@ -171,7 +171,9 @@ Bear in mind the main purpose of this quiz is for you to test your understanding
68. [Elon Musk's](elon_musk.md) net worth is about 200 billion USD, suppose he spends all his net worth on $1 prostitutes, how many times to the Moon and back would they reach? Suppose the length of a [woman](woman.md) with stretched arms is 2 meters, distance to the Moon 380000 km and neglect the fact that there are only 8 billion people on Earth. Also considering cost of normal living to be $30 per day and average life span 70 years how many lifetimes could he live off of this fortune?
69. Say we have a square digital image, i.e. a grid of pixels of resolution *N x N*. We want to scale it down to *N/2 x N/2*. For this we could subdivide the image into 2x2 blocks and out of each block take only one pixel, for example the top left one, discarding the three other pixels. However there is a danger in doing this -- for example downscaling a black and white [dithering](dithering.md) pattern (a kind of checker board) this way would result in either a completely black or completely white image, drastically changing the overall brightness of the whole image! What's this problem called and how could we prevent it?
70. Give numeric answers to queries that will follow, then compute average error against each correct answer; you want an error not greater than 3. Number of essential software freedoms defined by GNU. Year when Creative Commons non-profit was established. PDP 10 word size divided by 5 (use integer division). Century (its one-based sequential number) in which Western Roman Empire officially ended (lost its last emperor). Century in which [Nikola Tesla](tesla.md) was born. Year when first man set foot on the Moon.
71. Did you enjoy this quiz?
71. You've probably seen a game freeze and become unresponsive and then you likely heard audio get stuck too in a weird way: a short piece of sound is just played over and over like a broken vinyl record. Why does this happen? How and WHY is audio typically implemented here?
72. Mention at least one advantage and one disadvantage of using [matrices](matrix.md) to represent transformations in 3D engines.
72. Did you enjoy this quiz?
### Answers
@ -245,7 +247,9 @@ Bear in mind the main purpose of this quiz is for you to test your understanding
68. About 1052 distances to the Moon, about 260926 lives.
69. It's called [aliasing](aliasing.md), it's addressed by [antialiasing](antialiasing.md) which usually suppresses or removes the effect by increasing the sampling frequency, in our case of downscaling image this would mean replacing each of the small 2x2 blocks by an average pixel value in that block, i.e. taking into account all four samples as opposed to just one.
70. 4, 2001, 7 (the word size is 36), 5 (year 476), 19 (year 1856), 1969.
71. yes
71. Continuous audio is normally implemented with a [circular buffer](circular_buffer.md) -- that is we have a buffer of audio samples of certain size *N* and that is being played over and over, with the play head going from start to finish and then back to start again; the program has to keep updating this buffer regularly to fill it with new samples to play and it has to keep ahead of the play head. Circular buffer is nice because we don't have to shift it as a whole (which would require moving a lot of values in memory), the only thing that is moving is the play head, that's why it's used as opposed to e.g. a queue. When a game freezes, it stops operating correctly and it stops updating the audio buffer, so whatever is in it will just be played over and over in a loop.
72. Main advantage is that a matrix can hold any combination of transformations and that applying all the transformations is then simply performed by performing a single matrix multiplication which additionally may be implemented with quite fast matrix multiplication algorithms. Not only can a matrix represent for example the whole translation+rotation+scale transformation of a single object, it can hold any number of such transformations performed in any order so that we can for example precompute a matrix that will perform world transformation, camera space transformation and view space transformations all at once! That's very fast. Disadvantages of matrices may be that they can only hold affine transformations (i.e. they can't represent ANY transformation whatsoever), it may also be a bit harder to extract back the parameters of the transformation from a matrix (though it can be done) etc. Also in case of some extreme memory limitations matrices may take up more space than would be strictly needed.
@ -16,6 +16,8 @@ On one hand human languages are cool when viewed from cultural or [artistic](art
Due to this fuzziness human languages inevitably change over time no matter how hard we try to counter this, any text written a few thousand years ago is nowadays very hard to understand -- not because the old languages aren't spoken anymore, but because the original meanings of specific words, phrases and constructs are distroted by time; when learning an old language we learn what each word meant by reading its translation to some modern word, but the modern word is always more or less different. Even if it's a very simple word such as "fish", our modern word for fish means a slightly different thing than let's say ancient Roman's word for fish because it had slightly different connotations such as potential references to other things: fish for example used to be the symbol of Christianity, nowadays people don't even commonly make this connection. Fishermen were a despised class of workers, to some fish may have signified food and abundance, to others something that "smells bad", to others something or someone who's "slippery". Some words may have referred to some contemporary "[meme](meme.md)" that's been long forgotten and if some text makes the reference, we won't understand it. The word "book" for example meant something a bit different 2000 years ago than it means now: back then a book might have been just a relatively short scroll, it was expensive and people didn't read books the same way as we do today, they commonly just read them out loud to others, so "reading a book" and the word "book" itself doesn't conjure the same picture in our heads as it did back then. Or another example showing the difference between languages existing at the same time is this: while the Spanish word "perro" translates to English as "dog", the meanings aren't the same; some English speakers use the word as a synonym for "friend" but in Spanish the word can be used as an insult so shouting "perro" and "dog" in the street may lead to different (possibly completely opposite) images popping up in the heads of those who hear it. How do you describe a word precisely if you can only describe it with other imprecise words that are changing constantly? No, not even pictures will help -- if you attach the picture of a cat to the word "cat", it's still not clear what it means -- does it stand for the picture of the cat or for the cat that's in the picture, does it stand ONLY for the one cat that's in the picture or all other animals that are similar to the one in the picture? How similar? Is lion a cat? Is a toy cat or cartoon cat a cat? Or does the picture signify that anything with a fur is a cat? If it looks like cat but walks on two legs and speaks, is it still a cat? Now imagine describing a more abstract term such as *thought*, *number* or *existence*. There is no solid ground, even such essential words as "to want" or "to be" have different meanings between languages ("to be" can stand for "to exist", "to be in a place", "to temporarily have some property", "to permanently have some property" etc.). Even dictionaries admit defeat and are happy with having circular definitions because there aren't any foundations to build upon, circular definitions are inevitable, dictionaries just help you connect fuzzy concepts together. All of this extends to tenses, moods, cases and everything else. This can be very well seen e.g. with people interpreting old texts such as the Bible, for example some say [Jesus](jesus.md) claimed to be the son of God while others reject it, saying that even if he stated the sentence, it actually wasn't meant literally as it was a commonly used phrase that meant something else -- these people will argue about everything and they can comfortably interpret the same text in completely opposite ways. The point is that we just can't know.
{ Just one more of other countless examples I recently encountered: it used to be generally believed that [Jesus](jesus.md) was crucified so that he was nailed on the cross through his palms, however it was shown this wouldn't work and also other evidence showed people were nailed more in the arms, in a way that would hold the weight of the body but wouldn't hit the artery. The confusion came from translation -- the Greek word for "hand" also includes part of an arm, i.e. the word for hand in Greek is different from the word hand in some other languages. ~drummyfish }
In addition there are ALWAYS great many hidden implicit assumptions that both communicating sides have to share to be able to communicate (and these can only be assured by many years of learning, spent in the same environment) -- for example if I tell someone "Drive to the city and buy food.", in fact I mean something like "Right now walk with your feet to our car, open the door, sit in, take the wheel in your hands, start the car, drive only on the road with your eyes open, ..."; the guy can technically satisfy my order by waiting 10 years, then driving a truck through forests with eyes closed over the whole globe and back. Just as it's impossible to perfectly define all words, it is impossible to explicitly recount all assumptions. Though the mentioned example is exaggerated, it shows an ever present phenomenon we have to deal with, a phenomenon which can cause misunderstanding or be easily abused.
This is the grand issue that common people almost universally overlook, most will naively think that with careful effort it is possible to express oneself so clearly that others simply won't be able to misunderstand -- this is sadly false, even with most carefully crafted sentences language always extremely easily allows any word to be twisted by politicians to anything they want, it destroys old knowledge and prevents us from communicating with clarity and recording ideas so that they would last into the future. This damnation of language plagues every book, authors constantly complain "I should have rather used this and that word" but that wouldn't even help, it's impossible to say something so as to not be misunderstood because human language is a weak, crippled tool just based on shouting weird sounds in hopes someone will get a vague idea of what's going on in your head. Due to this limitation of language it is absolutely worthless to discuss anything if after 5 minutes you don't come to agreement, the discussion will lead nowhere, it's best to just leave it at communication being impossible because even if linguistically you speak the same language, you cannot communicate correct meanings, even words like "is", "when", "bad" or "will" will have absolutely different meanings, you would have to define every word of every sentence and then every word of every new sentence you produce for 1000 years until you come to circular definitions when you'll still be disagreeing but won't even be able to waste time further.
@ -24,5 +26,4 @@ This issue is very hard to solve, maybe impossible. It seems that due to the ext
{ The only idea of a solution on how to make a "mathematically precise" human language for real world communication is the following. Firstly make a mathematical model of some artificial world that's similar to ours, for simplicity we can now just consider something like a 2D grid with differently colored cells, i.e. something like a [cellular automaton](cellular_automaton.md). The world changes in steps and each cell can "talk", i.e. at any frame it can emit a text string. Now make a language that's precisely defined in this world; if the world is simple, it's pretty doable e.g. like this: write a function in some programming language that takes the world and check if what the cells are saying classifies as your language used in a correct way within this world (so the function just returns *true/false*, nothing else is needed). Now this single function mathematically defines your language -- by looking at your function's source code anyone can derive the absolutely correct meaning of any word or sentence because he can see how the function checks whether that word of phrase is used correctly, he will know exactly which situations fit given sentence and which don't. Now the final step is only to find correspondence between the real life and your simplified mathematical world, e.g. that cells represent humans and so on (but this will have shortcomings, e.g. our simple world will make it difficult or impossible to talk about body parts since cells have none; also making the connection between the mathematical world and real world relies on intuition). ~drummyfish }
{ Yet another, maybe more practical idea would be to create a set of very few core words -- let's say 100, which we would try to define extremely precisely by all the current imperfect means but with very elevated effort, i.e. each word would have a detailed description, translations to 20 other natural languages, positive and negative examples, pictures attached etc. Then the rest of the language would be defined only using these core words. But maybe it wouldn't work -- the language would be possibly a bit more stable but would eventually degenerate as well. ~drummyfish }
{ Yet another, maybe more practical idea would be to create a set of very few core words -- let's say 100, which we would try to define extremely precisely by all the current imperfect means but with very elevated effort, i.e. each word would have a detailed description, translations to 20 other natural languages, positive and negative examples, pictures attached etc. Then the rest of the language would be defined only using these core words. But maybe it wouldn't work -- the language would be possibly a bit more stable but would eventually degenerate as well. ~drummyfish }
@ -45,12 +45,12 @@ As perhaps the most influential man in history whose image has been twisted, use
- **His father** is sometimes theorized, by historians, to have been a roman soldier Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera to whom point some of the clues and whose grave has been found in Germany.
- Bible gives his **genealogy back to Adam**: Luke (however with some disagreement with Matthew) recounts all ancestors of Jesus back to God (who created Adam) -- Jesus is 77th in row here.
- His **profession** probably wasn't a "carpenter" in the sense of "working mainly with wood", he was more likely a mason/stonecutter/builder -- the translation in Bible is firstly inaccurate and using wood as a material wasn't that common back then. He was likely a very poor laborer whose life conditions may have been even worse than that of some slaves living in bigger cities.
- **He was a [Jew](jew.md)**, he was circumcised, read Jewish scriptures, believed in Jewish God, kept to Jewish rituals and traditions -- it's obvious but often overlooked fact that's been further obscured by the church and Christian culture. There was no other religion than various branches of Judaism back then, he didn't come with the idea of starting a brand new religion, he rather saw himself as a Jewish messiah foretold by the Jewish texts, walking what he believed to be the true way of the religion that was all around back then.
- **He was a [Jew](jew.md)**, he was circumcised, read Jewish scriptures, believed in Jewish God and prophecies, kept to Jewish rituals and traditions -- it's an obvious but often overlooked fact that's been further obscured by the church and Christian culture. There was no other religion than various branches of Judaism back then, Jesus didn't come with the idea of starting a brand new religion, he rather saw himself as a Jewish messiah foretold by the Jewish texts, walking what he believed to be the true way of the religion that was all around back then and which he was part of. Today's Christianity is probably something Jesus wouldn't even embrace -- parallels to this kind of evolution of religions may very well be seen in the world of non-religious ideologies as well, for example see the hostility and differences between [free software](free_software.md) and [open $ource](open_source.md) that emerged just in recent decades: the [founder](rms.md) of free software himself highly disapproves of open source, open source already breaks many of the essential premises and rules of original free software movement, despite it all being very recent and having everything recorded, even in live memories of people -- now imagine this evolution stretched to 2000 years, with no reliable records of the original events, with politics and corruption mixed in and so on.
- **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**.
- There are highly **controversial theories that he had kids** with Mary Magdalene and that his bloodline survives until today (Dan Brown has famously written some books about it).
- ...
**Is Jesus God?** Or was he just his son? Or is God and Jesus the same? This seems to not actually be easy to answer, different people will tell you different things, some point to passages in Bible where they believe he literally says he is the God, others say the translation is not precise or even if it is that it doesn't matter (anyone can say really say he's a God) etcetc. The whole thing around holy trinity and so on is not easy to resolve objectively (some Muslims have even been entertained by this fact that Christians can't even get to agree on who their god is), but basically most Christians pray to Jesus, call him "our Lord and Savior" and generally treat him as if he is the same as God, so we can really see him that way.
**Is Jesus God?** Or was he just his son? Or is God and Jesus the same? What about the "holy spirit"? This seems to not actually be easy to answer, different people will tell you different things, some point to passages in Bible where they believe he literally says he is the God, others say the translation is not precise or even that it doesn't matter (anyone can really say he's a God) etcetc. The whole thing around holy trinity and so on is not easy to resolve objectively (some Muslims have even been entertained by this fact that Christians can't even get to agree on who their god is), but basically most Christians pray to Jesus, call him "our Lord and Savior" and generally treat him as if he was the same as God, so we can really see him that way.
*Not to be [confused](often_confused.md) with [liberalism](liberalism.md).*
Libertarianism is a [harmful](harmful.md) political ideology whose definition is quite broad and not super clear, but which in essence gives highest priority to individual "liberty" and seeks to minimize the role of state (but typically without wanting to remove it). A bit like [anarchism](anarchism.md), libertarianism has many branches which frequently greatly diverge and even oppose each other, some are called more "leftist", some more "rightist" -- libertarianism usually tries to pretend to be focusing on the people, i.e. their "liberties", pseudoequality ("equality before law", "equality of opportunity", ...), oppose "the kind of corporate [capitalism](capitalism.md) we have today", believing some kind of "saner" version of it can work (which it can't), and claims that people can form a working, decentralized society by loose associations, however, unlike anarchism which opposes state and any kind of hierarchy altogether (with [true anarchism](anpac.md) also opposing any violence), libertarianism typically wants to preserve some functions of the state such as courts and justice for protection against crime, and it acknowledges property as a sacred thing that may even be defended by violence, i.e. libertarianism just replaces the rule of states by rule of private subjects, getting quite close to ["anarcho" capitalism](ancap.md), the stupidest idea yet conceived. Libertarians basically adopts the **"law of the jungle"** or **"wild west"** mindset. So it's [shit](shit.md), do not subscribe.
Libertarianism, also known as the *redneck ideology*, is a [harmful](harmful.md) political ideology whose definition is quite broad and not super clear, but which in essence gives highest priority to individual "liberty" and seeks to minimize the role of state (but typically without wanting to remove it). A bit like [anarchism](anarchism.md), libertarianism has many branches which frequently greatly diverge and even oppose each other, some are called more "leftist", some more "rightist" -- libertarianism usually tries to pretend to be focusing on the people, i.e. their "liberties", pseudoequality ("equality before law", "equality of opportunity", ...), oppose "the kind of corporate [capitalism](capitalism.md) we have today", believing some kind of "saner" version of it can work (which it can't), and claims that people can form a working, decentralized society by loose associations, however, unlike anarchism which opposes state and any kind of hierarchy altogether (with [true anarchism](anpac.md) also opposing any violence), libertarianism typically wants to preserve some functions of the state such as courts and justice for protection against crime, and it acknowledges property as a sacred thing that may even be defended by violence, i.e. libertarianism just replaces the rule of states by rule of private subjects, getting quite close to ["anarcho" capitalism](ancap.md), the stupidest idea yet conceived. Libertarians basically adopts the **"law of the jungle"** or **"wild west"** mindset. So it's [shit](shit.md), do not subscribe.
The [color](color.md) associated with libertarianism is yellow, which symbolizes piss.
@ -4,13 +4,26 @@ LRS wiki, also Less Retarded Wiki, is a [public domain](public_domain.md) ([CC0]
LRS wiki was started by [drummyfish](drummyfish.md) on November 3 2021 as a way of recording and sharing his views, experience and knowledge about technology, as well as for creating a completely public domain educational resource and account of current society for future generations. It was forked from so called "based wiki" at a point when all the content on it had been made by drummyfish, so at this point LRS wiki is 100% drummyfish's own work; over time it became kind of a snapshot of drummyfish's brain and so the wiki doesn't allow contributions (but allows and encourages [forks](fork.md)).
Some distinguishing features of LRS wiki that make it much better than other wikis include:
- Everything is absolutely and completely public domain under CC0 and there appears nothing under "fair use" so you can blindly copy-paste any piece of text or code and do absolutely whatever you want with it, without having to give credit or maintain some back link or any similar kind of [bullshit](bullshit.md) insanity.
- There are no images, only [ASCII art](ascii_art.md), making it very small in size, free and readable on devices that can only display text.
- Use of [Unicode](unicode.md) is minimized to absolutely bare minimum so you'll probably never encounter problems related to encoding -- again, anything that can display ASCII will be able to read the wiki.
- There is absolutely no moderation, no [code of censorship](coc.md) and the wiki doesn't adhere to cultural standards of [21st century](21st_century.md) -- for example it never uses "gender neutral" pronouns -- it rather tries to focus on real issues and reflect truth.
- There are no [SJW](sjw.md), [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) or [rightist](right.md) editors.
- Articles try to be written somewhat well, they aim to actually help most people rather than be an ugly dump of every information ever discovered about the subject.
- Articles often contain simple runnable code examples, mostly in plain [C](c.md) code aligned with LRS principles, which can normally just be copy pasted into a file and compiled without additional libraries.
- There are no [ads](marketing.md) of course and there will never be a single one, it is impossible for LRS to contain any ad just as it is impossible for human to breathe water.
- It is not a website, websites is just one form of the wiki -- it exists in other formats such as plaintext on [gopher](gopher.md), one long pdf document, one long HTML document, collection of markdown files etc.
- plus much more :)
Over time, being written solely by drummyfish without much self censorship and "language filtering", the wiki also became something like drummyfish's raw brain dump with all the thoughts and moods averaged over the time span of writing the wiki -- reading through it makes you see relatively faithfully how drummyfish internally thinks (e.g. you see anticapitalist rants everywhere because these annoying thoughts are just constantly bothering drummyfish, whatever he's thinking about) -- this can make many people vomit but it's a kind of experiment and some even liked it, so it stays up. No one is forced to read it and CC0 ensures anyone can shape it into anything better hopefully.
The wiki can also additionally be seen as a dirty collection of drummyfish's cheatsheets, links, code snippets, [jokes](jokes.md), attempts at [ASCII art](ascii_art.md), vent rants etcetc. So the whole thing is like a digital swamp that one might see as a kind of retarded [art](art.md) that combines many things together: technical, cultural, personal, objective and subjective, beautiful and ugly. It might also be viewed as a shitpost or [meme](meme.md) taken too far. It's just its own thing.
The wiki is similar to and was inspired by other wikis and similar works, for example in its topics and technical aspects it is similar to the earliest (plain HTML) versions of [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) and [wikiwikiweb](wikiwikiweb.md). In tone and political incorrectness it is similar to [Encyclopedia Dramatica](dramatica.md), but unlike Dramatica LRS is a "serious" project.
LRS wiki is currently written as a collection of [Markdown](markdown.md) files that use a few [shell scripts](shell_script.md) that convert the whole thing to HTML for the web (and can also produce txt and pdf version of it), i.e. it doesn't use any wiki engine or bloated static site generator. There is a plan to rewrite the wiki in [comun](comun.md).
**Technology "powering" LRS wiki** is plain and simple, it uses no frameworks or static site generators, the wiki is currently written as a collection of [Markdown](markdown.md) files that use a few [shell scripts](shell_script.md) that convert the whole thing to HTML for the web (and can also produce txt and pdf version of it), i.e. it doesn't use any wiki engine or bloated static site generator. There is a plan to maybe rewrite the wiki in [comun](comun.md).
@ -173,7 +173,7 @@ There is a famous [encyclopedia](encyclopedia.md) of integer sequences at https:
**All [natural numbers](natural_number.md) are [interesting](interesting.md)**: there is a [fun](fun.md) [proof](proof.md) by contradiction of this. Suppose there exists a set of uninteresting numbers which is a subset of natural numbers; then the smallest of these numbers is interesting by being the smallest uninteresting number -- we've arrived at contradiction, therefore a set of uninteresting numbers cannot exist.
TODO: what is the best number? maybe top 10? would 10 be in top 10?
TODO: what is the best number? maybe top 10? would 10 be in top 10? what's the first number that's in top itself?
In [computer graphics](graphics.md) palette is a set of possible colors that can be displayed, the term usually refers to a selected smaller subset of all colors that can in theory be displayed (large sets of colors tend to be called [color spaces](color_space.md) rather than palettes). Nowadays mainstream computers are powerful enough to work with over 6 million 24bit [RBG](rbg.md) colors (so called True Color) practically without limitations so the use of palettes is no longer such a huge thing, but with resource-limited machines, such as [embedded](embedded.md) devices and older computers, the use of palettes is sometimes necessary or at least offers many advantages (e.g. saving a lot of memory). Nevertheless palettes find uses even in "[modern](modern.md)" graphics, e.g. in the design of image formats that save space. Palettes are also greatly important in [pixel art](pixel_art.md) as an artistic choice.
In [computer graphics](graphics.md) palette is a set of possible [colors](color.md) that can be displayed, the term usually refers to a selected smaller subset of all colors that can in theory be displayed (large sets of colors tend to be called [color spaces](color_space.md) rather than palettes). Nowadays mainstream computers are powerful enough to work with over 6 million 24bit [RBG](rbg.md) colors (so called True Color) practically without limitations so the use of palettes is no longer such a huge thing, but with resource-limited machines, such as [embedded](embedded.md) devices and older computers, the use of palettes is sometimes necessary or at least offers many advantages (e.g. saving a lot of memory). Nevertheless palettes find uses even in "[modern](modern.md)" graphics, e.g. in the design of image formats that save space. Palettes are also greatly important in [pixel art](pixel_art.md) as an artistic choice.
Palettes usually contain a few to few thousand colors and the number is normally a power of 2, i.e. we see palettes with number of colors being 8, 16, 256, 2048, etc. -- this has advantages such as efficiency (fully utilizing color indices, keeping memory aligned etc.). Palettes can be general purpose or specialized (for example some image formats such as [GIF](gif.md) create a special palette for every individual image so as to best preserve its colors). Palettes can also be explicitly stored (the palette colors are stored somewhere in the memory) or implicit (the color can somehow be derived from its index, e.g. the [565](565.md) palette).
@ -70,9 +70,21 @@ Besides the standard library there will also exist many third party [libraries](
## History
The first higher level programming language was probably Plankalkul made by Konrad Zuse in 1942.
WIP
TODO
Very early computers were programmed directly in [machine code](machine_code.md), there weren't even any assemblers and assembly languages, programmers had to do things like search for opcodes in computer manuals, manually encode data and get this all onto punch cards or in better case use some primitive interface such as so called "front panel" to program the computer. These kinds of machine languages that were used back then are now called **first generation languages**.
The **first higher level programming language** was probably Plankalkul made by Konrad Zuse some time shortly after 1942, though it didn't run on any computer, it was only in stage of specification -- implementation of it would only be made much later, in 1975. It was quite advanced -- it had [functions](function.md), arrays, exceptions and some advanced data structures, though it for example didn't support [recursive](recursion.md) calls.
The **first [assembly](assembly.md) language** was created by Maurice Wilkes and his team for the [EDSAC](edsac.md) computer released in 1949. It used single letters for instructions. Assembly languages are called **second generation languages**, they further help with programming, though still at very low level. Programmers were now able to write text (as opposed to plain numbers), instructions got human friendlier names and assemblers did some simple but tedious tasks automatically, but it's still it was pretty tedious to write in assembly and programs were still machine specific, non-portable.
Only the **third generation languages** made the step of adding [abstraction](abstraction.md) to achieve a level of comfortable development and portability -- programmers would be able to e.g. write algebraic expressions that would be automatically translated to specific instructions by the language compiler; it would be enough to write the program once and then automatically compile it for different CPUs, without the need to rewrite it. **[Fortran](fortran.md)** is considered to be first such language, made in 1957 by [IBM](ibm.md). Fortran would develop and change throughout the years, it was standardized and added more "features", it became quite popular and is still used even nowadays, it is known for being very fast.
Perhaps the greatest event was invention of the **[C](c.md) language** in 1972 by Dennis Ritchie and Brian Kerninghan who used it as a tool for their [Unix](unix.md) operating system. The early version C was quite different from today's C but the language as a whole is undoubtedly the most important one in history -- it's not the most elegant one but it achieved the exactly correct mixture of features, simplicity and correct design choices such as allowing freedom and flexibility of implementation that would in turn lead to extreme efficiency and adoption by many, to standardization, further leading to many implementations and their high [optimization](optimization.dm) which in turned increased C's popularity yet more and so on. From this point on new languages would typically in one way or another try to iterate on C.
Also in 1972 the **first [esoteric programming language](esolang.md)** -- INTERCAL -- was created as kind of parody language. This would create a dedicated community of people creating similar "funny" language, which is highly active even today.
YouTube (also JewTube { Lol jewtube.com actually exists. ~drummyfish} or just YT) is a huge, [censored](censorship.md) [proprietary](proprietary.md) [capitalist](capitalism.md) video [consuming](consumerism.md) "website"/platform, since 2006 seized by the [Google](google.md) terrorist organization. It has become the monopoly "video content platform", everyone uploads his videos there and so everyone is forced to use that awful shitty site from time to time to view some tutorial or whatnot. YouTube is based on content consumerism, aggressive predatory marketing, [copyright trolling](copyright_troll.md), propaganda and general abuse of its [useds](used.md) -- it is financed from surveillance-powered ads as well as sponsor propaganda inserted into videos. Alternatives to YouTube, such as [bitchute](bitchute.md), the "rightist" YouTube, never really caught on very much -- YouTube is sadly synonymous with online videos just as Google is synonymous with searching the web. This is of course extremely, extremely, extremely, extremely bad.
YouTube (also JewTube { Lol jewtube.com actually exists. ~drummyfish} or just YT) is a huge, [censored](censorship.md) [proprietary](proprietary.md) [capitalist](capitalism.md) video [consuming](consumerism.md) "website"/platform, since 2006 seized by the [Google](google.md) terrorist organization. It has become the monopoly "video content platform", everyone uploads his videos there and so everyone is forced to use that awful shitty site from time to time to view some tutorial or whatnot. YouTube is based on content consumerism, aggressive predatory [marketing](marketing.md), [copyright trolling](copyright_troll.md), propaganda and general abuse of its [useds](used.md) -- it is financed from surveillance-powered ads as well as sponsor propaganda inserted into videos. The place is extremely [toxic](toxic.md), radioactive and more dangerous than Chernobyl in terms of probability of acquiring brain [cancer](cancer.md), the propagandists ("content creators") are unbelievably ugly abominations you must start to hate even from just seeing a video thumbnail. Alternatives to YouTube, such as [bitchute](bitchute.md), the "rightist" YouTube, never really caught on very much -- YouTube is sadly synonymous with online videos just as Google is synonymous with searching the web. This is of course extremely, extremely, extremely, extremely bad.
Just one of countless damages YouTube has done to society is establishing videos as standard medium of any form of communication and information storage -- back in the day Internet was mostly text-based, sometimes there was an image or video of course, but only when needed. Since YouTube's rise to fame a lot of information has just moved to videos, even that which suffer by this format, e.g. books, announcements, notes, presentations, tutorials, pure audio and so on. All of this [bloat](bloat.md) of course makes the information hard to index and search, store, process, view on weak devices, it wastes enormous amounts of bandwidth, computing power and so forth. Thanks YouTube.
