Update

cc0.md

@@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ CC0 is recommended by [LRS](lrs.md) for both programs and other art -- however f
 
 It's nice that CC0 became quite widely used and you can find a lot of material under this waiver, but **BEWARE**, if you find something under CC0, do verify it's actually valid, normies often don't know what CC0 means and happily post derivative works of proprietary stuff under CC0.
 
-Some **things under CC0** include Librivox audiobooks, [Dusk OS](duskos.md), [Wikidata](wikidata.md) database, great many things on sites like [Wikimedia Commons](wikimedia_commons.md), [opengameart](oga.md) (see e.g. Kenney), Blendswap, freesound etc., whole [Esolang Wiki](esolang.md), OSdev Wiki (since 2011), [Encyclopedia Dramatica](dramatica.md) (EDIT: seems like they dropped it now :D Internet archive has the old CC0 version still), [LRS](lrs.md) software ([Anarch](anarch.md), [small3dlib](small3dlib.md), [raycastlib](raycastlib.md), [SAF](saf.md), [comun](comun.md)) and [LRS wiki](lrs_wiki.md), [books](books.md) like *The Pig and the Box* (anti [DRM](drm.md) child story) or *[Cost of Freedom](cost_of_freedom.md)*, some [fonts](font.md) by dotcolon, Lix (libre game), evlisp minimalist [Lisp](lisp.md) (from book "Lisp From Nothing") and many others.
+Some **things under CC0** include Librivox audiobooks, [Dusk OS](duskos.md), [Wikidata](wikidata.md) database, Lichess chess database, great many things on sites like [Wikimedia Commons](wikimedia_commons.md), [opengameart](oga.md) (see e.g. Kenney), Blendswap, freesound etc., whole [Esolang Wiki](esolang.md), OSdev Wiki (since 2011), [Encyclopedia Dramatica](dramatica.md) (EDIT: seems like they dropped it now :D Internet archive has the old CC0 version still), [LRS](lrs.md) software ([Anarch](anarch.md), [small3dlib](small3dlib.md), [raycastlib](raycastlib.md), [SAF](saf.md), [comun](comun.md)) and [LRS wiki](lrs_wiki.md), [books](books.md) like *The Pig and the Box* (anti [DRM](drm.md) child story) or *[Cost of Freedom](cost_of_freedom.md)*, some [fonts](font.md) by dotcolon, Lix (libre game), evlisp minimalist [Lisp](lisp.md) (from book "Lisp From Nothing") and many others.

crypto.md

@@ -8,7 +8,9 @@ The word *crypto* in *crpytocurrency* **doesn't imply that the currency provides
 
 # History
 
-TODO
+As always, the concepts used to implement cryptocurrencies aren't very new, many date back to [80s](80s.md) and beyond, but what brought cryptocurrencies to practice and started the crypto age was [bitcoin](bitcoin.md), created at the beginning of 2009 by a guy who on the Internet calls himself Satoshi Nakamoto, but whose real identity is still not known. He wrote a paper about bitcoin and implemented it. Bitcoin became huge, many people who initially invested in it (including Nakamoto) became millionaires overnight, and many other cryptocurrencies came to existence to try to compete with and/or improve on bitcoin. This includes even semi humorous cryptocurrencies such as [Dogecoin](dogecoin.md), but mainly [Monero](monero.md), a crypto created around 2014 that improves on the "privacy" issues with bitcoin and which became quite popular.
+
+TODO: moar
 
 # How It Works
 

cyberbullying.md

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+# Cyber"bullying"
+
+Cyberbullying doesn't exist, you can just walk away from the screen (unicornically). Actually you don't even have to do that, just turn off the Internet, or literally just turn off the chat software or whatever.

encyclopedia.md

@@ -72,3 +72,4 @@ Here is a list of notable encyclopedias, focused on general knowledge English la
 - [Jargon File](jargon_file.md)
 - [wikiwikiweb](wikiwikiweb.md)
 - [memopedia](memopedia.md)
+- the incredibly fucking deep [soyjak](soyjak.md) rabbithole

freedom.md

@@ -2,12 +2,16 @@
 
 *Only when man loses everything he becomes actually free. Freedom is about letting go.*
 
-Freedom denotes the possibility to act as one desires without suffering negative consequences.
+Freedom denotes the possibility to act as one desires without suffering negative consequences. The opposite of freedom is [slavery](slavery.md).
 
 TODO: more
 
 **In society it is impossible to have freedom while also safely ensuring it won't be abused at the same time.** You have to choose one or the other.
 
+**Freedom implies elimination of responsibility.** Beginners often erroneously think that freedom must come with responsibility, but investing about a minute of thinking reveals the opposite is in fact true. Responsibility implies punishment for bad decisions, even if the punishment is only internal (feeling bad about what one has done etc.) and a threat of punishment for some decision effectively removes the option, i.e. ad absurdum responsibility is like having a man pointing gun at you, saying "don't you dare do A, or else" -- you are not physically prevented from doing A, but the threat effectively makes you not be able to choose A, reducing freedom. The logic of "freedom with responsibility" therefore argues than for example people under oppressive totalitarian regimes have [freedom of speech](free_speech.md) because their mouth is not physically sewed to prevent them from speaking, they can really say anything they want, they just have to accept they will be executed along with their whole family if they say something bad.
+
+NOTE: One may ask how will [LRS](lrs.md) deal with the above? If we argue for true freedom, do we argue for feeling no responsibility even for things like murder etc.? The answer is basically this: to make people not do bad things don't remove their freedom to do bad things, keep their freedom to do anything while making them want to choose to do good things.
+
 People who seriously look for attaining mental/spiritual freedom often resort to [asceticism](asceticism.md), at least for a period of time (e.g. [Buddha](buddha.md)) -- this is very commonly not done with the intent of actually giving up all materialistic pleasures forevermore, but rather to let go of the [dependency](dependency.md) on the them, to know and see that one really can live without them if needed so that one becomes less afraid of losing them, which is often what internally enslaves us. Without even realizing it we are nowadays addicted to many things (games, social media, overeating, shiny gadgets, ...) like an alcoholic is to booze; it is not necessarily bad to drink alcohol, but it is bad to be addicted to it -- to free himself the alcoholic needs to abstain from alcohol for a long period of time. Our chains are often within ourselves: for example we often don't have the freedom to say what we want to say because that might e.g. ruin our career, preventing us from enjoying our expensive addictions -- once we don't worry about this, we gain the freedom to say what we want. Once you rid yourself of fear of jail, you gain the freedom to do potentially illegal things, and so on. Additionally going through the experience of letting go of pleasures very often opens up your eyes and mind, new thoughts emerge and one reevaluates what's really important in life.
 
 Freedom is something promised by most (if not all) ideologies/movements/etc.; this is because without further specification the term is so wide it says very little -- the very basic thing to know is, of course, that **there is no such thing as general freedom**; one kind of freedom restricts other kinds of freedom -- for example so called freedom of market says that a rich capitalist is free to do whatever he wants, which leads to him enslaving people, killing the freedom of those people.

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.
 
+It is conjectured that all furries are [gay](gay.md).
+
 { 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

often_confused.md

@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ There are many terms that are very similar and can many times be used interchang
 - **[analog](analog.md)** vs **[mechanical](mechanical.md)** vs **non-electronic**
 - **[anarchy](anarchism.md)** vs **[chaos](chaos.md)**
 - **[argument](argument.md)** vs **[parameter](parameter.md)** vs **formal parameter**
-- **[array](array.md)** vs **[list](list.md)** vs **[tuple](tuple.md)** vs **[string](string.md)** vs **[set](set.md)** vs **[class](class.md)** vs **[multiset](multiset.md)**
+- **[array](array.md)** vs **[list](list.md)** vs **[vector](vector.md)** vs **[tuple](tuple.md)** vs **[string](string.md)** vs **[set](set.md)** vs **[class](class.md)** vs **[multiset](multiset.md)**
 - **[ASCII](ascii.md)** vs **[plain text](plain_text.md)** vs **[Unicode](unicode.md)** vs **[UTF](utf.md)** vs **[ANSI](ansi.md)**
 - **[ASCII art](ascii_art.md)** vs **[ANSI art](ansi_art.md)** vs **[Unicode](unicode.md) art**
 - **[assembler](assembler.md)** vs **[assembly](assembly.md)** vs **[machine code](machine_code.md)**
@@ -87,6 +87,7 @@ There are many terms that are very similar and can many times be used interchang
 - **[globalism](globalism.md)** vs **[globalization](globalization.md)**
 - **[goniometry](goniometry.md)** vs **[trigonometry](trigonometry.md)**
 - **[gradient noise](gradient_noise.md)** vs **[value noise](value_noise.md)**
+- **heading** vs **header**
 - **[hyperlink](hyperlink.md)** vs **[link](link.md)** vs **[URI](uri.md)** vs **[URL](url.md)**
 - **[ID](id.md)** vs **[index](index.md)** vs **[token](token.md)** vs **[hash](hash.md)** vs **[handle](handle.md)** vs **[identifier](identifier.md)**
 - **[ideology](ideology.md)** vs **[philosophy](philosophy.md)** vs **[religion](religion.md)** vs **[paradigm](paradigm.md)**
@@ -108,6 +109,7 @@ There are many terms that are very similar and can many times be used interchang
 - **[multisampling](multisampling.md)** vs **[supersampling](supersampling.md)**
 - **[nationalism](nationalism.md)** vs **[patriotism](patriotism.md)**
 - **[NP](p_vs_np.md)** vs **[NP-hard](np_hard.md)** vs **[NP-complete](np_complete.md)**
+- **[overflow](overflow.md)** vs **[wrap around](wrap.md)**
 - **[paging](paging.md)** vs **[virtual memory](virtual_memory.md)**
 - **[path tracing](path_tracing.md)** vs **[ray tracing](ray_tracing.md)** vs **[ray casting](raycasting.md)**
 - **[principal square root](principal_sqrt.md)** vs **[square root](sqrt.md)** (especially when defining [i](i.md))
@@ -121,7 +123,6 @@ There are many terms that are very similar and can many times be used interchang
 - **[strategy](strategy.md)** vs **[tactics](tactics.md)**
 - **[Unicode](unicode.md)** vs **[UTF](utf.md)**
 - **[webpage](webpage.md)** vs **[website](website.md)**
-- **[wrap around](wrap.md)** vs **[overflow](overflow.md)**
 - ...
 
 ## See Also

science.md

@@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ TODO: some noice tree of sciences or smth
 
 **There is no simple objective definition of a strict science** -- the definition of science is hugely arbitrary, political and changes with development of society, technology, culture, changes in government and so on. Science should basically stand for the most rational and objective knowledge we're able to practically obtain about something, however the specific criteria for this are unclear and have to be agreed on -- even if we leave out malicious intents at shaping the definition of science and only consider a completely honest definition of "rational effort", what's "rational" is highly subjective -- What level of confidence is high enough to us? Which axioms to accept? Which methods do we believe to be reliable enough? To believe a mathematical proof is correct, is it enough if 5 experts check there is no mistake? Or does it have to be 20 experts? Even among top scientists there are always subjective opinions. The [scientific method](scientific_method.md) is evolving and there are many debates over it, with some even stating that there can be no universal method of science. The [p-value](p_value.md) used to determine whether measurements are statistically significant has basically just an arbitrarily set value for what's considered a "safe enough" result. Some say that if a research is to be trusted, it has to be [peer reviewed](peer_review.md), i.e. that what's scientific has to be approved by chosen experts -- this may be not just because people can make mistakes but also because in current highly competitive society there appears science [bloat](bloat.md), obscurity and tendencies to push fake research and purposeful deception, i.e. our politics and culture are already defining what science is. However the stricter the criteria for science, the more monopolized, centralized, controlled and censored it becomes.
 
+**Summary of the western-style science**, for those who never attended elementary school or got amnesia or something, is basically this: science uses so called *scientific method* to acquire knowledge. Scientific method works more or less like this: first we formulate a hypothesis, i.e. something we think might be true and which we want to test (for example: "men are on average smarter than women"). Then we perform experiments and observations, i.e. collect data (for example we make men and women take IQ tests). Then we evaluate the data and basically compute how likely it is, according to the data, that our hypothesis holds. More precisely we compute so called *p-value* which is basically a probability of obtaining the data we got provided that our hypothesis is NOT true (we call this a *null hypothesis*), i.e. we say "the data look like this either because our hypothesis is true or by pure chance, while the probability of the latter is X (given by p-value)". If the probability *X* is very very low, we are basically saying that either our hypothesis is correct, or we witnessed a miracle (e.g. men scored 10 points higher average on IQ tests than women either because they're really smarter or by all of them being extremely lucky that day, probability of which is extremely low). This is how things are "proven" in western science. However notice that the possibility of a statistical miracle is always there and so **with scientific method we can never prove a hypothesis true with absolute certainty**, we can only approach high level of confidence.
+
 **Science is not almighty** as brainwashed internet [euphoric](atheism.md) kids like to think, that's a completely false idea fed to them by the overlords who abuse "science" ([soyence](soyence.md)) for control of the masses, as religion was and is still used -- soyence is the new religion [nowadays](21st_century.md). Yes, (true) science is great, it is an awesome tool, but it is just that -- a tool, usable for SOME tasks, not a [silver bullet](silver_bullet.md) that could be used for everything. What can be discovered by science is in fact quite limited, exactly because it purposefully LIMITS itself only to accept what CAN be proven and so remains silent about everything else (which however doesn't mean there lies no knowledge or value in the everything else or in other approaches to learning) -- see e.g. Godel's incompleteness theorems that state it is mathematically impossible to really prove validity of mathematics, or the nice compendium of all knowability limitations at http://humanknowledge.net/Thoughts.html. For many (if not most) things we deal in life science is either highly impractical (do you need to fund a peer reviewed research to decide what movie you'll watch today?) or absolutely useless (setting one's meaning of life, establishing one's basic moral values, placing completely random bets, deciding to trust or distrust someone while lacking scientifically relevant indicators for either, answering metaphysical questions such as "Why is there ultimately something rather than nothing?", anything that cannot be falsified, if only for practical reasons etc.). So don't be Neil de Grass puppet and stop treating science as your omnipotent pimplord, it's just a hammer useful for bashing some specific nails.
 
 **What should we accept as "legit" science?** [We](lrs.md), in the context of our [ideal society](less_retarded_society.md), argue for NOT creating a strict definition of science, just as we are for example against "formalizing morality" with laws etc. There are no hard lines between good and evil, fun and boring, useful and useless, bloated and minimal, and so also there is no strict line between science and non-science. What is and is not science is to be judged on a case-by-case basis and can be disagreed on without any issue, science cannot be a mass produced stream of papers that can automatically be marked OK or NOT OK. We might define the term **[less retarded science](less_retarded_science.md)** so as to distinguish today's many times twisted and corrupted "science/[soyence](soyence.md)" from the real, good and truly useful science. Less retarded science should follow similar principles as [our technology](lrs.md), it should be completely free as in freedom, [selfless](selflessness.md), [suckless](suckless.md) as much as possible, unobscured etc. -- especially stressed should be the idea of many people being able to reproduce less retarded science; e.g. Newton's law of gravitation is less retarded because it can easily be verified by anyone, while the existence of Higgs boson is not -- this freedom of science can be measured with [freedom distance](freedom_distance.md).

slowly_boiling_the_frog.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Slowly Boiling The Frog
 
-*Slowly boiling the frog* is a phrase said to communicate the idea that people will tolerate a great change for the worse if that change is very gradual, even if they would absolutely not tolerate this change being made quickly. It refers to an experiment in which a frog doesn't jump out of boiling water if the water temperature is raised very gradually (even though according to "modern science" this experiment isn't real).
+*Slowly boiling the frog* is a phrase behind which stands the idea that people will tolerate a very significant change for the worse if that change is very gradual, even if they would absolutely not tolerate such change being made quickly. It refers to an experiment in which a frog doesn't jump out of boiling water if the water temperature is raised very gradually (even though according to "modern science" this experiment actually doesn't work exactly this way). In essence it can be sad that people won't protest living in bad conditions, they will only protest a quick change for the worse -- this is easily abused by those in power, such as [corporations](corporation.md) and states: [they can](yes_they_can.md) bring any kind of evil to practice if only they invest the time to do it gradually. This pattern is very reliable and used plentifully over and over without people ever learning from it.
 
 For example the amount and aggressiveness of brainwashing [ads](marketing.md) and technological abuse that young people tolerate nowadays would have been absolutely unacceptable a few decades ago, but now it's the reality of life that few even question (some complete retards like that *linus tech* [faggot](faggot.md) even defend it). Imagine you traveled back to 1990s and made the following offer to a random man: wanna buy this device that will be spying on you, show you ads whenever you interact with it, you'll have to pay for it monthly, charge it daily and every two years pay for a new model? He'd tell you must have some serious brain damage to even make that offer. Nowadays the situation is completely opposite: they'll call you retarded if you decline this offer. The frog has been boiled.
 

stereotype.md

@@ -154,6 +154,13 @@ Some stereotypes are:
   - spread everywhere like rats
   - can adapt to any environment
   - do all kinds of weird religious rituals
+- men:
+  - direct, strong, decisive, stubborn, overconfident, when provoked may easily be rude and aggressive, beat their wives
+  - [competitive](competition.md)
+  - good at [math](math.md) and exact sciences, often on detriment of being good at art, humanities and "soft skills" (these are seen as gay)
+  - hide their feelings, trash talk ever best friends, revealing feminine emotions is seen as a weakness and sign of [homosexuality](gay.md)
+  - thinking only of [sex](sex.md), will have sex with every woman any time and everywhere, will have as many sexual partners as possible, however romantically will love only one woman, to the point of dying for her (but will rather die than marry her)
+  - like cars, guns, military, machines in general, building and repairing "[do it yourself](dyi.md)" style, not reading manuals (that's for sissies)
 - Mexican:
   - all just have sombreros and mustaches
   - love and drink tequila all day
@@ -185,6 +192,10 @@ Some stereotypes are:
   - extroverted, passionate, dance flamenco
   - take naps on siesta
   - attractive tanned men
+- [whites](white.md)
+  - pinnacle of [evolution](evolution.md), like Michelangelo's Davis is the peak of [art](art.md)
+  - smart, beautiful, generally good at everything
+  - not many other stereotypes as whiteness is seen as the default, the norm to which others are compared
 - [women](woman.md):
   - bad at driving, bad spatial skills
   - bad at logical thinking and [math](math.md)
@@ -195,4 +206,5 @@ Some stereotypes are:
   - attracted to douchebags, assholes and money, golddigging, avoid nice guys
   - can distinguish and name different shades of similar colors
   - on board of a ship bring bad luck
+  - love fashion, the color pink, Barbie dolls, cleaning, cooking etc.
   - secretly want to have sex with [dogs](dog.md) rather than with men

tool_slave.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Tool Slave
 
-*Amateur is obsessed with tools. Master is obsessed with art itself.*
+*Amateur is obsessed with tools. Master is obsessed with art.*
 
 Tool slave is someone who, instead of being focused on creating [art](art.md), is rather overly focuses on his tools, he is too dependent on his specific tools of choice, has a fanboy mentality about his favorite brand and rarely creates something because he is too busy just configuring his tools and arguing with others. Typical examples are for example the [Emacs](emacs.md)/[Vim](vim.md) fanboys, Unix [ricing](ricing.md) addicts, [GNU](gnu.md)/[Linux](linux.md) distro [fighters](fight_culture.md) etc. Remember that art is the true goal, a tool is only there to help you make it happen -- a good tool is not that over which you masturbate but rather that which you hardly even notice is there, it's in the background and doesn't bother you as you're being focused on creation of your art. If you spend 80 years looking for the right tools to create something and suddenly you find it's too late to put the tools to good use, you have lived your life wrong, you completely wasted all of it by getting ready to do good instead of doing good. Only a reasonable time should be spent on finding a [good enough](good_enough.md) tool, then one must start creating in order to become a master -- a master will transcend his tools and won't even care anymore about which tools he's using -- a mediocre musician will refuse to play music with a cheap instrument, a master will play beautiful music with any instrument you give him. A tool must be slave to you, not vice versa. Tool is not your [tamagotchi](tamagotchi.md) pet -- once you start to feel emotion, [pride](pride.md) or attachment to your tool, something is wrong.
 

transsexual.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Transsexual
 
-WARNING: The article contains a lot of comparisons to [Nazism](nazi.md).
+*WARNING: The article contains a lot of comparisons to [Nazism](nazi.md).*
 
 Transsexualism (also *trannyism*, *transsexual* being shortened to just *trans*) is a [disease](disease.md) which makes someone very strongly desire to be the opposite [sex](sex.md) than he was born, to the point of it becoming a cause of deep [depression](depression.md), self harm and [suicidal](suicide.md) tendencies. Transsexuals are also colloquially called *trannies*; there are many other terms such as a *shemale*, *trap*, *t-girl*, *m2f* (male to female), *f2m* (female to male) and so on. Transsexual is not to be confused with a transvestite (someone who just dresses as the other sex, e.g. as part of a fetish or public show), hermaphrodite etc.
 
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ Hopefully that's enough examples to demonstrate the difference. Really you must
 
 So the question is rather: why are you NOT a transsexual yet?
 
-For good lulz see also transsexuals in sports.
+For good lulz and drama see also transsexuals in sports.
 
 ## See Also
 

wiki_stats.md

@@ -3,9 +3,9 @@
 This is an autogenerated article holding stats about this wiki.
 
 - number of articles: 601
-- number of commits: 902
-- total size of all texts in bytes: 4456288
-- total number of lines of article texts: 33825
+- number of commits: 903
+- total size of all texts in bytes: 4461267
+- total number of lines of article texts: 33850
 - number of script lines: 294
 - occurrences of the word "person": 9
 - occurrences of the word "nigger": 98
@@ -16,8 +16,8 @@ longest articles:
 - [exercises](exercises.md): 112K
 - [capitalism](capitalism.md): 76K
 - [how_to](how_to.md): 72K
+- [chess](chess.md): 64K
 - [less_retarded_society](less_retarded_society.md): 64K
-- [chess](chess.md): 60K
 - [3d_rendering](3d_rendering.md): 56K
 - [faq](faq.md): 56K
 - [number](number.md): 52K
@@ -35,60 +35,72 @@ longest articles:
 
 top 50 5+ letter words:
 
-- which (2504)
+- which (2510)
 - there (1926)
-- people (1751)
-- example (1515)
-- other (1384)
-- number (1259)
+- people (1753)
+- example (1519)
+- other (1386)
+- number (1261)
 - about (1219)
 - software (1206)
-- program (991)
-- because (958)
-- their (935)
+- program (993)
+- because (962)
+- their (936)
 - would (919)
 - being (863)
-- something (852)
+- something (853)
+- called (848)
 - language (846)
-- called (846)
-- things (842)
+- things (844)
 - numbers (808)
 - simple (796)
-- computer (771)
+- computer (776)
 - without (747)
-- programming (729)
+- programming (730)
 - function (715)
 - different (705)
 - these (702)
 - however (697)
 - system (665)
-- world (652)
+- world (654)
 - should (634)
 - doesn (632)
 - while (624)
 - point (613)
-- games (607)
+- games (609)
 - still (598)
-- society (595)
+- society (596)
 - drummyfish (589)
 - using (575)
 - simply (574)
-- possible (568)
+- possible (569)
 - though (558)
 - similar (540)
 - course (540)
-- https (536)
+- https (538)
 - memory (529)
 - always (521)
 - value (510)
 - technology (509)
-- probably (507)
+- probably (508)
 - really (506)
-- basically (502)
+- basically (505)
 
 latest changes:
 
 ```
+Date:   Wed Oct 16 20:58:06 2024 +0200
+  bullshit.md
+  chess.md
+  main.md
+  marketing.md
+  mechanical.md
+  privacy.md
+  random_page.md
+  stereotype.md
+  wiki_pages.md
+  wiki_stats.md
+  woman.md
 Date:   Tue Oct 15 22:22:58 2024 +0200
   acronym.md
   dependency.md
@@ -110,24 +122,6 @@ Date:   Mon Oct 14 20:53:01 2024 +0200
   deferred_shading.md
   disease.md
   doom.md
-  drummyfish.md
-  duke3d.md
-  fail_ab.md
-  game_engine.md
-  geek.md
-  langtons_ant.md
-  line.md
-  linux.md
-  main.md
-  markov_chain.md
-  minimalism.md
-  often_confused.md
-  operating_system.md
-  people.md
-  physics_engine.md
-  public_domain.md
-  race.md
-  random_page.md
 ```
 
 most wanted pages:
@@ -167,8 +161,8 @@ most popular and lonely pages:
 - [modern](modern.md) (102) 
 - [computer](computer.md) (102) 
 - [kiss](kiss.md) (100) 
-- [censorship](censorship.md) (99) 
-- [fun](fun.md) (98) 
+- [censorship](censorship.md) (100) 
+- [fun](fun.md) (99) 
 - [gnu](gnu.md) (96) 
 - [linux](linux.md) (94) 
 - [programming](programming.md) (93) 
@@ -180,7 +174,7 @@ most popular and lonely pages:
 - [less_retarded_society](less_retarded_society.md) (82) 
 - [free_culture](free_culture.md) (82) 
 - [art](art.md) (81) 
-- [public_domain](public_domain.md) (79) 
+- [public_domain](public_domain.md) (80) 
 - [corporation](corporation.md) (79) 
 - [woman](woman.md) (78) 
 - [programming_language](programming_language.md) (77) 

wiki_style.md

@@ -7,12 +7,12 @@ If you contribute, add yourself to [wiki authors](wiki_authors.md)! You can also
 ## Rules
 
 1. **Everything is [public domain](public_domain.md)** under [CC0](cc0.md) to which all contributors agree. No one owns what we write here.
-2. **No [fair use](fair_use.md)** or even unfair use. We want this Wiki to be as free as possible and don't thread the fine legal lines. That means you can't directly include anything on this Wiki if it's copyrighted, **even if it's under a free license**. So generally **avoid any copy pasting and rather try to write everything yourself**.
-3. **No unnecessary [censorship](censorship.md)**. Necessary censorship basically only includes spam, shitty content, [IP](intellectual_property.md)-infected content (content that would make this wiki not be in public domain) and hardcore illegal stuff that would immediately put us in jail, though we would of course love to include it. However spreading truth mustn't be hurt by fear of jail. Controversial/incorrect/taboo content etc. is NOT to be censored.
-4. **Electronic bullying of other wiki users is NOT PROHIBITED**. Nothing is prohibited here. { Also I'm alone here so at best I can bully myself :D ~drummyfish }
+2. **No [fair use](fair_use.md)** or even unfair use. We want this Wiki to be as free as possible and don't thread the fine legal lines. That means you can't directly include anything on this Wiki if it's copyrighted, **even if it's under a free license**. So generally **avoid any copy pasting and rather try to write everything yourself**. Also no Wikipedia style fair use abuse like including detailed plot summaries of proprietary works -- this is incompatible with free culture (yes, even if Wikipedia claims otherwise).
+3. **No unnecessary [censorship](censorship.md)**. Necessary censorship basically only includes spam, shitty content, [IP](intellectual_property.md)-infected content (content that would make this wiki not be in public domain) and hardcore illegal stuff that would immediately put us in jail, though we would of course love to include that. However spreading truth mustn't be hurt by fear of jail. Controversial/incorrect/taboo content etc. is NOT to be censored.
+4. **[Electronic bullying](cyberbullying.md) of other wiki users is NOT PROHIBITED**. Nothing is prohibited here. { Also I'm alone here so at best I can bully myself :D ~drummyfish }
 5. **ILLEGAL CONTENT IS ALLOWED** -- it still won't be added, because that would make this wiki less legally [free](free_culture.md), however this rule will be here to show we shit on laws and also that it's mostly quite stupid to forbid something that is already forbidden by definition, websites resort to doing it to dodge responsibility because they are [shit scared](fear_culture.md), but it's still stupid nonetheless. Putting rules like "uploading illegal content is prohibited" is basically like saying "I declare it that in my house laws of physics must function", illegal content will be prohibited whether you forbid it or not.
 6. Peer-reviewed sources are highly discouraged, we prefer uncensored sources. 
-7. [Nigger](nigger.md). This rule has practically no effect because linguistically it has no meaning, but it is here to help [free speech](free_speech.md).
+7. [Nigger](nigger.md). This rule has practically no effect because linguistically it isn't even a sentence, but it is here to help [free speech](free_speech.md).
 
 ## Style