hobbit movies (a short children book was made into a whole trilogy of movies, for more moneis, furthermore extremely badly made), and continues today by yet much worse consumerist, absolutely disgusting McDonalds style crap stuffed with lesbians and [liberalism](liberalism.md) and shit. The original books are still [proprietary](proprietary.md), but their entering to [public domain](public_domain.md) is at least on the horizon -- unlike most modern fantasy works, Lord of the Rings should enter the public domain relatively "soon": in 2044. Besides the main LOTR trilogy Tolkien also wrote several related works, such as *The Hobbit* (the prequel, more of a children book, but still very good to read) and *The Silmarillion* (kind of "Bible", recounting history and mythology of the world, origin of the races etc.).
 
 NOTE: **Anything post 2005 is NOT part of Lord of the Rings.** It's very important to note this because the franchise became one of the most raped milking cows of [capitalist](capitalism.md), [pseudoleft](pseudoleft.md), [SJWs](sjw.md) and other evil. Only look for pre-2005 stuff.
 

main.md

@@ -128,6 +128,7 @@ Are you a [noob](noob.md) but see our ideas as appealing and would like to join
 - That there exist [numbers](number.md) that are not [computable](computability.md) or are otherwise [unknowable](knowability.md)? See e.g. Chaitin's constant.
 - That throughout [history](history.md) one of the most common patterns is appearance of new lucrative technology or trend which is labeled safe by [science](soyence.md), then officially recommended, promoted, adopted by the industry and heavily utilized for many years to decades before being found harmful, which is almost always greatly delayed by the industry trying to hide this fact? This was the case e.g. with [asbestos](asbestos.md), [freons](freon.md) (responsible for ozone layer depletion), [x rays](x_ray.md), radioactive paint (see *radium girls*), lobotomy (which even generated a Nobel Prize), some food preservatives, [plastics](plastic.md), smoking, car emissions and great many prescription drugs among which used to be even cocaine. Despite corporations denying it, there even appears evidence that cell phone radiation causes cancer (e.g. *Meta-analysis of long-term mobile phone use and the association with brain tumors*, 2008, even International Agency for Research on Cancer now holds that phones may pose such danger). Yet when you question safety of a new lucrative invention, such as [5G](5g.md), antidepressants or some quickly developed lucrative [vaccines](vax.md), you are labeled insane.
 - That curved monitors are bad?
+- That in 2005 a cunt from company named Duke Faunabeheer, hired by another cunt company called Endemol, illegally killed an innocent sparrow (endangered species) who was flying nearby a shitty domino world record attempt so that it wouldn't knock the dominoes off and ruin their crappy TV show? The cunts did it because like [everyone who runs any kind of company](entrepreneur.md) they're inhumane bastards who only lust money for whores and won't hesitate to kill for it. You live in a world where lives are taken for a fucking TV show.
 - That before sufficiently advanced [computer graphics](graphics.md) was around, NASA still had space flight simulators? Instead of rendering [3D graphics](3d_rendering.md) they used a live feed from a small [camera](camera.md) placed in a miniature physical environment; the camera was moved by the people in the simulator. Such simulators still exist (although mostly just as a curiosity), e.g. for tanks and submarines -- they offer photorealistic graphics at very high [resolution](resolution.md) and FPS.
 - That the [dickheads](faggot.md) maintaining the debian `fortune` utility package started to [censor](censorship.md) "offensive" fortunes, moving them to a separate `fortunes-off` package that won't by default be installed, and which in the [future](future.md) will be removed completely? They also put some cringe disclaimers and apologies to man pages and so on.
 - That [Kinora](kinora.md), invented around 1895, allowed people to view short videos with a simple, small, purely mechanical device? It used the flip-book principle.

nigger.md

@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ The word is used in a number of projects and works, e.g.:
 - **On the Creation of Niggers** (https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_Creation_of_Niggers), a short poem by H. P. Lovecraft, one of the greatest authors of all time.
 - **Nigger in the Wonderland**, an old [game](game.md).
 - **Alabama Nigger**, a famous song.
+- Memorable movie quotes such as the Pulp Fiction's rant about dead nigger storage.
 - ...
 
 { LOL take a look at this https://encyclopediadramatica.online/Nigger, another take at https://wiki.soyjaks.party/Nigger. Another website: http://niggermania.com. Also https://www.chimpout.com. Another one: http://www.nigrapedia.com. ~drummyfish }

npc.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # NPC
 
-NPC (non-player character) is a character in a video [game](game.md) that's not controlled by a player but rather by [AI](ai.md); the term has now came to also be used for people in [real life](irl.md) that exhibit high conformance and rather low [intelligence](iq.md) which allows them to choose to live in blissful ignorance. Vast majority of people in our society are NPCs with brain programmed by the system so that they form an army that keeps sustaining the system. Such people are also often called normies or [blue pilled](blue_pill.md): they have mainstream opinions, [react only to keywords](shortcut_thinking.md), use mainstream technology, obediently [consume](consumerism.md), don't make much trouble and follow the lined up path through life (school, career, family, retirement). Sometimes they perceive themselves as rebels, [geeks](geek.md), noncomformists and freethinkers for deviating from the mainstream in tiny insignificant ways, such as by using [GNU](gnu.md)/[Linux](linux.md) (which they just call Linux) or for supporting mild [piracy](piracy.md) of abandonware games, but they are still NPCs (making an NPC feel like he does have free will is part of the system) -- to in fact stop being an NPC one unfortunately has to undergo a quite drastic [englightenment](unretard.md) that comes with life shattering realizations such as that we in fact do live in a nightmare and dystopia to which absolute majority of people (the NPCs) are completely blind, it means giving up or rethinking all the values one was taught and becoming a completely different man. This usually also leads to extreme social isolation, losing all friends, developing depression, losing social and sexual life, even falling in poverty and potentially attempting [suicide](suicide.md) (see also [red pill](red_pill.md) and [black pill](black_pill.md)) -- such is sadly the price for seeing the [truth](truth.md). It is scary, and in addition being an NPC is greatly rewarded by the system just like being a soldier is rewarded by the state: the system for example allows to compensate lack of talent with increased conformance -- even with average talent you will be able to achieve high success if you show above average conformity. And so under this great social pressure even the people who have the option to live as a non-NPC rather subconsciously choose to live in self deception and stay an NPC for life.
+NPC (non-player character) is a character in a video [game](game.md) that's not controlled by a player but rather by [AI](ai.md); the term has now come to also be used for people in [real life](irl.md) that exhibit high conformance and rather low [intelligence](iq.md) which allows them to choose to live in blissful ignorance. Just like a video game NPC behaves by a simple [algorithm](algorithm.md), human NPC behaves by simple rules and obeys orders (not just on what to do but also on what to think) dictated by the system (government, [corporations](corporation.md), [culture](culture.md), [economy](economy.md), ...), most often delivered through mass media (TV, social media, magazines, billboards, ...). Vast majority of people in our society are NPCs with brain programmed by the system so that they form an army that keeps sustaining the system. Such people are also often called normies or [blue pilled](blue_pill.md): they have mainstream opinions, [react only to keywords](shortcut_thinking.md), use mainstream technology, obediently [consume](consumerism.md), don't make much trouble and follow the lined up path through life (school, career, family, retirement). Sometimes they perceive themselves as rebels, [geeks](geek.md), noncomformists and freethinkers for deviating from the mainstream in tiny insignificant ways, such as by using [GNU](gnu.md)/[Linux](linux.md) (which they just call Linux) or for supporting mild [piracy](piracy.md) of abandonware games, but they are still NPCs (making an NPC feel like he does have free will is part of the system) -- to in fact stop being an NPC one unfortunately has to undergo a quite drastic [englightenment](unretard.md) that comes with life shattering realizations such as that we in fact do live in a nightmare and dystopia to which absolute majority of people (the NPCs) are completely blind, it means giving up or rethinking all the values one was taught and becoming a completely different man. This usually also leads to extreme social isolation, losing all friends, developing depression, losing social and sexual life, even falling in poverty and potentially attempting [suicide](suicide.md) (see also [red pill](red_pill.md) and [black pill](black_pill.md)) -- such is sadly the price for seeing the [truth](truth.md). It is scary, and in addition being an NPC is greatly rewarded by the system just like being a soldier is rewarded by the state: the system for example allows to compensate lack of talent with increased conformance -- even with average talent you will be able to achieve high success if you show above average conformity. And so under this great social pressure even the people who have the option to live as a non-NPC rather subconsciously choose to live in self deception and stay an NPC for life.
 
-Those who are NPCs usually see non-NPCs as "right wing extremists", as all noncomformists are painted in the media. It's a form of modern [witch hunt](witch_hunt.md) and [fear culture](fear_culture.md) that the system has established to discredit and eliminate non-conformists and sustain the army of NPCs that it needs in place in order to survive. Of course it's in no way true that a non-NPC has to be a [Hitler](hitler.md) worshiping [rightist](left_right.md) or that he has to support violence and genocide or any similar kind of nonsense: in fact rightists are just fanatic [capitalist](capitalism.md) idiots. A non-NPC is simply someone who examines the world closely, objectively and through own eyes (as opposed to accepting what he's told) and discovers everything is wrong -- what he decides to do about this is then a completely individual choice. Some indeed do panic and let their animal instincts take over, becoming violent, seeking revenge and so on. Others -- like [us](lrs.md) -- just try to make things better by ACTUALLY refusing all kind of violence and advocating TRUE equality of people and unconditional [love](love.md) of all living beings -- however even this will be seen as extremism by NPCs because if we refuse to kill anyone, including the "enemies", we will of course consequently be labeled "supporters of the enemies", so there is no way out -- as a non-NPC you will never be able to make friends with an NPC no matter how hard you try, what values you hold and what actions you make, an NPC will always see you as a "right wing extremist fanatic" by the mere fact that you refuse to accept mainstream propaganda.
+NPCs usually see every non-NPC as a "right wing extremists", for that's how all noncomformists are painted in the media. It's a form of modern [witch hunt](witch_hunt.md) and [fear culture](fear_culture.md) that the system has established to discredit and eliminate non-conformists and sustain the army of NPCs that it needs in place in order to survive. Of course it's nowhere close to truth that a non-NPC would have to be a [Hitler](hitler.md) worshiping [rightist](left_right.md) or that he has to support violence and genocide or even lean to rightist ideas at all: in fact rightists are just fanatic [capitalist](capitalism.md) idiots, NPCs themselves, blindly following rules and nonsensical orders as they're very often militant and embrace being soldiers, machines who blindly obey orders. A non-NPC is simply someone who examines the world closely, objectively and through own eyes (as opposed to accepting what he's told) and discovers everything is wrong -- what he decides to do about this is then a completely individual choice. Some indeed do panic and let their animal instincts take over, becoming violent, seeking revenge and so on. Others -- like [us](lrs.md) -- just try to make things better by ACTUALLY refusing all kind of violence and advocating TRUE equality of people and unconditional [love](love.md) of all living beings -- however even this will be seen as extremism by NPCs because if we refuse to kill anyone, including the "enemies", we will of course consequently be labeled "supporters of the enemies", so there is no way out -- as a non-NPC you will never be able to make friends with an NPC no matter how hard you try, what values you hold and what actions you make, an NPC will always see you as a "right wing extremist fanatic" by the mere fact that you refuse to accept mainstream propaganda.
 
 It is a common misconception that humans keep getting smarter and smarter by evolution -- the NPC's intelligence is where evolution stops, human intelligence won't evolve any further -- if anything, it may perhaps yet decrease. It is so because the NPC is now a close to perfect cell for the higher organism that will form from humans -- exactly like human body is formed of more primitive cells, a higher metaorganism is forming on [Earth](earth.md) to whom humans are the cells. Our cells don't have 200 IQ because they don't need it -- in fact, it would be bad if they did: a cell is supposed to only do its [job](work.md) without thinking and, if necessary, sacrifice its life for the organism. The cell does this just like an NPC [nationalist](nationalism.md) sacrifices his life for his country. Cells that do anything else are detected as [cancerous](cancer.md) and eliminated. This is what humans are being shaped into and what the NPCs contribute to by their lifestyle: eternal enslavement, removal of all humanity from humans, reshaping humans into unthinking machines. Yes, the NPC is stupid, but he is the [future](future.md), he foreshadows the true fate of a man that in the future will be more and more like the obedient robot. It is sad but sadly true. People who are above NPC intelligence and refuse to take part in forming the organism are an evolutionary failure, they are useless cells ([incels](incel.md) lol?) and will become extinct -- that's why the intelligent are bullied, isolated and denied reproduction while the average conformist is rewarded with care, means for living and rights to breed: the system wants the NPC genes, not the rebel genes.
 
@@ -11,7 +11,9 @@ It is a common misconception that humans keep getting smarter and smarter by evo
 - [blue pill](blue_pill.md)
 - [normie](normie.md)
 - [muggle](muggle.md)
+- [humanoid](humanoid.md)
+- [retard](retard.md)
 - [tool slave](tool_slave.md)
 - [nu-male](nu_male.md)
 - [soydev](soydev.md)
-- [truth](truth.md)
+- [unretard](unretard.md)

often_confused.md

@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ There exist many terms that are highly similar and can legitimately be used inte
 - **[AI](ai.md)** vs **[machine learning](machine_learning.md)** vs **[neural networks](neural_net.md)**
 - **[algebra](algebra.md)** vs **[arithmetic](arithmetic.md)** vs **[math](math.md)** vs **[logic](logic.md)**
 - **[algorithm](algorithm.md)** vs **[program](program.md)** vs **[process](process.md)** vs **[heuristic](heuristic.md)** vs **[source code](source_code.md)**
+- **[algorithm](algorithm.md)** vs **[logarithm](logarithm.md)** lol
 - **America** vs **[USA](usa.md)**
 - **[analog](analog.md)** vs **[mechanical](mechanical.md)** vs **non-electronic**
 - **[anarchy](anarchism.md)** vs **[chaos](chaos.md)**
@@ -114,6 +115,7 @@ There exist many terms that are highly similar and can legitimately be used inte
 - **[latency/ping/lag](latency.md)** vs **[throughput/bandwidth](throughput.md)** vs **speed**
 - **[leftism](left_right.md)** vs **[pseudoleftism](pseudoleft.md)**
 - **[liberalism](liberalism.md)** vs **[libertarianism](libertarianism.md)**
+- **[library](library.md)** vs **[module](module.md)**
 - **[license](license.md)** vs **[waiver](waiver.md)**
 - **main [memory](memory.md)** vs **working memory** vs **[RAM](ram.md)**
 - **[logic](logic.md)** vs **[math](math.md)**
@@ -129,6 +131,7 @@ There exist many terms that are highly similar and can legitimately be used inte
 - **[NP](p_vs_np.md)** vs **[NP-hard](np_hard.md)** vs **[NP-complete](np_complete.md)**
 - **non-existent** vs **[virtual](virtual.md)** vs **[abstract](abstraction.md)**
 - **opaque** vs **solid**
+- **orientation** vs **[rotation](rotation.md)**
 - **[overflow](overflow.md)** vs **[wrap around](wrap.md)**
 - **[paging](paging.md)** vs **[virtual memory](virtual_memory.md)**
 - **[path tracing](path_tracing.md)** vs **[ray tracing](ray_tracing.md)** vs **[ray casting](raycasting.md)**

optimism.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Optimism
 
-Optimism (also called "positivity" etc.) is a [mental illness](disease.md) manifested by refusal to accept [truths](truth.md) too difficult or uncomfortable to bear. It is a voluntarily chosen cognitive bias making one lie to self: in a situation where it's unclear whether A or B is true (and hence the most rational belief would be to count both as a potential possibility), an optimist will choose to declare one option as not true solely by the fact he would dislike if it was true, i.e. optimism literally by definition means choosing irrational beliefs out of mental weakness. Optimism is always [evil](evil.md), it is the opium of the masses and plagues especially western society of the [21st century](21st_century.md), it makes people do nothing against a worsening situation because they come to accept the lie that things are actually fine rather than trying to fix them -- that's why the ruling bodies, such as governments and [corporations](corporation.md), always promote optimism, they want people to stay passive, blind, comfortable, unaware and therefore harmless. An optimist on board of a sinking ship will not try to help the situation, he will refuse to prepare a life boat or send distress calls, he will close his eyes and ears to not see the disaster and will many a time attack those who refuse to do the same, accusing others of conspiracy theories and creating panic. An optimist in [dystopian society](capitalism.md) will not do anything to fix society, he will only keep repeating programmed phrases such as "it's not ideal but there are still some good things", and so he'll end up collaborating with the system on [making it worse and worse](slowly_boiling_the_frog.md).
+Optimism (also called "positivity" etc.) is a [mental illness](disease.md) manifested by refusal to accept [truths](truth.md) too difficult or uncomfortable to bear. It is a voluntarily chosen cognitive bias, denial of reality, making one lie to self: in a situation where it's unclear whether A or B is true (and hence the most rational belief would be to count both as a potential possibility), an optimist will choose to declare one option as not true solely by the fact he would dislike if it was true, i.e. optimism literally by definition means choosing irrational beliefs out of mental weakness. Optimism is always [evil](evil.md), it is the opium of the masses and plagues especially western society of the [21st century](21st_century.md), it makes people do nothing against a worsening situation because they come to accept the lie that things are actually fine rather than trying to fix them -- that's why the ruling bodies, such as governments and [corporations](corporation.md), always promote optimism, they want people to stay passive, blind, comfortable, unaware and therefore harmless. An optimist on board of a sinking ship will not try to help the situation, he will refuse to prepare a life boat or send distress calls, he will close his eyes and ears to not see the disaster and will many a time attack those who refuse to do the same, accusing others of conspiracy theories and creating panic. An optimist in [dystopian society](capitalism.md) will not do anything to fix society, he will only keep repeating programmed phrases such as "it's not ideal but there are still some good things", and so he'll end up collaborating with the system on [making it worse and worse](slowly_boiling_the_frog.md).
 
 ## See Also
 

people.md

@@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ Here is a list of people notable in technology or in other ways related to [LRS]
 - **[Melvin Kaye](mel.md) aka Mel**: genius old time programmer that appears in [hacker lore](hacker_culture.md) (*Story of Mel*)
 - **[Mental Outlaw](mental_outlaw.md)**: [suckless](suckless.md) vlogger/celebrity
 - **[Mother Teresa](mother_teresa.md)**
+- **Nils M Holm**: creator of minimalist languages and compilers (notably [T3X](t3x.md)), [buddhist](buddhism.md)
 - **[Nina Paley](nina_paley.md)**: [female](woman.md) artist, one of the most famous proponents of [free culture](free_culture.md)
 - **[Noam Chomsky](noam_chomsky.md)**: linguist notable in theoretical [compsci](computer_science.md), anarchist
 - **[Oscar Toledo G.](toledo.md)**: programmer of tiny programs and [games](game.md) (e.g. the smallest [chess](chess.md) program), sadly [proprietary](proprietary.md) [winfag](windows.md)

programming_language.md

@@ -146,8 +146,8 @@ Here is a table of notable programming languages in chronological order (keep in
 | [Go](go.md)             | **kind of** maybe| 2009  | 4.71 (G)| 5.20 (G) |                          |      | 130, proprietary?      | "successor to C" but not well executed, bearable but rather avoid       |
 | [LIL](lil.md)           | **yea**          | 2010? |         |          |                          |      |                        | not known too much but nice, "everything's a string"                    |
 | [uxntal](uxn.md)        | **yes** but SJW  | 2021  |         |          | 400 (official)           |      | 2? (est.), proprietary | assembly lang. for a minimalist virtual machine, PROPRIETARY SPEC.      |
-| **[T3X/0](t3x.md)**     | **yes**          | 2022  |         |          | 4K                       | 66   | 130, proprietary       | T3X family, minimalist, Pascal-like                                     |
+| [T3X/0](t3x.md)         | **yes**          | 2022  |         |          | 4K                       | 66   | 130, proprietary       | T3X family, minimalist, Pascal-like                                     |
-| **[comun](comun.md)**   | **yes**          | 2022  |         |          | 4K                       | 76   | 2, CC0                 | "official" [LRS](lrs.md) language, WIP, similar to Forth                |
+| [comun](comun.md)       | **yes**          | 2022  |         |          | 4K                       | 76   | 2, CC0                 | "official" [LRS](lrs.md) language, WIP, similar to Forth                |
 
 NOTES on the table above:
 

pseudominimalism.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ Pseudominimalism is a kind of [technology](tech.md) design (of which most guilty
 
 While true minimalists do appreciate minimalist look as well (because in their world it's a natural consequence of good design and as a result a sign of minimalism they over time learn to look for and appreciate), pseudominimalists are obsessed with visuals, the casing, the shell and that is their true goal to which they sacrifice the internal beauty, so after a while you learn to spot pseudominimalists just by their attempts at what they call a "clean design" or "user experience" -- a true minimalist uses minimalism so that bullshit doesn't stands in his way, a **pseudominimalist is just a snob** using visuals to pretend he's an intellectual or, as he loves to say, an "artist". Over time you learn to smell the sweat poured into font choice, spacing of paragraphs and choice of color palettes, eventually leaking even to [natural language](human_language.md) he uses to communicate (usually on the detriment of communication) in which he tries to use minimum of words which just makes it hard to understand what he wants to say. A typical example is the [shitty 100r wiki](xxiivv.md). Pseudominimalist thinks calling a link to the main page "main page" is too mainstream, so he calls it just "m" or something like that.
 
-A different example of pseudominimalism is demonstrated by great many "[modern](modern.md)" [CLI](cli.md) programs which [code monkeys](coder.md) use to impress their [YouTube](youtube.md) viewers or to feel like matrix haxors. Some people believe that anything running in the command line has to be minimalist by a law of nature -- this is less and less true as we progress into the [future](future.md). A lot of [capitalist software](capitalist_software.md) add a CLI interface ex post **on top** of an already bloated program (they even invented a term for this: "[headless](headless.md)"), often by simply disabling [GUI](gui.md) (but leaving all its [dependencies](dependency.md) in). An example may be the [gomux](gomux.md) chat client. Similarly many window managers demonstrate pseudominimalism by "looking minimalist", as in having thin 1 pixel borders for windows, flat colors, pixel art fonts etc., while in fact being bloated as hell under the hood. A very cheap trick used to impress retards is [rendering 3D graphics](3d_rendering.md) in terminal with [ASCII graphics](ascii_graphics.md), which is the easiest thing in the world to do, but for some reason people around 110 IQ wet themselves seeing anything rendered with ASCII.
+A different example of pseudominimalism is demonstrated by great many "[modern](modern.md)" [CLI](cli.md) programs which [code monkeys](coder.md) use to impress their [YouTube](youtube.md) audience or to feel like matrix haxors. Some people believe that anything running in the command line has to be minimalist by a law of nature -- this is less and less true as we progress into the [future](future.md). A lot of [capitalist software](capitalist_software.md) adds a CLI interface ex post **on top** of an already bloated program (they even invented a term for this: "[headless](headless.md)"), often by simply disabling [GUI](gui.md) (but leaving all its [dependencies](dependency.md) in). An example may be the [gomux](gomux.md) chat client. Similarly many window managers demonstrate pseudominimalism by "looking minimalist", as in having thin 1 pixel borders for windows, flat colors, pixel art fonts etc., while in fact being bloated as hell under the hood. A very cheap trick used to impress retards is [rendering 3D graphics](3d_rendering.md) in terminal with [ASCII graphics](ascii_graphics.md), which is the easiest thing in the world to do, but for some reason people around 110 IQ wet themselves seeing anything rendered with ASCII.
 
 Another form of pseudominimalism is **making a minimalist tool for something that in itself is a non-minimalist [bullshit](bullshit.md)** -- for example minimalist frontend for Facebook, minimalist Steam client, minimalist password manager, minimalist [Bitcoin](bitcoin.md) wallet etc.
 

race.md

@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ In general the politically correct love to pick and attack **strawmen**: typical
 
 The "race is a social construct" argument is perhaps the absolutely most cretinous and idiotic ever given, it's almost so stupid as to not even be worth addressing -- this one is the kind of "not even wrong", just completely irrelevant and stupid to such a degree you can't but just shake your head. What the FUCK is a "social construct" supposed to mean in the first place, and how is it relevant? Does it mean that race is an abstract concept made by humans? Well yes, but so is physics, species and whole biology, governments, mathematics, colors, numbers, engineering and a million of other things. Does it mean these things don't exist or that they have no significance? Are you completely braindead or what? Denying the facts regarding human race is called **[race denialism](race_denialism.md)**, the acceptance of these facts is called [race realism](race_realism.md). Race denialism is part of the basis of today's [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) political ideology, theories such as polygenism (multiregional hypothesis) are forbidden to be supported and they're ridiculed and demonized by mainstream information sources like [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) who only promote the [politically correct](political_correctness.md) "out of Africa" theory which is built on biased data in a way that looks "[scientific](soyence.md)" so as to mislead science fanboys (as [Luke Smith](luke_smith.md) pointed out in his podcast, the so called "evidence based" approach to studying history is greatly biased as it takes absence of evidence for evidence of absence and this is greatly harmful considering that evidence for older events is less likely to be preserved; but the term "evidence based" [sounds goods](shortcut_thinking.md)). [SJWs](sjw.md) reject any idea of a race with the same religious fanaticism with which Christian fanatics opposed Darwin's evolution theory.
 
-**What races are there?** That depends on definitions^([according to who?][according to logic]), the boundaries between races are [fuzzy](fuzzy.md) and the lines can be drawn differently. The traditional, most general division still found in the greatest 1990s encyclopedias is to three large groups: **Caucasoid** (white), **Negroid** (black) and **Mongoloid** (yellow). These can be further subdivided (brown races etc.). Some go as far as calling different nations separate races (e.g. the Norwegian race, Russian race etc.), thought that may be a bit of a stretch. We must always remember that objectively there exist genetic clusters, but the borders, characteristic by which we divide and names we give the groups are invented (just like we may classify movies by genre, year of creating, budget etc.), so some may classify people into three races while others into five etc., WITHOUT this denying the existence of races. One of the first scientific divisions of people into races was done by Francois Bernier in *New Division of the Earth by the Different Species or "Races" of Man that Inhabit It* into Europeans, Asians, Africans and Sami (north Europe), based on skin color, hair color, height and shape of face, nose and eyes. There are also names for **mixed races**, for example *mulatto* (mix of black and white), *metis* (mix of white and American Indian), *mestizo* (mix of Spanish and American Indian), *zambo* (mix of black and American Indian), *hapa* (generally mixed race, often used for white-Asian mix) etc.
+**What races are there?** That depends on definitions^([according to who?][according to logic]), the boundaries between races are [fuzzy](fuzzy.md) and the lines can be drawn differently. The traditional, most general division still found in the greatest 1990s encyclopedias is to three large groups: **Caucasoid** (white), **Negroid** (black) and **Mongoloid** (yellow). These can be further subdivided (brown races etc.). Some go as far as calling different nations separate races (e.g. the Norwegian race, Russian race etc.) -- here we have to be more careful because many (not all of course) modern "nations" really ARE very artificial, rather political divisions, often based on very recently drawn borders on the map (e.g. [Czechia](czechia.md)) or even voluntary [identification](identity_politics.md) with a "nation". We must always remember that objectively there exist genetic clusters, but the borders, characteristic by which we divide and names we give the groups are invented (just like we may classify movies by genre, year of creating, budget etc.), so some may classify people into three races while others into five etc., WITHOUT this denying the existence of races. One of the first scientific divisions of people into races was done by Francois Bernier in *New Division of the Earth by the Different Species or "Races" of Man that Inhabit It* into Europeans, Asians, Africans and Sami (north Europe), based on skin color, hair color, height and shape of face, nose and eyes. There are also names for **mixed races**, for example *mulatto* (mix of black and white), *metis* (mix of white and American Indian), *mestizo* (mix of Spanish and American Indian), *zambo* (mix of black and American Indian), *hapa* (generally mixed race, often used for white-Asian mix) etc.
 
 There is a controversial 1994 book called *The Bell Curve* that deals with differences in intelligence between races (later followed by other books such as *The Global Bell Curve* trying to examine the situation world-wide). [SJWs](sjw.md) indeed tried to attack it, however international experts on intelligence agree the book is correct in saying average intelligence between races differs (see e.g. [The Wall Street Journal's Mainstream Science on Intelligence](https://web.archive.org/web/20120716184838/http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/taboos/wsj_main.html)). Online resources with a lot of information on racial differences are e.g. https://zerocontradictions.net/FAQs/race-FAQs and http://www.humanbiologicaldiversity.com/, https://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Race_and_morphology, https://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Arguments_regarding_the_existence_of_races etc. Note that even if some particular resource may be fascist, biased and contain propaganda of its own, it may likely give you information the pseudoleftist mainstream such as [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) and [Google](google.md) simply [censor](censorship.md) -- while we may of course not approve of the politics/opinions/goals/etc. of some we link to, we still link to them to provide access to censored information so that one can seek truth and form his own opinions.
 

soyence.md

@@ -21,6 +21,8 @@ For the ones who possibly still don't get it, here is a little comparison. It is
 - example of science: "Objects close to Earth dropped in vacuum fall and accelerate at the same rate no matter their weight. Do whatever you please with this information. If you don't believe it, check it yourself. If you find a more accurate law, please let it be known."
 - example of NOT science: "This claim has been published in a top science magazine and reviewed by 100 people each one having 10 PhDs and 100 science medals, so trust it or you'll be bullied."
 
+A **red flag** often giving soyence away is **use and embedding of political mechanisms** such as authority, credibility, voting, "[democracy](democracy.md)", consensus, peer review, fact checks, [censorship](censorship.md), [codes of conduct](coc.md), popularization, promotion, [marketing](marketing.md) etc. True science, by definition, is something that cannot be deceiving, it is self proving and doesn't need policing, equations either work and predict or they don't, knowledge is either useful or not, there is no room for belief or ideology. Nowadays we already implicitly assume deception by requiring peer reviews, we distinguish "morally bad fact" and "morally good lies", we elect priests whose word is to be taken for fact just by the title before their name -- this is NOT true science.
+
 Of course, once science advances, it may stop being so simple as for everyone to be able to for example check the results that scientists found, that's without doubt, the point is simply that at the stage when the field starts being a religion, for whatever reason at all, we can no longer call it science, it is simply religion that evolved from science. That is all.
 
 Basically with science we can utilize **[freedom distance](freedom_distance.md)** to measure "how much of a science" something is -- here we may define freedom distance as the average distance to someone who can completely grasp the presented "science" with ALL that's required, including understanding the results, verifying the himself and so on. If this distance is within a small village, we can consider it science; if it's several countries, it is not science anymore.

transsexual.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 *WARNING: The article contains a lot of comparisons to [Nazism](nazi.md).*
 
-Transsexualism (also *trannyism*, *transsexual* being shortened to just *trans*) is a [disease](disease.md) which makes someone very strongly desire to be the opposite [sex](sex.md) than he was born, to the point of it becoming a cause of deep [depression](depression.md), self harm and [suicidal](suicide.md) tendencies. Transsexuals are also colloquially called *trannies*; there are many other terms such as a *shemale*, *trap*, *t-girl*, *clown*, *m2f* (male to female), *f2m* (female to male) and so on. Transsexual is not to be confused with a transvestite (someone who just dresses as the other sex, e.g. as part of a fetish or public show), hermaphrodite etc.
+Transsexualism (also *trannyism*, *transsexual* being shortened to just *trans*) is a [disease](disease.md) which makes someone very strongly desire to be the opposite [sex](sex.md) than he was born, to the point of it becoming a cause of deep [depression](depression.md), self harm and [suicidal](suicide.md) tendencies. Transsexuals are also colloquially called *trannies*; there are many other terms such as a *shemale*, *trap*, *t-girl*, *clown*, *X-man*, *m2f* (male to female), *f2m* (female to male) and so on. Transsexual is not to be confused with a transvestite (someone who just dresses as the other sex, e.g. as part of a fetish or public show), hermaphrodite etc.
 
 { A personal comment: maybe 50% of my online friends are transsexual, many of them among the best people I've ever met, I really deeply love them and some of them I got really, really close with. They really do suffer immensely and it breaks my heart. Really I don't care about what people want to be, it's fine to be whoever or whatever you want. I don't pretend I enjoy the sight of a man with lipstick on, walking around in schoolgirl clothes, but that's fine too, I also dislike seeing people in suits, with tattoos and many other things -- as a grown up adult I can bear seeing things I don't exactly love and I can get over them easily. What I talk about here is harmful and dangerous fascist identity politics. Don't let politicians divide us, we can love each other even despite disagreements and different tastes, don't let them tell you that if you oppose their politics you automatically also support a genocide of all transsexuals. That's some Nazi level of brainwashing. ~drummyfish }
 

vim.md

@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ Some important commands in command mode are:
   - **`q`**: Quit, or close the current extra window/tab. Use **`qa`** for closing all windows/tabs and quit. **`q!`** (or **`qa!`**) quits without saving changes, **`wq`** quits with saving changes, **`wqa`** quits all saving all changes etc.
   - **`w`**: Save changes (can be followed by filename).
   - **`noh`**: Cancel highlighted text (e.g. after search).
-  - **`!`**: Run command in terminal, you can e.g. compile your program this way. For running Vim commands before the terminal commands use **`vimcommands |! terminalcommands`**, e.g. `:wa |! make && ./program`.
+  - **`!`**: Run command in terminal, you can e.g. compile your program this way and so **use vim as an [IDE](ide.md)**. For running Vim commands before the terminal commands use **`vimcommands |! terminalcommands`**, e.g. `:wa |! make && ./program`.
   - **`tabedit filename`**: Opens given file in a new tab (tabs are closed with `:q`).
   - **`tabmove number`**: Move current tab to given position (`+` and `-` can be used for relative movement of tabs).
   - **`vsplit`**: Creates a new window by splitting the current one vertically.

wiki_stats.md

@@ -2,10 +2,10 @@
 
 This is an autogenerated article holding stats about this wiki.
 
-- number of articles: 619
+- number of articles: 620
-- number of commits: 961
+- number of commits: 962
-- total size of all texts in bytes: 4980466
+- total size of all texts in bytes: 4996103
-- total number of lines of article texts: 36162
+- total number of lines of article texts: 36283
 - number of script lines: 295
 - occurrences of the word "person": 9
 - occurrences of the word "nigger": 104
@@ -26,69 +26,93 @@ longest articles:
 - [programming_language](programming_language.md): 44K
 - [3d_model](3d_model.md): 44K
 - [internet](internet.md): 44K
-- [iq](iq.md): 40K
 - [main](main.md): 40K
+- [iq](iq.md): 40K
 - [copyright](copyright.md): 40K
-- [bloat](bloat.md): 36K
+- [bloat](bloat.md): 40K
 - [cheating](cheating.md): 36K
 - [raycasting](raycasting.md): 36K
 
 top 50 5+ letter words:
 
-- which (2754)
+- which (2765)
-- there (2166)
+- there (2173)
-- people (2100)
+- people (2106)
-- example (1709)
+- example (1723)
-- other (1564)
+- other (1569)
-- about (1387)
+- about (1393)
-- number (1299)
+- number (1303)
-- software (1239)
+- software (1243)
-- because (1133)
+- because (1136)
-- their (1068)
+- their (1071)
-- would (1043)
+- would (1045)
-- program (1031)
+- program (1032)
-- something (1023)
+- something (1027)
-- being (1000)
+- being (1002)
-- things (956)
+- things (958)
-- language (925)
+- language (934)
-- called (907)
+- called (911)
-- without (852)
+- without (853)
-- simple (848)
+- simple (850)
-- function (838)
+- function (841)
-- computer (834)
+- computer (836)
-- numbers (821)
+- numbers (822)
-- different (773)
+- different (776)
 - however (767)
-- these (760)
+- these (762)
-- programming (757)
+- programming (760)
-- world (742)
+- world (745)
 - system (722)
-- should (703)
+- should (704)
-- doesn (700)
+- doesn (701)
-- still (694)
+- still (698)
 - games (678)
-- while (664)
+- while (670)
-- point (657)
+- point (658)
-- society (649)
+- society (650)
-- simply (647)
+- simply (648)
-- drummyfish (642)
+- drummyfish (647)
-- possible (632)
+- possible (633)
-- using (625)
+- using (628)
-- probably (616)
+- probably (624)
-- always (614)
+- always (616)
-- course (593)
+- course (595)
-- similar (586)
+- similar (590)
-- https (574)
+- https (578)
-- though (572)
+- actually (575)
-- someone (572)
+- though (573)
-- actually (570)
+- someone (573)
-- basically (565)
+- basically (566)
-- really (563)
+- really (565)
-- technology (541)
+- technology (545)
 
 latest changes:
 
 ```
+Date:   Tue Jan 21 21:53:21 2025 +0100
+  atheism.md
+  bloat.md
+  bootstrap.md
+  english.md
+  hash.md
+  how_to.md
+  humorwashing.md
+  living.md
+  lrs.md
+  main.md
+  memory_management.md
+  often_confused.md
+  portability.md
+  programming_language.md
+  pseudominimalism.md
+  random_page.md
+  rights_culture.md
+  shitword.md
+  t3x.md
+  uxn.md
+  wiki_pages.md
+  wiki_stats.md
+  youtube.md
 Date:   Sun Jan 19 14:26:24 2025 +0100
   byte.md
   charity_sex.md
@@ -104,35 +128,11 @@ Date:   Sun Jan 19 14:26:24 2025 +0100
   iq.md
   leading_the_pig_to_the_slaughterhouse.md
   left_right.md
-  love.md
-  often_confused.md
-  often_misunderstood.md
-  optimization.md
-  random_page.md
-  raycasting.md
-  shitword.md
-  shortcut_thinking.md
-  slowly_boiling_the_frog.md
-  tas.md
-  wiki_pages.md
-  wiki_stats.md
-Date:   Thu Jan 16 23:00:49 2025 +0100
-  21st_century.md
-  3d_model.md
-  3d_rendering.md
-  90s.md
-  anarchism.md
-  art.md
-  ashley_jones.md
-  assembly.md
-  books.md
-  c.md
-  calculus.md
 ```
 
 most wanted pages:
 
-- [data_type](data_type.md) (14)
+- [data_type](data_type.md) (15)
 - [meme](meme.md) (13)
 - [embedded](embedded.md) (13)
 - [irl](irl.md) (12)
@@ -147,27 +147,27 @@ most wanted pages:
 - [drm](drm.md) (10)
 - [sdl](sdl.md) (9)
 - [pointer](pointer.md) (9)
-- [html](html.md) (9)
 - [emacs](emacs.md) (9)
 - [brute_force](brute_force.md) (9)
 - [war](war.md) (8)
 - [syntax](syntax.md) (8)
+- [html](html.md) (8)
 
 most popular and lonely pages:
 
-- [lrs](lrs.md) (325) 
+- [lrs](lrs.md) (327) 
 - [capitalism](capitalism.md) (295) 
-- [c](c.md) (234) 
+- [c](c.md) (235) 
-- [bloat](bloat.md) (227) 
+- [bloat](bloat.md) (228) 
-- [free_software](free_software.md) (195) 
+- [free_software](free_software.md) (196) 
 - [game](game.md) (148) 
 - [suckless](suckless.md) (146) 
-- [proprietary](proprietary.md) (133) 
+- [proprietary](proprietary.md) (134) 
-- [modern](modern.md) (116) 
+- [modern](modern.md) (118) 
-- [minimalism](minimalism.md) (115) 
+- [minimalism](minimalism.md) (116) 
 - [censorship](censorship.md) (113) 
-- [kiss](kiss.md) (109) 
+- [kiss](kiss.md) (110) 
-- [computer](computer.md) (109) 
+- [computer](computer.md) (110) 
 - [fun](fun.md) (104) 
 - [programming](programming.md) (103) 
 - [math](math.md) (101) 
@@ -177,10 +177,10 @@ most popular and lonely pages:
 - [fight_culture](fight_culture.md) (94) 
 - [bullshit](bullshit.md) (94) 
 - [woman](woman.md) (92) 
+- [hacking](hacking.md) (91) 
 - [corporation](corporation.md) (91) 
 - [art](art.md) (91) 
-- [hacking](hacking.md) (90) 
+- [free_culture](free_culture.md) (90) 
-- [free_culture](free_culture.md) (89) 
 - [less_retarded_society](less_retarded_society.md) (88) 
 - [public_domain](public_domain.md) (85) 
 - [chess](chess.md) (85) 

woman.md

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ The symbol for woman is a circle with cross at its bottom ([Unicode](unicode.md)
 
 **Even mainstream science acknowledges women are dumber than men**: even the extremely politically correct [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) states TODAY in the article on human brain that male brain is on average larger in volume (even when corrected for the overall body size) AND that there is correlation between volume and intelligence: this undeniably implies women are dumber. Men also have faster reaction times. On average male brain weights 10% more than woman's and has 16% more brain cells. The Guinness book of 1987 states the average male brain weight being 1424 grams and that of a female being 1242 grams; the averages both grow with time quite quickly so nowadays the numbers will be higher in both sexes, though the average of men grows faster. The heaviest recorded brain belonged to a man (2049 grams), while the lightest belonged to a woman (1096 grams). Heaviest woman brain weighted 1565 grams, only a little more than men's average. [IQ](iq.md)/intelligence measured by various tests has been consistently significantly lower for women than for men, e.g. the paper named *Sex differences in intelligence and brain size: A paradox resolved* found a 4 point difference, noting that in some problems such as 3D spatial rotations males score even 11 points higher average.
 
-[Historically](history.md) in every [culture](culture.md) women have been privileged over men, and they still are: being a woman means playing life on low difficult (women for example commit [suicides](suicide.md) much less often, much less frequently end up being homeless and so on) -- while men always had to [work](work.md) their asses off, go to [wars](war.md), explore and hunt for food, women often weren't even supposed to work, they could stay at home, chill while guarding the fire and playing with children -- this is becoming less and less so with [capitalism](capitalism.md) which aims to simply enslave everyone, nowadays mostly through the [feminist](feminism.md) cult that brainwashed women to desire the same slavery as men. In case of emergencies it's always been the rule to save women and children first, in wars women and children were oftentimes spared in mass executions. Thanks to being smaller, thinner and lighter women need fewer calories to survive, i.e. men have to pay more money just for staying alive (Does anyone care about this inequality gap? Of course not). Statistically **women live about 6 years longer lives than men** because they have easier and less stressful life, they don't have to work as hard and they can obtain privileges (such as free food and better healthcare) just with a flirty smile. Woman make much more money by prostitution than men, why do evil women discriminate against poor men this way? While feminists are furious about wage gaps in professions where men make more money than women, none gives a single damn about these opposite kinds of inequality gaps which just confirms what everyone already knows: feminists don't care about equality, they simply care about women. Women also have the huge social privilege of being able to to have sex and/or get a partner at any time with no effort and/or **trade sex (or even just mere company) for things and services** -- this happens very often, see e.g. the [GamerGate](gamergate.md) scandal which basically revealed that women "developers" were fucking game reviewers to push promotion of their "games", i.e. here we see that **women oppress men** not just by treating them as mere sexual objects but also by having good games made by men be rejected in favor of bad games made by women by the power of sex. Being a woman means playing life on very low difficulty, you can have anything you want at any time. Man on the other hand won't get sex unless he's a billionaire or at least 2 meters tall, no matter how smart, nice or physically fit he is. For a woman to get sex it's enough to just ask while not weighting two tons, that's literally how easy it is. It is proven that taller men have more sexual partners which means women are discriminating against short men: why are women so evil and practice [body shaming](body_shaming.md)? Didn't they want equality or something?
+[Historically](history.md) in every [culture](culture.md) women have been privileged over men, and they still are: being a woman means playing life on low difficult (women for example commit [suicides](suicide.md) much less often, much less frequently end up being homeless and so on) -- while men always had to [work](work.md) their asses off, go to [wars](war.md), explore and hunt for food, women often weren't even supposed to work, they could stay at home, chill while guarding the fire and playing with children -- this is becoming less and less so with [capitalism](capitalism.md) which aims to simply enslave everyone, nowadays mostly through the [feminist](feminism.md) cult that brainwashed women to desire the same slavery as men. In case of emergencies it's always been the rule to save women and children first, in wars women and children were oftentimes spared in mass executions. Thanks to being smaller, thinner and lighter women need fewer calories to survive, i.e. men have to pay more money just for staying alive (Does anyone care about this inequality gap? Of course not). Statistically **women live about 6 years longer lives than men** because they have easier and less stressful life, they don't have to work as hard and they can obtain privileges (such as free food and better healthcare) just with a flirty smile. Women have always enjoyed better social benefits and security, for example paid maternal leave, widow pensions, lower retirement age (despite statistically living longer) etc. Woman make much more money by prostitution than men, why do evil women discriminate against poor men this way? While feminists are furious about wage gaps in professions where men make more money than women, none gives a single damn about these opposite kinds of inequality gaps which just confirms what everyone already knows: feminists don't care about equality, they simply care about women. Women also have the huge social privilege of being able to to have sex and/or get a partner at any time with no effort and/or **trade sex (or even just mere company) for things and services** -- this happens very often, see e.g. the [GamerGate](gamergate.md) scandal which basically revealed that women "developers" were fucking game reviewers to push promotion of their "games", i.e. here we see that **women oppress men** not just by treating them as mere sexual objects but also by having good games made by men be rejected in favor of bad games made by women by the power of sex. Being a woman means playing life on very low difficulty, you can have anything you want at any time. Man on the other hand won't get sex unless he's a billionaire or at least 2 meters tall, no matter how smart, nice or physically fit he is. For a woman to get sex it's enough to just ask while not weighting two tons, that's literally how easy it is. It is proven that taller men have more sexual partners which means women are discriminating against short men: why are women so evil and practice [body shaming](body_shaming.md)? Didn't they want equality or something?
 
 [Fun](fun.md) fact: in [Czechia](czechia.md) it is literally a folk tradition to beat women on Easter, for which the woman must give the man who beat her a treat, it's called Pomlazka, or Easter whip in [English](english.md), look it up :D
 
@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ Don't!
 
 Any girl that has ever seen the [Internet](internet.md) is spoiled beyond grave, avoid these for any cost. If you seriously want to live with a woman, it's best to consider diving into the jungle and find some half ape indigenous girl not touched by capitalism yet, those may be unironically cool.
 
-If you really really want a woman, you have to accept one basic fact and behave in accordance with it: **women are incapable of romantic love**. This is a fact very hard to accept by young men, but it really is so -- if you don't believe it (and you 100% don't), you will discover it yourself. This is not to say that a women feels nothing in a relationship, but as a man you just have to realize a woman does NOT feel the same romantic feelings you feel towards her EVEN IF she looks like she does -- she WILL mimic the feelings because YOU, the man, need this for the relationship, she will behave so that to you it seems like she is feeling great romantic love, and she probably is feeling something -- most likely even believing it's the real love -- but it is NOT the same thing you are feeling. The truth is woman is calculating (not always consciously), she doesn't love YOU but rather what you PROVIDE for her, i.e. usually [money](money.md), security, protection, genes for her offspring, possibly social status etc. Again, this is not to say a woman is a monster incapable of love -- she can for example feel a much stronger (absolutely [selfless](selflessness.md)) love than a man for her children, but NOT for the partner. It's all evolution: a man's role is to spread his seed as much as possible (that's why he may be cheating) and protect women (that's why he loves her so much), whereas a woman is supposed to take care of children (that's why she before anything looks for the best partner that will ensure the best for her children). Women learn to externally behave in ways that are compatible with you, i.e. she will reward you with affection for what you provide her, but please realize that INTERNALLY she works absolutely differently than you, men and women are different creatures. Even if a man cheats on his woman, he will often love her so much he would die for her, but the woman will never do the same, in fact she will leave you at the first opportunity that allows her to safely get a better partner, no matter how many roses and love letters you bring her. It is similar to cat and dog love: a cat will cuddle with you and behave cute, but it NEVER feels the same kind of love a [dog](dog.md) feels towards you: the cat behaves like it does because it gets something out of you; it will leave you if it finds a better place to live and it will never miss you. In emergency a dog will defend you to his death, a cat will run away and leave you to your fate. Once again this is not to say a cat is necessarily a bitch and an evil animal, you only have to take its personality for what it is and behave accordingly, you can never treat cat like you would treat a dog.
+If you really really want a woman, you have to accept one basic fact and behave in accordance with it: **women are incapable of romantic love**. This is a fact very hard to accept by young men, but it really is so -- if you don't believe it (and you 100% don't), you will discover it yourself. This is not to say that a woman feels nothing in a relationship, but as a man you just have to realize a woman does NOT feel the same romantic feelings you feel towards her EVEN IF she looks like she does -- she WILL mimic the feelings because YOU, the man, need this for the relationship, she will behave so that to you it seems like she is feeling great romantic love, and she probably is feeling something -- most likely even believing it's the real love -- but it is NOT the same thing you are feeling. The truth is woman is calculating (not always consciously), she doesn't love YOU but rather what you PROVIDE for her, i.e. usually [money](money.md), security, protection, genes for her offspring, possibly social status etc. Again, this is not to say a woman is a monster incapable of love -- she can for example feel a much stronger (absolutely [selfless](selflessness.md)) love than a man for her children, but NOT for the partner. It's all evolution: a man's role is to spread his seed as much as possible (that's why he may be cheating) and protect women (that's why he loves her so much), whereas a woman is supposed to take care of children (that's why she before anything looks for the best partner that will ensure the best for her children). Women learn to externally behave in ways that are compatible with you, i.e. she will reward you with affection for what you provide her, but please realize that INTERNALLY she works absolutely differently than you, men and women are different creatures. Even if a man cheats on his woman, he will often love her so much he would die for her, but the woman will never do the same, in fact she will leave you at the first opportunity that allows her to safely get a better partner, no matter how many roses and love letters you bring her. It is similar to cat and dog love: a cat will cuddle with you and behave cute, but it NEVER feels the same kind of love a [dog](dog.md) feels towards you: the cat behaves like it does because it gets something out of you; it will leave you if it finds a better place to live and it will never miss you. In emergency a dog will defend you to his death, a cat will run away and leave you to your fate. Once again this is not to say a cat is necessarily a bitch and an evil animal, you only have to take its personality for what it is and behave accordingly, you can never treat cat like you would treat a dog.
 
 Jerking off is the easiest solution to satisfying needs connected to fucking women. If you absolutely HAVE to get laid, save up for a prostitute, that's the easiest way and most importantly won't ruin your life. Or decide to become [gay](gay.md), that may make matters much easier. You may also potentially try to hit on some REAL ugly girl that's literally desperate for sex, but remember it has to be the ugliest, fattest landwhale that you've ever seen, it's not enough to just find a 3/10, that's still a league too high for you that will reject you unless you pay her. Also consider that if you don't pay for sex, there is a 50% chance you will randomly get sued for rape sometime during the following 30 year period. If you want a girlfriend, then rather don't. The sad truth is that to make a woman actually "love" you, as much as one is capable of doing so, you HAVE TO be an enormously evil ass that will beat her to near death, abuse her, rape her and regularly cheat on her -- that's how it is and that's what every man has to learn the hard way -- as we know, the older generation's experience cannot be communicated by words, the young generation always thinks it is somehow different and will never listen. Sadly this is simply how it is -- even if you think you have found the "special one", the one that's different, the intelligent introverted one that's nice and friendly to you, nope, she is still a woman, she won't love you unless you're a murderer dickass beating her daily (NOTE: we don't advocate any violence, our advice here is to simply avoid women). If you think getting close to her, being nice and listening to her will make her love you, you're going to hit a brick wall very hard -- this road only ever leads to a friendzone 100% of the times, you will end up carrying her purse while she's shopping without her letting you touch her ever. If you just want a nonsexual girl friend, then it's fine, but you will never make a girlfriend this way. This is not the girl's fault, she is programmed like that, blaming the girl here would be like blaming a child for overeating on candy or blaming a cat for torturing birds for fun; and remember, THE GIRL SUFFERS TOO, she is literally attracted only to those who will abuse her, it is her curse. If anyone's to blame for your suffering, it is you for being so extremely naive -- always remember you are playing with fire. You may still get a girl to stay with you or even marry you and have kids if you have something that will make her want to be with you despite not loving you, which may include being enormously rich, being so braindead to have million subscribers on YouTube, having an enormous 1 meter long dick or literally giving up all dignity and succumbing to being her lifelong slave dog doing literally everything she says when she says it, but that will still get you at most 4/10 and is probably not worth it. { From my experience this also goes for trans girls somehow, so tough luck. Maybe it's so even for gay men in the woman role. ~drummyfish } All in all rather avoid all of this and pay for a prostitute, buy some sex toys, watch porn and stay happy <3
 

youtube.md

@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ A typical 2022 YouTube video now looks like this:
   HAPPENED HOLY JESUS!!!!!!  SEXUAL, I WAS JUST RAPED      MY ANAL NEEDS COCK
 ```
 
-*Pinnacle of capitalist entertainment culture: faithful screenshot of YouTube in 2024. Other cultures must envy the heights our art reached.*
+*Pinnacle of capitalist entertainment culture: faithful screenshot of YouTube in 2024. Other cultures must envy the heights our art has reached.*
 
 YouTube is also a [copyright](copyright.md) [dictatorship](dictatorship.md), anyone can take down any video containing even the slightest clip from a video he uploaded, even if such use would legally be allowed under [fair use](fair_use.md) and even if that user doesn't have any copyright to enforce (YouTube simply supposes that whoever uploads a video to their site first must have created that video as a whole and holds a godlike power over it), i.e. YouTube is [de facto](de_facto.md) making its own copyright laws which are much more strict that they are in real life (which is hard to imagine but they managed to do it). In other words there is a corporation that makes laws which effectively are basically just like normal laws except they don't even pass any law making process, their evaluation doesn't pass through justice system (courts), and the sole purpose of these laws is to rape people for money that goes solely to pay for YouTube CEO's whores and private jets. A reader in the future probably won't believe it, but there are even people who say that "this is OK" because, quote, I shit you not, """[they're a private company so they can do whatever they want](private_company_cant_do_whatever_it_wants.md)""". Yes, such arguments have come out of some lifeform's mouth. That probably implies a negative [IQ](iq.md).