Update

art.md

@@ -4,13 +4,13 @@
 
 Art is nowadays mostly understood to be an endeavor (and by extension also its results) that seeks discovery and creation of [beauty](beauty.md) and primarily relies on intuition, its value being mainly in feelings it gives rise to, but it can also stand for a "craft" and skills that are difficult to learn -- both of these meanings however highly overlap as beauty is often connected to that which is difficult to create (as by definition such creations are very rare and therefore valuable). While the most immediate examples of art that come to mind are for example [music](music.md) and painting, fine arts, literature etc., even the most [scientific](science.md) and rigorous effort like [math](math.md) and [programming](programming.md) becomes art when pushed to the highest level, to the boundaries of current knowledge where intuition becomes important for further development. It is sadly the case that modern western culture tries to reduce art to something with no other utility than to be aesthetic or otherwise immediately pleasing to people at large, but [we](lrs.md) must rather see art as something much deeper -- as it has been in the past, for example in ancient Greece -- i.e. that which is beautiful by utility, design, craftsmanship, and whose beauty may be hidden and revealed only to those with enough insight (for example a well written program can only be appreciated by those skilled at programming). Where exactly to draw the boundary between art and non-art is a matter of philosophy, [culture](culture.md) and personal opinion, but usually art is thought to e.g. require attributes of a living human being such as something akin to "soul", thinking, intuition, experience, creativity and emotion -- that which is performed only mechanically is not seen as art. Even though latest [artificial intelligence](ai.md) shows that art can possibly be produced even by a machine, the machine has to be very sophisticated and mimic very complex human thinking -- even if made by a machine, there must be an element of [magic](magic.md) present, a touch of muse, something not completely understood, for a work to be classified as art. At [LRS](lrs.md) we use the word "art" quite broadly, not just for fine art, but also for any craft, and for that which might normally be called "[work](work.md)", as the word "work" to us carries a negative connotation.
 
-**Good art always needs time**, usually a lot of time, and you cannot predict how much time it will need, **art cannot be made on schedule** or as a product. By definition creating true art is never a routine (though it requires well trained skills in routine tasks), it always invents something new, something no one has done before (otherwise it's just copying that doesn't need an artist) -- in this sense the effort is the same as that of research and science or exploring previously unwalked land, you can absolutely never know how long it will take you to invent something, what complications you will encounter or what you will find in an unknown land. You simply do it, fail many times, mostly find nothing, you repeat and repeat until you find the good thing. For this art also requires a lot of effort -- yes, there are cases of masterpieces that came to be very casually, but those are as rare as someone finding a treasure by accident. Art is to a great degree a matter of chance, trial and error, the artist himself doesn't understand his own creation when he makes it, he is only skilled at searching and spotting the good, but in the end he is just someone who invests a lot of time into searching, many times blindly.
+**Good art always takes time**, usually a lot of time, and you cannot predict how much time it will need, **art cannot be made on schedule** or as a product. By definition creating true art is never a routine (though it requires well trained skills in routine tasks), it always invents something new, something no one has done before (otherwise it's just copying that doesn't need an artist) -- in this sense the effort is the same as that of research and [science](science.md) or exploring previously unwalked land, you can absolutely never know how long it's going to take you to invent something new, what complications you'll encounter or what you will find in an unknown land. You simply do it, fail many times, mostly find nothing, you repeat and repeat for years until one day you finally stumble upon something worthy of attention. For this art also requires a lot of effort -- yes, there have been cases of masterpieces made very casually, but those are as rare as someone finding a treasure by accident. Art is to a great degree a matter of chance, trial and error, the artist himself doesn't understand his own creation when he makes it, he is only skilled at searching and spotting the good, but in the end he is just someone who invests a lot of time into searching, many times blindly.
 
-Mastery of art comes with **transcending the tool** in the sense of no longer being focused on the tools as well as no longer being its [slave](tool_slave.md). An amateur is obsessed with his tools, he keeps [hopping](hopping.md) editors, [languages](programming_language.md), distros, keyboards, headphones, drills, clothes, he says he can't work without his specific tools; a master comes and creates the art -- if he has no paintbrush, he does it with a pencil and if he doesn't have a pencil, he draws it in the sand. Master is only thinking about art and he can achieve it with most tools he can get his hands on. Chess master doesn't need a chessboard, football master can play barefoot, master climber doesn't need climbing equipment, master drummer can play with a stick he picks from the ground. Great composers, such as Bedrich Smetana, kept composing the best music even after they went deaf and lost what might seem like the most essential tool for composing: that of hearing the music; and yet a "composer" of the [21st century](21st_century.md) finds the audacity to call himself a "professional" while at the same time being unable to compose music without his favorite [DAW](daw.md) at hand. By eliminating the [dependency](dependency.md) on specific tools a mastery of art can be seen as a form of [freedom](freedom.md).
+Mastery of art comes with **transcending the tool** in the sense of no longer being focused on the tool as well as no longer being its [slave](tool_slave.md). An amateur is obsessed with his tools, he keeps [hopping](hopping.md) editors, [languages](programming_language.md), distros, keyboards, headphones, drills, clothes, he says he can't work without his specific tools; a master comes and creates the art -- if he has no paintbrush, he does it with a pencil and if he doesn't have a pencil, he draws it in the sand. Master is only thinking about art and he can achieve it with most tools he can get his hands on. Chess master doesn't need a chessboard, football master can play barefoot, master climber doesn't need climbing equipment, master drummer can play with a stick he picks from the ground. Great composers, such as Bedrich Smetana, kept composing the best music even after they went deaf and lost what might seem like the most essential tool for composing: that of hearing the music; and yet a "composer" of the [21st century](21st_century.md) finds the audacity to call himself a "professional" while at the same time being unable to compose music without his favorite [DAW](daw.md) at hand. By eliminating the [dependency](dependency.md) on specific tools a mastery of art can be seen as a form of [freedom](freedom.md).
 
 **Art is discovered**, not made. The author of art is merely a discoverer of some beautiful pattern of nature, he may not even fully comprehend or understand that which he discovered, he must in no way be considered its "owner" or arbiter of its use (as capitalism wants to make it with bullshit such as [copyright](copyright.md)). Author has no higher authority in interpretation of his art than anyone else.
 
-Art, like a [woman](woman.md), is beautiful and just like a woman it too often sells itself and becomes a whore, it is too difficult to find sincere, pure art like it is difficult to find a sincere love of a woman.
+Art, like a [woman](woman.md), is beautiful and just like a woman it too often sells itself and becomes a whore, it is difficult to find sincere, pure art like it is difficult to find a sincere love of a woman.
 
 **Art is about acquiring big picture view.** Doing something by following steps of some [algorithm](algorithm.md) is not an art: this is something anyone can do without any experience, creativity or making use of intuition -- even a dumb machine can do this. A process turns into art once it becomes largely driven by very complex decision making done by the brain based on years and years of experience and deep, interconnected knowledge of all the the possible what ifs. A filmmaker cannot just start shooting a movie without having a head loaded with good knowledge of how cameras work, knowing about composition, visual aesthetics, sound, music, colors, acting, writing, editing, doing practical effects, digital effect and many, many other things -- it's not possible to say "I'll first shoot the movie and I'll learn about editing when I get to editing" because editing has to be taken into account already when shooting the movie, the work can only be started when it's already finished in the filmmaker's head. One must know what's important and what to focus on, have an idea of how long something will take to shoot in order to be able to even do any planning, and, importantly, be able to improvise, make spontaneous decisions that will be GOOD, because unexpected things will happen and the ability to make the correct decision in such a situation REQUIRES seeing into the future, seeing the context, the consequences and costs of possible decisions. That's why a director cannot be just someone who knows how to direct actors, he must be someone who knows EVERYTHING about all parts of the movie. Therefore if you want to become a true artist in your craft, you have to learn everything around it. A [capitalist](capitalism.md) will tell you to just learn one thing and ignore everything else that's "out of your responsibility" -- that won't make you an artist, that will just make you a tool. When you want to become an excellent programmer, you can't just limit yourself to learning one programming language and ignore areas that don't interest you too much, claiming "you'll learn it when you need it". You must learn all the areas to acquire different angle views, to collect a set of tools out of which you'll be able to always pick the most appropriate one; knowing just one way means you have just one tool, like going to build a house with just a screwdriver. So go and learn as much as you can, do not overspecialize, do not think you can just know very little and follow a tutorial to make art -- you cannot.
 

drummyfish.md

@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ He likes many things such as animals, peace, [freedom](freedom.md), [programming
 
 Before becoming a kind of schizo, he used to be relatively normal, even had a girlfriend for a while -- for a long time he was a [proprietary](proprietary.md) [Windows](windows.md) normie, using [Facebook](facebook.md) and playing mainstream games like Trackmania and [World of Warcraft](wow.md) (since vanilla, quit during WotLK, played tauren warrior named *Drummy*). In the university he started using GNU/Linux because it was convenient for the school work, but still mostly used Windows. Only near the end of his studies he became more interested in [FOSS](foss.md), after reading [Richard Stallman](rms.md)'s biography. At the beginning he promoted "[open source](open_source.md)" and used [soynet](soynet.md) platforms such as [Fediverse](fediverse.md), later on he found the [suckless](suckless.md) website and was enlightened by [minimalism](minimalism.md); he also started to see through the evils of [open $ource](open_source.md), [capitalism](capitalism.md) and other things and refused to conform, which led him to the path of becoming the aforementioned schizo.
 
-In 2012 drummyfish fell into deep [depression](depression.md) and became convinced he was going blind, he also got a kind of hardcore burnout and extreme exhaustion, headaches etc., he had to postpone his studies and take a year off -- since then his psychological issues became worse, it took around two years just to recover from this, however a similarly devastating breakdown came in 2015, again requiring a year off for recovery. In 2019 drummyfish has written a "manifesto" of his ideas called **Non-Competitive Society** that describes the political ideas of an ideal society. It is in the [public domain](public_domain.md) under [CC0](cc0.md) and available for download online and was translated to more than zero languages. Around 2020 he spent a few months in mental hospital. Since then he was forced to do various slaveries such as newspaper and spam distribution (on a bicycle), janitor/cleaner, night guard at a factory etc. Some time around 2023 he bought a tiny caravan inawoods and plans to live there, away from society. Also in 2023 he lost 30 kg thanks to a combination of diet and depression.
+In 2012 drummyfish fell into deep [depression](depression.md) and became convinced he was going blind, he became desperate and cried all the time, additionally falling into a kind of hardcore burnout and extreme exhaustion, headaches etc., he had to postpone his studies and take a year off -- since then his psychological issues started to worsen, it took around two years just to somewhat recover, however a similarly devastating breakdown came again in 2015 after a failed attempt at discontinuing antidepressants, again requiring a year off for recovery. Since then he would start suffering regular depressive episodes and constant worsening anxiety. In 2019 drummyfish has written a "manifesto" of his ideas called **Non-Competitive Society** that describes the political ideas of an ideal society. It is in the [public domain](public_domain.md) under [CC0](cc0.md) and available for download online and was translated to more than zero languages. Around 2020 he spent a few months in mental hospital. Since then he was forced to do various slaveries such as newspaper and spam distribution (on a bicycle), janitor/cleaner, night guard at a factory etc. Some time around 2023 he bought a tiny caravan inawoods and plans to live there, away from society. Also in 2023 he lost 30 kg thanks to a combination of diet and depression.
 
 **Drummyfish is from the alternative, good far [future](future.md)** (one that won't happen but would happen if [LRS](lrs.md) was realized), he comes from a society several thousand to possibly millions years ahead -- if you want to talk to a man from the future, talk to drummyfish. How is it possible? Imagine you traveled back to cavemen times, times when no one knew the wheel and couldn't count beyond 10, when it was normal for people to perform ritual sacrifices of human and so on -- imagine yourself at this time, telling people "you don't have to sacrifice this guy, it's no good" or "you can use wheel to transfer these stones to save 90% of your current effort" and the cavemen being like "[LMAO](lmao.md) you schizo, that will never work, humans have to be sacrificed, society can't work without it, stop your utopia bullshit" and "LMAO wheel? What's that schizo shit? It won't work, we don't even have to try. Our top [shamanism](soyence.md) popularizator says it's BS so we believe him. Numbers beyond 10? You mean infinity? You have some demons in you, take your potions." You would literally be a man from the future in the past, and that is what drummyfish is nowadays. Drummyfish says things like "stop [competition](competition.md)", "stop nationalism", "stop bullshit like political correctness", "adopt true [minimalism](minimalism.md)", and people are like "LMAO stop that utopia bullshit [pedo](pedophilia.md), competition is necessary for human organism to physically function because Neil de grass told me that on TV, take your schizo potions, minimalism will never work because it's nonintuitive and it isn't good for the economy gods".
 
@@ -40,10 +40,12 @@ Drummyfish will probably [kill himself](suicide.md) one day -- likely not that s
 
 ## See Also
 
+- [people](people.md)
 - [autism](autism.md)
 - [schizo](schizo.md)
 - [based](based.md)
 - [loser](loser.md)
 - [retard](retard.md)
 - [chad](chad.md)
-- [lolcow](lolcow.md)
+- [lolcow](lolcow.md)
+- [Terry Davis](terry_davis.md)

good_enough.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Good Enough
 
-A good enough solution to a problem is a solution that solves the problem satisfyingly (not necessarily precisely or completely) while achieving minimal cost (effort, complexity, [maintenance](maintenance.md), implementation time etc.). This is contrasted with an [overkill](overkill.md), a solution that's "too good" (for a higher cost). For example a word-for-word translation of a text is a primitive way of translation, but it may be good enough to understand the meaning of the text; in many climates a tent is a good enough accommodation solution while a luxury house is a solution of better quality (more comfortable, safe, ...) for a higher cost. It's been said that the [perfect is the enemy of good](perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good.md).
+A good enough solution to a problem is one that solves it satisfyingly (not necessarily precisely or completely) while paying near-minimal cost (effort, complexity, [maintenance](maintenance.md), implementation time etc.). This is contrasted with an [overkill](overkill.md), a solution that's "too good" and comes with a higher cost. For example a word-for-word translation of a text is a primitive way of translation, but it may be good enough to understand the meaning of the text; in many climates a tent is a good enough accommodation solution while a luxury house is a solution of better quality (more comfortable, safe, ...) for a higher cost. It's been said that the [perfect is the enemy of good](perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good.md).
 
 To give an example from the world of [programming](programming.md), [bubble sort](bubble_sort.md) is in many cases better than quick sort for its simplicity, even though it's much slower than more advanced sorts. [ASCII](ascii.md) is mostly good enough compared to [Unicode](unicode.md). And so on.
 

kiss.md

@@ -41,4 +41,5 @@ Compared to [suckless](suckless.md), [Unix philosophy](unix_philosophy.md) and [
 - [primitivism](primitivism.md)
 - [LRS](lrs.md)
 - [KISP](kisp.md)
-- [frugality](frugality.md)
+- [frugality](frugality.md)
+- [kys](kys.md)

less_retarded_society.md

@@ -22,6 +22,13 @@ We purposefully make this goal a little bit vague, we avoid specifying our basic
 
 We will further set a few principles to which we'll stick on the way towards the goal. Firstly **we will never force anything** as forcing any idea, whatever it may be, always ends up being [evil](evil.md). To us **ends NEVER justify the means.** We want to increase happiness of life mainly through **increasing its [freedom](freedom.md)** -- and it's important to note we mean REAL freedom, i.e. increasing the number of choices anyone has [de facto](de_facto.md) available at any moment. This must never be confused with so called "pseudofreedom" which just means "law of the jungle".
 
+**Is it possible to achieve ideal society?** We believe so -- an outline of our reasoning is this:
+
+1. **If all people behave in ideal ways, we can achieve ideal society where everyone is happy, therefore if it's possible, everyone should accept this goal.** It is evident that if people behaved [selflessly](selflessness.md), we could have all the advantages of current society without any disadvantages and inefficiencies, there would be no [money](money.md), violence, crime, prisons, banks, loans, oppression, wars, poverty, consumerism, bureaucracy, people would voluntarily do what's needed and we would live as equals. Those who reject this goal usually do so not because they think it's technically impossible, but because they believe people at large cannot ever behave like this. But if it indeed was possible, then no matter if one wants well being for everyone or just himself and his family, there is no reason to reject this kind of society because everyone would benefit from it.
+2. **It is possible for people to behave in near-ideal ways.** There are individuals and even whole communities who manage to get close to the ideal behavior, do selfless things, sacrifice themselves for others, it's just that they are currently in great minority.
+3. **[Culture](culture.md) is what decides how people behave.** Values, goals and ways of behavior are formed by culture: education, art, role models, family and friends and general environment one grows up in. This is also very evident: in Christian communities people grow up to adopt Christian values, in capitalist ones people adopt capitalist values etc. A shining example is for example a culture of highly militant states where large masses of soldiers are willing to sacrifice own life for higher values they've been taught. To change how people behave and what they aim for means to establish appropriate culture.
+4. **It is possible to change culture, therefore we can make most people behave in near ideal ways.** We see we have the power to change culture, to [normalize](normalization.md) concepts that were previously rejected and abandon harmful traditions -- no matter one's political alignment, any politics is based on this assumption. Why would anyone try to make a change in society if he believed it wasn't possible? And by this we arrive at the conclusion that our initial proposal of making people behave in near-ideal ways and establishing a near-ideal society should be possible through the change of culture, and by the mentioned fact that everyone should accept the goal if it's possible, it should naturally happen just by making all people realize what we have just reasoned out, i.e. mere [education](education.md) could have sufficient power.
+
 ## Basic Description
 
 The following is a basic description of just some features of the ideal society, some of which are however only speculative. Keep in mind it is impossible to plan a whole society exactly -- even if some of the speculations here turn out to be somehow erroneous, it probably still doesn't present a fatal obstacle to implementing our society, things may simply just turn out differently or to be more or less challenging than we predict.

life.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
 
 The definition of *life* depends on context and particular field of study and is typically very broad and [fuzzy](fuzzy.md), but generally speaking it's a form of very complex behavior similar to that of humans, often characterized by attributes such as reproduction, thinking, emotion, reacting to stimuli, growing, communication, [consciousness](consciousness.md), self preservation instincts etc. This separates matter to living (animals, humans, plants, ...) and non-living ([rocks](rock.md), water, ...), we say something is either alive of [dead](death.md). It's hard to isolate an exact set of attributes identifying life because whenever we think of an attribute as a necessity for life, we can subsequently break the definition by imagining something without said attribute that would still be perceived as living: for example should we naturally assume reproduction a necessary attribute of life, we can immediately think of a sterile individual incapable of reproduction who is nonetheless still quite clearly a living being. Therefore we tend to classify life by fuzzy [clustering](cluster.md), in terms of "[closeness](distance.md)" to what we typically expect a living being to look like (and this closeness, i.e. distance, may give rise to a spectrum, implying some things may be "more alive" than others, as in "humans are more alive than viruses"), and this in turn comes with borderline cases where we remain unsure, such as [artificial intelligence](ai.md). Some have alternatively defined life as **that which resists [entropy](entropy.md)**, i.e. systems that maintain their own ordered structure in spite of natural laws constantly working towards everything "turning to dust", and that would be an excellent definition wasn't it for the fact that some just can't find it satisfactory: for example most religions or biologists can't accept it as even robots are hereby classified as living beings. Biologists may define life as carbon-based matter exhibiting certain biological processes. Religions often connect life with "soul", a supernatural essence present in humans, animals and perhaps even plants. For the purposes of [our](lrs.md) wiki we will define life as that which **by its behavior, especially showing experience of pleasure and suffering, is similar to us, humans**. For us life is the greatest miracle in our [Universe](universe.md) and we choose to [make it our goal](less_retarded_society.md) to support it, make it thrive and be happy.
 
-Life and circumstances of life, such as its origin, mechanisms, purpose and abundance in the Universe, are among the greatest mysteries in existence. It poses questions we cannot even remotely answer. [Earth](earth.md) is so far the only place in [Universe](universe.md) known to ever have hosted life -- despite best efforts we never came across a compelling evidence or even a hint of alien life anywhere besides our home planet. But it's still possible that life is all around us, just staying hidden -- does an ant crawling on human's shoe realize he's touching a giant living being? Origin of life itself remains unanswered as well. Some believe it may have been brought to Earth from different parts of the Universe, e.g. by comets -- the so called *panspermia* theory. Most prevalent is however the theory that life arose itself [by chance](randomness.md) from non-living matter, which is called *abiogenesis*. But, again, we don't have a slightest clue about how likely it is for life to randomly come to be on its own, scientists never came close to replicating such process in their laboratories. Religions typically say life was created by [god](god.md).
+Life and circumstances of life, such as its origin, mechanisms, purpose and abundance in the Universe, belong among the greatest mysteries in existence. After thousands of years science can't give us answers -- not even remote guesses. [Earth](earth.md) is so far the only place in [Universe](universe.md) known to ever have hosted life -- despite best efforts we never came across a compelling evidence or even a hint of alien life anywhere besides our home planet. But it's still possible that life is all around us, just staying hidden -- does an ant crawling on human's shoe realize he's touching a giant living being? Origin of life itself remains unanswered as well. Some believe it may have been brought to Earth from different parts of the Universe, e.g. by comets -- the so called *panspermia* theory. Most prevalent is however the theory that life arose itself [by chance](randomness.md) from non-living matter, which is called *abiogenesis*. But, again, we don't have a slightest clue about how likely it is for life to randomly come to be on its own, scientists never came close to replicating such process in their laboratories. Religions are typically built upon a belief that life was created by [god](god.md) or another kind of supernatural entity. Most of what we know from scientific point of view can probably be summed up like this: life is based on the the chemical element carbon, it probably needs water in liquid state, in its most primitive form it appeared on Earth nearly 4 billion years ago and then continued to slowly change over time according to Darwin's laws of [evolution](evolution.md) and natural selection and the genetic information of living organisms is carried (mostly) by the [DNA](dna.md) molecule.
 
 TODO
 

lmao.md

@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ On this wiki we kind of use LMAO as a synonym to [LULZ](lulz.md) as used on [Enc
 - The MMORPG *New World* by *Amazon Games* was programmed by retards (probably some diversity team) who made the client authoritative which allowed for [fun](fun.md) such as becoming invincible by draggine the game window or duplicate currency with lag switches.
 - In 2016 there was a progaming team in Halo called Mi Seng which in a broadcast game did a pretty funny thing: when they were leading they went into hiding in buggy spots and then just did nothing until the time ran out. Normies were crying, the commentators were pretty awkward, they considered this "unethical" xD We consider it pretty cool.
 - In 2016 [Micro$oft](microsoft.md) released a Twitter [AI](ai.md) bot called Tay which was made to teach itself how to talk from the text on the Internet. It can be guessed it quickly became extremely racist and enraged waves of [SJW](sjw.md)s so they had to shut it down.
+- The 2009 launch of [Pokemon](pokemon.md) Platinum saw one of the coolest [trollz](trolling.md) ever: during the event someone (who actually wasn't caught but it's speculated it was a guy cosplaying as a Team Rocket) created photoshopped flyers announcing there would be an "official" giveaway of a special Pokemon. The wifi was of course coming from the perpetrator's device and when the kids collected the Pokemon, they received a Gengar named [Nigger](nigger.md) with [stereotypical](stereotype.md) moves such as "thief" and "sucker punch".
 - There are many funny stories from [4chan](4chan.md). In 2012 they made masses of Justin Bieber fans shave their heads by spreading fake news that Bieber had cancer under the hashtag #BaldForBieber. In 2013 they made a similarly funny prank by making Justin Bieber fans cut themselves with another faked campaign #CuttingForBieber. In 2013 they made a huge number of Appletoddlers destroy their [iPhones](iphone.md) with fake ads that promoted a new "feature" that makes the phone waterproof via a software update. Similarly in 2014 they spread fake ads about a new iPhone "feature" that would let users charge their phones in a microwave. 4chan also hijacked many internet polls such as the Mountain Dew's poll for naming their new drink in 2012: people from 4chan raided the poll and chose the name "Hitler Did Nothing Wrong", with names such as "Diabeetus" or "Soda" as followers. Another raided poll was that of Talor Swift about at which school she should perform -- 4chan mass voted for a school for deaf children which eventually won (Taylor Switch handled it by donating money to the school). 4chan also chose North Korea as a country for Justin Bieber's tour. Another hilarious story is from 2006 when 4chan raided the Habbo Hotel (a MMO game mostly for children); they made shitton of black characters with afros, went around blocking players from accessing game areas, grouping to form swastikas and famously blocking a hotel pool with the sign "Pool's closed due to AIDS".
 - In 2022 a proprietary "[smart](smart.md) home" company Insteon got into financial trouble, shut down its servers and left people without functioning houses.
 - In the 1985 book *Big Score: The Billion-Dollar Story: The Billion-Dollar Story of Silicon Valley* there is a nice chapter talking about the manufacturing of integrated chips that explains how the process is (or at least used to be) very unpredictable and how it's basically astrology for the managers to try to predict and maximize the yield rates (the percentage of manufactured chips that function correctly). There were companies whose research showed the number of good chips correlated with the phases of the Moon, another one found that chips were destroyed by tiny droplets of piss on the hands of workers who didn't wash their hands and that [women](woman.md) workers during menstruation destroyed more chips because of the increased amount of oil secreted from their hands.

often_confused.md

@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ There exist many terms that are highly similar and can legitimately be used inte
 - **[algorithm](algorithm.md)** vs **[program](program.md)** vs **[process](process.md)** vs **[heuristic](heuristic.md)** vs **[source code](source_code.md)**
 - **[algorithm](algorithm.md)** vs **[logarithm](logarithm.md)** lol
 - **America** vs **[USA](usa.md)**
+- **[anagram](anagram.md)** vs **[palindrome](palindrome.md)**
 - **[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** vs **variable**

optimization.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Optimization
 
-Optimization means making a program more efficient in terms of some computing resource usage or by any similar metric, commonly aiming for higher execution speed or lower memory usage (but also e.g. lower power consumption, lower [network](network.md) speed demand etc.) while preserving how the program functions externally; this can be done manually (by rewriting parts of your program) or automatically (typically by [compiler](compiler.md) when it's translating your program). Unlike [refactoring](refactoring.md), which aims primarily for a better readability of source code, optimization changes the inner behavior of the executed program to a more optimal one. Apart from optimizing programs/[algorithms](algorithm.md) we may also more widely talk about optimizing e.g. [data structures](data_structure.md), file formats, [hardware](hardware.md), [protocol](protocol.md) and so on.
+Optimization means making a [program](program.md) more efficient in terms of some computing resource usage or by any similar metric, commonly aiming for higher execution speed or lower memory usage (but also e.g. lower power consumption, lower [network](network.md) speed demand etc.) while preserving how the program functions externally; this can be done manually (by rewriting parts of your program) or automatically (typically by [compiler](compiler.md) when it's translating your program). Unlike [refactoring](refactoring.md), which aims primarily for a better readability of source code, optimization changes the inner behavior of the executed program to a more optimal one. Apart from optimizing programs/[algorithms](algorithm.md) we may also more widely talk about optimizing e.g. [data structures](data_structure.md), file formats, [hardware](hardware.md), [protocol](protocol.md) and so on.
 
 ## Manual Optimization
 
@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ These are mainly for [C](c.md), but may be usable in other languages as well.
 - **[Single compilation unit](single_compilation_unit.md) (one big program without [linking](linking.md)) can help compiler optimize better** because it can see the whole code at once, not just its parts. It will also make your program compile faster.
 - Search literature for **algorithms with better [complexity class](complexity_class.md)** ([sorts](sorting.md) are a nice example).
 - For the sake of simple computers such as [embedded](embedded.md) platforms **avoid [floating point](floating_point.md)** as that is often painfully slowly emulated in software (and also inserts additional code, making the executable bigger). Use [fixed point](fixed_point.md), or at least offer it as a [fallback](fallback.md). This also applies to other hardware requirements such as [GPU](gpu.md) or sound cards: while such hardware accelerates your program on computers that have the hardware, making use of it may lead to your program being slower on computers that lack it.
+- **Consider various [overheads](overhead.md) in critical parts of code**. Overhead is an extra resource price for some kind of feature or mechanism you're using, for example a [function](function.md) call is a bit slower than directly embedding code that's not inside a function, an [OOP](oop.md) program will use more memory than a non-OOP program just because it uses OOP etc. That's why critical parts of code are often written in [assembly](assembly.md) -- to avoid overhead of higher level languages. However, you can (and should) minimize overhead in other ways also: for example in [3D graphics](3d_rendering.md) rendering a single 3D object has a certain overhead, so instead of rendering a scene with many separate 3D objects it's better to merge then all into a single big 3D object.
 - **Factoring out invariants from loops and early branching can create a speed up**: it's sometimes possible to factor things out of loops (or even long non-looping code that just repeats some things), i.e. instead of branching inside the loop create two versions of the loop and branch in front of them. This is a kind of space-time tradeoff. Consider e.g. `while (a) if (b) func1(); else func2();` -- if *b* doesn't change inside the loop, you can rewrite this as `if (b) while (a) func1(); else while (a) func2();`. Or in `while (a) b += c * d;` if *c* and *d* don't change (are invariant), we can rewrite to `cd = c * d; while (a) b += cd;`. And so on.
 - **Division can be replaced by multiplication by [reciprocal](reciprocal.md)**, i.e. *x / y = x * 1/y*. The point is that multiplication is usually faster than division. This may not help us when performing a single division by variable value (as we still have to divide 1 by *y*) but it does help when we need to divide many numbers by the same variable number OR when we know the divisor at compile time; we save time by precomputing the reciprocal before a loop or at compile time. Of course this can also easily be done with [fixed point](fixed_point.md) and integers!
 - **Consider the difference between logical and bitwise operators!** For example [AND](and.md) and [OR](or.md) boolean functions in C have two variants, one bitwise (`&` and `|`) and one logical (`&&` and `||`) -- they behave a bit differently but sometimes you may have a choice which one to use, then consider this: bitwise operators usually translate to only a single fast (and small) instruction while the logical ones usually translate to a branch (i.e. multiple instructions with potentially slow jumps), however logical operators may be faster because they are evaluated as [short circuit](short_circuit_eval.md) (e.g. if first operand of OR is true, second operand is not evaluated at all) while bitwise operators will evaluate all operands.

randomness.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 *Not to be [confused](often_confused.md) with [pseudorandomess](pseudorandomness.md).*
 
-Randomness means unpredictability, lack of patterns, and/or behavior without cause. Random events can only be predicted imperfectly using [probability](probability.md) because there is something present that's subject to chance, something we don't know; events may be random to us either because they are inherently random (i.e. they really have no cause, pattern etc.) or because we just lack knowledge or practical ability to perfectly predict the events. Randomness is one of the most basic, yet also one of the most difficult concepts to understand about our [Universe](universe.md) -- it's a phenomenon of uttermost practical importance, we encounter it every second of our daily lives, but it's also of no lesser interest to science, philosophy, art and religion. Whole libraries could be filled just with books about this topic, here we will be able to only scratch the surface of it by taking a look at the very basics of randomness, mostly as related to [programming](programming.md) and [math](math.md). Randomness (and pseudorandomness) is one the things that can bring a lot of [fun](fun.md) into [programming](programming.md) -- it's quite simple but very entertaining to create generators of various random things such as random [music](music.md), novels (see e.g. [nanogenmo](nanogenmo.md)) pictures, randomly behaving bots and so on.
+Randomness means unpredictability, lack of patterns, and/or events without (apparent) cause. Random events can only be predicted imperfectly using [probability](probability.md) because there is something present that's subject to chance, something we don't know; events may be random to us either because they are inherently random (i.e. they really have no cause, pattern etc.) or because we just lack knowledge, understanding or practical ability to perfectly predict the events. Randomness is one of the most basic, yet also one of the most difficult concepts to understand about our [Universe](universe.md) -- it's a phenomenon of uttermost practical importance, we encounter it every second of our daily lives, but it's also of no lesser interest to science, philosophy, art and religion. Whole libraries could be filled just with books about this topic, here we will be able to only scratch the surface of it by taking a look at the very basics of randomness, mostly as related to [programming](programming.md) and [math](math.md). Randomness (and pseudorandomness) is one the things that can bring a lot of [fun](fun.md) into [programming](programming.md) -- it's quite simple but very entertaining to create generators of various random things such as random [music](music.md), novels (see e.g. [nanogenmo](nanogenmo.md)) pictures, randomly behaving bots and so on.
 
 As with similarly wide spanning terms the word *randomness* and *random* may be defined in different ways and change meaning slightly depending on context, for example sometimes we have to distinguish between "true" randomness, such as that we encounter in [quantum mechanics](quantum.md) or that present in nondeterministic mathematical models, and [pseudorandomness](pseudorandomness.md) (what as a programmer you'll be probably dealing with), i.e. imitating this true randomness with [deterministic](determinism.md) ("non-randomly behaving") systems, e.g. sequences of numbers that are difficult to [compress](compression.md). Other times we call random anything at all that just deviates from usual order, as in "someone started randomly spamming me in chat". Sometimes there are slight nuances in the meaning, for example by the word "random" we can mean "generated by a randomly behaving process", but also for example "data having statistical properties the same as if they were generated by a random process". Sometimes the distinctions don't matter too much, sometimes they do. Let's briefly review a few terms related to this topic:
 

sin.md

@@ -178,3 +178,39 @@ int sinInt(int x)
   return sign * (16 * x) / ((5 * PI * PI - 4 * x) / UNIT);
 }
 ```
+
+Mainstream way of implementing [floating point](float.md) sine (but potentially fixed point too) is through [Taylor series](taylor_series.md), i.e. with a [polynomial](polynomial.md) of order *N* that has first *N* [derivatives](derivative.md) identical to the approximated function near some given point. For *sin(x)* near *x = 0* this series is:
+
+*sin(x) = x/1! - x^(3)/3! + x^(5)/5! - x^(7)/7! + ...*
+
+Here is a simple implementation using fixed number of terms, which nonetheless gives quite precise results:
+
+```
+double sinF(double x)
+{
+#define _PI 3.141593
+  if (x < 0)
+    x = -1 * x + _PI;
+
+  int part = (2 * x) / _PI;
+
+  x -= part * _PI / 2;
+
+  if (part % 2)
+    x = _PI / 2 - x;
+#undef _PI
+
+  double x2 = x * x, r = x;
+
+  x *= x2;
+  r -= x / 6;
+  x *= x2;
+  r += x / 120;
+  x *= x2;
+  r -= x / 5040;
+  x *= x2;
+  r += x / 362880;
+  return r;
+}
+```
+

soyence.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
 
 { I did my own peer review of this article and give it 10/10. ~drummyfish }
 
-Soyence (also spelled soyience) is [business](business.md), [propaganda](propaganda.md) and [politics](politics.md) trying to pass as [science](science.md), nowadays typically connected to [pseudoleftism](pseudoleft.md) (hence the word *[soy](soy.md)*), [pseudoskepticism](pseudoskepticism.md), [capitalism](capitalism.md) and [corporations](corporation.md). It is what in the [21st century](21st_century.md) has taken on the role that's historically been played by the church: that of establishing and maintaining orthodoxy for the control of mass population -- this time it is so called "science" or "rationality" that's used as the tool instead of [God](god.md) and religion, however the results are the same -- this is sometimes called the *cult of science* (quite nicely summed up e.g. [here](https://web.archive.org/web/20220924050207/https://www.reddit.com/r/television/comments/6bi4ho/comment/dhn89le/)). Soyence is not about listening to what science says, it is about listetning to what *"reputable scientists"* say, and of course not questioning them; soyence is what the typical reddit [atheist](atheism.md) or [tiktok](tiktok.md) [feminist](feminism.md) believes science is or what Neil De Grass Tyson tells you science is. While science is about collecting facts and drawing conclusions, soyence is about setting conclusions and finding or fabricating facts that support them. One red flag to watch out in relation to soyence is a great weight put on **reputation** -- in true science reputation plays no role, only results do; reputation and its great value for one's acceptance is rather part of [politics](politics.md) (and maybe show business). Notice for example how in the past it was more common to hear "science has found X" (as in "logic itself shows this fact") rather than "scientists have found X", which is more common nowadays -- mentally we have shifted to separate people to "scientists", those who "know" and dictate what's true, and non-scientists, those who don't know and must just listen. Soyence calls itself the one and only science^TM and [gatekeeps](gatekeeping.md) the term by calling unpopular science (such as that regarding human [race](race.md), questioning official versions of [historical](history.md) events or safety of big pharma [vaccines](vaccine.md)) "[pseudoscience](pseudoscience.md)" and "[conspiracy theories](conspiracy_theory.md)". Soyence itself is pseudoscience but it has an official status, approval of [state](state.md), strong connection to [politics](politics.md), it is mainstream, popular, controlled by those in power, [censored](censorship.md) ("moderated") and intentionally misleading. Soyence can be encountered in much of [academia](academia.md), on [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) and in other popular/mainstream media such as TV "documentaries" and [YouTube](youtube.md). A soyence supporter wrongfully believes that reason wouldn't allow such a large scale mass population manipulation (despite this happening over and over throughout history) -- people at large aren't reasonable and reason [cannot](yes_they_can.md) beat [propaganda](propaganda.md); only the highest naivety could make you believe that politics will follow science -- it's the other way around, and always has been. With enough power [anything is possible](yes_they_can.md). Big science is a big dirty game just like big politics or big corporate business, anyone thinking that corruption avoids big science or that it's only present in small amounts is naive like an unborn child, it is literally like believing big politics is free of corruption and done by good selfless people who are concerned about securing well being for the citizens.
+Soyence (also spelled soyience) is [business](business.md), [propaganda](propaganda.md) and [politics](politics.md) attempting to pass as [science](science.md), nowadays typically connected to [pseudoleftism](pseudoleft.md) (hence the word *[soy](soy.md)*), [pseudoskepticism](pseudoskepticism.md), [capitalism](capitalism.md) and [corporations](corporation.md). It is what in the [21st century](21st_century.md) has taken on the role that's historically been played by the church: that of establishing and maintaining orthodoxy for the control of mass population -- this time it is so called "science" or "rationality" that's used as the tool instead of [God](god.md) and religion, however the results are the same -- this is sometimes called the *cult of science* (quite nicely summed up e.g. [here](https://web.archive.org/web/20220924050207/https://www.reddit.com/r/television/comments/6bi4ho/comment/dhn89le/)). Soyence is not about listening to what science says, it is about listetning to what *"reputable scientists"* say, and of course not questioning them; soyence is what the typical reddit [atheist](atheism.md) or [tiktok](tiktok.md) [feminist](feminism.md) believes science is or what Neil De Grass Tyson tells you science is. While science is about collecting facts and drawing conclusions, soyence is about setting conclusions and finding or fabricating facts that support them. One red flag to watch out in relation to soyence is a great weight put on **reputation** -- in true science reputation plays no role, only results do; reputation and its great value for one's acceptance is rather part of [politics](politics.md) (and maybe show business). Notice for example how in the past it was more common to hear "science has found X" (as in "logic itself shows this fact") rather than "scientists have found X", which is more common nowadays -- mentally we have shifted to separate people to "scientists", those who "know" and dictate what's true, and non-scientists, those who don't know and must just listen. Soyence calls itself the one and only science^TM and [gatekeeps](gatekeeping.md) the term by calling unpopular science (such as that regarding human [race](race.md), questioning official versions of [historical](history.md) events or safety of big pharma [vaccines](vaccine.md)) "[pseudoscience](pseudoscience.md)" and "[conspiracy theories](conspiracy_theory.md)". Soyence itself is pseudoscience but it has an official status, approval of [state](state.md), strong connection to [politics](politics.md), it is mainstream, popular, controlled by those in power, [censored](censorship.md) ("moderated") and intentionally misleading. Soyence can be encountered in much of [academia](academia.md), on [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) and in other popular/mainstream media such as TV "documentaries" and [YouTube](youtube.md). A soyence supporter wrongfully believes that reason wouldn't allow such a large scale mass population manipulation (despite this happening over and over throughout history) -- people at large aren't reasonable and reason [cannot](yes_they_can.md) beat [propaganda](propaganda.md); only the highest naivety could make you believe that politics will follow science -- it's the other way around, and always has been. With enough power [anything is possible](yes_they_can.md). Big science is a big dirty game just like big politics or big corporate business, anyone thinking that corruption avoids big science or that it's only present in small amounts is naive like an unborn child, it is literally like believing big politics is free of corruption and done by good selfless people who are concerned about securing well being for the citizens.
 
 *"I don’t care about individual scientists, only a consensus of scientists. [...] I don't care, titles don't matter, what matters is consensus."* --Neil de Grass on Del Bigtree's TV show
 
@@ -12,20 +12,20 @@ Compared to good old [fun](fun.md) pseudosciences such as [astrology](astrology.
 
 Soyence uses all the cheap tricks of politics (also not dissimilar to those of [greenwashing](greenwashing.md), [openwashing](openwashing.md) etc.) to win stupid people, it builds on the cult of bullying religion and creating a [war mentality](fight_culture.md), overuse of twisted "rationality" ([pseudoskepticism](pseudoskepticism.md)), creating science [bloat](bloat.md) and bullshit "scientific" fields to obscure lies, punishment of the correct use of rationality, building cults of personality ("science educators", the [gatekeepers](gatekeeping.md) of "science") and appealing to egoism and naivity of wannabe smartasses while at the same time not even holding up to principles of science such as genuine objectivity. A soyence kid will for example keep preaching about how everything should be proven by reproducible experiments while at the same time accepting [de facto](de_facto.md) irreproducible results, e.g. those obtained with billion dollar worth research performed at [CERN](cern.md) which can NOT be reproduced anywhere else than at CERN with thousands of top scientist putting in years of work. Such results are not reproducible in practice, they are accepted on the basis of pure faith in those presenting it, just as religious people accept the words of preachers. The kid will argue that in theory someone else can build another CERN and reproduce the results, but that won't happen in practice, it's just a purely theoretical unrealistic scenario so his version of what "science" is is really based on reproducibility that only works in a dreamed up world, this kind of reproducibility doesn't at all fulfill its original purpose of allowing others to check, confirm or refute the results of experiments. This starts to play a bigger role when for example vaccines start to get promoted by the government as "proven safe by science" (read "claimed safe by a corporation who makes money off of people being sick"), the soyence kid will gladly accept the vaccine and [fight](fight_culture.md) for their acceptance just thanks to this label, not based on any truly scientific facts but out of pure faith in self proclaimed science authorities -- trusting an authority (be it pope, priests, holy book or a scientific journal) is by definition [religion](religion.md) and here the soyentist is relying purely on faith, a concept he would like to think he hates with his soul.
 
-The "[citation needed](citation_needed.md)" craziness that indicates lack of any brain and pure reliance on the word of authority is seen e.g. on [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md). Wikipedia doesn't accept original research, observation or EVEN LOGIC ITSELF as a basis for presenting something -- everything, even trivial claims have to have a "citation" from a source WITH mainstream political views (unpopular and controversial sources are banned); Wikipedia is therefore one big propaganda ground for those with power over the mainstream media.
+The "[citation needed](citation_needed.md)" insanity that indicates lack of any brain and pure reliance on the word of authority is best exemplified by [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md). Wikipedia doesn't accept original research, observation or EVEN LOGIC ITSELF as a basis for presenting something -- everything, even trivial claims, must have a "citation" from a source WITH mainstream political views (unpopular and controversial sources are banned); Wikipedia is therefore one big propaganda ground for those with power over the mainstream media.
 
 Soyence relies on low [IQ](iq.md), shallow education and popular "science education" (e.g. neil de grass), while making its followers believe they are smart. It produces propaganda material such as "documentaries" with Morgan Freeman (i.e. people who are good at persuasion rather than being competent), series like The Big Bang Theory and [YouTube](youtube.md) videos with titles such as "Debunking Flat Earth with FACTS AND LOGIC", so there's a huge mass of [NPCs](npc.md) thinking they are Einsteins who blindly support this cult. Soyence attacks science from within by attacking its core principles, i.e. it tries to ridicule and punish thinking outside the box and asking specific questions -- in this it is not dissimilar to a mass [religion](religion.md).
 
 For the ones who possibly still don't get it, here is a little comparison. It is good if for now you don't see it as "good" vs "evil" (this is a separate step, left for later on), just as a comparison of what science is vs what's politics. The first step is simply to see the difference.
 
 - example of science: "Objects close to Earth dropped in vacuum fall and accelerate at the same rate no matter their weight. Do whatever you please with this information. If you don't believe it, check it yourself. If you find a more accurate law, please let it be known."
-- example of NOT science: "This claim has been published in a top science magazine and reviewed by 100 people each one having 10 PhDs and 100 science medals, so trust it or you'll be bullied."
+- example of NOT science: "This claim has been published in a top science magazine and reviewed by 100 people each one having 10 PhDs and 100 science medals, so trust it or be bullied."
 
-A **red flag** often giving soyence away is **use and embedding of political mechanisms** such as authority, credibility, voting, "[democracy](democracy.md)", consensus, peer review, fact checks, [censorship](censorship.md), [codes of conduct](coc.md), popularization, promotion, [marketing](marketing.md) etc. True science, by definition, is something that cannot be deceiving, it is self proving and doesn't need policing, equations either work and predict or they don't, knowledge is either useful or not, there is no room for belief or ideology. Nowadays we already implicitly assume deception by requiring peer reviews, we distinguish "morally bad fact" and "morally good lies", we elect priests whose word is to be taken for fact just by the title before their name -- this is NOT true science.
+A **red flag** often giving soyence away is **use and embedding of political mechanisms** such as authority, credibility, voting, "[democracy](democracy.md)", consensus, peer review, fact checks, [censorship](censorship.md), [codes of conduct](coc.md), popularization, promotion (posters, social media, ...), [marketing](marketing.md) etc. True science, by definition, is something that cannot be deceiving, it is self proving and doesn't need policing, equations either work and predict or they don't, knowledge is either useful or not, there is no room for belief or ideology. Nowadays we already implicitly assume deception by requiring peer reviews, we distinguish "morally bad fact" and "morally good lies", we elect priests whose word is to be taken for fact just by the title before their name -- this is NOT true science.
 
 Of course, once science advances, it may stop being so simple as for everyone to be able to for example check the results that scientists found, that's without doubt, the point is simply that at the stage when the field starts being a religion, for whatever reason at all, we can no longer call it science, it is simply religion that evolved from science. That is all.
 
-Basically with science we can utilize **[freedom distance](freedom_distance.md)** to measure "how much of a science" something is -- here we may define freedom distance as the average distance to someone who can completely grasp the presented "science" with ALL that's required, including understanding the results, verifying the himself and so on. If this distance is within a small village, we can consider it science; if it's several countries, it is not science anymore.
+With science we can utilize **[freedom distance](freedom_distance.md)** to measure "how much of a science" something is -- here we may define freedom distance as the average distance to someone who can completely grasp the presented "science" with ALL that's required, including understanding the results, verifying them himself and so on. If this distance is within a small village, we can consider it science; if it's several countries, it is not science anymore.
 
 Soyence [popularizators](popularization.md) also like to contaminate science with emotion, with "stories" and [heroes](hero_culture.md) and other kind of bullshit that has no place in true science: true science is pure rationality, it aims for highest objectivity possible and to that emotion is an obstacle. Science is a cold, emotionless tool -- if you don't see [beauty](beauty.md) in this fact alone, science is not for you.
 

wiki_stats.md

@@ -3,9 +3,9 @@
 This is an autogenerated article holding stats about this wiki.
 
 - number of articles: 621
-- number of commits: 967
-- total size of all texts in bytes: 5047518
-- total number of lines of article texts: 36616
+- number of commits: 968
+- total size of all texts in bytes: 5051858
+- total number of lines of article texts: 36622
 - number of script lines: 295
 - occurrences of the word "person": 9
 - occurrences of the word "nigger": 105
@@ -35,60 +35,78 @@ longest articles:
 
 top 50 5+ letter words:
 
-- which (2799)
-- there (2187)
+- which (2804)
+- there (2190)
 - people (2141)
-- example (1746)
+- example (1747)
 - other (1586)
-- about (1400)
+- about (1404)
 - number (1325)
-- software (1248)
-- because (1158)
+- software (1251)
+- because (1162)
 - their (1086)
-- would (1056)
+- would (1058)
 - something (1043)
 - program (1034)
 - being (1017)
 - things (963)
 - language (937)
-- called (917)
+- called (919)
+- without (860)
 - function (860)
-- without (858)
 - simple (853)
 - computer (840)
 - numbers (828)
-- different (791)
+- different (794)
 - however (774)
 - these (772)
 - programming (768)
 - world (750)
 - system (727)
-- doesn (710)
 - should (709)
-- still (704)
+- doesn (709)
+- still (707)
 - games (680)
 - while (671)
-- point (663)
+- point (664)
 - society (660)
 - drummyfish (657)
 - simply (653)
-- possible (640)
+- possible (641)
 - using (635)
-- probably (633)
-- always (620)
-- course (601)
-- similar (595)
-- https (586)
+- probably (635)
+- always (621)
+- course (605)
+- similar (596)
+- https (588)
 - actually (583)
-- someone (578)
-- though (576)
-- basically (568)
+- someone (579)
+- though (577)
+- basically (570)
 - really (566)
 - technology (548)
 
 latest changes:
 
 ```
+Date:   Wed Feb 12 23:09:00 2025 +0100
+  anarch.md
+  approximation.md
+  harry_potter.md
+  less_retarded_society.md
+  living.md
+  log.md
+  lrs.md
+  main.md
+  morality.md
+  often_misunderstood.md
+  random_page.md
+  sqrt.md
+  sw_rendering.md
+  vector.md
+  venus_project.md
+  wiki_pages.md
+  wiki_stats.md
 Date:   Sat Feb 8 19:09:45 2025 +0100
   21st_century.md
   anarch.md
@@ -110,24 +128,6 @@ Date:   Sat Feb 8 19:09:45 2025 +0100
   main.md
   marketing.md
   music.md
-  often_confused.md
-  people.md
-  progress.md
-  quine.md
-  race.md
-  random_page.md
-  rock.md
-  saf.md
-  slowly_boiling_the_frog.md
-  sqrt.md
-  suicide.md
-  usa.md
-  wiki_pages.md
-  wiki_stats.md
-  zoomer.md
-Date:   Fri Jan 31 15:03:34 2025 +0100
-  anarch.md
-  art.md
 ```
 
 most wanted pages:
@@ -155,10 +155,10 @@ most wanted pages:
 
 most popular and lonely pages:
 
-- [lrs](lrs.md) (331) 
-- [capitalism](capitalism.md) (298) 
+- [lrs](lrs.md) (332) 
+- [capitalism](capitalism.md) (299) 
 - [c](c.md) (237) 
-- [bloat](bloat.md) (228) 
+- [bloat](bloat.md) (229) 
 - [free_software](free_software.md) (197) 
 - [game](game.md) (150) 
 - [suckless](suckless.md) (149) 
@@ -174,16 +174,16 @@ most popular and lonely pages:
 - [gnu](gnu.md) (99) 
 - [linux](linux.md) (98) 
 - [shit](shit.md) (96) 
+- [woman](woman.md) (94) 
 - [fight_culture](fight_culture.md) (94) 
 - [corporation](corporation.md) (94) 
 - [bullshit](bullshit.md) (94) 
-- [woman](woman.md) (93) 
 - [art](art.md) (92) 
 - [hacking](hacking.md) (91) 
 - [less_retarded_society](less_retarded_society.md) (90) 
 - [free_culture](free_culture.md) (90) 
+- [public_domain](public_domain.md) (86) 
 - [chess](chess.md) (86) 
-- [public_domain](public_domain.md) (85) 
 - [pseudoleft](pseudoleft.md) (83) 
 - ...
 - [combinatorics](combinatorics.md) (5)