Update

bloat.md

@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
 # Bloat
 
-Bloat is a very wide term that in the context of [software](software.md) and technology means extreme growth in terms of source code size, complexity, number of [dependencies](dependency.md), [redundancy](redundancy.md), unnecessary or useless features (e.g. [feature creep](feature_creep.md)) and resource usage, all of which lead to inefficient, badly designed technology with bugs and [security](security.md) vulnerabilities, as well as **loss of [freedom](free_software.md)**, waste of human effort and great obscurity and ugliness. Bloat is extremely bad and one of the greatest technological issues of today. Creating bloat is bad engineering at it worst and unfortunately it is what's absolutely taking over all technology nowadays, mostly due to [capitalism](capitalism.md), commercialization, consumerism and incompetent people trying to take on jobs they are in no way qualified to do.
+Bloat is a very wide term that in the context of [software](software.md) and technology means extreme growth in terms of source code size, complexity, number of [dependencies](dependency.md), [redundancy](redundancy.md), unnecessary or useless features (e.g. [feature creep](feature_creep.md)) and resource usage, all of which lead to inefficient, badly designed technology with bugs and [security](security.md) vulnerabilities, as well as **loss of [freedom](free_software.md)**, waste of human effort and great obscurity and ugliness. Simply put bloat is burdening [bullshit](bullshit.md). Bloat is extremely bad and one of the greatest technological issues of today. Creating bloat is bad engineering at its worst and unfortunately it is what's absolutely taking over all technology nowadays, mostly due to [capitalism](capitalism.md), commercialization, consumerism and incompetent people trying to take on jobs they are in no way qualified to do.
 
 [LRS](lrs.md), [suckless](suckless.md) and some others rather small groups are trying to address the issue and write software that is good, minimal, safe, efficient and well functioning. Nevertheless our numbers are very small and in this endeavor we are basically standing against the whole world and the most powerful tech corporations.
 
 The issue of bloat may of course appear outside of the strict boundaries of computer technology, nowadays we may already observe e.g. **[science bloat](science_bloat.md)** -- science is becoming so overcomplicated (many times on purpose, e.g. by means of [bullshit](bullshit.md) science) that 99% people can NOT understand it, they have to BELIEVE "scientific authorities", which does not at all differ from the dangerous blind religious behavior. Any time a new paper comes out, chances are that not even SCIENTISTS from the same field but with a different specialization will understand it in depth and have to simply trust its results. This combined with self-interest obsessed society gives rise to [soyence](soyence.md) and large scale brainwashing and spread of "science approved" propaganda.
 
-Bach to technology though, 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) license?"** 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** 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). 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.
+Back to technology though, 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) license?"** 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** 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). 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.
 
 ## Typical Bloat
 
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ The following is a list of software usually considered a good, typical example o
 
 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).
 
-Small bloat is a subject of popular [jokes](joke.md) such as "OMG he uses a unicode fonts -- 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](depend.md) on Unicode.
+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](depend.md) on Unicode.
 
 Small bloat includes for example:
 

c_pitfalls.md

@@ -32,11 +32,11 @@ int main(void)
 }
 ```
 
-**Char data type signedness is not defined**. The signedness can be explicitly "forced" by specifying `signed char` or `unsigned char`.
+**Overflow behavior of signed type operations is not specified.** Sometimes we suppose that e.g. addition of two signed integers that are past the data type's limit will produce two's complement overflow, but in fact this operation's behavior is undefined, C99 doesn't say what representation should be used for numbers. For [portability](portability.md), predictability and safety **it is safer to use unsigned types**.
 
 **Bit shifts by type width or more are undefined.** Also bit shifts by negative values are undefined. So e.g. `x >> 8` is undefined if width of the data type of `x` is 8 bits.
 
-**Overflow behavior of signed type operations is not specified.** Sometimes we suppose that e.g. addition of two signed integers that are past the data type's limit will produce two's complement overflow, but in fact this operation's behavior is undefined, C99 doesn't say what representation should be used for numbers.
+**Char data type signedness is not defined**. The signedness can be explicitly "forced" by specifying `signed char` or `unsigned char`.
 
 ## Memory Unsafety
 

capitalism.md

@@ -4,6 +4,8 @@
 
 Capitali$m is the worst (not only) economic system we've yet seen in [history](history.md),^[source](logic.md) literally based on pure greed and artificially sustained conflict between people (so called [competition](competition.md)), abandoning all morals and putting money and profit (so called [capital](capital.md)) above everything else including preservation of life itself, capitalism fuels the worst in people and forces them to compete and suffer for basic resources, even in a world where abundance of resources is already possible to achieve. Capitalism goes against progress (see e.g. [antivirus paradox](antivirus_paradox.md)), [good technology](lrs.md), freedom, it supports immense waste of resources, wars, abuse of people, destruction of environment, decline of morals, invention of [bullshit](bullshit.md) (bullshit jobs, bullshit laws, ...), [torture](marketing.md) of people and animals and much more. Nevertheless, it's been truthfully stated that "it is now easier to imagine the end of all life than any substantial change in capitalism." Another famous quote is that "capitalism is the belief that the worst of men driven by the nastiest motives will somehow work for the benefit of everyone", which is quite correct.
 
+{ Some web bashing capitalism I just found: http://digdeeper.club/articles/capitalismcancer.xhtml, read only briefly, seems to contain some nice gems capturing the rape of people. ~drummyfish }
+
 **Capitalism is fundamentally flawed and CANNOT be fixed** -- capitalists build on the idea that competition will drive society, that market will be self sustaining, however capitalism itself works for instating the rule of the winners who eliminate their competition, capitalism is self destabilizing, i.e. the driving force of capitalism is completely unsustainable and leads to  catastrophic results as those who get ahead in working competition are also in advantage -- as it's said: money makes money, therefore money flow from the poor to the rich and create a huge imbalance in which competition has to be highly forced, eventually completely arbitrarily and in very harmful ways (invention of bullshit jobs, creating artificial needs and hugely complex laws). It's as if we set up a race in which those who get ahead start to also go faster -- expecting a sustained balance in such a race is just insanity. Society tries to "[fight](fight_culture.md)" this emerging imbalance with various laws and rules of market, but this effort is like trying to fight math itself -- the system is mathematically destined to be unstable, pretending we can win over laws of nature themselves is just pure madness.
 
 Capitalism produces the [worst imaginable technology](capitalist_software.md) and rewards people for [being cruel to each other](entrepreneur.md). It points the direction of society towards a [collapse](collapse.md) and may very likely be the [great filter](great_filter.md) of civilizations; in capitalism people de-facto own nothing and become wholly dependent on corporations which exploit this fact to abuse them as much as possible. This is achieved by [slowly boiling the frog](slowly_boiling_the_frog.md). No one owns anything, products become [services](saas.md) (your car won't drive without Internet connection and permission from its manufacturer), all independency and decentralization is lost in favor of a highly fragile and interdependent economy and infrastructure of services. Then only a slight break in the chain is enough to bring the whole civilization down in a spectacular domino effect.

collapse.md

@@ -1,16 +1,18 @@
 # Collapse
 
-Collapse of our civilization is a concerning scenario in which basic structures of society relatively rapidly fall apart and cause world-wide horrors such as chaos, [wars](war.md), famine and loss of advanced technology. It is something that's very likely coming very soon: we are especially focusing on a very probable **technological collapse** (caused by badly designed technology as well as its wrong application and extreme overuse causing a dangerous dependence) but of course clues point to it coming from many directions (ecological, economical, political, natural disasters such as a coronal mass ejection etc.). Recently there has even appeared a specific term *collapsology* referring to the study of the potential collapse.
+Collapse of our civilization is a concerning scenario in which basic structures of society relatively rapidly fall apart and cause unusually large, possibly world-wide horrors such as chaos, [wars](war.md), famine and loss of advanced technology. It is something that will very likely happen very soon due to uncontrolled growth and societal decline by [capitalism](capitalism.md): we, the [LRS](lrs.md), are especially focusing on a very probable **technological collapse** (caused by badly designed technology as well as its wrong application and extreme overuse causing dangerous [dependencies](dependency.md)) but of course clues point to collapse are coming from many directions (ecological, economical, political, natural disasters such as a coronal mass ejection etc.). Some have said that a society can deal with one crisis, but if multiple crises hit at once this hit may be fatal; however the dependence of current society on computer technology is so great that its collapse could be enough to deliver a fatal blow alone. Recently (around 2015) there has even appeared a specific term **collapsology** referring to the study of the potential collapse.
 
 There is a [reddit](reddit.md) community for discussing the collapse at https://reddit.net/r/collapse. [WikiWikiWeb](wikiwikiweb.md) has a related discussion under *ExtinctionOfHumanity*.
 
-In technological world a lot of people are concerned with the collapse, notable the [collapse OS](collapse_os.md), an operating system meant to run on simple [hardware](hw.md) after the technological supply chain collapses and renders development of modern computers impossible. They believe the collapse will happen before 2030. The chip shortage and energy crisis of 2020s are one of the first warnings and shows how fragile the systems really is.
+Collapse of civilizations has been a repeated theme throughout [history](history.md), it is nothing new or exceptional, see e.g. Maya empire collapse, Bronze age collapse, the fall of Rome etc. It usually comes when a civilization reaches high complexity and becomes "spoiled", morally corrupt and socially divided -- just what we are seeing today.
 
-[Ted Kaczynski](ted_kaczynski.md), a famous primitivist murderer, has seen the collapse as a possible option. People like [Luke Smith](luke_smith.md) advocate (and practice) simple, independent off-grid living, besides other reasons in order to be prepared for such an eventuality as a collapse. Even [proprietary](proprietary.md) normies such as [Jonathan Blow](jonathan_blow.md) warn of a coming disaster (in his talk *Preventing the Collapse of Civilization*). [Viznut](viznut.md) is another programmer warning about the collapse.
+In technological world a lot of people are concerned with the collapse, notable the [collapse OS](collapse_os.md), an operating system meant to run on simple [hardware](hw.md) after the technological supply chain collapses and renders development of modern computers impossible. They believe the collapse will happen before 2030. The chip shortage, financial, climatic and energetic crisis and beginning of war in Europe as of early 2020s are one of the first warnings showing how fragile the systems really is.
 
-The details of the collapse cannot of course be predicted exactly -- it may come is an quick, violent form (e.g. in case of a disaster causing a blackout) or as a more agonizing slow death. CollapseOS site talks about two stages of the slow collapse: the first one after the collapse of the supply chain. i.e. when the production of modern computers halts, and the second (decades after) when the last modern computer stops working.
+[Ted Kaczynski](ted_kaczynski.md) (a famous primitivist mathematician that committed mass murderer to warn about the decline of society due to complex technology) has seen the collapse as a possible option. Internet bloggers/vloggers such as [Luke Smith](luke_smith.md) and *no phone man* advocate (and practice) simple, independent off-grid living, possibly to be prepared for such an event. Even [proprietary](proprietary.md) normies like [Jonathan Blow](jonathan_blow.md) warn of a coming disaster (in his talk *Preventing the Collapse of Civilization*). [Viznut](viznut.md) is another programmer warning about the collapse.
 
-{ I've read a book called Blackout by Marc Elsberg whose story revolves around a large collapse of power supply in Europe. It goes into details on what the consequences would likely be. It's a nice read on the topic. ~drummyfish }
+The details of the collapse cannot of course be predicted exactly -- it may come in a relatively quick, violent form (e.g. in case of a disaster causing a blackout) or as a more agonizing slow death. CollapseOS site talks about two stages of the slow collapse: the first one after the collapse of the supply chain. i.e. when the production of modern computers halts, and the second (decades after) when the last modern computer stops working. It most likely won't happen overnight -- that's a very extreme case. A typical collapse may take decades during which  all aspects of society see a rapid decline. Of course, a collapse doesn't mean extinction of humans either, just deaths of many and great losses of what has been achieved culturally and technologically.
+
+{ I've read a book called *Blackout* by Marc Elsberg whose story revolves around a fictional large collapse of power supply in Europe. A books called *The World Without Us* explores what the world would look like if humans suddenly disappeared. ~drummyfish }
 
 ## Late 2022 Report
 

copyright.md

@@ -1,12 +1,14 @@
 # Copyright
 
-Copyright (better called copyrestriction) is one of many types of so called [intellectual property](intellectual_property.md) (IP), i.e. a legal concept that allows ownership (restriction) of certain kinds of [information](information.md). Copyright specifically allows to own (i.e. restrict other people's rights to) [art](art.md) creations such as images, songs or texts, which include source code of computer programs. Copyright is not to be confused with [trademark](trademark.md) or [patent](patent.md). Copyright is symbolized by C in a circle or in brackets: (C).
+Copyright (better called copyrestriction) is one of many types of so called "[intellectual property](intellectual_property.md)" (IP), a legal concept that allows "ownership", i.e. restriction and [censorship](censorship.md) of certain kinds of [information](information.md), for example prohibition of sharing useful information or improving art. Copyright specifically allows the copyright holder (not necessarily the author) a monopoly (practically absolute power) over [art](art.md) creations such as images, songs or texts, which include source code of computer [programs](program.md). Copyright is a [capitalist](capitalism.md) mechanism for creating [artificial scarcity](artificial_scarcity.md), enabling censorship and elimination of the [public domain](public_domain.md) (a pool of freely shareable works that people could easily share, utilize and enjoy). Copyright is not to be confused with [trademarks](trademark.md), [patents](patent.md) and other kinds of "intellectual property". Copyright is symbolized by C in a circle or in brackets: (C), which is often accompanies by the phrase "all rights reserved".
 
-When someone creates something that can even remotely be considered artistic expression (even such things as e.g. a mere collection of already existing things), they automatically gain copyright on it, without having to register it anywhere or let it be known anywhere. They then have practically full control over the work and can successfully sue anyone who basically just touches it in any way. Therefore **any code without a [free](free_software.md) license attached is implicitly fully owned by its creator** (so called "all rights reserved") and can't be used by anyone without permission. It is said that copyright can't apply to ideas, only to expressions of ideas, however that's [bullshit](bs.md), the line isn't clear and is arbitrarily drawn by judges; for example regarding stories in books it's been established that the story itself can be copyrighted, not just its expression (you can't rewrite the Harry Potter story in different words and start selling it).
+When someone creates something that can even remotely be considered artistic expression (even such things as e.g. a mere collection of already existing things), he automatically gains copyright on it, without having to register it, announce it or let it be known anywhere in any way. He then practically has a full control over the work and can successfully sue anyone who basically just touches the work in any way. Therefore **any code without a [free](free_software.md) license attached is implicitly fully "owned" by its creator** (so called "all rights reserved") and can't be used by anyone without permission. It is said that copyright can't apply to ideas (ideas are covered by [patents](patent.md)), only to expressions of ideas, however that's [bullshit](bs.md), the line isn't clear and is arbitrarily drawn by judges; for example regarding stories in books it's been established that the story itself can be copyrighted, not just its expression (you can't rewrite the Harry Potter story in different words and start selling it).
 
-The current extreme form of copyright (as well as other types of IP such as software patents) has been highly criticized by many people, even those whom it's supposed to "protect" (e.g. small game creators). Strong copyright laws basically benefit corporations and "trolls" on the detriment of everyone else. It smothers creativity and efficiency by prohibiting people to reuse, remix and improve already existing works. Most people are probably for *some* form of copyright but still oppose the current extreme form which is pretty crazy: copyright applies to everything without any registration or notice and last usually 70 years (!!!) **after** the author has died (!!!) and is already rotting in the ground. This is 100 years in some countries. In some countries it is not even possible to waive copyright to own creations. Some people are against the very idea of copyright (those may either use waivers such as [CC0](cc0.md) or [unlicense](unlicense.md) or protest by not using any licenses and simply ignoring copyright which however will actually discourage other people from reusing their works). Though copyright was originally intended to ensure artists can make living with their works, it has now become the tool of states and corporations for universal censorship; states can use copyright to for example take down old politically inconvenient books shared on the internet even if such takedowns do absolute not serve protection of anyone's living but purely political interests.
+As if copyright wasn't bad enough of a [cancer](cancer.md), **there usually exist extra oppressive copyright-like restrictions called related rights or neighboring rights  such as "[moral rights](moral_rights.md)", "[personal rights](personal_rights.md)" etc.** Such "rights" differ a lot by country and can be used to restrict and censor even copyright-free works. This is a stuff that makes you want to commit [suicide](suicide.md). Waivers such as [CC0](cc0.md) try to waive copyright as well as neighboring rights (to what extent neighboring rights can be waived is debatable though).
 
-Prominent critics of copyright include [Lawrence Lessig](lessig.md) (who established [free culture](free_culture.md) and [Creative Commons](creative_commons.md)) as a response), [Nina Paley](nina_paley.md) and [Richard Stallman](rms.md).
+The current extreme form of copyright (as well as other types of IP such as software patents) has been highly criticized by many people, even those whom it's supposed to "protect" (small game creators, musicians etc.). Strong copyright laws basically benefit [corporations](corporation.md) and "trolls" on the detriment of everyone else. It smothers creativity and efficiency by prohibiting people to reuse, remix and improve already existing works. Most people are probably for *some* form of copyright but still oppose the current extreme form which is pretty crazy: **copyright applies to everything without any registration or notice and last usually 70 years (!!!) AFTER the author has died (!!!)** and is already rotting in the ground. This is 100 years in some countries. In some countries it is not even possible to waive copyright to own creations. Some people, including [us](lrs.md), are against the very idea of copyright (those may either use waivers such as [CC0](cc0.md) or [unlicense](unlicense.md) or protest by not using any licenses and simply ignoring copyright which however will actually discourage other people from reusing their works). Though copyright was originally intended to ensure artists can make living with their works, it has now become the tool of states and corporations for universal censorship, control, bullying, creating scarcity and [bullshit jobs](bullshit_job.md); states can use copyright to for example take down old politically inconvenient books shared on the Internet even if such takedowns do absolute not serve protection of anyone's living but purely political interests.
+
+Prominent critics of copyright include [Lawrence Lessig](lessig.md) (who established [free culture](free_culture.md) and [Creative Commons](creative_commons.md)) as a response), [Nina Paley](nina_paley.md) and [Richard Stallman](rms.md). There are many movements and groups opposing copyright or its current form, most notably e.g. the [free culture](free_culture.md) movement, [free software](free_software.md) movement, [Creative Commons](creative_commons.md) etc.
 
 The book *Free Culture* by Lessig talks, besides others, about how copyright has started and how it's been shaped by corporations to becoming their tool for monopolizing art. The concept of copyright has appeared after the invention of [printing press](printing_press.md). The so called *Statute of Anne* of 1710 allowed the authors of books to control their copying for **14 years** and only after **registartion**. The term could be prolonged by anothert 14 years if the author survived. The laws started to get more and more strict as control of information became more valued and eventually the term grew to **life of author plus 70 years**, without any need for registration or deposit of the copy of the work. Furthermore with new technologies, the scope of copyright has also extended: if copyright originally only limited *copying* of books, in the Internet age it started to cover basically any use, as any manipulation with digital data in the computer age requires making local copies. Additionally the copyright laws were passing despite being unconstitutional as the US constitution says that copyright term has to be finite -- the corporations have found a way around this and simply regularly increased the copyright's term, trying to make it [de-facto](de_facto.md) [infinite](infinity.md). Their reason, of course, was to firstly forever keep ownership of their own art but also, maybe more importantly, to **kill the [public domain](public_domain.md)**, i.e. prevent old works from entering the public domain where they would become a completely free, unrestricted work for all people, competing with their proprietary art. Nowadays, with coprporations such as [YouTube](youtube.md) and [Facebook](facebook.md) de-facto controlling most of infromation sharing among common people, the situation worsens further: they can simply make their own laws that don't need to be passed by the government but simply implemented on the platform they control. This way they are already killing e.g. the right to [fair use](fair_use.md), they can simply remove any content on the basis of "copyright violation", even if such content would normally NOT violate copyright because it would fall under fair use. This would normally have to be decided by court, but a corporation here itself takes the role of the court. So in terms of copyright, corporations have now a greater say than governments, and of course they'll use this power against the people (e.g. to implement censorship and surveillance).
 
@@ -22,6 +24,7 @@ A work which is not covered by copyright (and any other IP) -- which is nowadays
 
 ## See Also
 
+- [free culture](free_culture.md)
 - [copyleft](copyleft.md)
 - [fair use](fair_use.md)
 - [creative commons](cc.md)

corporation.md

@@ -6,4 +6,6 @@ The most basic fact to know about corporations is that **100% of everything a co
 
 **Corporation is not a human, it has no emotion and absolutely 0 sense of morality.** 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. Of course, most just don't care, and most don't even have a choice. Similar principles allowed for example the [Holocaust](holocaust.md) to happen. Anyone who has ever worked anywhere knows that managers always pressure workers just to make money, not to behave more ethically -- of course, such a manager would be fired on spot -- and indeed, workers that try to behave ethically are replaced by those who make more money, just as companies that try to behave ethically in the market are replaced by those that rather make money, i.e. corporations. This is nothing surprising, the definition of [capitalism](capitalism.md) implies existence of a system with Darwinian evolution that selects entities that are best at making money for any cost, and that is exactly what we are getting. To expect any other outcome in capitalism would be just trying to deny mathematics itself.
 
+There is probably nothing we can do to stop corporations from taking over the world and eventually eliminating humans, we have probably passed the **[capitalist singularity](capitalist_singularity.md)**.
+
 TODO

formal_language.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 The field of formal languages tries to [mathematically](math.md) and rigorously examine and describe anything that can be viewed as a language, which probably includes most structures we can think of, from human languages and computer languages to visual patterns and other highly abstract structures. Formal languages are at the root of theoretical [computer science](compsci.md) and are important e.g. for [computability](computability.md)/decidability, computational complexity, [security](security.md) and [compilers](compiler.md), but they also find use in linguistics and other fields of [science](science.md).
 
-A **formal language** is defined as a (potentially infinite) set of strings over some alphabet (which is finite). I.e. a language is a subset of E* where E is a finite alphabet (a set of *letters*). (* is a *Kleene Star* and signifies a set of all possible strings over E). The string belonging to a language may be referred to as a *word* or perhaps even *sentence*, but this word/sentence is actually a whole kind of *text* written in the language, if we think of it in terms of our natural languages.
+A **formal language** is defined as a (potentially infinite) set of strings (which are finite but unlimited in length) over some alphabet (which is finite). I.e. a language is a subset of E* where E is a finite alphabet (a set of *letters*). (* is a *Kleene Star* and signifies a set of all possible strings over E). The string belonging to a language may be referred to as a *word* or perhaps even *sentence*, but this word/sentence is actually a whole kind of *text* written in the language, if we think of it in terms of our natural languages.
 
 **For example**, given an alphabet [a,b,c], a possible formal language over it is [a,ab,bc,c]. Another, different possible language over this alphabet is an infinite language [b,ab,aab,aaab,aaaab,...] which we can also write with a [regular expression](regex.md) as a*b. We can also see e.g. English as being a formal language equivalent to a set of all texts over the English alphabet (along with symbols like space, dot, comma etc.) that we would consider to be in English as we speak it.
 
@@ -20,4 +20,4 @@ We usually classify formal languages according to the **[Chomsky](chomsky.md) hi
  
 Note that here we are basically always examining **infinite languages** as finite languages are trivial. If a language is finite (i.e. the set of all strings of the language is finite), it can automatically be computed by any type 3 computational model. In [real life](irl.md) computers are actually always equivalent to a finite state automaton, i.e. the *weakest* computational type (because a computer memory is always finite and so there is always a finite number of states a computer can be in). However this doesn't mean there is no point in studying infinite languages, of course, as we're still interested in the structure, computational methods and approximating the infinite models of computation.
 
-**NOTE**: When trying to classify a [programming language](programming_language.md), we have to be careful about what we classify: one things is what a program written in given language can compute, and another thing is the language's [syntax](syntax.md). To the former all strict general-purpose programming languages such as [C](c.md) or [JavaScript](javascript.md) are type 0 ([Turing complete](turing_complete.md)). From the syntax point of view it's a bit more complicated and we need to further define what exactly a syntax is (where is the line between syntax and semantic errors): it may be (and often is) that syntactically the class will be lower. There is actually a famous [meme](meme.md) about [Perl](perl.md) syntax being undecidable.
+**NOTE**: When trying to classify a [programming language](programming_language.md), we have to be careful about what we classify: one thing is what a program written in given language can compute, and another thing is the language's [syntax](syntax.md). To the former all strict general-purpose programming languages such as [C](c.md) or [JavaScript](javascript.md) are type 0 ([Turing complete](turing_complete.md)). From the syntax point of view it's a bit more complicated and we need to further define what exactly a syntax is (where is the line between syntax and semantic errors): it may be (and often is) that syntactically the class will be lower. There is actually a famous [meme](meme.md) about [Perl](perl.md) syntax being undecidable.

free_speech.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Free Speech
 
-Freedom of speech means there are no arbitrary government or anyone else imposed punishments for or obstacles (such as [censorship](censorship.md)) to merely talking about anything, making any public statement or publication of any information. **Free speech has to be by definition absolute and have no limit**, otherwise it's not free speech but controlled speech -- trying to add exceptions to free speech is like trying to limit to whom a [free software](free_software.md) license if granted; doing so immediately makes such software non-free. Freedom of speech is an essential attribute of a mature society, sadly it hasn't been widely implemented yet and with the [SJW](sjw.md) cancer the latest trend in society is towards eliminating free speech rather than supporting it (see e.g. [political correctness](political_correctness.md)). Speech is being widely censored by extremist groups (e.g. [LGBT](lgbt.md), see [cancel_culture](cancel_culture.md)) and states -- depending on country there exist laws against so called "[hate speech](hate_speech.md)", questioning official versions of history (see e.g. [Holocaust](holocaust.md) denial laws present in many EU states), criticizing powerful people (for example it is illegal to criticize or insult that huge inbred dick Thai king), sharing of useful information such as books ([copyright](copyright.md) censorship) etc. Free speech nowadays is being eliminated by the strategy of creating an exception to free speech, usually called "hate speech", and then classifying any undesired speech under such label and silencing it.
+Freedom of speech means there are no arbitrary government or anyone else imposed punishments for or obstacles (such as [censorship](censorship.md)) to merely talking about anything, making any public statement or publication of any information. **Free speech has to be by definition absolute and have no limit**, otherwise it's not free speech but controlled speech -- trying to add exceptions to free speech is like trying to limit to whom a [free software](free_software.md) license if granted; doing so immediately makes such software non-free. Freedom of speech is an essential attribute of a mature society, sadly it hasn't been widely implemented yet and with the [SJW](sjw.md) cancer the latest trend in society is towards eliminating free speech rather than supporting it (see e.g. [political correctness](political_correctness.md)). Speech is being widely censored by extremist groups (e.g. [LGBT](lgbt.md), see [cancel culture](cancel_culture.md)) and states -- depending on country there exist laws against so called "[hate speech](hate_speech.md)", questioning official versions of history (see e.g. [Holocaust](holocaust.md) denial laws present in many EU states), criticizing powerful people (for example it is illegal to criticize or insult that huge inbred dick Thai king), sharing of useful information such as books ([copyright](copyright.md) censorship) etc. Free speech nowadays is being eliminated by the strategy of creating an exception to free speech, usually called "hate speech", and then classifying any undesired speech under such label and silencing it.
 
 The basic principle of free speech says that **if you don't support freedom of speech which you dislike, you don't support free speech**.
 

history.md

@@ -6,15 +6,17 @@ WIP
 
 This is a brief summary of history of [technology](technology.md) and [computers](computer.md).
 
-The earliest known appearance of technology related to humans is the use of **stone tools** of hominids in Africa some two and a half million years ago. Learning to start and control **fire** was one of the most important advances of earliest humans; this probably happened hundreds of thousands to millions years ago, even before modern humans. Around 8000 BC the **[Agricultural Revolution](agricultural_revolution.md)** happened: humans domesticated animals and plants and subsequently started to create cities. Primitive **writing** can be traced to about 7000 BC to China. **Wheel** was another extremely useful technology humans invented, it is not known exactly when or where it appeared, but it might have been some time after 5000 BC (in Ancient Egypt the Great Pyramid was built still without the knowledge of wheel). Around 4000 BC **history starts with first written records**. Humans learned to smelt and use metals approximately 3300 BC (**Bronze Age**) and 1200 BC (**Iron Age**). **[Abacus](abacus.md)**, one of the simplest devices aiding with computation, was invented roughly around 2500 BC. However people used primitive computation helping tools, such as bone ribs, probably almost from the time they started trading. Babylonians in around 2000 BC were already able to solve some forms of **[quadratic equations](quadratic_equation.md)**.
+The earliest known appearance of technology related to humans is the use of **stone tools** of hominids in Africa some two and a half million years ago. Learning to start and control **fire** was one of the most important advances of earliest humans; this probably happened hundreds of thousands to millions years ago, even before modern humans. Around 8000 BC the **[Agricultural Revolution](agricultural_revolution.md)** happened: humans domesticated animals and plants and subsequently started to create cities. Primitive **writing** can be traced to about 7000 BC to China. **Wheel** was another extremely useful technology humans invented, it is not known exactly when or where it appeared, but it might have been some time after 5000 BC -- in Ancient Egypt **The Great Pyramid** was built around 2570 BC still without the knowledge of wheel. Around 4000 BC **history starts with first written records**. Humans learned to smelt and use metals approximately 3300 BC (**Bronze Age**) and 1200 BC (**Iron Age**). **[Abacus](abacus.md)**, one of the simplest devices aiding with computation, was invented roughly around 2500 BC. However people used primitive computation helping tools, such as bone ribs, probably almost from the time they started trading. Babylonians in around 2000 BC were already able to solve some forms of **[quadratic equations](quadratic_equation.md)**.
 
 After 600 BC the Ancient Greek [philosophy](philosophy.md) starts to develop which would lead to strengthening of rational, [scientific](science.md) thinking and advancement of [logic](logic.md) and [mathematics](math.md). Around 300 BC Euklid wrote his famous *Elements*, a mathematical work that proves theorems from basic [axioms](axiom.md). Around 400 BC **[camera obscura](camera_obscura.md)** was already described in a written text from China where **[gears](gear.md)** also seem to have been invented soon after. Ancient Greeks could communicate over great distances using **Phryctoria**, chains of fire towers placed on mountains that forwarded messages to one another using light. 234 BC Archimedes described the famous [Archimedes screw](archimedes_screw.md) and created an **[algorithm](algorithm.md) for computing the number [pi](pi.md)**. In 2nd century BC the **Antikythera mechanism, the first known [analog](analog.md) computer** is made to predict movement of heavenly bodies. Romans are known to have been great builders, they built many roads and such structures as the Pantheon (126 AD) and aqueducts with the use of their own type of concrete and advanced understanding of physics.
 
 Around 50 AD Heron of Alexandria, an Egyptian mathematician, created a number of highly sophisticated inventions such as a **vending machine** that accepted coins and gave out holy water, and a cart that could be "programmed" with strings to drive on its own.
 
-In the 3rd century Chinese mathematician Liu Hui describes operations with **negative numbers**, even though negative numbers have already appeared before. In 600s AD an Indian astronomer Brahmagupta first used the number **[zero](zero.md)** in a systematic way, even though hints on the number zero without deeper understanding of it appeared much earlier.
+In the 3rd century Chinese mathematician Liu Hui describes operations with **negative numbers**, even though negative numbers have already appeared before. In 600s AD an Indian astronomer Brahmagupta first used the number **[zero](zero.md)** in a systematic way, even though hints on the number zero without deeper understanding of it appeared much earlier. In 9th century the Mayan empire is [collapsing](collapse.md), though it would somewhat recover and reshape.
 
-Around the year of our Lord 1450 a major technological leap known as the **Printing Revolution** occurred. Johannes Gutenberg, a German goldsmith, perfected the process of producing books in large quantities with the movable type press. This made books cheap to publish and buy and contributed to fast spread of information and better education.
+Around the year of our Lord 1450 a major technological leap known as the **Printing Revolution** occurred. Johannes Gutenberg, a German goldsmith, perfected the process of producing books in large quantities with the movable type press. This made books cheap to publish and buy and contributed to fast spread of information and better education. Around this time the **Great Wall of China** is being built.
+
+They year 1492 marks the **discovery of America** by Christopher Columbus who sailed over the Atlantic Ocean, though he probably wasn't the first in history to do so, and it wasn't realized he sailed to America before his death.
 
 During 1700s a major shift in civilization occurred, called the **[Industrial Revolution](industrial_revolution.md)**. It spanned roughly from 1750 to 1850. It was a process of rapid change in the whole society due to new technological inventions that also led to great changes in how people worked and lived their everyday lives. It started in Great Britain but quickly spread over the whole world. One of the main changes was the **transition from manual manufacturing to factory manufacturing** using machines and sources of energy such as coal. **[Steam engine](steam_engine.md) played a key role**. Work became more organized, society became industrionalized. This revolution became [criticized](ted_kaczynski.md) as it unfortunately opened the door for [capitalism](capitalism.md), made people less independent as everyone had to become a specialized cog in the society machine, at this time people started to measure time in minutes and lead very planned lives. People became enslaved by the system.
 

intellectual_property.md

@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
-# Intellectual Property
+# "Intellectual Property"
 
-Intellectual property (IP, not to be confused with [IP address](ip_address.md)) is a toxic [capitalist](capitalism.md) idea that says that people should be able to own [information](information.md) (such as ideas, presentation style, songs or text) and that it should be treated in ways very similar to physical property. For example [patents](patent.md) are one type of intellectual property which allow an inventor of some idea to *own* that idea and be able to limit its use and charge money to people using that idea, or prevent people from using that idea altogether. [Copyright](copyright.md) is probably the most harmful of IP today, and along with patents the most relevant one in the area of technology. However, IP encompasses many other subtypes of this kind of "property" such as [trademarks](trademark.md), trade dress, plant varieties etc. IP is an arbitrarily invented grant of monopoly on information, i.e. something that is otherwise naturally free.
+"Intellectual property" (IP, not to be confused with [IP address](ip_address.md)) is a toxic [capitalist](capitalism.md) idea that says that people should be able to own [information](information.md) (such as ideas, presentation style, songs or text) and that it should be treated in ways very similar to physical property. For example [patents](patent.md) are one type of intellectual property which allow an inventor of some idea to *own* that idea and be able to limit its use and charge money to people using that idea, or prevent people from using that idea altogether. [Copyright](copyright.md) is probably the most harmful of IP today, and along with patents the most relevant one in the area of technology. However, IP encompasses many other subtypes of this kind of "property" such as [trademarks](trademark.md), trade dress, plant varieties etc. IP is an arbitrarily invented grant of monopoly on information, i.e. something that is otherwise naturally free.
 
 Most people with brain oppose this idea, see e.g. http://harmful.cat-v.org/economics/intellectual_property/.
 
-IP exists to benefit corporations, it artificially limits the natural [freedom of information](information_freedom.md) and tries to eliminate freedom and competition, it fuels consumerism (for example a company can force deletion of old version of its program in order to force users to buy the new version), it helps keep malicious features in programs (by forbidding any study and modifications) and forces reinventing wheels which is extremely energy and resource wasting. Without IP, everyone would be able to study, share, improve and remix and combine existing technology and art.
+IP exists to benefit [corporations](corporation.md), it artificially limits the natural [freedom of information](information_freedom.md) (see [artificial scarcity](artificial_scarcity.md)) and tries to eliminate freedom and competition, it fuels consumerism (for example a company can force deletion of old version of its program in order to force users to buy the new version), it helps keep malicious features in programs (by forbidding any study and modifications) and forces reinventing wheels which is extremely energy and resource wasting. Without IP, everyone would be able to study, share, improve and remix and combine existing technology and art.
 
 Many people protest against the idea of IP -- either wanting to abandon the idea completely, as [we](lrs.md) do, or at least arguing for great relaxation the insanely strict and aggressive forms that destroy our society. Movements such as [free software](free_software.md) and [free culture](free_culture.md) have come into existence in protest of IP laws. Of course, capitalists don't give a shit. It can be expected the IP [cancer](cancer.md) will be reaching even more extreme forms very soon, for example it will be perpetual and encompassing such things as mere though (thoughts will be monitored and people will be charged for thinking about ideas owned by corporations).
 
-It must be noted that as of 2020 **it is not possible to avoid the IP shenanigans**. Even though we can eliminate most of the harmful stuff (for now) with [licenses](license.md) and [waivers](waiver.md), there are many things that may be impossible to address or posing considerable dangers, e.g. trademark or patent troll attacks. In some countries (US) it is illegal to make free programs that try to circumvent [DRM](drm.md). Some countries make it explicitly impossible to e.g. waive copyright. It is impossible to safely check whether your creation violates on someone else's IP. There exists [shit](shit.md) such as [moral rights](moral_rights.md) that may exist even if copyright doesn't apply.
+It must be noted that as of 2020 **it is not possible to avoid the IP shenanigans**. Even though we can eliminate most of the harmful stuff (for now) with [licenses](license.md) and [waivers](waiver.md), there are many things that may be impossible to address or posing considerable dangers, e.g. trademark, personal rights or patent troll attacks. In some countries (US) it is illegal to make free programs that try to circumvent [DRM](drm.md). Some countries make it explicitly impossible to e.g. waive copyright. It is impossible to safely check whether your creation violates on someone else's IP. There exists [shit](shit.md) such as [moral rights](moral_rights.md) that may exist even if copyright doesn't apply.

lrs.md

@@ -2,6 +2,8 @@
 
 Less retarded software (LRS) is a specific kind of [software](software.md) aiming to be a truly good technology maximally benefiting and respecting its users, following the philosophy of extreme [minimalism](minimalism.md) ([Unix philosophy](unix_philosophy.md), [suckless](suckless.md), [KISS](kiss.md)), [anarcho pacifism](anpac.md) and [freedom](free_software.md). The term was invented by [drummyfish](drummyfish.md).
 
+The symbol of LRS is a heart ([love](love.md)), the peace symbol (pacifism, nonviolence) and A in circle ([anarchism](anarchism.md)), in [unicode](unicode.md): ❤☮Ⓐ.
+
 By extension LRS can also stand for *[less retarded society](less_retarded_society.md)*, a kind of ideal society which we aim to achieve with our technology.
 
 ## Definition

main.md

@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ Welcome to [Less Retarded Wiki](lrs_wiki.md), an encyclopedia only I can edit. B
   FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF   FFF'           FFF           'FFF   FFF'      .FF'     'FF.      'FFF
   'FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF'   FFF          .FFFFF           FFF   FFF      .FF'       'FF.      FFF 
     FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF     FFF        .FFFFFFFFF.        FFF   FFF     .FF:,,,,,,,,,:FF.     FFF
-     'FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF'      FFF      .FFF' FFF 'FFF.      FFF   FFF    .FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF.    FFF 
+     'FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF'      FFF      .FFF' FFF 'FFF.      FFF   FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF 
        FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF        FFF.   .FFF'   FFF   'FFF.   .FFF   FFF.  .FF'             'FF.  .FFF
         'FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF'          FFF..FFF'     FFF     'FFF..FFF     FFF..FF'               'FF..FFF
           FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF             FFFFF'       FFF       'FFFFF       FFFFF'                 'FFFFF

nc.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+# NC
+
+In the context of [licenses](license.md) the acronym NC stands for *non-commercial* and means "only non-commercial use allowed", which is an unpopular limitation that makes such a license **by definition [proprietary](proprietary.md) (i.e. NOT a [free cultural](free_culture.md) license)**. This means that a work shared under a license with NC clause is prohibited from being used commercially (which itself is a very unclear statement), greatly limits the freedom of such work and opens the door for legal fuzziness and therefore possible bullying. The NC limitation appears most notably in two [Creative Commons](creative_commons.md) licenses: CC BY-NC-SA and CC BY-NC-ND; again, despite these licenses being Creative Commons, they are **NOT [free as in freedom](free_culture.md)** licenses -- note that this is not an opinion or controversial statement, NC licenses very clearly break the consensual definition of free cultural works and Creative Commons themselves clearly state this is the case; they justify NC licenses as part of the proprietary-free license spectrum, standing somewhere in between "all rights reserved" and free cultural licenses. Even though to free culture newcomers NC licenses don't seem like such a big deal, they are in fact extremely [harmful](harmful.md) to free culture, **DO NOT USE NC LICENSES**. NC is similar (and similarly harmful) to another proprietary license limitation: [ND](nd.md) (no derivatives allowed).
+
+**Why are NC licenses bad?** Firstly the *Definition of Free Cultural Works* project that maintains the widely accepted definition of free culture has an article on this: https://freedomdefined.org/Definition. Let us write a summary of the arguments ALONG WITH [our own](lrs.md) arguments:
+
+- **"Commercial use" isn't just selling, it possibly prohibits beneficial uses you would want to allow.** Imagine you create e.g. an educational image that you would like many people to see -- by using an NC license you will however prohibit for example other people from showing the image on social media if they are people who make money from social media, for example YouTubers that make money from ads on their videos will be prohibited (or at least greatly discouraged) from showing your educational image in their videos, you may also rule out use by ethical non-profits who still need to make some money to sustain themselves etc. Of course, the author may allow commercial use in individual cases and "on the go", in the spirit of [permission culture](permission_culture.md), however this may be practically impossible in cases of big collaborative works similar to e.g. [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) with possibly thousands of authors.
+- **It is very unclear what commercial use means which opens door to legal fear and avoidance of NC works.** "Commercial use" may be interpreted not just as directly selling the work but as doing pretty much anything with the work that somehow, even indirectly, leads to some kind of profit -- consider e.g. printing an NC picture on your shirt (allowed by the NC license) and then wearing that shirt while promoting something you're selling -- if such shirt could be seen as helping you get attention of more customers and so result in making more money, you're potentially violating the license and the author can sue you. I.e. by using NC works you will always have to worry to not come close to anything that could be seen, even by a stretch, as a "commercial use". This is a worry that will exist as long as copyright on the work, i.e. certainly for your whole life. For this reason people simply avoid using such works and even choose to use lower quality works that don't pose such dangers. Using an NC license will therefore make your work much less popular, less visible and, of course, much less useful.
+- **It makes the work incompatible with other licenses.** Works under NC license cannot be included in free cultural works, for example text written on the Citizendium encyclopedia (licensed NC) cannot be copied to Wikipedia (licensed free under CC-BY-SA).
+- **It adds huge legal [bloat](bloat.md).** Similarly to e.g. [copyleft](copyleft.md), the NC clause has to either be very vague and unclear or extremely long and complex in explaining what it really means. This of course leads to unclarities, legal bugs, confusion, payments of lawyers etc.
+- **It strengthens the idea of [intellectual property](intellectual_property.md).** The basic aim of free culture is to relax "intellectual property" laws, not to strengthen them or continue the ways of [permission culture](permission_culture.md), therefore the strict NC limitation is very unpopular among proponents of free culture. We, [LRS](lrs.md), strongly reject the very idea of being able to own information, so stricter legal conditions are always worse in our view.
+- **NC license may be in some cases worse than no license at all.** Even though Creative Commons NC licenses give basic rights such as that for non-commercial sharing, the explicit prohibition of commercial use may in specific cases result in more harm than if there was no license attached to the work, because breaking a rule that's stated explicitly may in court be seen as a bit more serious and intentional than breaking an implicit rule. (Similar reasoning was used to reject [CC0](cc0.md) by [OSI](osi.md).)
+- **NC license is [proprietary](proprietary.md), i.e. all arguments against proprietary works apply.**

see_through_clothes.md

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+# See Through Clothes
+
+TODO: tech for seeing through clothes

stereotype.md

@@ -14,9 +14,9 @@ Some stereotypes are:
   - arrogant, rude, individualist, self-centered
   - eccentric, extroverted, loud behavior
   - violent, militant, imperialist, constantly invade other countries
-  - don't mind violence but are afraid of public nudity
+  - don't mind violence but are afraid of public nudity, get panic attacks when see a naked child
   - solve things by brute force rather than by smartness
-  - obsessed with working as much as possible
+  - obsessed with working as much as possible and forcing others to do the same
   - want everything big
   - US south: slow, even more stupid, racist, rednecks, inbred, for slavery, for guns
 - Asians:
@@ -30,11 +30,11 @@ Some stereotypes are:
   - collectivist, sacrifice themselves for society
   - there are too many of them, lives of the poor ones have no value, work safety of peasants is non existent
 - [black people](nigger.md):
-  - unintelligent, stupid, uneducated, primitive
+  - unintelligent, stupid, uneducated, primitive, poor
   - physically fit, good at sports
   - good at music, especially rhythmic music
   - fathers leave their children
-  - all look the same
+  - all look the same, similar to monkeys
   - have big dicks
   - criminals
 - Australians:
@@ -59,20 +59,22 @@ Some stereotypes are:
   - friendly but appear cold
   - beautiful women
 - English:
-  - well behaved, reserved, educated
+  - well behaved, reserved, educated, classy
   - conservative, old fashioned
   - drink tea
+  - dry humor
   - football fans
   - dislike French
+  - bad cuisine
 - French:
   - good lovers
-  - lazy, Bohemian life
+  - lazy, Bohemian life, hate work
   - eat baguettes and frogs
   - dislike Brits
   - revolutionaries, constantly protest
   - artists, intellectuals
 - [gays](gay.md):
-  - men act feminine, are good at art
+  - men act feminine, are good at art and women jobs
   - women (lesbian) are masculine, ugly with short pink hair
 - Germans:
   - no sense of [humor](fun.mf), being kind of robots
@@ -101,8 +103,9 @@ Some stereotypes are:
   - everyone reads manga and goes to karaoke after work
   - extremely precise, always on time, well organized
   - have extremely technologically advanced toilets
+  - commit seppuku when fail at something important 
 - [jews](jew.md):
-  - very smart
+  - very smart, inventive
   - greedy
   - good at [business](business.md)
   - have the "eagle nose"
@@ -114,7 +117,7 @@ Some stereotypes are:
   - very religious
   - heavy drinkers
 - Russians:
-  - very tough, big and strong, endure conditions that would kill other people
+  - very tough, big and strong, endure conditions that would kill other people, keep pet bears
   - drunk (especially by vodka), aggressive, rude
   - wear Adidas pants
   - act straight without talking too much, ignore work safety
@@ -127,6 +130,7 @@ Some stereotypes are:
 - [women](woman.md):
   - bad at driving
   - bad at logical thinking and [math](math.md)
+  - passive aggressive
   - gossip
   - don't know what they want, "no" can mean "yes"
   - too emotional, especially on period

zero.md

@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ Some properties of and facts about this number follow:
 - It is, along with 1, one of the symbols used in [binary](binary.md) logic and is normally interpreted as the "off"/"false"/"low" value.
 - Its opposite is most often said to be the [infinity](infinity.md), even though it depends on the angle of view and the kind of infinity we talk about. Other numbers may be seen as its opposite as well (e.g. 1 in the context of [probability](probability.md)).
 - As it is one of the most commonly used numbers in programming,  computers sometimes deal with it in special ways, for example in [assembly](assembly.md) languages there are often special instructions for comparing to 0 (e.g. `NEZ`, not equals zero) which can save memory and also be faster. So as a programmer you may optimize your program by trying to use zeros if possible.
-- In [C](c.md) 0 represents the [false](false.md) value, a function returning 0 many times signifies an [error](error.md) during the execution of that function. However 0 also sometimes means success, e.g. as a return value from the main function.
+- In [C](c.md) and many other languages 0 represents the [false](false.md) value, a function returning 0 many times signifies an [error](error.md) during the execution of that function. However 0 also sometimes means success, e.g. as a return value from the main function. 0 is also often used to signify [infinity](infinity.md), no limit or lack of value (e.g. [NULL](null.md) pointer normally points to address 0 and means "pointing nowhere").
 - [Historically](history.md) the concept of number zero seems to have appeared at least 3000 BC and is thought to signify an advanced abstract thinking, though it was first used only as a positional symbol for writing numbers and only later on took the meaning of a number signifying "nothing".
 
 **Dividing by zero is not defined**, it is a forbidden operation mainly because it breaks equations (allowing dividing by zero would also allow us to make basically any equation hold, even those that normally don't). In programming dividing by zero typically causes an error, crash of a program or an [exception](exception.md). In some programming languages [floating point](float.md) division by zero results in [infinity](infinity.md). When operating with [limits](limit.md), we can handle divisions by zero in a special way (find out what value an [expression](expression.md) approaches if we get infinitely close to dividing by 0).