Update

3d_model.md

@@ -241,4 +241,16 @@ OK, back to the mainstream now. Nowadays as a [FOSS](foss.md) user you will most
 
 **Don't forget to stick to [LRS](lrs.md) principles!** This is important so that your models are friendly to good technology. I.e. even if "[modern](modern.md)" desktops don't really care about polygon count anymore, still take the effort to optimize your model so as to not use more polygons that necessary! Your models may potentially be used on small, non-consumerist computers with [software renderers](software_rendering.md) and low amount of RAM. [Low-poly](low_poly.md) is better than high-poly (you can still prepare your model for automatic subdivision so that obtaining a higher poly model from it automatically is possible). Don't use complex stuff such as PBR or skeletal animation unless necessary -- you should mostly be able to get away with a simple diffuse texture and simple keyframe morphing animation, just like in old games! If you do use complex stuff, make it optional (e.g. make a normal map but don't rely on it being used in the end).
 
+So finally let's recount some of the advice:
+
+- Create good topology! This helps many things, for example nice deformation during animation, nice automatic subdivision, adding loops and so on. It's good if the whole model consists only of quads (four sided polygons). They must be well distributed: use more quads where the shape is complex, use fewer quads on flat parts. Do not create degenerated polygons (e.g. extremely long, very sharp triangles etc.). For this first create the shape (e.g. by sculpting or with boolean operations with basic shapes or whatever), then do retopo. Noobs often just sculp something and than use that as the final model: NEVER DO SUCH FUCKING ATROCITIES.
+- Minimize the number of triangles (and vertices etc.)! Every single triangle/polygon has to be well justified: if a triangle isn't necessary to achieve something (for example NOTICEABLE, IMPORTANT change in shape), it shouldn't be there at all. If some triangles won't be seen at all (e.g. bottom of a house model), just remove them.
+- Remember to correctly compute normals etc., use normals and things like smoothing groups/sharp edges to achieve sharpness vs smoothness. It is unbelievable but some noobs don't know about this at all and try to make sharp corners by inserting one billion triangles on the edge. NEVER FUCKING DO THAT.
+- If triangles don't have to intersect, they shouldn't. Remember, not all 3D engines have z-buffers -- these won't render your model correctly, and even those that have z-buffer may suffer from artifacts, they will have overdraw etc., intersections are just not nice.
+- The whole geometry has to be balanced, you probably cannot have a characters face modelled with 5 triangles while spending 100 triangles on fingers. Again, noobs manage to create these abominations with sculpting tools and so on.
+- Know the model's purpose and optimize it for that purpose. For example when making some background prop for a game, make it super simple, don't create details. Sometimes you may want to have enclosed model, sometimes you want a model will be friendly to very weak hardware etcetc. Just use your brain.
+- NEVER call a high poly model [low poly](low_poly.md). If it has more than 200 triangles it's probably not low poly.
+- [KEEP IT SIMPLE](kiss.md). Use only one diffuse texture if it's [good enough](good_enough.md), bake everything in it, don't use 10 PBR texture just because your engine supports it and your favorite jewtuber says that it's "[modern](modern.md)". Use vertex morphing animation instead of armature, you basically never NEED armatures/skeletal animation. And so on.
+- ...
+
 Good luck with your modeling!

4chan.md

@@ -24,5 +24,6 @@ Despite dwelling slightly [underground](underground.md) -- maybe better said bei
 - [reddit](reddit.md)
 - [8kun](8kun.md)
 - [bienvenido a internet](bai.md)
+- [loquendo](loquendo.md)
 - [something awful](something_awful.md)
 - [rare Pepe](rare_pepe.md)

cancer.md

@@ -22,4 +22,5 @@ Examples of cancer are:
 
 ## See Also
 
+- [AIDS](aids.md)
 - [shit](shit.md)

evil.md

@@ -7,3 +7,17 @@ Evil is something that's in conflict with our goal, it is the opposite of [good]
 As [Richard Stallman](rms.md) says, **all evil does some good, which is never a reason to support it**. Just as any good always does a little bit of evil, the opposite also holds: for example [Facebook](facebook.md), a [corporation](corporation.md) who accelerates and largely causes downfall of civilization and kills and tortures millions of people, may on occasion help do something good, for example help people communicate during an emergency, however it is no reason to support Facebook or to stop supporting its destruction.
 
 If we consider evil to be that which is not restrained from amoral behavior, we conclude that in a [competitive](competition.md) system (such as [capitalism](capitalism.md)) evil always wins, simply because it's always in an advantage -- evil always has all possible options at hand to choose from, the amoral ones but also including the moral ones (evil will on occasion do good if it's in its interest), unlike good which limits itself to only choosing from morally sound options. It's like having two [chess](chess.md) players, one being limited by some further rules, for example only being able to take the opponent's pieces in self defense, not being able to attack first -- it is possible the disadvantaged player will win some games, but if they keep perpetually playing games over and over and reach about the same skill level, the disadvantage will inevitably make the crippled player to eventually be losing every single game. In other words good has tied hands, in a perpetual [fight](fight_culture.md) it will always fall behind and lose in the end. The only way for evil (as a form of behavior) to be eliminated is to establish a [non competitive system](less_retarded_society.md).
+
+From now on we'll focus specifically on evil from our point of view, which is largely overlaps with the traditional view of evil before [21st century](21st_century.md). Some signs of such evil include:
+
+- [Self interest](self_interest.md): no one seeking self interest can ever be good, even if on occasion pursuit of self interest may spawn a little bit of good, as mentioned above.
+- "Ends justify the means": evil will always use any means necessary to achieve its goal while good will rather not achieve the goal than to use unethical means. It may even be that historically majority of evil is distinguished from good only by making this decision -- goals of many evil groups were many times noble, what made them evil was that they pursued that goal by any available means. The unethical means include for example [censorship](censorship.md), violence, lying and so on. 
+- Using excuses such as "if I don't do it, someone else will", "[just doing my job](just_doing_my_job.md)", "[everyone does it](everyone_does_it.md)", "life is a [fight](fight_culture.md)", "people are inherently evil" etc.
+- Constantly trying to make others do something, "shape" them, push them into having to behave in some way. A good man is interested in something and lets others live their lives as they want, an evil man is an "[entrepreneur](entrepreneur.md)" constantly stalking others and annoying them, never giving them peace, not interested in things but in making other people do some shit, as they were his toys. It is a [disease](disease.md) of psychopathy, he only desires power for its own sake, he doesn't care if his "business" is complete bullshit, only that it lets him be the king of his slaves, that he has power over them (which he will call by euphemisms such as "[responsibility](responsibility.md)", "caring about them", "feeding them" etc.).
+- Using violence and forcing others into things: similarly to the points above, even if one's goals are noble and possibly good, trying to "enforce" them will always turn one into an evil entity, just as it was the case with various "communist" movement and so on. Good will only ever offer ideas, educate, leaving others to accept the ideas voluntarily.
+- Being [popular](hero_culture.md): popularity is an unethical tool greatly useful for achieving goals. If it's popular, it's evil with 99% probability, good is practically never popular (it would only be so in [good society](less_retarded_society.md)).
+- Manipulation, brainwashing, lying, misleading, pretending, ...
+- Hostility towards [morality](morality.md) and [ethics](ethics.md) -- this manifests e.g. by phrases such as "get a job" ("shut up, stop thinking and conform"), "let's just get the work done", by ridiculing idealism of others and so on.
+- Being rich. Focusing on money means being evil, additionally large amounts of money are impossible to be achieved ethically and also having a lot of money means sitting on resources that others could be using. So basically being rich is just 100% guarantee of being evil.
+- Caring about looks (for example wearing a suit, uniform, makeup, having [tattoos](tattoo.md), piercing, hairstyle etc.). Good looks are cheap but effective form of manipulation, it shows someone wants to manipulate other in a very blatant way.
+- ...

free_speech.md

@@ -16,3 +16,4 @@ Despite what the propaganda says **there is no free speech in our society**, the
 
 - [nigger](nigger.md)
 - [censorship](censorship.md)
+- [loquendo](loquendo.md)

gay.md

@@ -18,6 +18,8 @@ Of course, [we](lrs.md) have nothing against gay people as we don't have anythin
 
 **Are you gay?** How can you tell? In doing so you should actually NOT be guided by your sexual desires -- as has been said, most people are bisexual and in sex it many times holds that what disgusts you normally turns you on when you're horny, i.e. if you're a guy and would enjoy sucking a dick, you're not necessarily gay, it may be pure curiosity or just the desire of "forbidden fruit"; this is quite normal. Whether you're gay is probably determined by what kind of LIFE partner you'd choose, i.e. what sex you can fall in a ROMANTIC relationship with. If you're a guy and fall in love with another guy -- i.e. you're passionate just about being with that guy (even in case you couldn't have sex with him) -- you're probably gay. (Of course this holds the other way around too: if you're a guy and enjoy playing with tits, you may not necessarily be straight.)
 
+Is homosexuality disgusting? Yes of course it's fucking disgusting.
+
 ## See Also
 
 - [tranny](tranny.md)

iq.md

@@ -108,6 +108,8 @@ DISCLAIMER: The previous paragraph is suitable to everyone. The following is a b
 
 { NOTE: There used to be a joke about me being the smartest being on the planet by this test but I removed it because I realized it was probably [egoism](egoism.md) masked as a joke. ~drummyfish }
 
-
+## See Also
+
+- [divine intellect](terry_davis.md)
 
 

island.md

@@ -37,3 +37,8 @@ This is the freedom island where [we](less_retarded_society.md) live! It has [no
 - **`T`: a modest [zen](zen.md) [temple](temple.md)**: It has nice view of the sea and we go meditate here.
 - **`F`: the beach forum**: It's a beach where people naturally gather to discuss in groups.
 - **`I`: the tiny island**: A small island, for those who want to be extra alone.
+
+## See Also
+
+- [Utopia](utopia.md)
+- [Loquendo City](loquendo_city.md)

kiss.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 *See also [minimalism](minimalism.md).*
 
-KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid!; also KISR, *keep it simple ,retard*) is a [minimalist](minimalism.md) design philosophy that favors simplicity, both internal and external, [technology](tech.md) that is **as simple as possible** to achieve given task. This philosophy doesn't primarily stem from [laziness](laziness.md) or a desire to rush something (though these are completely valid reasons too), but mainly from the fact that higher [complexity](complexity.md) comes with increasingly negative effects such as the cost of development, cost of [maintenance](maintenance.md), greater probability of [bugs](bug.md) and failure, more [dependencies](dependency.md) etc.
+KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid!; also KISR, *keep it simple, retard*) is a [minimalist](minimalism.md) design philosophy that favors simplicity, both internal and external, [technology](tech.md) that is **as simple as possible** to achieve given task. This philosophy doesn't primarily stem from [laziness](laziness.md) or a desire to rush something (though these are completely valid reasons too), but mainly from the fact that higher [complexity](complexity.md) comes with increasingly negative effects such as the cost of development, cost of [maintenance](maintenance.md), greater probability of [bugs](bug.md) and failure, more [dependencies](dependency.md) etc.
 
 WATCH OUT: many have started to ride on the wave of the "KISS" trend and abuse the term, twisting its true meaning; for example GNU/Linux Mint has started to market itself as "KISS" -- that's of course ridiculous and all Mint developers are cretins and idiots. **Maximum INTERNAL simplicity is a necessary prerequisite for the KISS philosophy**, anything that's just simple on the outside is a mere harmful [pseudominimalism](pseudominimalism.md) -- you may as well use a [Mac](mac.md).
 

less_retarded_society.md

@@ -66,6 +66,8 @@ As people don't have to work, very few people need to make daily travels, theref
 
 **[Art](art.md) is rich and unrestricted** (no [copyright](copyright.md) or other "[IP](intellectual_property.md)" exists), with people being able to fully dedicate their lives to it if they wish and with the possibility to create without distraction such as having to make living or dealing with copyright. People collaborate and reuse each other's works, many [free universes](free_universe.md) exist, everyone can enjoy all art without restriction and remix it however he wishes. Art is not someone's property or capital, it is a discovery made by someone for everyone's benefit.
 
+**[War](war.md) is impossible** in this world -- states, nations and borders between countries no longer exist, people naturally avoid forming fascist groups that would compete and since everyone has abundance of everything and since things such as poverty, crime (which could be blamed on "someone else"), politicians, "jobs" to be "taken", [heroes](hero_culture.md) to be followed and [fear culture](fear_culture.md) no longer exist, there is simply no reason for people to even think about war, not even talking about a strong culture of non-violence that wouldn't allow resolving any conflict with violence even if it appeared. People don't confine themselves to their own "country", they travel freely and get to know people all around the globe, everyone shares a common language and see every other human being as part of his own family. Even if a mentally ill individual appears who wants to start a war for its own sake, it's impossible for him to do -- how can he convince thousands of people to start killing each other when these people don't have any reason for doing so, when they love each other and are happy doing what they're doing? To convince a man to go take a weapon and walk to literal hell to kill other human beings while at constant risk of dying a horrible death requires people to be extremely brainwashed, desperate, miserable and cornered into seeing no other option -- without this no one will ever want war. For this reason [armies](military.md) no longer exist either, people don't even know how to lead wars, war is simply a thing of the past.
+
 **People live much longer and healthier lives** thanks to faster research in (actual) medicine, free healthcare, more doctors (those who nowadays do bullshit business), better food (no junk/fast food), less pollution, higher living standard, more natural life closer to nature, minimization of stress and elimination of the [antivirus paradox](antivirus_paradox.md) from medicine. They also die more peacefully thanks to having lived a rich, fulfilling lives, they die in the circle of their family and are not afraid of death, they take it as natural part of life, death is culturally accepted and not feared. [Euthanasia](euthanasia.md) is allowed and common for those who wish to die for whatever reason.
 
 ## FAQ

lrs_wiki.md

@@ -27,6 +27,8 @@ The wiki is similar to and was inspired by other wikis and similar works, for ex
 
 **Technology "powering" LRS wiki** is plain and simple, it uses no frameworks or static site generators, the wiki is currently written as a collection of [Markdown](markdown.md) files that use a few [shell scripts](shell_script.md) that convert the whole thing to HTML for the web (and can also produce txt and pdf version of it), i.e. it doesn't use any wiki engine or bloated static site generator. There is a plan to maybe rewrite the wiki in [comun](comun.md).
 
+Is LRS is wiki as based as [encyclopedia dramatica](dramatica.md)? That's the big question. One thing is for sure though, you will probably find LRS wiki being actually online :)
+
 ## See Also
 
 - [LRS wiki stats](wiki_stats.md)
@@ -37,3 +39,4 @@ The wiki is similar to and was inspired by other wikis and similar works, for ex
 - [LRS](lrs.md)
 - [less retarded society](less_retarded_society.md)
 - [FAQ](faq.md)
+- [encyclopedia dramatica](dramatica.md)

minimalism.md

@@ -42,6 +42,8 @@ Under [capitalism](capitalism.md) technological minimalism is suppressed in the
 
 Remember, you can't lose if you don't play.
 
+A possible **real life analogy** of the mainstream bloated software vs minimalist software is for example this: the bloated, mainstream computing environment (Windows, Mac, "Linux" distros, mainstream web browsers, virtual machines etc.) is like a skyscraper in a city whereas minimalist software is a small, self-sufficient caravan somewhere in the woods. The skyscraper offers luxury but for an enormous price: it's extremely expensive to just build, just its realization requires tons and tons of bullshit like getting permissions, reviewing environmental and economic impacts, paying architects, planning the building process, ensuring safety, keeping to all regulations, getting enough capital, finding companies to contract and so on -- erecting the building will be an enormously stressful and risky task for many dozens of companies which it will be extremely difficult to just coordinate and once the building stands, it will continue to be extremely expensive to just maintain in habitable state, the rent will be enormous as you're paying for maintenance of the whole building, cleaning the stairs, for energies, clean water pumped to high altitudes, security systems, high speed internet and so on, plus you as someone who even "owns" an apartment in the skyscraper will have practically no control over it besides arranging furniture in the room you "own" while also in the end, for getting this kind of "luxury" of maybe getting a nice view of the city, it will even be inferior in many ways: you'll live in constant noise of the city, in polluted air, bombarded by ads and neons from the streets, you'll have to take the lift to your apartment (good luck if electricity goes out), you can't make much noise to not bother the neighbors, you'll have to work your ass off to just pay the bills, you'll have to be constantly cleaning all the marble and glass, becoming slave to the apartment, while risking conflicts with neighbors and so on. Your "apartment" (or a computer program) isn't even really a thing you own, it's just basically a tiny bit of something trivial (four walls) on top of some gigantic platform (the skyscraper inside the big city, the enormous operating system inside a virtual sandbox running in a [cloud](cloud.md) etc.), expensive just by being at this "privileged" location -- in this case we may substitute the word *platform* for *prison*. On the other hand your off-the-grid caravan will be cheap to get and maintain, you'll have complete control over it, be able to make absolutely any modifications to it, you can repair most things yourself (unlike e.g. with a "smart" apartment), it won't bother you with bullshit, there are no loud or annoying neighbors, [ads](marketing.md), no lifts, no safety regulations (in case of fire it's even much safer than living in skyscraper), you won't even have to pay extra taxes you'd pay for a "real" building, you'll be living in a nice, quiet and relaxing environment, have cleaner air, be more self sufficient, making your own solar electricity (and generally not needing so much electricity), flexible, able to move anywhere at any time. All this for basically giving up having a bathtub made of marble. Anyone with half a brain must see the stupidity of choosing to live in the skyscraper.
+
 With increased interest in minimalism the word *minimalism* itself gets misused and abused. Let's be reminded that true minimalism aims to minimize everything that's unnecessary, it starts with good, minimalist design, but ultimately grows outwards and becomes a life philosophy that doesn't stop at the internals of machines, it tries to minimize for example even the desires of the user of the technology. Stopping at minimalist design of internals shouldn't be called minimalism because minimalist design is simply good design -- there is no such thing as a good, non-minimalist internal design. And then there is the shallow capitalist pseudominimalism that bets purely on the looks. The following table sums up the differences:
 
 | what             | internal minimalism | external minimalism |

pseudorandomness.md

@@ -132,9 +132,9 @@ However the core of a pseudorandom generator is the quality of the sequence itse
 - **Try to [compress](compression.md) the sequence**: Truly random data should be basically impossible to compress -- you can exploit this fact and try to compress your sequence with some compression programs. It is ideal if the compression programs end up enlarging the file.
 - **Statistical tests**: Here you use objective mathematical tests -- there exist many very advanced tests, we'll only mention the very simple ones.
   - **[Histogram](histogram.md)**: Generate many numbers (but not more than the generator's period) and make a histogram (i.e. for every number count how many times it appeared) -- all numbers should appear roughly with the same frequency. If you make a nice generator, you should even see exactly the same count for every value generated -- this is explained above. Also count 1 and 0 bits in the whole sequence -- again there should be about the same number of them (exactly the same if you do it correctly). But keep in mind this only checks if you have correct frequencies of numbers, it says nothing about their distribution. Even a sequence 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, .... will pass this.
-  - **Averaging any non-short interval should be close to middle value**: In a random sequence it should hold that if you take any interval that's not too short -- let's say at least 100 numbers in a row -- the average value should very likely be close to the middle value (the longer the interval, the closer it should be). You can test your sequence like this. This already takes into account even the distribution of the numbers.
+  - **Check statistical properties on (non-short) subintervals of the series**: This will already take into account where the numbers appear in the sequence. For example check if the average value over some smaller intervals are always close to middle value, which should hold in a series of random numbers; also the minimum and maximum value, histogram (distribution of the values) and other statistical measures should basically be close to being the same on smaller intervals as they are over the whole series if the intervals aren't very short -- i.e. just be careful about not picking too short intervals -- the smaller interval you pick, the more likely it will be (even in the ideal random sequence) that a statistical property will diverge from its expected value, i.e. don't test intervals smaller than let's say 10000 values.
   - **[Fourier transform](fourier_transform.md)** (and similar methods that give you the spectrum) -- the spectrum of the data should have equal amount of all frequencies, just like white noise.
-  - **[Correlation](correlation.md) coefficients**: This is kind of the real proof of randomness, ideally no values should be correlated in your data, so you can try to compute some correlation coefficients, for example try to compute how much correlation there is between consecutive numbers (it's similar to plotting the data as coordinates and seeing if they form a line or not) -- you should ideally find no significant correlations.
+  - **[Correlation](correlation.md) coefficients**: This is kind of the real proof of randomness, ideally no values should be correlated in your data, so you can try to compute some correlation coefficients, for example try to compute how much correlation there is between consecutive numbers (it's similar to plotting the data as coordinates and seeing if they form a line or not) -- you should ideally find no significant correlations. [Autocorrelation](autocorrelation.md) may be a good test (basically you keep performing [dot product](dot_product.md) of the series with a shifted version of the same series -- this mustn't diverge too much from 0; ideal white noise has a high peak for 0 shift and then 0 values elsewhere).
   - **Chi square test**: Very common test for this kind of thing, see also *poker test*.
   - **[Monte Carlo](monte_carlo.md) tests**: Monte Carlo algorithms use random sampling to compute a certain desired value -- for example the value of [pi](pi.md). These suppose that we can sample certain space randomly, so we can exploit this -- if we know what result we want to get (for example we already know the value of pi) we can test the algorithm with our generator and see if we get the desired result -- if we come close to the desired result, we can be a bit more confident that our sampling was random, however we cannot be certain of it -- like with any testing we can only ever be certain about the presence of an error, not about the lack of it. Even a very dense, regular grid of points would probably pass this.
   - **The cool uber randomness test** described in article on [randomness](randomness.md) ;) Basically every number (and by extension any sequence of numbers) should be equally likely to be followed by any other number.

public_domain.md

@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ There are a number of places on the internet to look for public domain works, fo
 
 **Should you release you own works to the public domain?** Definitely yes! From [our](lrs.md) point of view public domain is the only option as we deem any "intellectual property" immoral, however even if you disagree with us, you may want to release at least some of your works into public domain, if only out of altruism, no longer caring about your old works, out of curiosity or to make yourself a bit popular in the free culture community (thought this is a motivation we don't entirely embrace). **Are you afraid to do so?** It is natural, letting go of something you spend part of your life on can raise a bit of anxiety, but this is just a fear of making the first step to the unknown, a fear almost entirely artificial, created by [capitalist](capitalism.md) propaganda; making this decision will really most likely only have positive effects unless you actually had SERIOUS plans to make a business of your proprietary art. Practically the worst that can happen is that your work goes unnoticed and unappreciated. If you are still hesitant, try to go slowly, first release one thing, something small, and see what happens.
 
-**But isn't releasing a work into public domain dangerous?** Doesn't that just invite someone to take the work and claim it as his own? This is a pretty common question so let's take a look at it. Firstly know that **releasing a work into public domain DOES NOT give others the right to claim it as their work** -- it gives them the right to use that work in any way, even to make money, but someone claiming to have made a work he did not in fact make is simply [plagiarism](plagiarism.md), lying and false claim of copyright, which is not only unethical and will hurt the reputation of the individual if it's proven (which can easily be done, e.g. by showing you released the work earlier with Internet Archive), but may even be punishable by law (even though plagiarism is usually not a crime in itself, it may be deemed for example a fraud). Yes, some people may still attempt to do it (just like people practice [piracy](piracy.md) despite it being illegal), but please note they can do this even if the work isn't public domain -- they can just as easily (and illegally) take it and claim it as their own even if you keep your copyright on it. The only "protection" against this is to simply never release the work publicly at all, i.e. the fact that you make your work public domain doesn't make it more likely to be plagiarized.
+**But isn't releasing a work into public domain dangerous?** Doesn't that just invite someone to take the work and claim it as his own? This is a pretty common question so let's take a look at it. Firstly know that **releasing a work into public domain DOES NOT give others the right to claim it as their work** -- it gives them the right to use that work in any way, even to make money (although it will be hard to make money solely by selling something that's already available for free), but someone claiming to have created a work he did not in fact create is simply [plagiarism](plagiarism.md), lying and false claim of copyright, which is not only unethical and will hurt the reputation of the individual if it's proven (which can easily be done, e.g. by showing you released the work earlier through Internet Archive etc.), but may even be punishable by law (even though plagiarism is usually not a crime in itself, it may be deemed for example a fraud). Yes, some people may still attempt to do it (just like people practice [piracy](piracy.md) despite it being illegal), but please note they can just as easily do this even if the work isn't public domain -- they can simply (though illegally) take it and claim it as their own even if you keep your copyright on it. The only "protection" against this is to simply never release the work publicly at all, i.e. the fact that you make your work public domain doesn't make it more easy to be plagiarized. From this point of view it' actually probably much more "dangerous" to for example publish the work anonymously (even if you keep "all rights reserved"), i.e. concealing your real identity when publishing the work (to which you may be pushed by the [privacy](privacy.md) hysteria of today's culture), as this will make it impossible for you to later on prove it was you who made it; if someone takes the work and starts milking it, you cannot sue him as you can't prove you hold copyright on it and he may claim it was him who originally published it anonymously (well, it actually further depends on each country how anonymously published works are treated, but in general it will be more messy and the fact you can't prove your authorship stays).
 
 { I remember myself how anxious I was about making the decision to release all my work into public domain, despite knowing it was the right thing to do and that I wanted to do it. I felt emotional about giving away rights to art I put so much love and energy into, fearing the evil vultures of the Internet would immediately "steal" it all as soon as I release it. I overcame the fear and now, many years later, I can say that not once have I regretted it, literally not a single case of abuse of my work happened (that I know of anyway), despite some of it becoming kind of popular. I only received love of many people who found my work useful, and even received donations from people. I've seen others put my work to use, improve it, I get mail from people thanking me for I've done. Of course this all is not why I did it, but it's nice, I write about it to share a personal experience that will maybe give you the courage to do the right thing as well. ~drummyfish }
 

racism.md

@@ -8,3 +8,4 @@ The term racism has nowadays two main definitions, due to the onset of [newspeak
 ## See Also
 
 - [political correctness](political_correctness.md)
+- [nigger](nigger.md)

tattoo.md

@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
 # Tattoo
 
 Tattoo is a body disfigurement formed by injecting ink under the skin to permanently mark it. Tattoo, similarly to [piercing](piercing.md), suits, dyed hair etc., is a sign of [egoism](egoism.md), [narcissism](narcissism.md), herd mentality, [identity](identity_politics.md) crisis, overconfidence of the incompetent and a cheap attempt at desperately trying to get attention or make oneself look interesting. Back in the day, in the [90s](90s.md), it wasn't common to have tattoos, having one meant you were a self centered egoistic attention whore -- it still means the same thing today but being egoistic attention whores is normal and encouraged now, so everyone has tattoos. We highly advise to distance oneself from anyone having a voluntarily made tattoo.
+
+Lol it seems it's starting to show that tattoos actually cause cancer -- what a fucking surprise. The ink contains mercury, lead, arsenic and other poison that will permanently be getting into your bloodstream over the years. Enjoy this retarded life decision. However watch capitalism try to cover this up with things like "there is no peer reviewed science^TM approved evidence of tattoo being harmful", as in "no one ever published a paper that would say bashing your head with hammer is harmful" :) Anyway tattoos are known to be associated with lower intelligence so it's just natural selection.

update_culture.md

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Update culture is a malicious mindset emerging in a [capitalist](capitalism.md)
 
 In software this process is a lot of times automatized and known as [autoupdates](autoupdate.md), but update culture encompasses more than this, it's the whole mentality of having to constantly keep up, update one's software, hardware and other products, it is part of [fear culture](fear_culture), [bullshit](bullshit.md) and [consumerism](consumerism.md). Normies get all neurotic when they haven't received their weekly updates that give them new content or fake sense of "[security](security.md)". The truth is updates break more things that they fix and make software progressively [shittier](modern.md). STOP FUCKING UPDATING EVERYTHING EVERY 3 SECONDS YOU IDIOTS. [Good software](lrs.md) is written once and works for hundreds of years without [maintenance](maintenance.md).
 
-A typical example falling under update culture are [web browsers](browser.md) or proprietary [operating systems](operating_system.md) that strive for [bloat monopoly](bloat_monopoly.md).
+A typical example falling under update culture are [web browsers](browser.md) or proprietary [operating systems](operating_system.md) that strive for [bloat monopoly](bloat_monopoly.md). Normalizing the practice of having to consume updates leads to the convenient opportunity for abuse of users: with the stuff you need you may be fed stuff you don't want.
 
 Update culture is however not limited to computers or technology, hell no. It is the mood of the whole society and applies to things such as fashion, business, gossip, watching TV news every day, browsing social media or constantly updating laws, it is the acceptance and approval of living in a constant stress of having to extort extreme amounts of energy just to keep up with artificially made up [bullshit](bullshit.md), to race against oneself and others in a never ending artificially sustained race with no winners, just with extremely exhausted participants. Current system of law requires constant everyday maintenance that's extremely costly, law needs to be constantly remade and rewritten to reflect any emerging trend in society because it is so unbelievably complex and tries to encompass every single aspect of our society. Of course we eventually oppose any kind of formal law, however the kind of update culture law is yet orders of magnitude worse -- if we see law as a tool to serve society, this kind of law is an utterly shitty tool similar to a hammer that has to be repaired every second just to keep functioning.
 

wiki_stats.md

@@ -3,9 +3,9 @@
 This is an autogenerated article holding stats about this wiki.
 
 - number of articles: 581
-- number of commits: 821
-- total size of all texts in bytes: 3960091
-- total number of lines of article texts: 30174
+- number of commits: 822
+- total size of all texts in bytes: 3967784
+- total number of lines of article texts: 30228
 - number of script lines: 262
 - occurences of the word "person": 7
 - occurences of the word "nigger": 88
@@ -25,70 +25,92 @@ longest articles:
 - [3d_model](3d_model.md): 40K
 - [bloat](bloat.md): 36K
 - [internet](internet.md): 36K
+- [history](history.md): 32K
 - [game](game.md): 32K
 - [random_page](random_page.md): 32K
 - [3d_rendering](3d_rendering.md): 32K
-- [history](history.md): 32K
 - [main](main.md): 32K
 - [pseudorandomness](pseudorandomness.md): 32K
 - [optimization](optimization.md): 32K
 
 top 50 5+ letter words:
 
-- which (2269)
-- there (1721)
-- people (1505)
+- which (2275)
+- there (1723)
+- people (1511)
 - example (1305)
-- other (1229)
+- other (1231)
 - number (1132)
-- software (1105)
-- about (1045)
-- program (905)
-- their (845)
-- because (816)
-- would (800)
+- software (1114)
+- about (1059)
+- program (906)
+- their (847)
+- because (820)
+- would (802)
 - called (777)
-- being (760)
+- being (762)
 - language (749)
 - computer (741)
 - numbers (738)
-- things (725)
-- something (723)
+- things (727)
+- something (727)
 - simple (720)
-- without (679)
-- programming (664)
-- function (664)
-- these (637)
-- different (633)
-- however (629)
-- world (587)
+- without (681)
+- programming (665)
+- function (665)
+- these (639)
+- different (634)
+- however (630)
+- world (589)
 - system (577)
 - should (577)
 - doesn (568)
-- games (565)
+- games (566)
 - point (556)
 - society (549)
-- while (527)
+- while (529)
 - though (524)
 - drummyfish (517)
 - memory (508)
-- using (506)
-- still (505)
-- possible (496)
+- using (507)
+- still (506)
+- possible (499)
 - similar (491)
-- course (489)
+- course (490)
 - simply (487)
-- technology (483)
-- https (461)
-- really (447)
-- always (444)
+- technology (484)
+- https (463)
+- really (448)
+- always (446)
 - value (443)
-- extremely (437)
-- basically (433)
+- extremely (438)
+- basically (434)
 
 latest changes:
 
 ```
+Date:   Sat Jun 15 01:24:09 2024 +0200
+  21st_century.md
+  bloat.md
+  bloat_monopoly.md
+  capitalism.md
+  drummyfish.md
+  elon_musk.md
+  go.md
+  history.md
+  lrs_dictionary.md
+  main.md
+  nigger.md
+  programming_style.md
+  random_page.md
+  security.md
+  shortcut_thinking.md
+  slowly_boiling_the_frog.md
+  smart.md
+  tangram.md
+  wiki_pages.md
+  wiki_stats.md
+  wow.md
 Date:   Thu Jun 13 20:56:20 2024 +0200
   21st_century.md
   bloat_monopoly.md
@@ -106,28 +128,6 @@ Date:   Thu Jun 13 20:56:20 2024 +0200
   public_domain.md
   random_page.md
   rms.md
-  soyence.md
-  wiki_pages.md
-  wiki_stats.md
-Date:   Tue Jun 11 13:36:28 2024 +0200
-  bloat.md
-  bloat_monopoly.md
-  c.md
-  czechia.md
-  de_facto.md
-  distance.md
-  exercises.md
-  free_culture.md
-  free_hardware.md
-  free_software.md
-  free_speech.md
-  free_universe.md
-  freedom.md
-  freedom_distance.md
-  lrs.md
-  lrs_dictionary.md
-  main.md
-  minimalism.md
 ```
 
 most wanted pages:
@@ -158,16 +158,16 @@ most popular and lonely pages:
 - [lrs](lrs.md) (282) 
 - [capitalism](capitalism.md) (222) 
 - [c](c.md) (214) 
-- [bloat](bloat.md) (204) 
+- [bloat](bloat.md) (205) 
 - [free_software](free_software.md) (169) 
 - [game](game.md) (140) 
 - [suckless](suckless.md) (137) 
 - [proprietary](proprietary.md) (119) 
 - [computer](computer.md) (96) 
 - [kiss](kiss.md) (95) 
-- [modern](modern.md) (92) 
+- [modern](modern.md) (93) 
+- [minimalism](minimalism.md) (89) 
 - [linux](linux.md) (89) 
-- [minimalism](minimalism.md) (88) 
 - [gnu](gnu.md) (85) 
 - [free_culture](free_culture.md) (81) 
 - [programming](programming.md) (80)