Cooooom

bloat_monopoly.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+# Bloat Monopoly
+
+Bloat monopoly is an exclusive control over or de-facto ownership of [software](software.md) not by legal means but by means of [bloat](bloat.md). I.e. even if given sofware is [FOSS](foss.md) (that is its source code is public and everyone has basic rights to it), it can still be made **practically** controlled exclusively by the developer because the developer is the only one with enough resources and/or know-how to be able to execute the basic rights such as meaningful modifications of the software.
+
+Bloat monopoly is [capitalism](capitalism.md)'s bypass of [free](free.md) licenses and accommodation to their popularity. With bloat monopoly capitalists can stick an [FOSS](foss.md) license to their software, get an automatic approval of most "open-source" fans as well as their free work time, while really staying in control almost to the same degree as with [proprietary](proprietary.md) software.
+
+Examples of bloat monopoly include web browsers, [Android](android.md) etc. This software is characteristic by its difficulty to be even compiled, yet alone understood and meaningfully modified, by its astronomical [maintenance](maintenance.md) cost that is hard to pay for volunteers, and by aggressive [update culture](update_culture.md).

capitalist_software.md

@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ A ridiculous example of capitalist software is the most consumerist type: [games
 
 But how can possibly a [FOSS](foss.md) program be abusive? Let's mention a few examples:
 
+- Being a **[bloat monopoly](bloat_monopoly.md)**.
 - **Allowing [maintenance](maintenance.md) cost to be high** and prioritizing e.g. [features](feature_creep.md) leads to program being expensive to maintain which discriminizes against developers unable to pay this maintenance cost. If a rich corporation intentionally makes their program bloated and expensive to just maintain, it ensures no one poor will be able to fork the software and maintain it, which effectively removes the possibility of an ethical competition being made our of their "open source" program.
 - **[Bloat](bloat.md), intentional [obscurity](obscurity.md) and [update_culture](update_culture.md) may lead to de-facto (as opposed to de-jure) limitations of basic [freedom conditions](free_software.md), despite a free license**. Specifically freedom 1 (to study the software, which may be unnecessarily difficult and **expensive**) and 2 (to modify the software, which requires its understanding, unnecessarily high cost of dealing with bad code and the ability to compile it which may be non-trivial). Therefore a company may, on paper, provide the rights to study and modify their program, but keep the actual know-how of the program's working and modification private, de-facto becoming the program's owner and sole controlling entity.
 - **Allowing [proprietary](proprietary.md) [dependencies](dependency.md)**, especiall in [open source](open_source.md). While free software usually avoids this, open source if happy with e.g. Windows-only programs which of course requires the users to run abusive code in order for the program to function.

girl.md

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+# Girl
+
+See [femoid](femoid.md).

proprietary.md

@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
 # Proprietary Software
 
-Proprietary software is any software that is not [free (as in freedom) software](free_software.md). This kind of software is basically always non-based, in fact it is mostly commercial software designed to abuse its user in some way. Examples of proprietary software are [MS Windows](windows.md), [MacOS](macos.md), [Adobe Photoshop](photoshop.md) and almost every [game](game.md).
+Proprietary software is any software that is not [free (as in freedom) software](free_software.md). This kind of software is basically always [evil](evil.md), in fact it is mostly [capitalist software](capitalist_software.md) designed to abuse its user in some way. Examples of proprietary software are [MS Windows](windows.md), [MacOS](macos.md), [Adobe Photoshop](photoshop.md) and almost every [game](game.md).
+
+Proprietary software licenses are usually called [EULAs](eula.md).

ui.md

@@ -4,4 +4,6 @@ User interface, or UI, is an interface between human and computer. Such interfac
 
 Remember the following inequality:
 
-*non-interactive [CLI](cli.md) > interactive [CLI](cli.md) > [TUI](tui.md) > [GUI](gui.md)*
+*non-interactive [CLI](cli.md) > interactive [CLI](cli.md) > [TUI](tui.md) > [GUI](gui.md)*
+
+Some faggots make living just by designing interfaces without even knowing programming lmao. They call it "user experience" or [UX](ux.md). We call it a [bullshit](bullshit.md).

update_culture.md

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Update culture is a negative trend in [capitalism](capitalism.md) in which devel
 
 In software this process is a lot of times automatized and known as [autoupdates](autoupdate.md), but update culture encompasses more than this, it's the whole mentality of having to constantly update one's software, hardware and other products. It is similar to [consumerism](consumerism.md) but more about constant modifications masked as "cool updates" rather than replacement of physical products.
 
-A typical example are [web browsers](browser.md) or proprietary [operating systems](operating_system.md).
+A typical example are [web browsers](browser.md) or proprietary [operating systems](operating_system.md) that strive for [bloat monopoly](bloat_monopoly.md).
 
 The updates are usually justified by "muh [security](security.md)" and "muh [modern](modern.md) [features](feature.md)". Users who want to avoid these updates or simply can't install them, e.g. due to using old incompatible hardware or missing dependency packages, are ridiculed as *poorfags*, idiots and their suffering is ignored. In fact, update culture is [cancer](cancer.md) because: