Update
This commit is contained in:
parent
bc0419bd2b
commit
757bcb3cf1
19 changed files with 1827 additions and 1796 deletions
|
|
@ -6,6 +6,8 @@ In 21st century there are already long established offices whose sole purpose is
|
|||
|
||||
21st century is a horror, devoid of all humanity. No sincerity exists anymore, only fakes, as everyone is seeking some kind of [capital](capitalism.md), no art is sincere anymore, no soul is present in any craft, there is no place for soul among pure self interest -- despite the world being filled with bright colors and infantile pictures, it's like a world full of creepy clowns, cartoon animals are dancing all around in ads and movies but you know it's all just soulless robots beneath the shell, something aimed purely at taking advantage of you, at raping you. They will torture you to death with a smile on their face.
|
||||
|
||||
Human is dead, he was replaced by [economy](economy.md). There are just things such as economy, laws, [rights](right_culture.md), countries, prosperity, [justice](justice.md), [correctness](political_correctness.md) and many others, but no human. You dislike what you do and think it has no meaning? Shut up and serve the economy.
|
||||
|
||||
In 21st century if you buy something there is only about 0.03% chance it will work. There is probably some law that says that if you buy something it should work, but in practice there are no laws because even if you could probably sue the seller, it would mean investing $100000000 and about 10 years of every day going to the court to get your $100 back, and the result isn't guaranteed anyway because for your investment you'll be able to afford maybe 3 lawyers while the corporation will have about 100 to 100000 lawyers, it's very unlikely you would beat that, so you just won't do it, you will just keep buying the thing over and over and praying it works. The exact breaking rates are fine tuned by special departments so as to not make people give up on buying the thing completely, but to make them buy as many of them as possible. This is basically completely optimized [capitalism](capitalism.md). Even if the thing works when you buy it, it will at best last maybe 3 days or 3 and a half days. It's similar with [work](work.md) (slavery) -- in theory there is some kind of minimum wage you should be paid but in practice you'll be very lucky to even be paid anything -- again, you could in theory sue your employer for not paying you but you can't really do it -- if you come naked or in bad clothes to the court you'll be automatically ruled guilty and since you have no money because the employer didn't pay you, you can't afford the required $1000000 suit, so you can't sue anyone -- so laws de facto only exist so that law makers have a job, they can't be used (well they can, but only by corporations). { I personally have this experience with computer mice -- I bought many mice this way because they just never worked, eventually I just gave up and stopped playing shooter games, I realized it's better to learn living without a working computer mouse, otherwise I would just spend all my life savings on them. ~drummyfish }
|
||||
|
||||
{ Sorry I just realized the previous paragraph is maybe written about 3 to 5 years ahead -- I sometimes do that because I see into the future and I don't want to rewrite this too often. Anyway it still falls under this century. ~drummyfish }
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
|
|||
# Bloat Monopoly
|
||||
|
||||
Bloat monopoly is an exclusive control over or [de-facto](de_facto.md) ownership of [software](software.md) or even a whole area of technology not by legal means but by means of [bloat](bloat.md), or generally just abusing bloat in ways that lead to gaining monopolies, e.g. by establishing standards or even legal requirements (such as the EU mandatory content filters) which only the richest may conform to. Even if given software is [FOSS](foss.md) (that is its source code is public and everyone has basic legal rights to it), it can be malicious due to bloat, for example it can still be made **practically** controlled exclusively by the developer because the developer is the only one with sufficient resources and/or know-how to be able to execute the basic rights such as meaningful modifications of the software, which goes against the very basic principle of [free software](free_software.md). Bloat monopoly is seeks to **maximize [freedom distance](freedom_ditance.md)**.
|
||||
Bloat monopoly is an exclusive control over or [de-facto](de_facto.md) ownership of [software](software.md) or even a whole area of technology not by legal means but by means of [bloat](bloat.md), or generally just abusing bloat in ways that lead to gaining monopolies, e.g. by establishing standards or even legal requirements (such as the EU mandatory content filters) which only the richest may conform to. Even if given software is [FOSS](foss.md) (that is its source code is public and everyone has basic legal rights to it), it can be malicious due to bloat, for example it can still be made **practically** controlled exclusively by the developer because the developer is the only one with sufficient resources and/or know-how to be able to execute the basic rights such as meaningful modifications of the software, which goes against the very basic principle of [free software](free_software.md). Bloat monopoly is seeks to **maximize [freedom distance](freedom_distance.md)**.
|
||||
|
||||
**Example**: take a look at the [web](www.md) and how [Google](google.md) is gaining control over it by getting the search engine monopoly. It is very clear web along with web browsers has been becoming bloated to ridiculous levels -- this is not a coincidence, bloat is pushed by [corporations](corporation.md) such as Google to eliminate possible emerging competition. If practically all websites require [JavaScript](js.md), [CSS](css.md), [HTTPS](https.md) and similar nonsense, it is becoming much more difficult to crawl them and create a web index, leaving the possibility to crawl the web mostly to the rich, i.e. those who have enough money, time and know-how to do this. Alongside this there is the web browser bloat -- as websites have become extremely complex, it is also extremely complex to make and maintain a web browser, which is why there is only a few of them, all controlled (despite FOSS licenses) by corporations and malicious groups, one of which is Google itself. For these reasons Google loves bloat and encourages it, e.g. simply by ranking bloated webpages better in their search results, and of course by other means (sponsoring, lobbying, advertising, ...).
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ A work which is not covered by copyright (and any other IP) -- which is nowadays
|
|||
- [trademark](trademark.md)
|
||||
- [public domain](pd.md)
|
||||
- [intellectual property](intellectual_property.md)
|
||||
- [plagiarism](plagiarism.md)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
|
|||
# Czechia
|
||||
|
||||
Czechia, or Czech Republic, is a small country in the middle of [Europe](europe.md), it's one of the most awful countries in the world. It split from Czechoslovakia in 1993, its capital is Prague, it has about 78000 square kilometers and population of 11 million, the political system and main religion is [capitalism](capitalism.md). In the past the country wasn't so bad, there was a good tradition of [socialism](socialism.md) so people had complete social security, education was completely free, everyone could afford food, there were very few [ads](marketing.md) in the media and generally people were quite happy, everyone would get healthcare and retirement pension; there was also quite diverse [culture](culture.md) of different villages with their own language dialects and traditions, there was zero crime, no one ever heard of guns or violence there, there was no [fear](fear_culture.md), and art was also somewhat nice, especially music, movies and movie dubbing. All of this disappeared swiftly once the country adopted [capitalism](capitalism.md) and [US](usa.md) culture after the so called *Velvet revolution* at the beginning of 1990s. Recently people were again made to vote -- the choices were to either make everything more shitty or to make things better. They voted to make everything shittier, so inflation is now skyrocketing, people are freezing in winter, TV is unwatchable, food is luxury, let alone things like houses, nothing works, everyone is enslaved, retirement age was postponed to something like 100 years of age plus you must have worked for about 80 years or something (this gets increased every year), ads torture you everywhere, there is no art anymore, health insurance payment is mandatory but you still have to pay for healthcare, but you won't find a doctor anyway, there are no doctors anymore (everyone went to do [marketing](marketing.md)). The country is only famous for its tradition of drinking a lot of beer. Czech people are mostly described by foreigners as cold, unfriendly, rude and ugly. One of the most famous politicians is a Czech Neonazi who's actually Japanese; another famous Czech is its ugly ex prime minister who is also not Czech but Slovak and is a mafia boss. Czechia has no historical, political or cultural significance. Czechs masturbate every day about Czechia.
|
||||
Czechia, or Czech Republic, is a small [Slav](slav.md) country in the middle of [Europe](europe.md), it's one of the most awful countries in the world. It split from Czechoslovakia in 1993, its capital is Prague, it has about 78000 square kilometers and population of 11 million, the political system and main religion is [capitalism](capitalism.md). In the past the country wasn't so bad, there was a good tradition of [socialism](socialism.md) so people had complete social security, education was completely free, everyone could afford food, there were very few [ads](marketing.md) in the media and generally people were quite happy, everyone would get healthcare and retirement pension; there was also quite diverse [culture](culture.md) of different villages with their own language dialects and traditions, there was zero crime, no one ever heard of guns or violence there, there was no [fear](fear_culture.md), and art was also somewhat nice, especially music, movies and movie dubbing. All of this disappeared swiftly once the country adopted [capitalism](capitalism.md) and [US](usa.md) culture after the so called *Velvet revolution* at the beginning of 1990s. Recently people were again made to vote -- the choices were to either make everything more shitty or to make things better. They voted to make everything shittier, so inflation is now skyrocketing, people are freezing in winter, TV is unwatchable, food is luxury, let alone things like houses, nothing works, everyone is enslaved, retirement age was postponed to something like 100 years of age plus you must have worked for about 80 years or something (this gets increased every year), ads torture you everywhere, there is no art anymore, health insurance payment is mandatory but you still have to pay for healthcare, but you won't find a doctor anyway, there are no doctors anymore (everyone went to do [marketing](marketing.md)). The country is only famous for its tradition of drinking a lot of beer. Czech people are mostly described by foreigners as cold, unfriendly, rude and ugly. One of the most famous politicians is a Czech Neonazi who's actually Japanese; another famous Czech is its ugly ex prime minister who is also not Czech but Slovak and is a mafia boss. Czechia has no historical, political or cultural significance. Czechs masturbate every day about Czechia.
|
||||
|
||||
Except for [drummyfish](drummyfish.md) only fascists live in the country, essentially everyone is a nationalist.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
6
faq.md
6
faq.md
|
|
@ -170,6 +170,12 @@ Now when it comes to *"hating"* people, there's an important distinction to be s
|
|||
|
||||
And yeah, of course sometimes we make [jokes](jokes.md) and sarcastic comments, it is relied on your ability to recognize those yourself. We see it as retarded and a great insult to intelligence to put disclaimers on jokes, that's really the worst thing you can do to a joke.
|
||||
|
||||
### Why are you insulting some people very much?
|
||||
|
||||
Basically to help reduce their enormously inflated [ego](egoism.md) which is a very bad [disease](disease.md) (while also taking the opportunity to test [free speech](free_speech.md) etc.). If someone has very low self esteem, it's good to help him out by bringing up his positives -- NO, not in the "self improvement" way -- in normal, human way. Not by lying, but simply by focusing on the good. If someone feels down, it's good to give him hope, show him the good, give him a hug, because being depressed and feeling down is a state of illness we want to cure. Similarly the other extreme -- too much self esteem -- is an extremely harmful disease, the ego has to be reduced, just like you cut off [tumor](cancer.md) tissue despite normally cutting parts of human body is generally bad. Here it's good to focus on the negative, for example that his face looks like ass, that he's stupid and so on (but we have to be careful: even negative attention is still attention, many times it's better to just ignore the individual). Notice that greater insults are coming towards greater celebrities: society needs to learn that being a celebrity inevitably comes with the disease of inflated ego, it is practically impossible to be a celebrity and being humble at the same time -- if we learn to dislike celebrities, it will no longer be possible for celebrities to exist because becoming a celebrity will come with decreasing popularity (while today it comes with increasing popularity, which is a very unstable system), the system will be self sustaining, keeping good health of society and people alike, creating a society completely without any narcissists and celebrities. So basically we all have to learn to dislike celebrities and help them out by insulting (and also ignoring) them the more they are famous.
|
||||
|
||||
But it may also be the case that sometimes I just publish my uncensored thoughts of frustration in a bad mental state and just insult someone and later on I just don't want to censor myself -- for this I am sorry, I am a shitty imperfect retard as well, even though I try to minimize this. In any case it should still be the case that speech never hurts anyone, either what I say is true, in which case it's OK to say it, or it isn't and I am a liar, so I am at worst hurting myself.
|
||||
|
||||
### So you really "love" everyone, even dicks like Trump, school shooters, instagram manipulators etc.?
|
||||
|
||||
Yes, but it may need an elaboration. There are many different kinds of love: love of a sexual partner, love of a parent, love of a pet, love of a hobby, love of nature etc. Obviously we can't love everyone with the same kind of love we have e.g. for our life partner, that's impossible if we've actually never even seen most people who live on this planet. The love we are talking about -- our universal love of everyone -- is an unconditional love of life itself. Being alive is a miracle, it's beautiful, and as living beings we feel a sense of connection with all other living beings in this universe who were for some reason chosen to experience this rare miracle as well -- we know what it feels like to live and we know other living beings experience this special, mysterious privilege too, though for a limited time. This is the most basic kind of love, an empathy, the happiness of seeing someone else live. It is sacred, there's nothing more pure in this universe than feeling this empathy, it works without language, without science, without explanation. While not all living beings are capable of this love (a virus probably won't feel any empathy), we believe all humans have this love in them, even if it's being suppressed by their environment that often forces them compete, hate, even kill. Our goal is to awaken this love in everyone as we believe it's the only way to achieve a truly happy coexistence of us, living beings.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -8,11 +8,13 @@ Free software is also known as *free as in freedom*, *free as in speech* softwar
|
|||
|
||||
**Examples of free software** include the [GNU](gnu.md) operating system (also known as "[Linux](linux.md)"), [GIMP](gimp.md) (image editor), [Stockfish](stockfish.md) chess engine, or games such as [Xonotic](xonotic.md) and [Anarch](anarch.md). Free software is actually what runs the world, it is a standard among experts and it is possible to do computing with exclusively free software (though this may depend on how far you stretch the definition), even though most normal people don't even know the term free software exists because they only ever come in contact with abusive [proprietary](proprietary.md) consumer software such as [Windows](windows.md) and capitalist [games](game.md). There also exists a lot of big and successful software, such as [Firefox](firefox.md), [Linux](linux.md) (the kernel) or [Blender](blender.md), that's often spoken of as free software which may however be only technically true or true only to a big (but not full) degree: for example even though [Linux](linux.md) is 99% free, in its [vanilla](vanilla.md) version it comes with [proprietary](proprietary.md) [binary blobs](binary_blob.md) which breaks the rules of free software. [Blender](blender.md) is technically free but it is also [capitalist software](capitalist_software.md) which doesn't really care about freedom and may de-facto limit some freedoms required by free software, even if they are granted legally by Blender's license. Such software is better called "[open source](open_source.md)" or [FOSS](foss.md) because it doesn't meet the high standards of free software. This issue of technically-but-not-really free software is addressed by some newer movements and philosophies such as [suckless](suckless.md) and our [less retarded software](lrs.md) who usually also aim for [unbloating](bloat.md) technology so as to make it more free in practice.
|
||||
|
||||
Though unknown to common people, the invention and adoption of free software has been **one the most important events in the history of computers** -- mere technology consumers nowadays don't even realize (and aren't told) that what they're using consists and has been enabled possibly mostly by software written non-commercially, by volunteers for free, basically on [communist](communism.md) principles. Even if consumer technology is unethical because the underlying free technology has been modified by [corporations](corporation.md) to abuse the users, without free software the situation would have been incomparably worse if Richard Stallman hadn't achieved the small miracle of establishing the free software movement. Without it there would probably be practically no alternative to abusive technology nowadays, everything would be much more closed, there would probably be no "[open source](open_source.md)", "[open hardware](open_hardware.md)" such as [Arduino](arduino.md) and things such as [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md). If the danger of [intellectual property](intellectual_property.md) in software wasn't foreseen and countered by Richard Stallman right in the beginning, the corporations' push of legislation would probably have continued and copyright laws might have been many times worse today, to the point of not even being able to legally write free software nowadays. We have to be very grateful that this happened and continue to support free software.
|
||||
Though unknown to common people, the invention and adoption of free software has been **one the most important events in the [history](history.md) of computers** -- mere technology consumers nowadays don't even realize (and aren't told) that what they're using consists and has been enabled possibly mostly by software written non-commercially, by volunteers for free, basically on [communist](communism.md) principles. Even if consumer technology is unethical because the underlying free technology has been modified by [corporations](corporation.md) to abuse the users, without free software the situation would have been incomparably worse if [Richard Stallman](rms.md) hadn't achieved the small miracle of establishing the free software movement. Without it there would probably be practically no alternative to abusive technology nowadays, everything would be much more closed, there would probably be no "[open source](open_source.md)", "[open hardware](open_hardware.md)" such as [Arduino](arduino.md) and things such as [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md). If the danger of [intellectual property](intellectual_property.md) in software wasn't foreseen and countered by Richard Stallman right in the beginning, the corporations' push of legislation would probably have continued and copyright laws might have been many times worse today, to the point of not even being able to legally write free software nowadays. We have to be very grateful that this happened and continue to support free software.
|
||||
|
||||
[Richard Stallman](rms.md), the inventor of the concept and the term "free software", says free software is about ensuring the freedom of computer users, i.e. people truly owning their tools -- he points out that unless people have complete control over their tools, they don't truly own them and will instead become controlled and abused by the makers (true owners) of those tools, which in [capitalism](capitalism.md) are [corporations](corporation.md). Richard Stallman stressed that **there is no such thing as partially free software** -- it takes only a single line of code to take away the user's freedom and therefore if software is to be free, it has to be free as a whole. This is in direct contrast with [open source](open_source.md) (a term discourages by Stallman himself) which happily tolerates for example [Windows](windows.md) only programs and accepts them as "open source", even though such a program cannot be run without the underlying proprietary code of the platform. It is therefore important to support free software rather than the business spoiled open source.
|
||||
|
||||
**Free software is not about [privacy](privacy.md)!** That is a retarded simplification spread by cryptofascists. Free software, as its name suggests, is about freedom in wide sense, which of course may include the freedom to stay anonymous, but there are many more freedoms which free software stands for, e.g. the freedom of customization of one's tools or the general freedom of [art](art.md) -- being able to utilize or remix someone else's creation for creating something new or better. Software focused on privacy is called simply privacy respecting software.
|
||||
**Free software is not about [privacy](privacy.md)!** That would be quite misleading viewpoint. Free software, as its name suggests, is about freedom in wide sense, which includes the freedom of absolute control over one's devices that may ensure privacy and anonymity, but there are many more freedoms which free software stands for, e.g. the freedom of customization of one's tools or the general freedom of [art](art.md) -- being able to utilize or remix someone else's creation for creating something new or better. Software focused on privacy is called simply privacy respecting software.
|
||||
|
||||
The forefront non-profit organization promoting free software has since its invention been the [Free Software Foundation](fsf.md) (FSF) started by Richard Stallman himself alongside his [GNU](gnu.md) project. Nevertheless we must keep in mind that FSF doesn't equal free software, free software as a concept is bigger than its inventor or any organization, the idea -- just as for example political or religious ideas -- has since its birth been adopted with various modifications by many others, it is being expanded, improved, renamed and yes, even twisted and abused. Free software has spawned or influenced for example [Debian](debian.md), [free culture](free_culture.md), [free hardware](free_hardware.md), [FSFE](fsfe.md), [FSFLA](fsfla.md), [open $ource](open_source.md), [suckless](suckless.md), [copyfree](copyfree.md), [freedesktop](freedesktop.md) and many others. FSF itself has become quite spoiled and political, but it has achieved sending out the message about sharing, collaboration and ethics, which at least a few people still try to keep following.
|
||||
|
||||
**Is free software [communism](communism.md)?** This is a question often debated by [Americans](usa.md) who have a panic phobia of anything resembling ideas of sharing and giving away for free. The answer is: yes and no. No as in it's not [Marxism](marxism.md), the kind of [evil](evil.md) pseudocommunism that plagued the world not a long time long ago -- that was a hugely complex, twisted violent ideology encompassing whole society which furthermore betrayed many basic ideas of equality and so on. Compared to this free software is just a simple idea of not applying intellectual property to software, and this idea may well function under some form of early capitalism. But on the other hand yes, free software is communism in its general form that simply states that sharing is good, it is communism as much as e.g. teaching a kid to share toys with its siblings.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -37,14 +39,14 @@ The developers of Debian operating system have created their own guidelines (Deb
|
|||
|
||||
## Measuring Practical Freedom With Freedom Distance
|
||||
|
||||
One big issue related to free software and similar causes (e.g. [free hardware](free_hardware.md)) is the danger of apparent freedom without practical freedom, i.e. freedom given legally on paper which however may be [de facto](de_facto.md) extremely hard or impossible to make use of practically, in real life. Imagine for example a highly complex software that by its license gives everyone the right to modify it but in practice to make meaningful modifications one needs specialized hardware and deep knowledge and know-how of how the code really works -- example of this is for example the [Android](android.md) operating system. This particular example is called [bloat monopoly](bloat_monopoly.md) and is highly used to misled users into thinking they have freedom or that they support something ethical while in fact they don't (see also e.g. [openwashing](openwashing.md)). Giving only this apparent freedom is how [capitalism](capitalism.md) adjusted to the wave of free software, it is how businesses silently smother real freedom while pretending to embrace free software (which they rather call [open source](open_source.md)). For this we always have to evaluate practical freedom we have, i.e. whether, and with what difficulties, we can execute the four basic freedoms required by free software -- remember that all are essential and once even a single of the freedoms is lost, the whole software becomes completely [proprietary](proprietary.md) and non-free.
|
||||
One big issue related to free software and similar causes (e.g. [free hardware](free_hardware.md)) is slipping into the trap of only apparent freedom, getting false feeling of freedom without actually having real, practical freedom; that is having freedom given legally on the paper which however may be [de facto](de_facto.md) extremely hard or impossible to make use of practically in real life. Imagine for example a highly complex software that by its license gives everyone the right to modify it but in practice to make meaningful modifications one needs specialized hardware and deep knowledge and know-how of how the code really works -- example of this is for example the [Android](android.md) operating system. This particular example is called [bloat monopoly](bloat_monopoly.md) and is highly used to mislead users into thinking they have freedom or that they support something ethical while in fact they don't (see also e.g. [openwashing](openwashing.md)). Giving only this apparent freedom is how [capitalism](capitalism.md) adjusted to the wave of free software, it is how businesses silently smother real freedom while pretending to embrace free software (which they rather call [open source](open_source.md)). For this we always have to evaluate practical freedom we have, i.e. whether, and with what difficulties, we can execute the four basic freedoms required by free software -- remember that all are essential and once even a single of the freedoms is lost, the whole software becomes completely [proprietary](proprietary.md) and non-free.
|
||||
|
||||
One possible measure of practical freedom is **freedom distance**. For any piece of software that comes with a free license (i.e. one that gives the four essential freedoms legally) let us define freedom distance as the average distance to the nearest man that can PRACTICALLY execute ALL of the freedoms. In other words it says how far you have to go to reach the freedom you are promised. As any metric it's a bit of a simplification, but while physical distances may seem to not matter much in the age of Internet, the measure contains in it embedded the number of people who have control over the piece of software, it says how centralized the control is and how difficult it will be to for example spot an remove malicious features. Large freedom distance means the freedom is far away, that you are relying on someone in another country to fix your software which of course is dangerous, even the Internet may get split, it is important for you to be able to execute your freedom locally (even if you're not doing it now, it is important that you COULD). It may also happen that the foreign maintainer of your software suddenly turns evil -- e.g. in pursuit of profit -- and then having someone close who can take over fixing and maintaining that software is key for freedom. From this point of view a freedom distance shorter than one's body is ideal -- it would mean that any single man has complete control over his own tool.
|
||||
One possible measure of practical freedom is **freedom distance**. For any piece of software that comes with a free license (i.e. one that gives the four essential freedoms legally) let us define freedom distance as the average minimum distance to the nearest man that can PRACTICALLY execute ALL of the freedoms (taken over all people in the world). In other words it says how far you have to go to reach the freedom you are promised. As any metric it's a bit of a simplification, but while physical distances may seem to not matter much in the age of Internet, the measure contains in it embedded the number of people who have control over the piece of software, it says how centralized the control is and how difficult it will be to for example spot and remove malicious features. Large freedom distance means the freedom is far away, that you are relying on someone in another country to fix your software which of course is dangerous, even the Internet may get split, it is important for you to be able to execute your freedom locally (even if you're not doing it now, it is important that you COULD). It may also happen that the foreign maintainer of your software suddenly turns evil -- e.g. in pursuit of profit -- and then having someone close who can take over fixing and maintaining that software is key for freedom. From this point of view a freedom distance shorter than one's body is ideal -- it would mean that any single individual has complete control over his own tool.
|
||||
|
||||
Let's show this on two extreme examples:
|
||||
|
||||
- A simple program will have very small freedom distance. For example the [suckless](suckless.md) implementation of the [cat](cat.md) program (from the [sbase](sbase.md) package) is written in C and currently has about 50 lines of code. How far on average do you have to go to find someone that will be able to use the program AND understand every part of the source code AND share the program AND make any kind of meaningful modification to it? Using and sharing will be pretty easy for everyone, but remember, we are looking for the closest man that can execute ALL of the freedoms, so we are looking for someone who can compile and modify very basic C programs. As the program is extremely simple, anyone who ever learned complete basics of programming will be able to do this, even if he's not nearly expert at programming -- this particular program doesn't even use [object oriented programming](oop.md), design patterns and similar "advanced" things that would further reduce the number of people who understand it. If you are reading this wiki, you can almost definitely do it but if you can't, it's extremely likely you will find someone like that in your street, and if not, then definitely at least a math teacher at nearest elementary school will. If we average this for all people on Earth, we may get a freedom distance shorter than size of a small village.
|
||||
- A very complex program will have big freedom distance. Here let's take a look at the mentioned [Android](android.md) operating system. Compiling Android is very hard, it even requires quite powerful hardware, it's not very likely you'll find someone who can easily do it very near, however to make meaningful modifications to the system will be yet much, much more difficult. Imagine you for example want to change process scheduling on the system, add new filesystem support, remove all networking and telemetry, port it to run in web browser or you want to replace the GUI system with a completely different one etc. Can you do these things easily? Remember, as a reader of this wiki you are technically skilled, and even so you most likely can't do it -- even if you're an excellent programmer and dedicate all energy to it, you will likely need a few weeks of full time work to add a simple feature to the OS, and you are still a negligible exception among all the normies around, so how far away is someone who has complete control over Android? These people are probably just sitting in Google headquarters. So Android's freedom distance will be quite close to average distance to Google headquarters over all people on Earth, which will be a distance of many countries.
|
||||
- A simple program will have very small freedom distance. For example the [suckless](suckless.md) implementation of the [cat](cat.md) program (from the [sbase](sbase.md) package) is written in C and currently has about 50 lines of code. How far on average do you have to go to find someone that will be able to use the program AND understand every part of the source code AND share the program AND make any kind of meaningful modification to it? Using and sharing will be pretty easy for everyone, but remember, we are looking for the closest human that can execute ALL of the freedoms, so we are looking for someone who can compile and modify very basic C programs. As the program is extremely simple, anyone who ever learned complete basics of programming will be able to do this, even if he's not nearly an expert at programming -- this particular program doesn't even use [object oriented programming](oop.md), design patterns and similar "advanced" things that would further reduce the number of people who understand it. If you are reading this wiki, you can almost definitely exercise all the freedoms with this program but even if you can't, it's extremely likely you will find someone who can in the neighborhood of your very street, and if not, then definitely at least the ICT teacher at nearest elementary school will. If the Internet goes down, if your country isolates politically or if the program's maintainer turns nuts or just stops maintaining the program, the program still stays quite safe and in your hands: if it needs fixing or improvement, at worst you'll have to ask your neighbor to help you out. Now if we average this freedom distance for all people on Earth, we may get a freedom distance smaller than the size of a small village -- this is pretty good.
|
||||
- A very complex program will have big freedom distance. Here let's take a look at the mentioned [Android](android.md) operating system. Compiling Android is very hard, it even requires quite powerful hardware, it's not very likely you'll find someone who can easily do it very near, however to make meaningful modifications to the system will be yet much, much more difficult. Imagine you for example want to change process scheduling in the system's kernel, add new filesystem support, remove all networking and telemetry, port it to run in web browser or you want to replace the GUI system with a completely different one etc. Can you do these things easily? Remember, as a reader of this wiki you are technically skilled, and even so you most likely can't do it -- even if you're an excellent programmer and dedicate all energy to it, you will likely need a few weeks of full time work to add a simple feature to the OS, and you are still a negligible exception among all the normies around, so how far away is someone who has complete control over Android? These people are probably just sitting in Google headquarters. So Android's freedom distance will be quite close to average distance to Google headquarters over all people on Earth, which will be a distance of many countries.
|
||||
|
||||
## History
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -2,4 +2,4 @@
|
|||
|
||||
*The main article about this is found in a section of [free software](free_software.md) article.*
|
||||
|
||||
Tl;dr: Freedom distance is the average distance to someone who can practically exercise ALL legally defined freedoms (such as the four essential freedoms of [free software](free_software.md)) or similarly satisfy some legal conditions; it is a metric that can be applied to measuring PRACTICAL effects of legal definitions.
|
||||
Tl;dr: Freedom distance is the average minimum distance to someone who can practically exercise ALL legally defined freedoms (such as the four essential freedoms of [free software](free_software.md)) or similarly satisfy some legal conditions; it is a metric that can be applied to measuring PRACTICAL effects of legal definitions.
|
||||
2
furry.md
2
furry.md
|
|
@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ Furry [porn](porn.md) is called **[yiff](yiff.md)**.
|
|||
|
||||
In the 1990s we were wondering whether by 2020 we'd already have cured cancer, solved world hunger, if we'd have cloned the mammoth, whether we'd have cities on Mars and flying cars. Well no, but you can sexually identify as a fox now.
|
||||
|
||||
{ POST DISCLAIMER: Firstly I have to disclaim I hate disclaimers, this is more of a note. Some of my very best online friends are furries, I hope they'll forgive me for this article, hopefully it's clear I never hate any individual on a personal level. Yeah, I do hate furrydom, but if you don't mind being friends with me, I will love to be friends with you no matter what, I really don't give a damn about this shite. Peace and please be safe :) <3 ~drummyfish }
|
||||
|
||||
## See Also
|
||||
|
||||
- [uwu](uwu.md)
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
1
gnu.md
1
gnu.md
|
|
@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ GNU has developed an almost unbelievable amount of software, it has software for
|
|||
- [GNU Mediagoblin](mediagoblin.md) (decentralized file hosting on the [web](web.md))
|
||||
- GNU Unifont ([unicode](unicode.md) font)
|
||||
- [GNU Privacy Guard](gpg.md) (gpg, OpenPGP encryption)
|
||||
- [GNU Scientific Library] (GSL, a nice [C](c.md) library of mathematical functions)
|
||||
- [GNU Collaborative International Dictionary of English](gcide.md)
|
||||
- ...
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ At the beginning of 1991 [Tim Berners-Lee](berners_lee.md) created the **[World
|
|||
|
||||
Shortly after the **[Soviet Union](ussr.md) dissolved** and on 25 August 1991 **[Linus Torvalds](linus_torvalds.md) announced [Linux](linux.md)**, his project for a completely [free as in freedom](free_software.md) Unix-like [operating system](os.md) kernel. Linux would become part of [GNU](gnu.md) and later one of the biggest and most successful software projects in history. It would end up powering Internet servers and supercomputers as well as desktop computers of a great number of users. Linux proved that free software works and surpasses proprietary systems.
|
||||
|
||||
After this very recent history follows, it's hard to judge which recent events will be of historical significance much later. 1990s have seen a huge growth of computer power, video [games](game.md) such as [Doom](doom.md) led to development of [GPU](gpu.md)s and high quality computer graphics along with a wide adoption of computers by common people, which in turn helped the further growth of Internet. In around mid 90s the [web](www.md) overtook [gopher](gopher.md) in popularity and started to become the forefront of the Internet. Late 90s saw the rise of the ["open source" movement](open_source.md) ([OSI](osi.md) was established in 1998). Worthy of mention is also the first animal cloned from an adult cell, sheep named Dolly, in 1996. In 1997 computer first beat human world [chess](chess.md) champion, it was the famous Kasparov vs [Deep Blue](deep_blue.md) match. Year 2000 was infamously preceded by the [Y2K](y2k.md) hysteria, the [fear](fear_culture.md) of technological [collapse](collapse.md) that was to be caused by computers flipping from year 99 to 00 -- this of course didn't happen. Shortly after 2000 [Lawrence Lessig](lessig.md) founded [Creative Commons](creative_commons.md), an organization that came hand in hand with the [free culture](free_culture.md) movement inspired by the [free software movement](free_software.md). At this point over 50% of US households had a computer. In 2003 the whole human [DNA](dna.md) was sequenced after 13 years of international collaborative effort. From 2005 we've seen a boom of [social networks](social_net.md) like [Facebook](facebook.md), [Twitter](twitter.md) and [YouTube](youtube.md) and also skyrocketing popularity of online and massively online games, owing a lot to the gigantic success of [World of Warcraft](wow.md); all of these contributed to making Internet and computers one of the most mainstream and lucrative things, ruining everything. Cell phones became a commonly owned item and after about 2005 so called "[smart](smart.md) phones" and other "smart" devices replaced them as a universal communication device capable of connecting to the Internet. Year 2010 seems to be the turning point beyond which societal decline accelerated immensely; 1990s seem to have been the peak of society, after the year 2000 society started to slowly decline but by inertia things were still relatively good for about another decade. In 2011 [Minecraft](minecraft.md) was released. After this we've seen the rise of [Bitcoin](bitcoin.md) and other [cryptocurrencies](crypto.md). Before 2020 we've also seen a brief spike in popularity of [VR](vr.md) (that would diminish again) and a huge advancement in [neural network](neural_network.md) [Artificial Intelligence](ai.md) which will likely be the topic of the future. 2022 saw the release of [ChatGPT](chatgpt.md), the AI chatbot that made a worldwide sensation by its human-like nature and intelligence -- the event will likely be seen as the moment of transition to a truly human-like AI. [Quantum computers](quantum.md) are being highly researched with already existing primitive prototypes; this will also likely be very important in the following years. Besides AI there were also [drones](drone.md), electromobiles, robotic Mars exploration and other things. However the society and technology have been in decadence for some time now, [capitalism](capitalism.md) has pushed technology to become hostile and highly [abusive to users](capitalist_software.md), extreme [bloat](bloat.md) of technology causes highly inefficient, extremely expensive and unreliable technology. In addition society is dealing with a lot of serious issues such as the [global warming](global_warming.md) and many people are foreseeing a [collapse of society](collapse.md).
|
||||
After this very recent history follows, it's hard to judge which recent events will be of historical significance much later. 1990s have seen a huge growth of computer power, video [games](game.md) such as [Doom](doom.md) led to development of [GPU](gpu.md)s and high quality computer graphics along with a wide adoption of computers by common people, which in turn helped the further growth of Internet. In around mid 90s the [web](www.md) overtook [gopher](gopher.md) in popularity and started to become the forefront of the Internet. Late 90s saw the rise of the ["open source" movement](open_source.md) ([OSI](osi.md) was established in 1998). Worthy of mention is also the first animal cloned from an adult cell, sheep named Dolly, in 1996. In 1997 computer first beat human world [chess](chess.md) champion, it was the famous Kasparov vs [Deep Blue](deep_blue.md) match. Year 2000 was infamously preceded by the [Y2K](y2k.md) hysteria, the [fear](fear_culture.md) of technological [collapse](collapse.md) that was to be caused by computers flipping from year 99 to 00 -- this of course didn't happen. With the year 2000 [21st century](21st_century.md) starts. Shortly after 2000 [Lawrence Lessig](lessig.md) founded [Creative Commons](creative_commons.md), an organization that came hand in hand with the [free culture](free_culture.md) movement inspired by the [free software movement](free_software.md). At this point over 50% of US households had a computer. In 2003 the whole human [DNA](dna.md) was sequenced after 13 years of international collaborative effort. From 2005 we've seen a boom of [social networks](social_net.md) like [Facebook](facebook.md), [Twitter](twitter.md) and [YouTube](youtube.md) and also skyrocketing popularity of online and massively online games, owing a lot to the gigantic success of [World of Warcraft](wow.md); all of these contributed to making Internet and computers one of the most mainstream and lucrative things, ruining everything. Cell phones became a commonly owned item and after about 2005 so called "[smart](smart.md) phones" and other "smart" devices replaced them as a universal communication device capable of connecting to the Internet. Year 2010 seems to be the turning point beyond which societal decline accelerated immensely; 1990s seem to have been the peak of society, after the year 2000 society started to slowly decline but by inertia things were still relatively good for about another decade. In 2011 [Minecraft](minecraft.md) was released. After this we've seen the rise of [Bitcoin](bitcoin.md) and other [cryptocurrencies](crypto.md). Before 2020 we've also seen a brief spike in popularity of [VR](vr.md) (that would diminish again) and a huge advancement in [neural network](neural_network.md) [Artificial Intelligence](ai.md) which will likely be the topic of the future. 2022 saw the release of [ChatGPT](chatgpt.md), the AI chatbot that made a worldwide sensation by its human-like nature and intelligence -- the event will likely be seen as the moment of transition to a truly human-like AI. [Quantum computers](quantum.md) are being highly researched with already existing primitive prototypes; this will also likely be very important in the following years. Besides AI there were also [drones](drone.md), electromobiles, robotic Mars exploration and other things. However the society and technology have been in decadence for some time now, [capitalism](capitalism.md) has pushed technology to become hostile and highly [abusive to users](capitalist_software.md), extreme [bloat](bloat.md) of technology causes highly inefficient, extremely expensive and unreliable technology. In addition society is dealing with a lot of serious issues such as the [global warming](global_warming.md) and many people are foreseeing a [collapse of society](collapse.md).
|
||||
|
||||
## Recent History Of Technology
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -176,6 +176,8 @@ This is a summary of some main guidelines on how an LRS supporter should behave
|
|||
- **Accept [death](death.md)** -- no, don't kill yourself, just accept death will come, maybe tomorrow, maybe in one hour, for you or for anyone you love, everything you ever made will become dirt. Constantly live with thought of death and get comfortable about it, you have to be ready to die at any moment and stop being too adraid of it, then you become really [free](freedom.md). Nowadays most people have panic fear of death which is similar to e.g. having panic phobia of germs -- no one wants go get sick, but if you're so gravely scared of catching any disease, you're enslaved, crippled, your life is limited, you can't do what you'd like to do. With death it's the same: try to live but don't let death scare you so much as to limit you in what you can say or do. Take a look at men who firmly stood behind their beliefs such as [Einstein](einstein.md), Seneca or Socrates, they all accepted death when it came and took it even if they could have avoided it; they are examples of highest mental freedom. Again, do NOT fucking kill yourself, that's a bad idea, just be ready for death and don't get dreadfully scared of it, it's not far away, it is probably just behind the next corner. { Regularly watching gore videos helps with this a bit. ~drummyfish }
|
||||
- **Try (almost) everything**: getting experience, even unpleasant one, is good. We won't advise you to try dangerous things so that you can't sue us, but it's not bad to have been through hardships, voluntarily or not. Firstly it helps you build the big picture view -- if you know what it's like to do hard manual work as well as suffer stressful intellectual work, if you know what it's like to feel great physical or mental pain, to be hungry, very fat or skinny, alone, popular and hated, abused and so on, you'll have more empathy, you'll know how people feel and you'll see through probaganda that paints you a distorted picture of what things are like, experience and pain make you wiser and also more loving. Don't risk your health or hurt yourself too much, but maybe don't be scared of taking a blow. Secondly this conveniently makes normies shut up because they can no longer use their favorite arguments (which are invalid but they will still use them) like "u cant citicize this if u havent tried it lolooololol!!!!!" and "loloolol have u even ever done X lol? then u cant talk about it" -- usually normie lives in a world of dichotomies like "you are either an intellectual or work manually", if you've done both his brain just freezes and he's like "ummmm but... but that cant... wait... so u say... mmmm... fuk u i have to go now".
|
||||
- **If you need to rest then fucking rest**, don't be a [productivist](productivity_cult.md) pussy, take as much time as you need before you feel like doing anything, it's okay.
|
||||
- **Study [conspiracy theories](conspiracy_theory.md)**: they teach you [critical thinking](critical_thinking.md) and bring up ideas society doesn't want you to think about -- that's why you're ridiculed for studying them, so it's exactly what you should do -- even if the theory itself is false (which it mostly isn't), it may lead you to truth. Most true conspiracy theories are just theories uncomfortable for the status quo for which evidence has been systematically hidden/destoyed and even the obvious, artificially constructed [strawman](strawman.md) theories (like "Jews are secretly vampires from another planet" or whatever) that serve nothing else than to discredit the legit ones provide at least [entertaining](fun.md) passtime. **Embrace being ridiculed**, give up your credibility and gain freedom to think about whatever you want.
|
||||
- **If you can't handle it ethically, don't handle it at all**: In real life many problems don't have a solution, most things in Universe are beyond your control -- things that can't be handled ethically are one of them. Is it OK to take unethical action to achieve something if ethical action won't work? No, just consider the thing unachievable, deal with the consequences, no matter how catastrophic they are. Catastrophic events happen, you don't ever have to behave unethically.
|
||||
- **Consumption satisfies your instincts, creation satisfies your soul.** You need both. When you're tired, you need to consume -- consume for as long as you please, but know it won't be enough. Consumption alone makes your life empty -- once you're rested, your stomach is full and your balls are empty, you feel a hunger for a higher purpose. It can only be satisfied by selfless creation.
|
||||
- ...
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ The base case of interpolation takes place in one dimension (imagine e.g. interp
|
|||
float interpolate(float a, float b, float t);
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Many times we apply our interpolation not just to two points but to many points, by segments, i.e. we apply the interpolation between each two neighboring points (a segment) in a series of many points to create a longer curve through all the points. Here we are usually interested in how the segments transition into each other, i.e. what the whole curve looks like at the locations of the points.
|
||||
Many times we apply our interpolation not just to two points but to many points, by segments, i.e. we apply the interpolation between each two neighboring points (a segment) in a series of many points to create a longer curve through all the points. Here we are usually interested in how the segments transition into each other, i.e. what the whole curve looks like at the exact locations of the points.
|
||||
|
||||
**[Nearest neighbor](nearest_neighbor.md)** is probably the simplest interpolation (so simple that it's sometimes not even called an interpolation, even though it technically is). This method simply returns the closest value, i.e. either *A* (for *t* < 0.5) or *B* (otherwise). This creates kind of sharp steps between the points, the function is not continuous, i.e. the transition between the points is not gradual but simply jumps from one value to the other at one point.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -35,6 +35,8 @@ Many times we apply our interpolation not just to two points but to many points,
|
|||
|
||||
**[Cubic](cubic.md) interpolation** can be considered a bit more advanced, it uses a [polynomial](polynomial.md) of degree 3 and creates a nice smooth curve through multiple points but requires knowledge of one additional point on each side of the interpolated interval (this may create slight issues with the first and last point of the sequence of values). This is so as to know at what slope to approach an endpoint so as to continue in the direction of the point behind it.
|
||||
|
||||
Besides these we may potentially use many other functions, curves and splines (for example Akima spline, Steffen spline and so on).
|
||||
|
||||
The above mentioned methods can be generalized to more dimensions (the number of dimensions are equal to the number of interpolation parameters) -- we encounter this a lot e.g. in [computer graphics](graphics.md) when upscaling [textures](texture.md) (sometimes called texture filtering). 2D nearest neighbor interpolation creates "blocky" images in which [pixels](pixel.md) simply "get bigger" but stay sharp squares if we upscale the texture. Linear interpolation in 2D is called [bilinear interpolation](bilinear.md) and is visually much better than nearest neighbor, [bicubic interpolation](bicubic.md) is a generalization of cubic interpolation to 2D and is yet smoother that bilinear interpolation.
|
||||
|
||||
TODO: simple C code pls, maybe linear interpolation without floats
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -114,6 +114,10 @@ void randomSeed(uint32_t seed)
|
|||
- **Inverse transform method**: In this method we take the inverse function of our desired distribution's cumulative distribution function (function that for any *x* says the probability the outcome will be lower than or equal to *x*) and we pass to it a number in range 0 to 1 generated with the vanilla uniform distribution -- this gives us the number in the desired distribution. However for this we have to know the cumulative distribution function's inverse function.
|
||||
- ...
|
||||
|
||||
{ If you want to look at some C code that tries to generate good pseudorandom numbers, take a look at gsl (GNU Scientific Library). ~drummyfish }
|
||||
|
||||
TODO: some algorithms from the gsl library described at https://www.gnu.org/software/gsl/doc/html/rng.html
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality/Testing Of Pseudorandom Sequences/Generators
|
||||
|
||||
This topic alone can be extremely complex, you could probably do a [PhD](phd.md) on it, let's just do some overview for mere noobs like us.
|
||||
|
|
@ -128,7 +132,7 @@ However the core of a pseudorandom generator is the quality of the sequence itse
|
|||
- **Try to [compress](compression.md) the sequence**: Truly random data should be basically impossible to compress -- you can exploit this fact and try to compress your sequence with some compression programs. It is ideal if the compression programs end up enlarging the file.
|
||||
- **Statistical tests**: Here you use objective mathematical tests -- there exist many very advanced tests, we'll only mention the very simple ones.
|
||||
- **[Histogram](histogram.md)**: Generate many numbers (but not more than the generator's period) and make a histogram (i.e. for every number count how many times it appeared) -- all numbers should appear roughly with the same frequency. If you make a nice generator, you should even see exactly the same count for every value generated -- this is explained above. Also count 1 and 0 bits in the whole sequence -- again there should be about the same number of them (exactly the same if you do it correctly). But keep in mind this only checks if you have correct frequencies of numbers, it says nothing about their distribution. Even a sequence 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, .... will pass this.
|
||||
- **Averaging any non-short interval should be close to middle value**: In a random sequence it should hold that if you take any interval that's not too short -- let's say at leas 100 numbers in a row -- the average value should very likely be close to the middle value (the longer the interval, the closer it should be). You can test your sequence like this. This already takes into account even the distribution of the numbers.
|
||||
- **Averaging any non-short interval should be close to middle value**: In a random sequence it should hold that if you take any interval that's not too short -- let's say at least 100 numbers in a row -- the average value should very likely be close to the middle value (the longer the interval, the closer it should be). You can test your sequence like this. This already takes into account even the distribution of the numbers.
|
||||
- **[Fourier transform](fourier_transform.md)** (and similar methods that give you the spectrum) -- the spectrum of the data should have equal amount of all frequencies, just like white noise.
|
||||
- **[Correlation](correlation.md) coefficients**: This is kind of the real proof of randomness, ideally no values should be correlated in your data, so you can try to compute some correlation coefficients, for example try to compute how much correlation there is between consecutive numbers (it's similar to plotting the data as coordinates and seeing if they form a line or not) -- you should ideally find no significant correlations.
|
||||
- **Chi square test**: Very common test for this kind of thing, see also *poker test*.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -34,7 +34,9 @@ There are a number of places on the internet to look for public domain works, fo
|
|||
|
||||
**Should you release you own works to the public domain?** Definitely yes! From [our](lrs.md) point of view public domain is the only option as we deem any "intellectual property" immoral, however even if you disagree with us, you may want to release at least some of your works into public domain, if only out of altruism, no longer caring about your old works, out of curiosity or to make yourself a bit popular in the free culture community (thought this is a motivation we don't entirely embrace). **Are you afraid to do so?** It is natural, letting go of something you spend part of your life on can raise a bit of anxiety, but this is just a fear of making the first step to the unknown, a fear almost entirely artificial, created by [capitalist](capitalism.md) propaganda; making this decision will really most likely only have positive effects unless you actually had SERIOUS plans to make a business of your proprietary art. Practically the worst that can happen is that your work goes unnoticed and unappreciated. If you are still hesitant, try to go slowly, first release one thing, something small, and see what happens.
|
||||
|
||||
{ I remember myself how anxious I was about making the decision to release all my work into public domain, despite knowing it was the right thing to do and that I wanted to do it. I felt emotional about giving away rights to art I put so much love and energy into, fearing the evil vultures of the Internet would immediately "steal" it all as soon as I release it. I overcame the fear and now, many years later, I can say that not once have I regretted it, literally not a single case of abuse of my work happened (that I know of anyway), despite some of it becoming kind of popular. I only received love of many people who found my work useful, and even received donations from people. I've seen others put my work to use, improve it, I get mail from people thanking me for I've done. Of course this all is not why I did it, but it's nice, I write about it to share a personal experience that will maybe give you the courage to do the right thing as well. ~drummyfish }
|
||||
**But isn't releasing a work into public domain dangerous?** Doesn't that just invite someone to take the work and claim it as his own? This is a pretty common question so let's take a look at it. Firstly know that **releasing a work into public domain DOES NOT give others the right to claim it as their work** -- it gives them the right to use that work in any way, even to make money, but someone claiming to have made a work he did not in fact make is simply [plagiarism](plagiarism.md), lying and false claim of copyright, which is not only unethical and will hurt the reputation of the individual if it's proven (which can easily be done, e.g. by showing you released the work earlier with Internet Archive), but may even be punishable by law (even though plagiarism is usually not a crime in itself, it may be deemed for example a fraud). Yes, some people may still attempt to do it (just like people practice [piracy](piracy.md) despite it being illegal), but please note they can do this even if the work isn't public domain -- they can just as easily (and illegally) take it and claim it as their own even if you keep your copyright on it. The only "protection" against this is to simply never release the work publicly at all, i.e. the fact that you make your work public domain doesn't make it more likely to be plagiarized.
|
||||
|
||||
{ I remember myself how anxious I was about making the decision to release all my work into public domain, despite knowing it was the right thing to do and that I wanted to do it. I felt emotional about giving away rights to art I put so much love and energy into, fearing the evil vultures of the Internet would immediately "steal" it all as soon as I release it. I overcame the fear and now, many years later, I can say that not once have I regretted it, literally not a single case of abuse of my work happened (that I know of anyway), despite some of it becoming kind of popular. I only received love of many people who found my work useful, and even received donations from people. I've seen others put my work to use, improve it, I get mail from people thanking me for I've done. Of course this all is not why I did it, but it's nice, I write about it to share a personal experience that will maybe give you the courage to do the right thing as well. ~drummyfish }
|
||||
|
||||
## How To Create Public Domain Works
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
3421
random_page.md
3421
random_page.md
File diff suppressed because it is too large
Load diff
3
rms.md
3
rms.md
|
|
@ -39,6 +39,8 @@ In the book *Free As In Freedom* it is also mentioned that **Stallman had aversi
|
|||
|
||||
As [anarchists](anarchism.md) we of course despise the idea of worshiping people, creating [heroes](hero_culture.md) and cults of personalities, but the enormous [historical](history.md) significance of Stallman has to be stressed as a plain and simple fact and though we may disagree with some of his methods and even opinions, it's as clear as it can be that he acted [selflessly](selflessness.md), in favor of all people -- something that can be said about very few, if anyone at all. Most other old time hackers, such as [Eric S. Ramyond](esr.md) and [Rob Pike](rob_pike.md) immediately abandoned all ideals of ethics and jumped the capitalist train with the first sight of money, Stallman stayed opposed to it, and for this he has our uttermost respect. Even though in our days his name is overshadowed in the mainstream by rich businessman and creators of commercially successful technology and even though we ourselves disagree with Stallman on some points, in the future [history](history.md) may well see Stallman as perhaps the greatest man of the software era, and rightfully so. Stallman isn't a mere creator of a commercially successful software product or a successful politician, he is an extremely morally strong philosopher, a great example to others, a prophet, someone who sees the truth and shows it to people -- he brilliantly foresaw the course of history and quickly defined ethics needed for the new era of mass available programmable computers at the right time, before the hammer hit. And not only that, he also basically alone established this ethics as a standard IN SPITE of all the world's [corporations](corporation.md) [fighting](fight_culture.md) back, in a field that back then was relatively obscure, unpopular in mainstream and hence not much supported by any mass media. He is also extremely unique in not pursuing self interest, in TRULY living his own philosophy, dedicating his whole life to his cause and refusing to give in even partially. All of this is at much higher level than simply becoming successful and famous within the contemporary capitalist system, his life effort is pure, true and timeless, unlike things achieved by pieces of shit such as [Steve Jobs](steve_jobs.md).
|
||||
|
||||
**Is Richard Stallman a celebrity?** This question is important to [us](lrs.md) because we dislike any celebrities. The answer is probably this: to a certain level he is a celebrity (though not nearly a Hollywood level celebrity, 99% of normal people never heard of him), but at least to a similar level he is just a well known expert on certain things. So yes, partially we have to dislike his celebrity part -- any worship of him as a God is acceptable only as a [meme](meme.md), we must never see him as a [hero](hero_culture.md). He seems to be a very rare case of a mini celebrity that managed to keep some morality, perhaps because his celebrity status, very uncommonly, came to him more because he wasn't careful enough to avoid it rather than because he actively pursued it. It's not an excuse -- if someone doesn't want to become a celebrity, he cannot become one -- but it may be an extenuating circumstance. This is to say: yes, it sucks he's a celebrity to some degree, but he's probably at least among the least harmful ones.
|
||||
|
||||
## See Also
|
||||
|
||||
- [John Gilmore](john_gilmore.md)
|
||||
|
|
@ -46,6 +48,7 @@ As [anarchists](anarchism.md) we of course despise the idea of worshiping people
|
|||
- [Jesus](jesus.md)
|
||||
- [Einstein](einstein.md)
|
||||
- [vrms](vrms.md)
|
||||
- [gentoo](gentoo.md)
|
||||
- [Linus Torvalds](torvalds.md)
|
||||
- [Alan Cox](alan_cox.md)
|
||||
- [Larry Wall](larry_wall.md)
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ Some further examples of soyence:
|
|||
- "Science says god doesn't exist." aka reddit [atheism](atheism.md)
|
||||
- "We can't believe this because it wasn't peer censored and/or it didn't pass the [null ritual](null_ritual.md) and/or it wasn't published in a journal on our approved literature list." (--[Wikipedia](wikipedia.md))
|
||||
- "This gender studies expert has proven sex is a racial construct and has no biological meaning. You disagree? Well, do you have a PhD in gender studies? No? Then shut up you fucking sexist."
|
||||
- "This goes against SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS therefore it's pseudoscience and conspiration theory."
|
||||
- "This goes against SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS therefore it's pseudoscience and [conspiracy theory](conspiracy_theory.md)."
|
||||
- "This research is racist.", using terms such as "scientific racism".
|
||||
- This guy's research is invalid because in his spare time he makes videos on ufology and other "conspiracy theories", his REPUTATION AND CREDIBILITY is destroyed.
|
||||
- "We should burn these old books that say things we don't like, just in case. When Nazis did it it was different."
|
||||
|
|
@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ Some further examples of soyence:
|
|||
Here are a few tips on how to spot soyence:
|
||||
|
||||
- Is trust involved? Things like authority of publishers, censorship, reviews etc.? If so, it is by definition NOT science.
|
||||
- Is questioning anything at all prevented and/or punished? It is [dogma](dogma.md), not science. True science encourages questioning EVERYTHING.
|
||||
- Is emotion involved? Is someone putting energy into promoting it? If yes, it's probably a preparation of business/politics grounds, not science.
|
||||
- Is money involved? Is any form of [capital](capital.md) (money, attention, power, ...) in play? Is there any form of business connected? If so, it is business, not science.
|
||||
- Is politics involved? Will the results help some currently active political group? It's highly suspicious, it almost definitely can't be trusted, it's most likely not science.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
File diff suppressed because one or more lines are too long
144
wiki_stats.md
144
wiki_stats.md
|
|
@ -2,10 +2,10 @@
|
|||
|
||||
This is an autogenerated article holding stats about this wiki.
|
||||
|
||||
- number of articles: 580
|
||||
- number of commits: 819
|
||||
- total size of all texts in bytes: 3941415
|
||||
- total number of lines of article texts: 30093
|
||||
- number of articles: 581
|
||||
- number of commits: 820
|
||||
- total size of all texts in bytes: 3950769
|
||||
- total number of lines of article texts: 30146
|
||||
- number of script lines: 262
|
||||
- occurences of the word "person": 7
|
||||
- occurences of the word "nigger": 88
|
||||
|
|
@ -35,60 +35,89 @@ longest articles:
|
|||
|
||||
top 50 5+ letter words:
|
||||
|
||||
- which (2257)
|
||||
- which (2261)
|
||||
- there (1720)
|
||||
- people (1491)
|
||||
- example (1292)
|
||||
- other (1226)
|
||||
- number (1130)
|
||||
- software (1086)
|
||||
- about (1037)
|
||||
- program (890)
|
||||
- their (841)
|
||||
- because (809)
|
||||
- would (797)
|
||||
- called (775)
|
||||
- people (1498)
|
||||
- example (1300)
|
||||
- other (1227)
|
||||
- number (1132)
|
||||
- software (1099)
|
||||
- about (1041)
|
||||
- program (901)
|
||||
- their (842)
|
||||
- because (810)
|
||||
- would (799)
|
||||
- called (777)
|
||||
- being (753)
|
||||
- language (749)
|
||||
- computer (741)
|
||||
- numbers (737)
|
||||
- something (720)
|
||||
- things (719)
|
||||
- simple (717)
|
||||
- without (677)
|
||||
- something (722)
|
||||
- things (721)
|
||||
- simple (720)
|
||||
- without (678)
|
||||
- programming (664)
|
||||
- function (664)
|
||||
- programming (659)
|
||||
- these (634)
|
||||
- different (632)
|
||||
- however (627)
|
||||
- these (636)
|
||||
- different (633)
|
||||
- however (629)
|
||||
- world (586)
|
||||
- system (575)
|
||||
- should (575)
|
||||
- system (570)
|
||||
- games (565)
|
||||
- doesn (561)
|
||||
- point (554)
|
||||
- society (544)
|
||||
- while (522)
|
||||
- doesn (563)
|
||||
- point (556)
|
||||
- society (545)
|
||||
- while (525)
|
||||
- though (521)
|
||||
- drummyfish (515)
|
||||
- memory (508)
|
||||
- using (505)
|
||||
- still (499)
|
||||
- possible (493)
|
||||
- course (489)
|
||||
- similar (488)
|
||||
- using (506)
|
||||
- still (500)
|
||||
- possible (495)
|
||||
- similar (490)
|
||||
- course (490)
|
||||
- simply (484)
|
||||
- technology (483)
|
||||
- https (460)
|
||||
- really (445)
|
||||
- really (446)
|
||||
- always (444)
|
||||
- value (443)
|
||||
- always (443)
|
||||
- extremely (433)
|
||||
- basically (429)
|
||||
- extremely (436)
|
||||
- basically (431)
|
||||
|
||||
latest changes:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Date: Tue Jun 11 13:36:28 2024 +0200
|
||||
bloat.md
|
||||
bloat_monopoly.md
|
||||
c.md
|
||||
czechia.md
|
||||
de_facto.md
|
||||
distance.md
|
||||
exercises.md
|
||||
free_culture.md
|
||||
free_hardware.md
|
||||
free_software.md
|
||||
free_speech.md
|
||||
free_universe.md
|
||||
freedom.md
|
||||
freedom_distance.md
|
||||
lrs.md
|
||||
lrs_dictionary.md
|
||||
main.md
|
||||
minimalism.md
|
||||
nigger.md
|
||||
public_domain_computer.md
|
||||
python.md
|
||||
random_page.md
|
||||
science.md
|
||||
soyence.md
|
||||
suckless.md
|
||||
trolling.md
|
||||
wiki_pages.md
|
||||
wiki_stats.md
|
||||
Date: Mon Jun 10 10:07:07 2024 +0200
|
||||
21st_century.md
|
||||
c.md
|
||||
|
|
@ -99,35 +128,6 @@ Date: Mon Jun 10 10:07:07 2024 +0200
|
|||
disease.md
|
||||
egoism.md
|
||||
everyone_does_it.md
|
||||
exercises.md
|
||||
fsf.md
|
||||
furry.md
|
||||
githopping.md
|
||||
john_carmack.md
|
||||
lrs.md
|
||||
lrs_dictionary.md
|
||||
main.md
|
||||
minimalism.md
|
||||
needed.md
|
||||
network.md
|
||||
often_confused.md
|
||||
operating_system.md
|
||||
optimization.md
|
||||
programming_language.md
|
||||
random_page.md
|
||||
rationalwiki.md
|
||||
raycasting.md
|
||||
ssao.md
|
||||
wiki_pages.md
|
||||
wiki_stats.md
|
||||
windows.md
|
||||
Date: Sat Jun 8 16:41:14 2024 +0200
|
||||
21st_century.md
|
||||
copyleft.md
|
||||
copyright.md
|
||||
data_hoarding.md
|
||||
drummyfish.md
|
||||
exercises.md
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
most wanted pages:
|
||||
|
|
@ -156,13 +156,13 @@ most wanted pages:
|
|||
most popular and lonely pages:
|
||||
|
||||
- [lrs](lrs.md) (281)
|
||||
- [capitalism](capitalism.md) (221)
|
||||
- [capitalism](capitalism.md) (222)
|
||||
- [c](c.md) (213)
|
||||
- [bloat](bloat.md) (204)
|
||||
- [free_software](free_software.md) (167)
|
||||
- [free_software](free_software.md) (169)
|
||||
- [game](game.md) (140)
|
||||
- [suckless](suckless.md) (135)
|
||||
- [proprietary](proprietary.md) (118)
|
||||
- [suckless](suckless.md) (136)
|
||||
- [proprietary](proprietary.md) (119)
|
||||
- [computer](computer.md) (96)
|
||||
- [kiss](kiss.md) (95)
|
||||
- [modern](modern.md) (92)
|
||||
|
|
@ -180,8 +180,8 @@ most popular and lonely pages:
|
|||
- [foss](foss.md) (75)
|
||||
- [fight_culture](fight_culture.md) (74)
|
||||
- [bullshit](bullshit.md) (73)
|
||||
- [art](art.md) (72)
|
||||
- [programming_language](programming_language.md) (71)
|
||||
- [art](art.md) (71)
|
||||
- [shit](shit.md) (70)
|
||||
- [float](float.md) (68)
|
||||
- [chess](chess.md) (67)
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue