Color (also *colour*) is the perceived visual quality of light that's associated with its [wavelength](wavelength.md) (or mixture of several wavelengths); for example [red](red.md), [blue](blue.md) and [yellow](yellow.md) are colors. [Electromagnetic](electromagnetism.md) waves with wavelength from about 380 to 750 nm (about 400 to 790 THz) form the **visible spectrum**, i.e. waves our eyes can see -- combining such waves with different intensities and letting them fall on the retina of our eyes gives rise to the perception of color in our brain. There is a hugely deep *color theory* concerned with the concept of color (its definition, description, reproduction, psychological effect etc.). Needless to say colors are extremely important in anything related to visual [information](information.md) such as [art](art.md), [computer graphics](graphics.md), astrophysics, various visualizations or just everyday perception of our world. Color support is sometimes used as the opposite of systems that are extremely limited in the number of colors they can handle, which may be called [monochromatic](monochrome.md), 1bit (distinguishing only two colors), black&white or [grayscale](grayscale.md).
Color (also *colour*, from *celare*, "to cover") is the perceived visual quality of light that's associated with its [wavelength](wavelength.md)/[frequency](frequency.md) (or mixture of several); for example [red](red.md), [blue](blue.md) and [yellow](yellow.md) are colors. [Electromagnetic](electromagnetism.md) waves with wavelength from about 380 to 750 nm (about 400 to 790 THz) form the **visible spectrum**, i.e. waves our eyes can see -- combining such waves with different intensities and letting them fall on the retina of our eyes gives rise to the perception of color in our brain. There is a hugely deep *color theory* concerned with the concept of color (its definition, description, reproduction, psychological effect etc.). Needless to say colors are extremely important in anything related to visual [information](information.md) such as [art](art.md), [computer graphics](graphics.md), astrophysics, various visualizations or just everyday perception of our world. Color support is sometimes used as the opposite of systems that are extremely limited in the number of colors they can handle, which may be called [monochromatic](monochrome.md), 1bit (distinguishing only two colors), black&white or [grayscale](grayscale.md). Color can be seen to be in the same relation to sight as [pitch](pitch.md) is to hearing.
**How many colors are there?** The number of colors humans can distinguish is of course individual (color blindness makes people see fewer colors but there are also conditions that make one see more colors) but various sources state we are able to distinguish millions or even over 10 million different colors on average. In computer technology we talk about **color depth** which says the number of [bits](bit.md) we use to represent color -- the more bits, the more colors we can represent. 24 bits are nowadays mostly used to record color (8 bits for each red, green and blue component, so called *true color*), which allows for 16777216 distinct colors, though even something like [16 bits](rgb565.md) (65536 colors) is mostly enough for many use cases. Some advanced systems however support many more colors than true color, especially extremely bright and dim ones -- see [HDR](hdr.md).
**What gives physical objects its color?** Most everyday objects get its color from reflecting only specific parts of the white light (usually sunlight), while absorbing the opposite part of the spectrum, i.e. for example a white object reflects all incoming light, a black one absorbs all incoming light (that's why black things get hot in sunlight), a red one reflects the red light and absorbs the rest etc. This is determined by the qualities of the object's surface, such as the structure of its atoms or its microscopic geometry.
Compression means encoding [data](data.md) (such as images or texts) in a different way so that the data takes less space (memory) while keeping all the important [information](information.md), or, in plain terms, it usually means "making files smaller". Compression is pretty important so that we can utilize memory or bandwidth well -- without it our hard drives would be able to store just a handful of videos, internet would be slow as hell due to the gigantic amount of transferred data and our [RAM](ram.md) wouldn't suffice for things we normally do. There are many [algorithms](algorithm.md) for compressing various kinds of data, differing by their complexity, performance, efficiency of compression etc. The reverse process to compression (getting the original data back from the compressed data) is called **decompression**. The ratio of the compressed data size to the original data size is called **compression ratio** (the lower, the better). The science of data compression is truly huge and complicated AF, here we'll just mention some very basics. Also watch out: compression algorithms are often a [patent](patent.md) mine field.
{ I've now written a tiny LRS compression library/utility called shitpress, check it out at https://codeberg.org/drummyfish/shitpress. It's fewrer than 200 LOC, so simple it can nicely serve educational purposes. ~drummyfish }
{ I've now written a tiny LRS compression library/utility called [shitpress](shitpress.md), check it out at https://codeberg.org/drummyfish/shitpress. It's fewer than 200 LOC, so simple it can nicely serve educational purposes. The principle is simple, kind of a dictionary method, where the dictionary is simply the latest output 64 characters; if we find a long word that occurred recently, we simply reference it with mere 2 bytes. It works relatively well for most data! ~drummyfish }
{ There is a cool compressing competition known as Hutter Prize that offers 500000 pounds to anyone who can break the current record for compressing [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md). Currently the record is at compressing 1GB down to 115MB. See http://prize.hutter1.net for more. ~drummyfish }
@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Football is one of the most famous [sport](sport.md) [games](game.md) in which t
We, [LRS](lrs.md), highly value football, as it's a very [KISS](kiss.md) sport that can be played by anyone anywhere without needing expensive equipment. It is the sport of the people, very popular in poor parts of the world.
Football can be implemented as a video [game](game.md) or inspire a game mode -- this has been done e.g. in [Xonotic](xonotic.md) (the Nexball mode) or [SuperTuxKart](supertuxkart.md).
Football can be implemented as a video [game](game.md) or inspire a game mode -- this has been done e.g. in [Xonotic](xonotic.md) (the Nexball mode) or [SuperTuxKart](supertuxkart.md). There is a popular mainstream [proprietary](proprietary.md) video game called Rocket League in which cars play football (INB4 zoomers start calling football "Rocket League with people").
Implicit means something that's assumed unless stated otherwise; it is the opposite of [explicit](explicit.md). Though not the same, the term is similar to *default*; for example an implicit/default background [color](color.md) of some image format may be defined as [white](white.md), meaning that unless background color is stated, we suppose the background to be white. Implicit values may be important e.g. for saving space -- imagine we have some dataset in which 90% of values are [zero](zero.md); then it is convenient to state zero to be the implicit value and not store such values, by which we'll save 90% of space.
Implicit means something that's assumed unless stated otherwise; it is the opposite of [explicit](explicit.md). For example many [floating point](float.md) formats assume an implicit (not physically stored) bit with value 1 prepended to the explicitly stored mantissa values. Though not the same, the term *implicit*is similar to *[default](default.md)*; for example an implicit/default background [color](color.md) of some image format may be defined as [white](white.md), meaning that unless background color is stated, we suppose the background to be white (though a *default* value may still be explicitly stored; default just means an initial, unchanged value). Implicit values may be important e.g. for saving space -- imagine we have some dataset in which 90% of values are [zero](zero.md); then it is convenient to state zero to be the implicit value and not store such values, by which we'll save 90% of space.
Welcome to [Less Retarded Wiki](lrs_wiki.md), an encyclopedia only I can edit. But you can [fork](fork.md) it, it is [public domain](public_domain.md) under [CC0](cc0.md) (see [wiki rights](wiki_rights.md)) :) Holy [shit](shit.md), I'm gonna get [cancelled](cancel_culture.md) hard as soon as [SJWs](sjw.md) find out about this. Until then, let's enjoy the ride. THERE'S NO [MODERATION](moderation.md), I can do whatever I want here lol. I love this. INB4 "[hate speech](hate_speech.md)" website { [LMAO](lmao.md) [codeberg](codeberg.md) has already banned it. [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) also banned me for "opinions expressed on my website". ~drummyfish } CONGRATULATIONS, you have discovered the one true, undistorted and unbiased view of the world -- this is not a [joke](jokes.md), this wiki contains pure truth and the solution to most of the issues of our society.
DISCLAIMER: There is no disclaimer you idiot.
DISCLAIMER: All opinions expressed here are facts.
@ -65,6 +65,8 @@ Here are prime numbers under 1000: 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 4
\__\__\_/\ \ /\ \ /\ \
```
There also exists a term **pseudoprime** -- it stands for a number which is not actually a prime but appears so because it passes some quick primality tests.
## Algorithms
**Primality test**: testing whether a number is a prime is quite easy and not computationally difficult (unlike factoring the number). A [naive](naive.md) algorithm is called *trial division* and it tests whether any number from 2 up to the tested number divides the tested number (if so, then the number is not a prime, otherwise it is). This can be optimized by only testing numbers up to the [square root](sqrt.md) (including) of the tested number (if there is a factor greater than the square root, there is also another smaller than it which would already have been tested). A further simple optimization is to to test division by 2, 3 and then only numbers of the form 6q +- 1 (other forms are divisible by either 2 or 3, e.g 6q + 4 is always divisible by 2). Further optimizations exist and for maximum speed a [look up table](lut.md) may be used for smaller primes. A simple [C](c.md) function for primality test may look e.g. like this:
@ -8,13 +8,15 @@ Instead of the word *race* the politically correct camp uses words such as *ethn
**Race can be told from the shape of the skull and one's [DNA](dna.md)**, which finds use e.g. in forensics to help solve crimes. It is officially called the *ancestry estimation*. Some idiots say this should be forbidden to do because it's "racist" lmao. Besides the obvious visual difference such as skin color **races also have completely measurable differences acknowledged even by modern "science"**, for example unlike other races about 90% of Asians have dry earwax. Similar absolutely measurable differences exist in height, body odor, alcohol and lactose tolerance, high altitude tolerance, vulnerability to specific diseases, hair structure, cold tolerance, risk of obesity, behavior (see e.g. the infamous *[chimp out](chimp_out.md)* behavior of black people) and others. While dryness of earwax is really a minor curiosity, it is completely unreasonable to believe that race differences stop at traits we humans find unimportant and that genetics somehow magically avoids affecting traits that are harder to measure and which our current society deems politically incorrect to exist. In fact differences in important areas such as intelligence were measured very well -- these are however either censored or declared incorrect and "debunked" by unquestionable "science" authorities, because politics.
Pseudoleft uses cheap, logically faulty arguments, to deny the existence of race; for example that there are no clear objective boundaries between races -- of course there are not, but how does that imply nonexistence of race? That's like saying that color doesn't exist because given any two distinct colors there exists a gradual transition.
The politically correct camp further argues that there wasn't enough time for human races to develop significant differences as evolution operates on scales of millions of years while the evolution of modern humans was taking part about in an order of magnitude smaller time scale. However it has been shown that evolution can be much faster under specific conditions, e.g. those of rapid environment change (shown e.g. in a documentary *Laws of the Lizard* on anoles that show signs of evolutionary change only after 14 years, also see e.g. the book *The 10,000 Year Explosion* talking about actual acceleration of human evolution) and interbreeding with other species (e.g. Neanderthals, which European population bred with but African population didn't), which did occur when humans spread around the world and had to live in vastly different conditions -- successful civilizations themselves actually furthermore started to rapidly change their environment to something that favors very different traits. We can take a look at the enormous differences between dog breeds which have been bred mostly during only the last 200 years and whose differences are enormous and not only physical, but also that of intelligence and temperament -- yes, the breeding of dogs has been selective, but a rapid change in environment may have a similar accelerating effect, and the process in humans still took many tens of thousands of years. For example races of slaves were probably selectively bred, even if unintentionally, as physically fit slaves were more likely to survive than those who were smart; similarly in prospering civilizations, e.g. that of Europe, where trade, business and development of technology (e.g. military) became more crucial for survival than in primitive desert or jungle civilizations, different traits such as intelligence became preferred by evolution.
Another pseudoleftist argument is that "the DNA of any two individuals is 99.6 % identical so the differences are really insignificant". That's of course completely faulty, it's like saying a strawberry and beer is practically the same thing as they are both about 93 % water. It is known that only a minuscule part of DNA has any actual biological effect, only a small part is important and therefore including all the unimportant junk in judging similarity is just purposeful attempt at misleading statistics.
Another pseudoleftist argument is that "the DNA of any two individuals is 99.6 % identical so the differences are really insignificant". Now consider that DNA of a pig is 98 % identical to human. We see the argument is like saying a strawberry and beer is practically the same thing as they are both about 93 % water. It is known that only a minuscule part of DNA has any actual biological effect, only a small part is important and therefore including all the unimportant junk in judging similarity is just purposeful attempt at misleading statistics.
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. [SJWs](sjw.md) reject any idea of a race with the same religious fanaticism with which Christian fanatics opposed Darwin's evolution theory.
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. [SJWs](sjw.md) reject any idea of a race with the same religious fanaticism with which Christian fanatics opposed Darwin's evolution theory.
Most generally races are called by the color of their skin, the most apparent attribute, i.e. White (Caucasian), Black (African, so called [negro](negro.md) and [negroid](negroid.md)), Yellow (Asian) and Brown (Indian). But the lines can be drawn in many ways, some go as far as calling different nations separate races (e.g. the Norwegian race, Russian race etc.).
**What races are there?** That depends on definitions, the boundaries between races are [fuzzy](fuzzy.md) and the lines can be drawn differently. Most generally races are called by the color of their skin, the most apparent attribute, i.e. White (Caucasian), Black (African, so called [negro](negro.md) and [negroid](negroid.md)), Yellow (Asian) and Brown (Indian). Some go as far as calling different nations separate races (e.g. the Norwegian race, Russian race etc.). 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. A common, very general division is also that into three big groups: white, black and yellow.
There is a controversial 1994 book called *The Bell Curve* that deals with differences in intelligence between races. [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)). An online resource with a lot of information on racial differences is e.g. http://www.humanbiologicaldiversity.com/. See also e.g. https://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Race_and_morphology. Note that even though the mentioned sites may be fascist, biased and contain propaganda of their own, they provide links to resources which the pseudoleftist mainstream such as [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) and [Google](google.md) simply censor -- while we may not promote the politics and opinions of mentioned sites, we link to them to provide access to censored information so that one can seek truth and form his own opinions.
@ -10,4 +10,4 @@ TODO: some noice tree of sciences or smth
**What should we then accept as legit science?** [We](lrs.md), in the context of our [ideal society](less_retarded_society.md), argue for NOT creating a strict definition of science, just as we are for example against "formalizing morality" with laws etc. What is and is not science is to be judged on a case-by-case basis, science cannot be a mass produced stream of papers that can automatically be marked as OK or NOT OK. We might define the term **[less retarded science](less_retarded_science.md)** so as to distinguish today's many times twisted and corrupted "science/[soyence](soyence.md)" from the real, good and truly useful science. Less retarded science should follow similar principles as [our technology](lrs.md), it should be completely free as in freedom, [selfless](selflessness.md), [suckless](suckless.md) as much as possible, unobscured etc.
Do NOT confuse or equate science with [academia](academia.md). As with everything, under capitalism academia has become rotten to the core, research is motivated by profit and what's produced is mostly utter bullshit shat out by wannabe PhDs who need to mass produce "something" as a part of the crazy academia publish-or-perish game. As with everything in capitalism, the closer you look, the more corruption you find.
**Never confuse trusting scientists vs trusting science** (especially in [capitalism](capitalism.md) and other dystopias), the former is literally faith ([soyence](soyence.md)), no different from blindly trusting religious preachers and political propaganda, the latter means only trusting that which you yourself can test and verify at home and therefore having real confidence. Also do NOT confuse or equate science with [academia](academia.md). As with everything, under capitalism academia has become rotten to the core, research is motivated by profit and what's produced is mostly utter bullshit shat out by wannabe PhDs who need to mass produce "something" as a part of the crazy academia publish-or-perish game. As with everything in capitalism, the closer you look, the more corruption you find.
Square root (sometimes shortened to *sqrt*) of number *a* is such a number *b* that *b^2 = a*, for example 3 is a square root of 9 because 3^2 = 9. Finding square root is one of the most basic and important operations in [math](math.md) and [programming](programming.md), e.g. for computing [distances](distance.md), solving [quadratic equations](quadratic_equation.md) etc. Square root is a special case of finding Nth [root](root.md) of a number for N = 2. Square root of a number doesn't have to be a whole number; in fact if the square isn't a whole number, it is always an [irrational number](irrational_number.md) (i.e. it can't be expressed as a fraction of two integers, for example square root of [two](two.md) is approximately 1.414...); and it doesn't even have to be a real number (e.g. square root of -1 is [i](i.md)). Strictly speaking there may exist multiple square roots of a number, for example both 5 and -5 are square roots of 25 -- the positive square root is called **principal square root**; principal square root of *x* is the same number we get when we raise *x* to 1/2, and this is what we are usually interested in -- from now on by *square root* we will implicitly mean *principal square root*. Programmers write *square root of x* as `sqrt(x)` (which should give the same result as raising to 1/2, i.e. `pow(x,0.5)`), mathematicians write it as:
```
_ 1/2
\/x = x
```
TODO
## Programming
TODO
Within desired precision square root can be relatively quickly computed iteratively by [binary search](binary_search.md). Of course if we need extreme speed, we may use a [look up table](lut.md) with precomputed values.
TODO: C code for binary search
The following is an [approximation](approximation.md) of integer square root in [C](c.md) that has acceptable accuracy to about 1 million (maximum error from 1000 to 1000000 is about 7%): { Painstakingly made by me. ~drummyfish }
The following is a**non-iterative [approximation](approximation.md)** of integer square root in [C](c.md) that has acceptable accuracy to about 1 million (maximum error from 1000 to 1000000 is about 7%): { Painstakingly made by me. ~drummyfish }
*A typical website under capitalism, 2023. For potential far-future readers: this is NOT exaggeration, all websites LITERALLY look like this.*
Back in the days (90s and early 2000s) web used to be a place of freedom working more or less in a decentralized manner, on [anarchist](anarchism.md) and often even [communist](communism.md) principles -- people used to have their own unique websites where they shared freely and openly, [censorship](censorship.md) was difficult to implement and mostly non-existent and websites used to have a much better design, were [KISS](kiss.md), safer, "open" (no paywalls, registration walls, country blocks, [DRM](drm.md), ...), MUCH faster and more robust as they were pure [HTML](html.md) documents. It was also the case that most websites were truly nice, useful and each one had a "soul" as they were usually made by passionate nerds who had a creative freedom and true desires to create a nice website (yes, even if they were making a commercial website for some company).
As the time marched on web used to become more and more [shit](shit.md), as is the case with everything touched by [capitalist](capitalist_software.md) hand -- the advent of so called **web 2.0** brought about a lot of [complexity](complexity.md), websites started to incorporate client-side scripts ([JavaScript](javascript.md), [Flash](flash.md), [Java](java.md) applets, ...) which led to many negative things such as incompatibility with browsers (kickstarting browser consumerism and [update culture](update_culture.md)), performance loss and security vulnerabilities (web pages now became Turing complete programs rather than mere documents) and more complexity in web browsers, which leads to immense [bloat](bloat.md) and browser [monopolies](bloat_monopoly.md) (greater effort is needed to develop a browser, making it a privilege of those who can afford it, and those can subsequently dictate de-facto standards that further strengthen their monopolies). Another disaster came with **[social networks](social_network.md)** in mid 2000s, most notably [Facebook](facebook.md) but also [YouTube](youtube.md), [Twitter](twitter.md) and others, which centralized the web and rid people of control. Out of comfort people stopped creating and hosting own websites and rather created a page on Facebook. This gave the power to corporations and allowed **mass-surveillance**, **mass-censorship** and **propaganda brainwashing**. As the web became more and more popular, corporations and governments started to take more control over it, creating technologies and laws to make it less free. By 2020, the good old web is but a memory and a hobby of a few boomers, everything is controlled by corporations, infected with billions of unbearable ads, [DRM](drm.md), malware (trackers, [crypto](crypto.md) miners, ...), there exist no good web browsers, web pages now REQUIRE JavaScript even if it's not needed in principle due to which they are painfully slow and buggy, there are restrictive laws and censorship and de-facto laws (site policies) put in place by corporations controlling the web.
