Update

ai.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Artificial Intelligence
 
-Artificial intelligence (AI) is an area of [computer science](compsci.md) whose effort lies in making [computers](computer.md) simulate thinking of humans and possibly other biologically [living beings](life.md). This may include making computers play [games](game.md) such as [chess](chess.md), compose [music](music.md), paint pictures, understand and processing audio, images and text on high level of [abstraction](abstraction.md) and understanding (e.g. translation between natural languages), making predictions about complex systems such as stock market or weather or even exhibit a general human-like behavior. Even though today's focus in AI is on [machine learning](machine_learning.md) and especially [neural networks](neural_network.md), there are many other usable approaches and models such as "hand crafted" state tree searching algorithms that can simulate and even outperform the behavior of humans in certain specialized areas.
+Artificial intelligence (AI) is an area of [computer science](compsci.md) whose effort lies in making [computers](computer.md) simulate thinking of humans and possibly other biologically [living beings](life.md). This may include making computers play [games](game.md) such as [chess](chess.md), compose [music](music.md), paint pictures, understand and processing audio, images and [text](text.md) on high level of [abstraction](abstraction.md) and understanding (e.g. translation between [natural languages](human_language.md)), making predictions about complex systems such as stock market or weather or even exhibit a general human-like behavior such as simulated emotion. Even though today's focus in AI is on [machine learning](machine_learning.md) and especially [neural networks](neural_network.md), there are many other usable approaches and models such as "hand crafted" state tree searching algorithms that can simulate and even outperform the behavior of humans in certain specialized areas.
 
 There's a concern that's still a matter of discussion about the dangers of developing a powerful AI, as that could possibly lead to a [technological singularity](tech_singularity.md) in which a super intelligent AI might take control over the whole world without humans being able to seize the control back. Even though it's still likely a far future and many people say the danger is not real, the question seems to be about *when* rather than *if*.
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ By 2023 neural network AI has become extremely advanced in processing visual, te
 
 ## Details
 
-As programmers let's first answer ourselves this: what really is AI to us? A programmer/mathematician typically simplifies AI to mean only this much: **making decisions**. I.e. let's forget human brain, emotion, psychology and all this kind of stuff for a second and focus only on one thing: decision making, and how to program computers so that they make an intelligent decision from input data. Every single "AI" system never does anything more than just take a look at current situation (state, context, data, ..., just a bunch of numbers) and from all possible actions that may be taken from here it tries to pick the best one (i.e. output another number). Whether it's making the best move in [chess](chess.md), deciding which animal is captured in a photo, choosing how to translate a word from English to Spanish or choosing what pixel to draw on the screen so that the result will resemble human art, the problem is always reduced to only deriving a number from some other numbers.
+As programmers let's first answer ourselves this: what really is AI to us? A programmer/mathematician typically simplifies AI to signify only this much: **computer making decisions**. I.e. let's forget human brain, emotion, psychology and all this kind of stuff for a second and focus only on one thing: decision making, and how to program computers so that they make an intelligent decision from input data. Every single "AI" system never does anything more than just take a look at current situation (state, context, data, ..., just a bunch of numbers) and from all possible actions that may be taken from here it tries to pick the best one (i.e. output another number). Whether it's making the best move in [chess](chess.md), deciding which animal is captured in a photo, choosing how to translate a word from English to Spanish or choosing what pixel to draw on the screen so that the result will resemble human art, the problem is always reduced to only deriving a number from some other numbers.
 
 AI to us is therefore nothing more than a mathematical [function](function.md) of state, outputting action (leading to another state). Also we will require this function to be pure, true and [deterministic](determinism.md) mathematical function, i.e. without any [randomness](randomness.md), hidden state etc., i.e. the function will always return the same result for the same input, the input depends SOLELY on the state we give it. In an extreme case every AI that works with finite memory could then literally be just a [table](lut.md) defining best action for any state -- but of course, such tables would be big and hard to make manually, so we typically try to create [algorithms](algorithm.md) that do the job of such table without taking so much space.
 

doom.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Doom
 
-Doom is a legendary video [game](game.md) released in December [1993](1990s.md), perhaps the most famous video game of all time, the game that popularized the [first man shooter](first_person_shooter.md) genre and shocked by its at the time extremely advanced [3D](pseudo_3D.md) graphics (yes, **Doom is 3D**) and caused one of the biggest revolutions in video game history. It was made by [Id Software](id_software.md), most notably by [John Carmack](john_carmack.md) (graphics + engine programmer) and [John Romero](john_romero.md) (tool programmer + level designer) -- all in all the game was developed by about 5 to 6 men in about a year. Doom is sadly [proprietary](proprietary.md), it was originally distributed as [shareware](shareware.md) (a gratis "demo" was available for playing and sharing with the option to buy a full version). However the game engine was later (1999) released as [free (as in freedom) software](free_software.md) under [GPL](gpl.md) which gave rise to many source [ports](port.md) and "improved" "[modern](modern.md)" engines (which however look like shit, the original looks by far the best, if you want to play Doom use Chocolate Doom or Crispy Doom, avoid anything with GPU rendering). The assets remain non-free but a completely free alternative is offered by the [Freedoom](freedoom.md) project that has created [free as in freedom](free_culture.md) asset replacements for the game. [Anarch](anarch.md) is an official [LRS](lrs.md) game inspired by Doom, completely in the [public domain](public_domain.md). Doom named a whole generation of so called [doomers](doomer.md).
+Doom is a legendary video [game](game.md) released in December [1993](1990s.md), perhaps the most famous video game of all time, the game that popularized the [first man shooter](first_person_shooter.md) genre and shocked by its at the time extremely advanced [3D](pseudo_3D.md) graphics (yes, **Doom is 3D**) and caused one of the biggest revolutions in video game history. It was made by [Id Software](id_software.md), most notably by [John Carmack](john_carmack.md) (graphics + engine programmer) and [John Romero](john_romero.md) (tool programmer + level designer) -- all in all the game was developed by about 5 to 6 men in about a year. Doom is sadly [proprietary](proprietary.md), it was originally distributed as [shareware](shareware.md) (a gratis "demo" was available for playing and sharing with the option to buy a full version). However the game engine was later (1999) released as [free (as in freedom) software](free_software.md) under [GPL](gpl.md) which gave rise to many source [ports](port.md) and "improved" "[modern](modern.md)" engines (which however look like shit, the original looks by far the best, if you want to play Doom use Chocolate Doom or Crispy Doom, avoid anything with GPU rendering). The assets remain non-free but a completely free alternative is offered by the [Freedoom](freedoom.md) project that has created [free as in freedom](free_culture.md) asset replacements for the game. [Anarch](anarch.md) is an official [LRS](lrs.md) game inspired by Doom, completely in the [public domain](public_domain.md).
 
 Doom has a cool wiki at https://doomwiki.org.
 

exercises.md

@@ -218,7 +218,8 @@ Bear in mind the main purpose of this quiz is for you to test your understanding
 111. What happens in [Forth](forth.md) when you try to define a word with the same name as another already existing word? Will the old word be deleted? Or is this forbidden to do? Also say why.
 112. What's the difference between [lazy](lazy.md) and strict evaluation? Show simple example.
 113. Write code in [Brainfuck](brainfuck.md) that copies the value in current cell to the cell on to the right, while KEEPING the value in current cell. Of course you may use another temporary cell to do this.
-114. Did you enjoy this quiz?
+114. What's the first sentence of the lyrics of the [Free Software](free_software.md) Song by [Richard Stallman](rms.md)?
+115. Did you enjoy this quiz?
 
 ### Answers
 
@@ -336,7 +337,8 @@ sin(x) / cos(x) - log2(2) = tg(x) - 1*, so we get *tg(x) >= 1*. So that will hol
 111. It can be done (and it's useful), the new word will shadow the old one -- i.e. invoking the word will execute the latest word of that name -- but the old word will still exist in the dictionary, so that if the new word is deleted the old one becomes accessible again. This is because the dictionary is searched from the newest entries to the oldest (it's usually a linked list starting with the latest defined word).
 112. They're both strategies for evaluating [expressions](expression.md): lazy (also *by need*) evaluates an argument ONLY once it's actually needed, while strict evaluation evaluates all arguments, even if some might not be needed. Example: let's have a function `or3(a,b,c)` which performs logical OR of three values; under strict evaluation all *a*, *b* and *c* will be evaluated and then logical OR will be performed; under lazy evaluation the function may first evaluate one argument, let's say *a*, and if it ends up being TRUE, there is no need to further evaluate *b* and *c* (the result is already known to be TRUE), so they won't be evaluated.
 113. For example `[->+>+<<]>>[-<<+>>]<<`: first we copy the current cell into TWO cells to the right -- one of them is used as a temporary cell; after this we use another loop to copy the value from the temporary cell back to the original location that we zeroes during the first copying.
-114. yes
+114. "Join us now and share the software."
+115. yes
 
 ## Other
 

free_software.md

@@ -18,6 +18,8 @@ The forefront non-profit organization promoting free software has since its inve
 
 **Is free software [communism](communism.md)?** This is a question often debated by [Americans](usa.md) who have a panic phobia of anything resembling ideas of sharing and giving away for free. The answer is: yes and no. No as in it's not [Marxism](marxism.md), the kind of [evil](evil.md) pseudocommunism that plagued the world not a long time long ago -- that was a hugely complex, twisted violent ideology encompassing whole society which furthermore betrayed many basic ideas of equality and so on. Compared to this free software is just a simple idea of not applying intellectual property to software, and this idea may well function under some form of early capitalism. But on the other hand yes, free software is communism in its general form that simply states that sharing is good, it is communism as much as e.g. teaching a kid to share toys with its siblings.
 
+[Fun](fun.md) fact: around 1991 Richard Stallman created the *Free Software Song* which starts with the lyrics: "Join us now and share the software; you'll be free, [hackers](hacking.md)." -- Stallman said he put the lyrics in the [public domain](public_domain.md). The melody is taken from Bulgarian folk song called *Sadi Moma*. The song has a very uncommon 7/8 rhythm that is not easy to follow, especially when singing at the same time, but Richard Stallman always follows it perfectly.
+
 ## Definition
 
 Free software was originally defined by [Richard Stallman](rms.md) for his [GNU](gnu.md) project. The definition was subsequently adopted and adjusted by other groups such as [Debian](debian.md) or [copyfree](copyfree.md) and so nowadays there isn't just one definition, even though the GNU definition is usually implicitly assumed. However, all of these definition are very similar and are quite often variations and subsets of the original one. The GNU definition of free software is paraphrased as follows:

gnu.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # GNU
 
-GNU (*"GNU is Not Unix"*, a [recursive](recursion.md) acronym) is a large software project established by [Richard Stallman](rms.md), the inventor of [free (as in freedom) software](free_software.md), running since 1983 with the goal of creating, maintaining and improving a completely free (as in freedom) [operating system](os.md), along with other free [software](software.md) that computer users might need. The project doesn't tolerate any [proprietary](proprietary.md) software (though it unfortunately tolerates other proprietary [data](data.md)). GNU achieved its goal of creating their free operating system when a [kernel](kernel.md) named [Linux](linux.md) became part of it in the 90s as the last piece of the puzzle -- the system should be called just GNU but is now rather known as GNU/Linux (watch out: most so called "Linux systems" nowadays aren't embraced by GNU as they diverge from GNU's strict policies on what the system should look like, only a handful of operating systems are recommended by GNU). However, the GNU project didn't end and continues to further develop the operating system, or rather a myriad of user software that runs under the operating system -- GNU develops a few of its projects itself and also offers hosting and support (such as free legal defense) for GNU projects developed by volunteers who dedicate their work to them. GNU gave rise to the [Free Software Foundation](fsf.md) and is one of the most important software projects in history of computing.
+GNU (*"GNU is Not Unix"*, a [recursive](recursion.md) acronym) is a large software [project](project.md) established by [Richard Stallman](rms.md), the inventor of [free (as in freedom) software](free_software.md), running since 1983 with the goal of creating, maintaining and improving a completely free (as in freedom) [operating system](os.md), along with other free [software](software.md) that computer users might need. The project doesn't tolerate any [proprietary](proprietary.md) software (though it unfortunately tolerates other proprietary [data](data.md)). GNU achieved its goal of creating their free operating system when a [kernel](kernel.md) named [Linux](linux.md) became part of it in the 90s as the last piece of the puzzle -- the system should be called just GNU but is now rather known as GNU/Linux (watch out: most so called "Linux systems" nowadays aren't embraced by GNU as they diverge from GNU's strict policies on what the system should look like, only a handful of operating systems are recommended by GNU). However, the GNU project didn't end and continues to further develop the operating system, or rather a myriad of user software that runs under the operating system -- GNU develops a few of its projects itself and also offers hosting and support (such as free legal defense) for GNU projects developed by volunteers who dedicate their work to them. GNU gave rise to the [Free Software Foundation](fsf.md) and is one of the most important software projects in history of computing.
 
 The mascot of GNU is literally gnu (wildebeest), it is available under a copyleft license. WARNING: ironically GNU is extremely protective of their brand's "intellectual property" and will rape you if you use the name GNU without permission (see the case of GNU boot). It's quite funny and undermines the whole project a bit.
 

law.md

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+# Law
+
+TODO
+
+**Western law disproved by [math](math.md)**: if law claims -- as it does at least in the first world -- that it's made so as to eliminate [false positives](false_positive.md), i.e. that a criminal has to be proven guilty beyond doubt to be convicted and that we will rather let a criminal run free than convict an innocent, then there is never a slightest reason for an innocent to defend himself when accused of a crime as there can exist no evidence that would prove him guilty. If there could exist evidence that would prove an innocent guilty, it couldn't be considered evidence exactly for this reason. Of course you will say nothing is perfect and despite best efforts false convictions will happen but then you are saying there exists evidence that falsely convicts an innocent unless he speaks -- if such evidence exists, then it cannot be considered evidence because it doesn't prove the crime beyond doubt, there is always the doubt of it being rendered false by what could be said. Therefore in this (our) system of law if anyone defends himself in the court, he automatically admits to the crime by doing so, because an innocent man has no reason to defend himself. Legal defense equals confession to crime. So legal defense, one of the very basic foundation stones of our law system, is [logically](logic.md) absolute bullshit, the system admits to lying by basing itself on a logically invalid mechanism and openly calls you a retard who won't notice this. In reality law is business of law firms that [battle](fight_culture.md) each other: whether you get convicted or not doesn't depend on whether you committed the crime in question but on how much you pay for a lawyer -- just as a more expensive [football](football.md) team will likely beat a cheaper team, a more expensive legal team will beat the cheaper one. [Capitalism](capitalism.md) is again working as expected.

lgbt.md

@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ LGBT is related to the concept of equality in a similar way in which crusade war
 
 Note that **not all gay people support LGBT**, even though LGBT wants you to think so and media treat e.g. the terms *gay* and *LGBT* as synonyms (this is part of [propaganda](propaganda.md), either conscious or subconscious). The relationship gay-LGBT is the same as e.g. the relationship White-WhitePride or German-Nazi: Nazis were a German minority that wanted to [fight](fight_culture.md) for more privileges for Germans of their own race (as they felt oppressed by other nations and races such as Jews), LGBT is a gay minority who wants to [fight](fight_culture.md) for more privileges for gay people (because they feel oppressed by straight people). LGBT isn't just about being gay but about approving of a very specific ideology that doesn't automatically come with being gay. LGBT frequently comments on issues that go beyond simply being gay (or whatever), for example LGBT openly stated disapproval of certain other orientation (e.g. [pedophilia](pedophilia.md)) and refuses to admit homosexuality is a disorder, which aren't necessarily stances someone has to take when simply being gay.
 
-**LGBT is greatly embraced by [capitalism](capitalism.md)** as it serves it well, it creates more conflict and [competition](competition.md) that business feeds on, new areas of [bullshit](bullshit.md) business (gay movies, gay music, gay books, gay games, gay speakers, gay merchandise, antidepressants for people that are depressed for not being gay enough, ...), attention grabbing potential (LOOK LOOK AT OUR AD, WE SUPPORT GAYS), political capital to be mined (CEO wants more money and power so he wants to get into politics? Starting a gay supporting party is an awesome tool.) etcetc. Indeed, as of 2024 literally every ad you see is woke and gay, capitalism just loves this new "rebel movement".
+**LGBT is greatly embraced by [capitalism](capitalism.md)** as it serves it well, it creates more conflict and [competition](competition.md) that business feeds on, new areas of [bullshit](bullshit.md) business (gay movies, gay music, gay books, gay games, gay speakers, gay merchandise, antidepressants for people that are depressed for not being gay enough, ...), attention grabbing potential (LOOK LOOK AT OUR AD, WE SUPPORT GAYS), **political capital** to be mined (CEO wants more money and power so he wants to get into politics? Starting a gay supporting party is an awesome tool) etcetc. Indeed, as of 2024 literally every ad you see is woke and gay, capitalism just loves this new "rebel movement". There is no real social issue LGBT should be solving anymore because the **issue of gay discrimination has been solved very long time ago now** -- not only has gay sex and relationships been legalized, they have also been culturally accepted, there is ZERO discrimination against gay people nowadays -- just answer yourself sincerely: do you think you wouldn't get hired in a company nowadays for being gay? Literally no one cares, the only thing a company cares for is your willingness to become their slave. They don't give a shit about you as a human, your desires, your sufferings, they only want to exploit you, no matter who you are. On the contrary, if anything, **being gay (or even transsexual) is nowadays a huge advantage** because companies are forced and WANT to hire such people to show their wokeness, people literally LIE on their resumes and come out as transsexual to have better chances of being hired. Why does LGBT still exist now when gay people are actually privileged? Will LGBT in the spirit of equality try to make the situation more balanced for the non-gay people now? I think we all know the answer: LGBT will continue to cheer up for gays no matter how privileged they are, there is no aim for equality in them, they are a political party aiming for power.
 
 **LGBT is a cult** that managed to actually get mainstream and embraced by the ruling powers ([states](state.md) and [corporations](corporation.md)) -- their [pseudoscience](soyence.md), called "[gender studies](gender_studies.md)", is not unlike the hilarious "science" of Ancient Aliens, the LGBT theories are not unlike the Nazi theories about underground Jewish societies secretly ruling the world. Just like some see everything a work of aliens or Jews, LGBT sees a secret gender oppression in everything, in 100 years old child cartoons, in primitive video games like [pacman](pacman.md), in colors of the butterfly wings, everything has a secret straight cis male oppression message embedded within it. If you ever wondered what it would look like if Scientology took over the world or if Nazis won the world war^([Hitler comparison committed but rightfully so]), you don't have to wonder anymore, it's right here (chances are just that you don't see it just as you wouldn't see Scientology as weird if you grew up in a culture completely controlled by it).
 

main.md

@@ -98,7 +98,8 @@ Are you a noob but see our ideas as appealing and would like to join us? Say no
 ## Did You Know
 
 - That [old](old.md) technology (such as toys or alerts in cars) could play prerecorded audio without using any electricity or needing batteries? This was done by [simply](kiss.md) using a plastic disc spinning on a needle (same principle as a vinyl record). There is a gramophone, called CardTalk, made purely of cardboard which plays vinyl records without any electricity (it used to be used by missionaries traveling to jungles etc.). [Phonograph](phonograph.md), invented around 1877, allowed people to easily record and play back sounds on a small cylinder covered with wax, the wax could later be smoothed out and rewritten with a new record.
-- That the term "retarded" was actually made as a [politically correct](political_correctness.md) replacement for medical terms such as "idiot", "imbecile" and "moron" which became seen as derogatory.
+- That the [free software](free_software.md) song has a very uncommon 7/8 rhythm that is not easy to follow?
+- That the term "[retarded](retarded.md)" was actually made as a [politically correct](political_correctness.md) replacement for medical terms such as "idiot", "imbecile" and "moron" which became seen as derogatory.
 - That all [Intel](intel.md) [processors](cpu.md) since 2008 (and [AMD](amd.md) processors since 2013) have a hardware [backdoor](backdoor.md) ([Intel ME](intel_me.md), [AMD PSP](amd_psp.md)) that run the [Minix](minix.md) operating system and allows spying on users of those processors no matter what operating system they run?
 - That Wilhelm Rontgen, a Nobel laureate, did not [patent](patent.md) his groundbreaking discoveries, stating that they should be freely available to anyone without any charge?
 - That brain size correlates with [intelligence](intelligence.md) and male brains are on average 10% larger than those of [women](woman.md)? Yep, this is still even on [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md), though the implications mustn't be mentioned there.

optimization.md

@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ These are mainly for [C](c.md), but may be usable in other languages as well.
 - **You can optimize critical parts of code in [assembly](assembly.md)**, i.e. manually write the assembly code that takes most of the running time of the program, with as few and as inexpensive instructions as possible (but beware, popular compilers are very smart and it's often hard to beat them). But note that such code loses [portability](portability.md)! So ALWAYS have a C (or whatever language you are using) [fallback](fallback.md) code for other platforms, use [ifdefs](ifdef.md) to switch to the fallback version on platforms running on different assembly languages.
 - **Loop unrolling/splitting/fusion, function inlining etc.**: there are optimizations that are usually done by high level languages at [assembly](assembly.md) level (e.g. loop unrolling physically replaces a loop by repeated commands which gains speed but also makes the program bigger). However if you're writing in assembly or have a dumb compiler (or are even writing your own) you may do these manually, e.g. with macros/templates etc. Sometimes you can hint a compiler to perform these optimizations, so look this up.
 - **[Parallelism](parallelism.md) ([multithreading](multithreading.md), [compute shaders](compute_shader.md), ...) can astronomically accelerate many programs**, it is one of the most effective techniques of speeding up programs -- we can simply perform several computations at once and save a lot of time -- but there are a few notes. Firstly not all problems can be parallelized, some problem are sequential in nature, even though most problems can probably be parallelized to some degree. Secondly it is hard to do, opens the door for many new types of bugs, requires hardware support (software simulated parallelism can't work here of course) and introduces [dependencies](dependency.md); in other words it is huge [bloat](bloat.md), we don't recommend parallelization unless a very, very good reason is given. Optional use of [SIMD](simd.md) instructions can be a reasonable midway to going full parallel computation.
-- **Optimizing [data](data.md)**: it's important to remember we can optimize both algorithm AND data, for example in a 3D game we may simplify our 3D models, remove parts of a level that will never be seen etc.
+- **Optimizing [data](data.md)**: it's important to remember we can optimize both algorithm AND data, for example in a 3D game we may simplify our 3D models, remove parts of a level that will never be seen etc. Ordering, grouping, aligning, reorganizing the data, changing number formats, adding indices and so on may help us achieve cache friendliness and simpler and/or faster algorithms. For example a color [palette](palette.md) may be constructed so that certain desired operations are faster; this is seen e.g. in [Anarch](anarch.md) where colors are arranged so that darkening/brightening is done just by decrementing/incrementing the color index. In [raycasting](raycasting.md) engines it is common to store images by columns rather than by rows as they will be drawn by columns -- this simple change of how data is ordered increases cache friendliness. And so on.
 - **Specialized hardware (e.g. a [GPU](gpu.md)) astronomically accelerates programs**, but as with the previous point, portablity and simplicity greatly suffers, your program becomes bloated and gains dependencies, always consider using specialized hardware and offer software fallbacks.
 - **Smaller code may also be faster** as it allows to fit more instructions into [cache](cache.md).
 - Do not optimize everything and for any cost: optimization often makes the code more cryptic, it may [bloat](bloat.md) it, bring in more bugs etc. Only optimize if it is worth the reward. { from *Game Programming Gurus* -drummyfish }
@@ -88,7 +88,6 @@ The following are some common methods of automatic optimization (also note that
 - **Removing instructions that do nothing**: generated code may contain instructions that just do nothing, e.g. NOPs that were used as placeholders that never got replaced; these can be just removed.
 - **Register allocation**: most frequently used variables should be kept in CPU registers for fastest access.
 - **Removing branches**: branches are often expensive due to not being CPU pipeline friendly, they can sometimes be replaced by a branch-free code, e.g. `if (a == b) c = 1; else c = 0;` can be replaced with `c = a == b;`.
-- **Memory alignment, reordering etc.**: data stored in memory may be reorganized for better efficiency, e.g. an often accessed array of bytes may actually be made into array of ints so that each item resides exactly on one address (which takes fewer instructions to access and is therefore faster). Data may also be reordered to be more [cache](cache.md) friendly.
 - **Generating [lookup tables](lut.md)**: if the optimizer judges some function to be critical in terms of speed, it may auto generate a lookup table for it, i.e. precompute its values and so sacrifice some memory for making it run extremely fast.
 - **Dead code removal**: parts of code that aren't used can be just removed, making the generated program smaller -- this includes e.g. functions that are present in a [library](library.md) which however aren't used by the specific program or blocks of code that become unreachable e.g. due to some `#define` that makes an if condition always false etc.
 - **[Compression](compression.md)**: compression methods may be applied to make data smaller and optimize for size (for the price of increased CPU usage).

wiki_stats.md

@@ -2,10 +2,10 @@
 
 This is an autogenerated article holding stats about this wiki.
 
-- number of articles: 591
-- number of commits: 875
-- total size of all texts in bytes: 4281640
-- total number of lines of article texts: 32642
+- number of articles: 592
+- number of commits: 876
+- total size of all texts in bytes: 4287328
+- total number of lines of article texts: 32707
 - number of script lines: 294
 - occurrences of the word "person": 7
 - occurrences of the word "nigger": 93
@@ -35,22 +35,22 @@ longest articles:
 
 top 50 5+ letter words:
 
-- which (2425)
-- there (1851)
-- people (1652)
+- which (2426)
+- there (1853)
+- people (1655)
 - example (1447)
-- other (1316)
+- other (1318)
 - number (1236)
-- about (1157)
-- software (1149)
-- program (975)
-- because (900)
+- about (1159)
+- software (1150)
+- program (976)
+- because (901)
 - their (889)
 - would (885)
 - called (827)
 - language (822)
-- something (807)
-- being (807)
+- something (809)
+- being (808)
 - things (804)
 - numbers (801)
 - simple (767)
@@ -62,33 +62,55 @@ top 50 5+ letter words:
 - different (678)
 - however (666)
 - system (647)
-- world (625)
+- world (628)
 - doesn (619)
 - should (614)
 - while (593)
 - point (588)
+- society (580)
 - games (580)
-- society (579)
-- drummyfish (562)
+- drummyfish (563)
 - simply (557)
-- using (551)
+- using (552)
 - though (548)
-- still (546)
+- still (547)
 - possible (540)
 - memory (525)
 - similar (520)
-- https (513)
+- https (517)
 - course (508)
 - value (503)
-- technology (497)
+- technology (498)
 - always (495)
 - basically (487)
 - really (479)
-- first (472)
+- probably (472)
 
 latest changes:
 
 ```
+Date:   Thu Sep 5 21:54:17 2024 +0200
+  art.md
+  chess.md
+  cloudflare.md
+  deep_blue.md
+  drummyfish.md
+  gemini.md
+  how_to.md
+  jokes.md
+  lisp.md
+  lrs_dictionary.md
+  main.md
+  often_confused.md
+  oop.md
+  people.md
+  programming_language.md
+  random_page.md
+  smol_internet.md
+  soyence.md
+  wiby.md
+  wiki_pages.md
+  wiki_stats.md
 Date:   Tue Sep 3 15:31:10 2024 +0200
   brain_software.md
   diogenes.md
@@ -100,28 +122,6 @@ Date:   Tue Sep 3 15:31:10 2024 +0200
 Date:   Mon Sep 2 20:43:40 2024 +0200
   ai.md
   approximation.md
-  assembly.md
-  chess.md
-  doom.md
-  gnu.md
-  idiot_fallacy.md
-  lmao.md
-  lrs_dictionary.md
-  main.md
-  racetrack.md
-  random_page.md
-  steganography.md
-  ubi.md
-  version_numbering.md
-  wiki_pages.md
-  wiki_stats.md
-  xonotic.md
-Date:   Sat Aug 31 14:44:45 2024 +0200
-  3d_model.md
-  3d_rendering.md
-  adam_smith.md
-  aliasing.md
-  ascii.md
 ```
 
 most wanted pages:
@@ -140,17 +140,17 @@ most wanted pages:
 - [pointer](pointer.md) (9)
 - [syntax](syntax.md) (8)
 - [sdl](sdl.md) (8)
+- [hitler](hitler.md) (8)
 - [gpu](gpu.md) (8)
 - [gpl](gpl.md) (8)
 - [emacs](emacs.md) (8)
 - [comun_shell](comun_shell.md) (8)
 - [war](war.md) (7)
-- [waiver](waiver.md) (7)
 
 most popular and lonely pages:
 
 - [lrs](lrs.md) (298) 
-- [capitalism](capitalism.md) (245) 
+- [capitalism](capitalism.md) (246) 
 - [c](c.md) (221) 
 - [bloat](bloat.md) (214) 
 - [free_software](free_software.md) (177) 
@@ -161,12 +161,12 @@ most popular and lonely pages:
 - [computer](computer.md) (99) 
 - [kiss](kiss.md) (98) 
 - [modern](modern.md) (95) 
+- [gnu](gnu.md) (93) 
 - [linux](linux.md) (92) 
-- [gnu](gnu.md) (92) 
 - [fun](fun.md) (92) 
 - [programming](programming.md) (90) 
-- [censorship](censorship.md) (88) 
-- [math](math.md) (85) 
+- [censorship](censorship.md) (90) 
+- [math](math.md) (87) 
 - [free_culture](free_culture.md) (82) 
 - [fight_culture](fight_culture.md) (82) 
 - [less_retarded_society](less_retarded_society.md) (81) 
@@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ most popular and lonely pages:
 - [public_domain](public_domain.md) (76) 
 - [programming_language](programming_language.md) (75) 
 - [foss](foss.md) (75) 
-- [chess](chess.md) (73) 
+- [internet](internet.md) (73) 
 - ...
 - [atan](atan.md) (5) 
 - [anal_bead](anal_bead.md) (5) 

windows.md

@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ Windows has these disadvantages (this is just a few things, we can't possibly as
 
 Not that you should use bloated Windows programs but even if you WANT that you can do it with [Wine](wine.md) under GNU/Linux, sometimes the programs even run better under Wine than on winshit itself lol. By this there is zero (or maybe even fewer) reasons to ever use windows, it's literally just for [faggots](faggot.md).
 
-Some people still decide to use it.
+Some "people" still decide to use it.
 
 **Should we compile our programs for Window$?** [Free software](free_software.md) supporters regularly debate this question, some say we shouldn't make Window$ versions of free programs so as to not support the platform. Nevertheless even such purists as [GNU](gnu.md) make Window$ versions of their programs with the justification that providing Window$ useds with the taste of freedom may convince them to leave the system (though their critics may equally see it as mere populism, i.e. just making their program more popular). It is probably true that making some free tools available on Window$ makes a transition to a free system easier just by making the transition more gradual: the used first learns to use free tools, then switches the underlying system, as opposed to making one giant leap into a completely foreign environment. { This is how it worked for myself anyway. ~drummyfish } **Nevertheless** our [LRS](lrs.md) point of view is yet a bit different -- we oppose any kind of [censorship](censorship.md), artificial scarcity and so on, including actively breaking compatibility (which includes not making something compatible if it is trivial to do), we simply refuse to be overlords strategically dictating whether something should work or not, that would be the [evil](evil.md) way. For this our advice is: if it's easy to make your program work somewhere, make it work there. Never put extra effort into lowering compatibility or accessibility. If you just don't care about some platform or it would present too much trouble for you to make it compatible, it's fine to not do it, but at least make it easy for others to do for you. So yes, you can (and probably should) make a Window$ version of your program, but it is also OK to have a bit of [fun](fun.md) while doing so -- for example [Anarch](anarch.md) on Window$ warns the player that his operating system is [malware](malware.md) :) **How to compile shit for Window$ when you don't have Window$?** There are several ways: for [C](c.md) (or C++ etc.) programs you may comfortably use e.g. MinGW ([mingw](mingw.md)) (basically the GNU compilers + binary tools compiled and packaged for Window$) -- this you can either run natively under GNU/Linux (look for mingw packages) or you may run the Window$ versions of it under [wine](wine.md) or in some [VM](vm.md) such as [qemu](qemu.md) or virtualbox (where you may additionally also test the compiled program); you may also theoretically e.g. make a web browser version of your program (with stuff like emscripten) which will run on all OSes.
 

woman.md

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ The symbol for woman is a circle with cross at its bottom ([Unicode](unicode.md)
 
 **Even mainstream science acknowledges women are dumber than men**: even the extremely politically correct [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) states TODAY in the article on human brain that male brain is on average larger in volume (even when corrected for the overall body size) AND that there is correlation between volume and intelligence: this undeniably implies women are dumber. Men also have faster reaction times. On average male brain weights 10% more than woman's and has 16% more brain cells. The Guinness book of 1987 states the average male brain weight being 1424 grams and that of a female being 1242 grams; the averages both grow with time quite quickly so nowadays the numbers will be higher in both sexes, though the average of men grows faster. The heaviest recorded brain belonged to a man (2049 grams), while the lightest belonged to a woman (1096 grams). Heaviest woman brain weighted 1565 grams, only a little more than men's average. [IQ](iq.md)/intelligence measured by various tests has been consistently significantly lower for women than for men, e.g. the paper named *Sex differences in intelligence and brain size: A paradox resolved* found a 4 point difference, noting that in some problems such as 3D spatial rotations males score even 11 points higher average.
 
-Historically women have been privileged over men, and they still are very much (for example they commit [suicides](suicide.md) much less often) -- while men had to [work](work.md) their asses off, go to [wars](war.md), explore and hunt for food, women often weren't even supposed to work, they could stay at home, chill while guarding the fire and playing with children -- this is becoming less and less so with [capitalism](capitalism.md) which aims to simply enslave everyone, nowadays mostly through the [feminist](feminism.md) cult that brainwashed women to desire the same slavery as men. In case of emergencies it's always been the rule to save women and children first, in wars women and children were oftentimes spared in mass executions. Statistically **women live about 6 years longer lives than men** because they have easier and less stressful life, they don't have to work as hard and they can obtain privileges (such as free food and better healthcare) just with a flirty smile. Woman make much more money by prostitution than men, why don't evil women discriminate against poor men this way? While feminists are furious about wage gaps in professions where men make more money than women, none gives a single damn about these opposite kinds of inequality gaps which just confirms what everyone already knows: feminists don't care about equality, they simply care about women. Women also have the huge social privilege of being able to to have sex and/or get a partner at any time with no effort and/or **trade sex (or even just mere company) for things and services**. Being a woman means playing life on very low difficulty, you can have anything you want at any time. Man on the other hand won't get sex unless he's a billionaire or at least 2 meters tall, no matter how smart, nice of physically fit he is. For a woman to get sex it's enough to just ask while not weighting two tons, that's literally how easy it is. It is proven that taller men have more sexual partners which means women are discriminating against short men: why are women so evil and practice [body shaming](body_shaming.md)? Didn't they want equality or something?
+[Historically](history.md) in every [culture](culture.md) women have been privileged over men, and they still are very much (for example they commit [suicides](suicide.md) much less often) -- while men had to [work](work.md) their asses off, go to [wars](war.md), explore and hunt for food, women often weren't even supposed to work, they could stay at home, chill while guarding the fire and playing with children -- this is becoming less and less so with [capitalism](capitalism.md) which aims to simply enslave everyone, nowadays mostly through the [feminist](feminism.md) cult that brainwashed women to desire the same slavery as men. In case of emergencies it's always been the rule to save women and children first, in wars women and children were oftentimes spared in mass executions. Thanks to being smaller, thinner and lighter women need fewer calories to survive, i.e. men have to pay more money just for staying alive (Does anyone care about this inequality gap? Of course not). Statistically **women live about 6 years longer lives than men** because they have easier and less stressful life, they don't have to work as hard and they can obtain privileges (such as free food and better healthcare) just with a flirty smile. Woman make much more money by prostitution than men, why don't evil women discriminate against poor men this way? While feminists are furious about wage gaps in professions where men make more money than women, none gives a single damn about these opposite kinds of inequality gaps which just confirms what everyone already knows: feminists don't care about equality, they simply care about women. Women also have the huge social privilege of being able to to have sex and/or get a partner at any time with no effort and/or **trade sex (or even just mere company) for things and services** -- this happens very often, see e.g. the [GamerGate](gamergate.md) scandal which basically revealed that women "developers" were fucking game reviewers to push promotion of their "games", i.e. here we see that **women oppress men** not just by treating them as mere sexual objects but also by having good games made by men be rejected in favor of bad games made by women by the power of sex. Being a woman means playing life on very low difficulty, you can have anything you want at any time. Man on the other hand won't get sex unless he's a billionaire or at least 2 meters tall, no matter how smart, nice of physically fit he is. For a woman to get sex it's enough to just ask while not weighting two tons, that's literally how easy it is. It is proven that taller men have more sexual partners which means women are discriminating against short men: why are women so evil and practice [body shaming](body_shaming.md)? Didn't they want equality or something?
 
 Women also can't drive, operate machines, they can't compare even to the worst men in sports, both physical and mental such as [chess](chess.md). Women have to have separate leagues and more relaxed rules, e.g. the title Woman Grand Master (WGM) in chess has far lower requirements to obtain than regular Grand Master (GM). (According to [Elo](elo.md) rating the best woman chess player in history would have only 8% chance of winning against current best male who would have 48% chance of winning). On the International Mathematical Olympiad only 43 out of 1338 medals were obtained by females. There are too many funny cases and video compilations of women facing men in sports (watch them before they're censored lol), e.g. the infamous Vaevictis female "progaming" team or the [football](football.md) match between the US national women team (probably the best women team in the world) vs some random under 15 years old boy's team which of course the women team lost. LMAO there is even a video of 1 skinny boy beating 9 women in boxing. Of course there are arguments that worse performance of women in mental sports is caused culturally; women aren't led so much to playing chess, therefore there are fewer women in chess and so the probability of a good woman player appearing is lower. This may be partially true even though genetic factors seem at least equally important and it may equally be true that not so many women play chess simply because they're not naturally good at it; nevertheless the fact that women are generally worse at chess than men stands, regardless of its cause -- a randomly picked men will most likely be better at chess than a randomly picked woman, and that's what matters in the end. Also if women are displaced from chess by culture, then what is the area they are displaced to? If women are as capable as men, then for any area dominated by men there should be an area equally dominated by women, however we see that anywhere men face women men win big time, even in the woman activities such as cooking and fashion design. Feminists will say that men simply oppress women everywhere, but this just means that women are dominated by men everywhere, which means they are more skilled and capable at everything, there is no way out -- yes, antelope are oppressed by lions, but it's because lions are stronger than antelopes. Here we simply argue that women are weaker than men, not that oppressing women is okay -- it isn't. Furthermore if women were weaker but not by that much, we should statistically see at least occasional dominance by a woman, but we practically don't, it's really almost impossible to find a single such case in history, which indicates women are VERY SIGNIFICANTLY weaker, i.e. not something we negligible we could just ignore. Being a woman correlates to losing to a man almost perfectly, it is a great predictor, basically as strong as can appear in science. It makes sense from the evolutionary standpoint as well, women simply evolved to take care of children, guard fire and save resource consumption by being only as strong as necessarily required for this task, while men had to be stronger and smarter to do the hard job of providing food and protection.
 
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ Women also can't drive, operate machines, they can't compare even to the worst m
 
 Now because today's brainwashed reader will see this as "[sexism](sexism.md)", let us remind ourselves that this is completely OK. Women are weaker, but in a [good society](less_retarded_society.md) this doesn't matter as in a good society people don't have to compete or prove their usefulness, everyone is loved equally, weak or strong. The issue here is not pointing out our differences but perpetuating a [shitty society](capitalism.md).
 
-A woman does super stupid shit like pay all her (or her husband's) life savings for silicon breast implants, then wear a dress that basically consist solely of cleavage but then when a man makes eye contact with her breasts during conversation she's like "WHY U NOT LOOOKING IN MY EYEEEEEEEES, STOP RAAAAPIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!". Beware -- a woman possesses the dangerous weapon of seduction which she plentifully makes use of, e.g. for gold digging. A woman is a master of pretense. A wisdom as old as mankind itself states that "you cannot live with a woman, and you cannot live without her" -- this is true, though the latter is much easier to do, especially lately. A woman doesn't think logically, she thinks emotionally (menstruation and their hormone levels jumping all over the place further make this yet much worse), so what's true or false depends on how she feels at the moment OR in the future via so called reverse causality: a woman saying "yes" can actually mean "no" if 20 years later she decides it actually meant "no" -- an action in the future determines the past. Physicists weren't able to explain this phenomenon yet; in fact no male is probably ever capable of understanding a woman.
+A woman does super stupid shit like pay all her (or her husband's) life savings for silicon breast implants, then wear a dress that basically consist solely of cleavage but then when a man makes eye contact with her breasts during conversation she's like "WHY U NOT LOOOKING IN MY EYEEES, STOP RAAAAPIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!". Beware -- a woman possesses the dangerous weapon of seduction which she plentifully makes use of, e.g. for gold digging. A woman is a master of pretense. A wisdom as old as mankind itself states that "you cannot live with a woman, and you cannot live without her" -- this is true, though the latter is much easier to do, especially lately. A woman doesn't think logically, she thinks emotionally (menstruation and their hormone levels jumping all over the place further make this yet much worse), so what's true or false depends on how she feels at the moment OR in the future via so called reverse causality: a woman saying "yes" can actually mean "no" if 20 years later she decides it actually meant "no" -- an action in the future determines the past. Physicists weren't able to explain this phenomenon yet; in fact no male is probably ever capable of understanding a woman.
 
 In the book [Flatland](flatland.md) women are mere [line](line.md) segments, the most primitive of two dimensional shapes, and it's made clear they are very dumb and dangerous, so society just treats them as beings without any notable intellect; a passage from the book for example cites that "it was decreed by the Chief Circle that, since women are deficient in reason but abundant in emotion, they ought no longer to be treated as rational, nor receive any mental education". The book is full of gems like that :D In the [Bible](bible.md) the first woman, Eve, was made by [God](god.md) from the rib of Adam, the first man, to make him company, however that turned out to be a mistake as Eve then pissed off God by eating forbidden fruit (and making Adam eat it too) and got herself and Adam kicked out paradise -- for this she doomed all women to suffer regular monthly bleeding.