@ -6,7 +6,13 @@ Censorship means intentional effort towards preventing exchange of certain kind
Sometimes it is not 100% clear which action constitutes censorship: for example categorization such as moving a forum post from one thread to another (possibly less visible) thread may or may not be deemed censorship -- this depends on the intended result of such action; moving a post somewhere else doesn't remove it completely but can make it less visible. Whether something is censorship always depends on the answer to the question: "does the action prevent others from information sharing?".
There exist **tools for bypassing censorship**, e.g. [proxies](proxy.md) or encrypted and/or distributed, censorship-resistant networks such as [Tor](tor.md), [Freenet](freenet.md), [I2P](i2p.md) or [torrent](torrent.md) file sharing. Watch out: using such tools may be illegal or at least make you look suspicious and be targeted harder by state surveillance.
**Modern censorship is much more sophisticated**; in old days, e.g. those of [USSR](ussr.md) pseudocommunist regimes, it was simple: stuff was reviewed and it either got censored or it passed, governments even openly admitted to censorship and stated it was simply necessary for the advancement of society. People wanted to talk but the government didn't want to let them. Not so nowadays, it got much advance in several ways:
1. Censorship is no longer done just by the state, but by [corporations](corporation.md), various social subgroups and even individuals as well, as so called self censorship, often automatically and subconsciously. In wanting to talk you are not just standing against one big bad guy who wants you silent, there are hundreds of sneaky bastards waiting to sue you, report you, ban you, cancel you, even physically terminate you if you touch anything controversial in one way or another.
2. **NO ONE ADMITS TO CENSORSHIP NOWADAYS, no matter how blatantly obvious their censorship is**, exactly in the capitalist "deny EVERYTHING" spirit -- Wikipedia explicitly states "we are not censored" and then literally removes and blocks inclusion of legitimate information it deems "harmful". You point it out, they ban you. They will say "no, it's not censorship, it is MODERATION, PROTECTION, DELISTING, free speech has its limits, it is not a ban, it is deplatformization, blocking of hate speech is not censorship blablabla ..." -- they are inventing hundreds of new terms so that they don't have to use the word *censorship*.
3. There is a lot of soft, undercover and hard to proof censorship -- no longer is something either censored or not censored, but it may be shadowbanned, hugely underanked in search, censored only to specific eyes, modified rather than deleted etc. For example [Google](google.md) censors thousands of websites; you WILL find those websites if Google sees you are looking specifically for those to test their censorship, but it won't ever show it to people who don't know about the site and are legitimately looking for the information they contain. Maybe they will show the site on the 100th page of the search results, which is equivalent to just blocking it completely, but they can say "haha we are not actually censoring it, gotcha". TV series and movies are silently edited retroactively in the [cloud](cloud.md) to no longer include scenes deemed politically incorrect, no one notices as no one owns physical copies anymore. And so on.
There exist **tools for bypassing censorship**, e.g. [proxies](proxy.md) or encrypted and/or distributed, censorship-resistant networks such as [Tor](tor.md), [Freenet](freenet.md), [I2P](i2p.md) or [torrent](torrent.md) file sharing. Watch out: using such tools may be illegal or at least make you look suspicious and be targeted harder by the surveillance.
@ -83,6 +83,8 @@ What is the **longest possible game**? It depends on the exact rules and details
The longest game played in practice is considered to be the one between Nikolic and Arsovic from 1989, a draw with 269 moves lasting over 20 hours. For a shortest game there have been ones with zero moves; serious decisive shortest game has occurred multiple times like this: `1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 c6 3.e3 Qa5+` (white resigned).
**Best player ever**: a 2017 paper called *Who is the Master?* analyzed 20 of the top players of history based on how good their moves were compared to Stockfish, the strongest engine. The resulting top 10 is (from best): Carlsen, Kramnik, Fischer, Kasparov, Anand, Khalifman, Smyslov, Petrosian, Karpov, Kasimdzhanov. It also confirmed that the quality of chess play at top level has been greatly increasing.
What's **the most typical game**? We can try to construct such a game from a game database by always picking the most common move in given position. Using the lichess database at the time of writing, we get the following incomplete game (the remainder of the game is split between four games, 2 won by white, 1 by black, 1 drawn):
@ -6,7 +6,9 @@ The language is intended to be the foundation of a completely new, non-[capitali
**A quick sum up** is following: comun is **[minimalist](minimalism.md)**, **[low level](low_level.md)** with minimum [abstraction](abstraction.md), **[portable](portability.md)**, **[imperative](imperative.md)** and **[stack](stack.md)-based**, using **reverse Polish notation**. It can be **both [compiled](compiler.md) and [interpreted](interpreter.md)**. There are **only primitive integer [data types](data_type.md)** (native integer size by default with possibility to specify exact width where necessary, signed/unsigned interpretation is left to the programmer) and **optional [pointers](pointer.md)** that can be used as variables, for managing multiple stacks, creating [arrays](array.md) etc. Its **specification can fit on a sheet of paper** and is **completely [public domain](public_domain.md)** under [CC0](cc0.md) (as is its current implementation). It has **no [standard library](stdlib.md)**. There are **no [English](english.md) keywords**; commands are rather very short (mostly 1 to three symbols) math-like symbols. Source code only allows [ASCII](ascii.md) symbols (no [unicode](unicode.md)). There is an **optional [preprocessor](preprocessor.md) that uses comun itself** (i.e. it doesn't use any extra language). **[Functions](function.md) and [recursion](recursion.md)** are supported. Many features of the language are optional and never burden the programmer if he doesn't use them. Simplified versions of the language (minicomun and microcomun) are also specified.
Here is a very short showcase of comun code:
## Examples
Here is a very short showcase of comun code, demonstrating some common functions:
```
max: <' ? ><.^.#takesmaximumoftwovalues
@ -34,4 +36,50 @@ factI:
.
```
The following is a [quine](quine.md) in comun:
```
0 46 32 34 S 34 32 58 83 S --> S: "0 46 32 34 S 34 32 58 83 S --> " .
```
The following code translates [brainfuck](brainfuck.md) to comun:
```
0 "$>0 " -->
@@
<? ?
<-
$0 "+" = $1 "-" = | ?
$0 -> $0 -> " " ->
.
$0 "<" = $1 ">" = | ?
"$" -> $0 -> "0" -> " " ->
.
$0 "." = ?
0 "->' " -->
.
$0 "," = ?
0 "$<0<-"-->
.
$0 91 = ? # left bracket
0 "@' " -->
.
$0 93 = ? # right bracker
0 ". " -->
.
^
;
!@
.
.
```
TODO: more, code examples, compare the above with C, ...
*Sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from feminism.* --[drummyfish](drummyfish.md)'s law
Feminism, also feminazism, is a [fascist](fascism.md) [terrorist](terrorism.md) [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) movement aiming the establishing female as the superior gender, for social revenge on men and gaining political power, e.g. that over [language](political_correctness.md). Similarly to [LGBT](lgbt.md), feminism is violent, [toxic](toxic.md) and [harmful](harmful.md), based on [brainwashing](brainwashing.md), mass hysteria, [bullying](bullying.md) (e.g. the [metoo](metoo.md) campaign) and [propaganda](propaganda.md).
Feminism, also feminazism, is a [fascist](fascism.md) [terrorist](terrorism.md) [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) movement aiming for establishing female as the superior gender, for social revenge on men and gaining political power, e.g. that over [language](political_correctness.md). Similarly to [LGBT](lgbt.md), feminism is violent, [toxic](toxic.md) and [harmful](harmful.md), based on [brainwashing](brainwashing.md), mass hysteria, [bullying](bullying.md) (e.g. the [metoo](metoo.md) campaign) and [propaganda](propaganda.md).
[LMAO](lmao.md), this just sums up the feminist ways: **a supposed woman writer who won 1 million euro prize turned out to actually be three men writers**, see Carmen Mola :)
Most generally game is a form of play which is restricted by certain rules, the goal of which is mostly [fun](fun.md), challenge and/or [competition](competition.md). A game may have various combinations of mental elements (e.g. competitive mental calculations, ...) and physical elements (based in [real life](irl.md), e.g. [football](football.md), [marble racing](marble_racing.md), ...); nowadays very popular games are [computer](computer.md) games, or video games (also gaymes or vidya, e.g. [Anarch](anarch.md), [minesweeper](minesweeper.md), [Doom](doom.md), ...), which are played with the help of a computer. *Game* is also a [mathematical](math.md) term in [game theory](game_theory.md) which studies games and competition rigorously.
A fun take at the very concept of a game is [Nomic](nomic.md), a game in which changing the game rules is part of the game. It leads to all kinds of mindfucks.
## Computer Games
Computer game is [software](software.md) whose main purpose is to be played and interactively entertain the [user](user.md). Sadly most computer games are [proprietary](proprietary.md) and [toxic](toxic.md).
@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ As perhaps the most influential man in history whose image has been twisted, use
- **He is acknowledged by other religions such as the [Islam](islam.md)**, though in these he usually plays some minor role of just some mortal preacher.
- We do not sport any anti-white [political correctness](political_correctness.md), however **the traditional depictions of his looks are likely wrong**, he most likely looked much different from the bearded, long-hair white man depictions we see in paintings -- these were likely affected by the Greek ideals of what gods look like. Jesus was a jew, probably of darker skin like all people from the area he lived in, possibly without long hair as some of his followers mention in the Bible that it is inappropriate for a man to have long hair.
- There are some non-canonical gospels (not accepted to Bible) that talk some funny shit about Jesus, e.g. the Infancy Gospel of Thomas talks about how Jesus **as a child killed other children in revenge with his supernatural powers**.
- **Jesus is supposed to return** and judge the people: this is known as the Second Coming and is hinted on in the Bible, though the details on the date or even the nature of the event are unclear and interpreted differently.
- **Jesus is supposed to return** and judge the people: this is known as the Second Coming and is hinted on in the Bible, though the details on the date or even the nature of the event are unclear and interpreted differently. Before the second coming **a number of antichrists, or false prophets, are to appear**.
@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ After many people realized OOP is kind of shit, there has been a boom of "OOP al
In short: NONE, **by default use the [imperative](imperative.md) paradigm** (also called "procedural"). Remember this isn't to say you shouldn't ever apply a different paradigm, but imperative should be the default, most prevalent and suitable one to use in solving most problems. There is nothing new to invent or "beat" OOP.
But why imperative? Why can't we simply improve OOP or come up with something ultra genius to replace it with? Why do we say OOP is bad because it's forced and now we are forcing imperative paradigm? The answer is that the **imperative paradigm is special because it is how computers actually work**, it is not made up but rather it's the **natural low level paradigm with minimum [abstraction](abstraction.md) that reflects the underlying nature of computers**. You may say this is just bullshit arbitrary rationalization but no, these properties makes procedural paradigm special among all other paradigms because:
But why imperative? Why can't we simply improve OOP or come up with something ultra genius to replace it with? Why do we say OOP is bad because it's forced and now we are forcing imperative paradigm? The answer is that the **imperative paradigm is special because it is how computers actually work**, it is not made up but rather it's the **natural low level paradigm with minimum [abstraction](abstraction.md) that reflects the underlying nature of computers**. You may say this is just bullshit arbitrary rationalization but no, these properties makes imperative paradigm special among all other paradigms because:
- Its implementation is simple and [suckless](suckless.md)/[LRS](lrs.md) because it maps nicely and naturally to the underlying hardware -- basically commands in a language simply translate to one or more instructions. This makes construction of compilers easy.
- It's predictable and efficient, i.e. a programmer writing imperative code can see quite clearly how what he's writing will translate to the assembly instructions. This makes it possible to write highly efficient code, unlike high level paradigms that perform huge amounts of [magic](magic.md) for translating foreign concepts to machine instructions -- and of course this magic may differ between compilers, i.e. what's efficient code in one compiler may be inefficient in another (similar situation arose e.g. in the world of [OpenGL](opengl.md) where driver implementation started to play a huge role and which led to the creation of a more low level API [Vulkan](vulkan.md)).
@ -6,6 +6,8 @@ Productivity cult is one of [modern](modern.md) [capitalist](capitalism.md) reli
A human is living being, not a machine, he should live a happy relaxed life, dedicated to spending time with his close ones, raising children, enjoying the beauties of nature, exploring secrets of the universe, without stress; he should create when inspiration or a truly great necessity comes to him and when he does, he should take his time to carefully make the art great, without hasting it or forcing it. Productivity cult goes all against this, it proclaims one should be constantly spitting out "something", torturing and forcing himself, maximizing quantity on detriment of quality, undergo constant stress while suppressing rest -- that one should all the time be preoccupied with competitive [fight](fight_culture.md), deadlines, that art he creates is something that can be planned on schedule, made on deadline and assigned a calculated price tag to be an ideal consumerist product. If such stance towards life doesn't make you wanna puke, you most likely lack a soul.
Do not produce. Create. Art takes time and can't be scheduled.
The name of the cult itself [says a lot about it](name_is_important.md). While a name such as *efficiency* would probably be better, as efficiency means doing less work with the same result and therefore having more free time, it is not a surprise that capitalism has chosen the word *productivity*, i.e. producing more which means working more, e.g. for the price of free time and mental health.
Productivity obsessed people are mostly idiots without the ability to think for themselves, they have desktops with "[motivational](motivation.md)" wallpapers saying shit like "the word impossible doesn't exist in my dictionary" and when you tell them if it wouldn't be better to rather establish a society where people wouldn't have to work they start screeching "HAHAA THATS IMPOSSIBLE IT CANT WORK". Productivity maximalists bully people for taking rest or doing what they otherwise enjoy in moderation -- they invent words such as "[procrastination](procrastination.md)" to create a feeling of ever present guilt induced by doing what one truly enjoys.
Steve Jobs was the prototypical evil [CEO](ceo.md) and co-founder of one of the worst [corporations](corporation.md) in the world: [Apple](apple.md). He was a psychopathic entrepreneur with a cult of personality that makes Americans cum. He was mainly known for his ability to manipulate people and he worsened technology by making it more consumerist, expensive and incompatible with already existing technology. All americans masturbate daily to Steve Jobs so he can also be considered the most famous US porn star.
{ LOL how come in the American movies the villain is always some rich boss of a huge corporation clearly resembling Steve Jobs, doing literally the same things, it's almost as if the average American actually somehow KNOWS and feels deep inside these people are pure evil, but suddenly outside of a Hollywood movie their brain switches to "aaaaah, that guy is amazing" and they just eat all his bullshit. I just can't comprehend this. ~drummyfish }
Jobs was born on February 24, 1955 and later was adopted which may have contributed to his development of psychopathy. He was already very stupid as a little child, he never really learned programming and was only interested in achieving what he wanted by crying and pressuring other people to do things for him. This translated very well to his adult life when he quit school to pursue money. He manipulated and abused his schoolmate [Steve Wozniak](wozniak.md), a [hacker](hacker.md), to make computers for him. They started [Apple](apple.md) in 1976 and started producing one of the first personal computers: Apple I and Apple II with which he won the [capitalist](capitalism.md) lottery and unfortunately succeeded on the market. Apple became a big ass company, however Jobs was such [shit](shit.md) CEO that **Apple fired him** lol. He went to do some other shit like NeXT. Then a bunch of things happened (TODO) and then, to the relief of the whole world, he died on October 5, 2011 from cancer. { LRS never wishes for anyone's death, here we only state the simple fact that the world is a better place without Jobs in it. ~drummyfish }
A woman (also girl, gril, gurl, femoid, wimminz or succubus; [tranny](tranny.md) girl being called [t-girl](tgirl.md), [trap](trap.md), [femboy](femboy.md), fake girl or [mtf](mtf.md)) is one of two genders (sexes) of humans, the other one being [man](man.md). Women are [cute](cute.md) (sometimes) but notoriously bad at [programming](programming.mg), [math](math.md) and [technology](technology.md): in the field they usually "work" on [bullshit](bullshit.md) (and mostly [harmful](harmful.md)) positions such as "diversity department", [marketing](marketing.md), "[HR](human_resources.md)", [UI](ui.md)/[user experience](ux.md), or as a [token](token.md) girl for media. If they get close to actual technology, their highest "skills" are mostly limited to casual "[coding](coding.md)" (which itself is a below-average form of [programming](programming.md)) in a baby language such as [Python](python.md), [Javascript](javascript.md) or [Rust](rust.md). Mostly they are just hired for quotas and make coffee for men who do the real work (until TV cameras appear). Don't let yourself be fooled by the propaganda, women have always been bad with tech.
A woman (also girl, gril, gurl, femoid, wimminz or succubus; [tranny](tranny.md) girl being called [t-girl](tgirl.md), [trap](trap.md), [femboy](femboy.md), fake girl or [mtf](mtf.md)) is one of two genders (sexes) of humans, the other one being [man](man.md). Women are the weaker sex, they are [cute](cute.md) (sometimes) but notoriously bad at [programming](programming.mg), [math](math.md) and [technology](technology.md): in the field they usually "work" on [bullshit](bullshit.md) (and mostly [harmful](harmful.md)) positions such as "diversity department", [marketing](marketing.md), "[HR](human_resources.md)", [UI](ui.md)/[user experience](ux.md), or as a [token](token.md) girl for media. If they get close to actual technology, their highest "skills" are mostly limited to casual "[coding](coding.md)" (which itself is a below-average form of [programming](programming.md)) in a baby language such as [Python](python.md), [Javascript](javascript.md) or [Rust](rust.md). Mostly they are just hired for quotas and make coffee for men who do the real work (until TV cameras appear). Don't let yourself be fooled by the propaganda, women have always been bad with tech.
**Even mainstream science acknowledges women are dumber than men**: even the extremely politically correct [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) states TODAY in the article on human brain that male brain is on average larger in volume (even when corrected for the overall body size) AND that there is correlation between volume and intelligence: this undeniably implies women are dumber. On average male brain weights 10% more than woman's and has 16% more brain cells. The Guinness book of 1987 states the average male brain weight being 1424 grams and that of a female being 1242 grams; the averages both grow with time quite quickly so nowadays the numbers will be higher in both sexes, though the average of men grows faster. The heaviest recorded brain belonged to a man (2049 grams), while the lightest belonged to a woman (1096 grams). Heaviest woman brain weighted 1565 grams, only a little more than men's average. [IQ](iq.md)/intelligence measured by various tests has been consistently significantly lower for women than for men, e.g. the paper named *Sex differences in intelligence and brain size: A paradox resolved* found a 4 point difference, noting that in some problems such as 3D spatial rotations males score even 11 points higher average.
Historically women have been privileged over men -- while men had to [work](work.md) their asses off, go to [wars](war.md), explore and hunt for food, women often weren't even supposed to work, they could stay at home, chill while guarding the fire and playing with children -- this is becoming less and less so with [capitalism](capitalism.md) which aims to simply enslave everyone, nowadays mostly through the [feminist](feminism.md) cult that brainwashed women to desire the same slavery as men. Statistically women live about 5 years longer lives than men because they don't have to worry and stress so much.
Women also can't drive, operate machines, they can't compare even to the worst men in sports, both physical and mental such as [chess](chess.md). Women have to have separate leagues and more relaxed rules, e.g. the title Woman Grand Master (WGM) in chess has far lower requirements to obtain than regular Grand Master (GM). (According to [Elo](elo.md) rating the best woman chess player in history would have only 8% chance of winning against current best male who would have 48% chance of winning). On the International Mathematical Olympiad only 43 out of 1338 medals were obtained by females. There are too many funny cases and video compilations of women facing men in sports (watch them before they're censored lol), e.g. the infamous Vaevictis female "progaming" team or the [football](football.md) match between the US national women team (probably the best women team in the world) vs some random under 15 years old boy's team which of course the women team lost. LMAO there is even a video of 1 skinny boy beating 9 women in boxing. Of course there are arguments that worse performance of women in mental sports is caused culturally; women aren't led so much to playing chess, therefore there are fewer women in chess and so the probability of a good woman player appearing is lower. This may be partially true even though genetic factors seem at least equally important and it may equally be true that not so many women play chess simply because they're not naturally good at it; nevertheless the fact that women are generally worse at chess than men stands, regardless of its cause -- a randomly picked men will probably be better at chess than a randomly picked woman, and that's what matters in the end. Also if women are displaced from chess by culture, then what is the area they are displaced to? If women are as capable as men, then for any area dominated by men there should be an area equally dominated by women, however we see that anywhere men face women men win big time, even in the woman activities such as cooking. It makes sense from the evolutionary standpoint, women simply evolved to take care of children, guard fire and save resource consumption by being only as strong as necessarily required for this task, while men had to be stronger and smarter to do the hard job of providing food and protection.
Women also can't drive, operate machines, they can't compare even to the worst men in sports, both physical and mental such as [chess](chess.md). Women have to have separate leagues and more relaxed rules, e.g. the title Woman Grand Master (WGM) in chess has far lower requirements to obtain than regular Grand Master (GM). (According to [Elo](elo.md) rating the best woman chess player in history would have only 8% chance of winning against current best male who would have 48% chance of winning). On the International Mathematical Olympiad only 43 out of 1338 medals were obtained by females. There are too many funny cases and video compilations of women facing men in sports (watch them before they're censored lol), e.g. the infamous Vaevictis female "progaming" team or the [football](football.md) match between the US national women team (probably the best women team in the world) vs some random under 15 years old boy's team which of course the women team lost. LMAO there is even a video of 1 skinny boy beating 9 women in boxing. Of course there are arguments that worse performance of women in mental sports is caused culturally; women aren't led so much to playing chess, therefore there are fewer women in chess and so the probability of a good woman player appearing is lower. This may be partially true even though genetic factors seem at least equally important and it may equally be true that not so many women play chess simply because they're not naturally good at it; nevertheless the fact that women are generally worse at chess than men stands, regardless of its cause -- a randomly picked men will most likely be better at chess than a randomly picked woman, and that's what matters in the end. Also if women are displaced from chess by culture, then what is the area they are displaced to? If women are as capable as men, then for any area dominated by men there should be an area equally dominated by women, however we see that anywhere men face women men win big time, even in the woman activities such as cooking and fashion design. Feminists will say that men simply oppress women everywhere, but this just means that women are dominated by men everywhere, which means they are more skilled and capable at everything, there is no way out -- yes, antelope are oppressed by lions, but it's because lions are stronger than antelopes. Here we simply argue that women are weaker than men, not that oppressing women is okay -- it isn't. Furthermore if women were weaker but not by that much, we should statistically see at least occasional dominance by a woman, but we practically don't, it's really almost impossible to find a single such case in history, which indicates women are VERY SIGNIFICANTLY weaker, i.e. not something we negligible we could just ignore. Being a woman correlates to losing to a man almost perfectly, it is a great predictor, basically as strong as can appear in science. It makes sense from the evolutionary standpoint as well, women simply evolved to take care of children, guard fire and save resource consumption by being only as strong as necessarily required for this task, while men had to be stronger and smarter to do the hard job of providing food and protection.
Now because today's brainwashed reader will see this as "[sexism](sexism.md)", let us remind ourselves that this is completely OK. Women are weaker, but in a [good society](less_retarded_society.md) this doesn't matter as in a good society people don't have to compete or prove their usefulness, everyone is loved equally, weak or strong. The issue here is not pointing out our differences but perpetuating a [shitty society](capitalism.md).
Of course even though rare, well performing women may statistically appear. The issue is women are very often involved with a cult such as the [feminists](feminism.md) who waste their effort on [fighting](fight_culture.md) men instead of focusing on study and creation of real technology, and on actually loving it. They don't see technology as a beautiful field of art and science, they see it as a battlefield, a political tool to be weaponized to achieve social status, revenge on society etc., which spoils any rare specimen of a capable woman. Even capable women can't seem to understand the pure joy of [programming](programming.md), the love of creation for its own sake, they think more in terms of "learning to COOODE will get me new followers on social networks" etc. Woman mentality is biologically very different from men mentality, a woman is normally not capable of true, deep and passionate love, woman only thinks in terms of benefit, golddigging etc. (which is understandable from evolutionary point of view as women had to ensure choosing a good father for their offspring); men, even if cheating, normally tend towards deep life-long love relationships, be it with women or art. You will never find a virgin basement dweller programmer or [demoscene](demoscene.md) programmer of female sex which isn't a poser, a [hacker](hacking.md) who is happy existing in a world of his own programs without the need for approval or external reward, a woman will likely never be able to understand this.
Of course even though rare, well performing women may statistically appear (though they will practically never reach the skill of the best men). That's great, such rare specimen could do great things. The issue is such women (as all others) are very often involved with a cult such as the [feminists](feminism.md) who waste their effort on [fighting](fight_culture.md) men instead of focusing on study and creation of real technology, and on actually loving it. They don't see technology as a beautiful field of art and science, they see it as a battlefield, a political tool to be weaponized to achieve social status, revenge on society etc., which spoils any rare specimen of a capable woman. Even capable women can't seem to understand the pure joy of [programming](programming.md), the love of creation for its own sake, they think more in terms of "learning to COOODE will get me new followers on social networks" etc. Woman mentality is biologically very different from men mentality, a woman is normally not capable of true, deep and passionate love, woman only thinks in terms of benefit, golddigging etc. (which is understandable from evolutionary point of view as women had to ensure choosing a good father for their offspring); men, even if cheating, normally tend towards deep life-long love relationships, be it with women or art. You will never find a virgin basement dweller programmer or [demoscene](demoscene.md) programmer of female sex which isn't a poser, a [hacker](hacking.md) who is happy existing in a world of his own programs without the need for approval or external reward, a woman will likely never be able to understand this. This seems to be evolutionary given, but perhaps in a [better culture](less_retarded_society.md) these effects could be suppressed.
Supposed "achievements" of women after circa 2010 can't be taken seriously, [propaganda](propaganda.md) has started to tryhard and invent and overrate achievements and basically just steal achievements of men and hand them over to women. There are [token](token.md) women inserted on [soyentific](soyence.md) positions etc. (lol just watch any recent [NASA](nasa.md) mission broadcast, there is always a woman inserted in front of the camera).
Supposed "achievements" of women after circa 2010 can't be taken seriously, [propaganda](propaganda.md) has started to tryhard and invent and overrate achievements and basically just steal achievements of men and hand them over to women (not that there were any significant achievement post 2010 though). There are [token](token.md) women inserted on [soyentific](soyence.md) positions etc. (lol just watch any recent [NASA](nasa.md) mission broadcast, there is always a woman inserted in front of the camera).
Of course, [LRS](lrs.md) loves all living beings equally, even women. In order to truly love someone we have to be aware of their true nature so that we can truly love them, despite all imperfections.
**Is there even anything women are better at than men?** Well, women seem for example more peaceful or at least less violent on average (feminism of course sees this as a "weakness" and tries to change it), though they seem to be e.g. more passive-aggressive. Nevertheless there have been a few successful queens in history, women can sometimes perhaps be good in representative roles (and other simple chair-sitting jobs). They have also evolved to perform the tasks of housekeeping and care taking at which they may excel (still it seems that if men fully focus on a specific tasks, they will beat women, for example the best cooks in the world are men). Sometimes women may be preferable exactly for not being as "rough" as men, e.g. as singers, psychologists, massage therapists, sex workers etc.
**Is there even anything women are better at than men?** Well, women seem for example more peaceful or at least less violent on average (feminism of course sees this as a "weakness" and tries to change it), though they seem to be e.g. more passive-aggressive. Nevertheless there have been a few successful queens in history, women can sometimes perhaps be good in representative roles (and other simple chair-sitting jobs), in being a "symbol", which doesn't require much of any skill (a statue of a god can do the same job really). They have also evolved to perform the tasks of housekeeping and care taking at which they may excel (still it seems that if men fully focus on a specific tasks, they will beat women, for example the best cooks in the world are men). Sometimes women may be preferable exactly for not being as "rough" as men, e.g. as singers, psychologists, massage therapists, sex workers etc.
lol http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com
also https://encyclopediadramatica.online/Woman :D
**How to deal with being a woman?** Well, just as you deal with not being born Einstein, Phelps or Kasparov. It's fine to be anyone, there is no need to [fight](fight_culture.md). Try to be a good human and live a fulfilling life, you can create a lot of good.
## Men Vs Women In Numbers
Here is a comparison of men and women in numbers that are still possible to be found in already highly censored sources. Of course, the numbers aren't necessarily absolutely up to date, at the time or reading they may be slightly outdated, also keep in mind that in the future such comparisons may become much less objective due to [SJW](sjw.md) forces -- e.g. because of [trans](tranny.md) athletes in sports we may see diminishing differences between measurements of performance of men and "women" because what in the future will be called women will be just men pretending to be women.
@ -54,21 +56,17 @@ Note: It is guaranteed that [soyentific](soyence.md) BIGBRAINS will start screec
Don't!
*see also [incel](incel.md)*
*see also [incel](incel.md)/[volcel](volcel.md)*
Jerking off is the easiest solution to satisfying needs connected to fucking women. If you absolutely HAVE to get laid, save up for a prostitute, that's the easiest way and most importantly won't ruin your life. Or decide to become [gay](gay.md), that may make matters much easier. You may also potentially try to hit on some REAL ugly girl that's literally desperate for sex, but remember it has to be the ugliest, fattest landwhale that you've ever seen, it's not enough to just find a 3/10, that's still a league too high for you that will reject you unless you pay her. Also consider that if you don't pay for sex, there is a 50% chance you will randomly get sued for rape sometime during the following 30 year period. If you want a girlfriend, then rather don't. The sad truth is that to make a woman actually "love" you, as much as one is capable of doing so, you HAVE TO be an enormously evil ass that will beat her to near death, abuse her, rape her and regularly cheat on her -- that's how it is and that's what every man has to learn the hard way -- as we know, the older generation's experience cannot be communicated by words, the young generation always thinks it is somehow different and will never listen. Sadly this is simply how it is -- even if you think you have found the "special one", the one that's different, the intelligent introverted one that's nice and friendly to you, nope, she is still a woman, she won't love you unless you're a murderer dickass beating her daily. If you think getting close to her, being nice and listening to her will make her love you, you're going to hit a brick wall very hard -- this road only ever leads to a friendzone 100% of the times, you will end up carrying her purse while she's shopping without her letting you touch her ever. If you just want a nonsexual girl friend, then it's fine, but you will never make a girlfriend this way. This is not the girl's fault, she is programmed like that, blaming the girl here would be like blaming a child for overeating on candy or blaming a cat for torturing birds for fun; and remember, THE GIRL SUFFERS TOO, she is literally attracted only to those who will abuse her, it is her curse. If anyone's to blame for your suffering, it is you for being so extremely naive -- always remember you are playing with fire. You may still get a girl to stay with you or even marry you and have kids if you have something that will make her want to be with you despite not loving you, which may include being enormously rich, being so braindead to have million subscribers on YouTube, having an enormous 1 meter long dick or literally giving up all dignity and succumbing to being her lifelong slave dog doing literally everything she says when she says it, but that will still get you at most 4/10 and is probably not worth it. { From my experience this also goes for trans girls, so tough luck. ~drummyfish } All in all rather avoid all of this and pay for a prostitute, stay happy <3
Jerking off is the easiest solution to satisfying needs connected to fucking women. If you absolutely HAVE to get laid, save up for a prostitute, that's the easiest way and most importantly won't ruin your life. Or decide to become [gay](gay.md), that may make matters much easier. You may also potentially try to hit on some REAL ugly girl that's literally desperate for sex, but remember it has to be the ugliest, fattest landwhale that you've ever seen, it's not enough to just find a 3/10, that's still a league too high for you that will reject you unless you pay her. Also consider that if you don't pay for sex, there is a 50% chance you will randomly get sued for rape sometime during the following 30 year period. If you want a girlfriend, then rather don't. The sad truth is that to make a woman actually "love" you, as much as one is capable of doing so, you HAVE TO be an enormously evil ass that will beat her to near death, abuse her, rape her and regularly cheat on her -- that's how it is and that's what every man has to learn the hard way -- as we know, the older generation's experience cannot be communicated by words, the young generation always thinks it is somehow different and will never listen. Sadly this is simply how it is -- even if you think you have found the "special one", the one that's different, the intelligent introverted one that's nice and friendly to you, nope, she is still a woman, she won't love you unless you're a murderer dickass beating her daily (NOTE: we don't advocate any violence, our advice here is to simply avoid women). If you think getting close to her, being nice and listening to her will make her love you, you're going to hit a brick wall very hard -- this road only ever leads to a friendzone 100% of the times, you will end up carrying her purse while she's shopping without her letting you touch her ever. If you just want a nonsexual girl friend, then it's fine, but you will never make a girlfriend this way. This is not the girl's fault, she is programmed like that, blaming the girl here would be like blaming a child for overeating on candy or blaming a cat for torturing birds for fun; and remember, THE GIRL SUFFERS TOO, she is literally attracted only to those who will abuse her, it is her curse. If anyone's to blame for your suffering, it is you for being so extremely naive -- always remember you are playing with fire. You may still get a girl to stay with you or even marry you and have kids if you have something that will make her want to be with you despite not loving you, which may include being enormously rich, being so braindead to have million subscribers on YouTube, having an enormous 1 meter long dick or literally giving up all dignity and succumbing to being her lifelong slave dog doing literally everything she says when she says it, but that will still get you at most 4/10 and is probably not worth it. { From my experience this also goes for trans girls somehow, so tough luck. Maybe it's so even for gay men in the woman role. ~drummyfish } All in all rather avoid all of this and pay for a prostitute, buy some sex toys, watch porn and stay happy <3
## Women In Tech/Science
## Notable Women In History
Finding famous women capable in technology is almost a futile task. One of the most famous women of [modern](modern.md) tech, even though more an entrepreneur than engineer, was [Elizabeth Holmes](elizabeth_holmes.md) who, to the feminists' dismay, turned out to be a complete fraud and is now facing criminal charges. [Grace Hopper](grace_hopper) (not "grass hopper" lol) is a woman actually worth mentioning for her contribution to programming languages, though the contribution is pretty weak. [Ada Lovelace](ada_lovelace.md) cited by the feminist propaganda as the "first programmer" also didn't actually do anything besides scribbling a note about a computer completely designed by a man. This just shows how desperate the feminist attempts at finding capable women in tech are. Then there are also some individuals who just contributed to the downfall of the technology who are, in terms of gender, at least partially on the woman side, but their actual classification is actually pretty debatable -- these are monstrosities with pink hair who invented such [cancer](cancer.md) as [COCs](coc.md) and are not even worth mentioning.
In the related field of [free culture](free_culture.md) there is a notable woman, [Nina Paley](nina_paley.md), that has actually done some nice things for the promotion of free culture and also standing against the [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) fascism by publishing a series of comics with a character named Jenndra Identitty, a parody of fascist trannies.
In [science](science.md) at wide we occasionally find a capable woman, for example Marie Curie.
## Notable Women In History
WIP
Here is a list of almost all historically notable women:
- **[Ada Lovelace](ada_lovelace)**: female nobleman who didn't have to work, once scribbled a note to a notebook about a computer made by a man. For this she enjoys endless glory among [feminists](feminism.md).
- **Beth Harmon**: female who was as good at chess as men, also a completely fictional character who never existed.
@ -77,7 +75,7 @@ WIP
- **Emily Wilding Davison**: injured an innocent horse by jumping under it in a protest.
- **Helen of Troy**: cause the Troy war.
- **Judit Polgar**: best non-fictional female [chess](chess.md) player that at her peak managed the incredible feet of ranking #56 in the world while actually existing.
- **[Marie Curie](marie_curie.md)**: this one was actually probably quite skilled and based, won two Nobel Prizes, though she probably stole most of her work from her husband.
- **[Marie Curie](marie_curie.md)**: this one was actually probably quite skilled and based, won two Nobel Prizes, though she probably stole most of her work from her husband. She was quite ugly tho.
- **Olga Hepnarova**: ran over 8 people with a truck, later executed.
