drummyfish/less_retarded_wiki
5
2
Fork 0
Code Issues 1 Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

Update

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Miloslav Ciz 2024-11-13 01:37:31 +01:00
parent db7839946f
commit da00222f76
31 changed files with 2180 additions and 1926 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
4chan.md
View file

@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ UPDATE: As of 2022 /g/ became literally unreadable, ABANDON SHIP. The board beca
However there are still other, quite nice boards for a more comfy, usually a very fun and politics-free experience, such as /an/ (animals), /out/ (outside), /vr/ (retro video games), /wg/ (wallpapers) and many others. A mistake most newcomers make is to just check out /b/ and /pol/ and swiftly quit in disgust. 4chan is actually designed this way on purpose, these so called "[cancer](cancer.md)" boards exist to filter out noobs. Only a few will proceed to explore other boards and indeed, there is a reward for doing so. One usually finds a nice niche board where people are quite mature and you no longer want to kill yourself when reading the threads.
Despite dwelling slightly [underground](underground.md) -- maybe better said being isolated from the normie "safespace" [censornet](censorship.md) -- 4chan has really been very notably significant for the whole Internet [culture](culture.md), long [books](book.md) could be written about its [history](history.md), culture, unique, intricate social mechanism of its ways of communication and impact on the rest of the cyberspace; the "4chan experience" is one of the things that can't faithfully be described by words, it has to be lived. Just like reddit mixed some interesting concepts into a unique, yet more powerful combination that's more than a sum of its ingredients, so did 4chan -- yes, other boards are to be credited for this too, but 4chan is the flagship, the center of it all. Especially important seems to be the anonymity aspect, you never know who you are talking to, it's never clear if someone is [trolling](troll.md), serious, shilling, extremely dumb or something in between. There is no karma, no handles, no profile pictures, no upvotes (at best there are numbers of replies), no post history, no account age, you have to rely on judging people by unusual attributes, for example by the style of their talk, their knowledge of the [lore](lore.md) and latest [memes](meme.md), by how they format their posts (e.g. the infamously hated empty lines), what images they attach, as these are the only clues. A thread on 4chan isn't something with a clear goal, you don't know if someone is asking a question because he wants a genuine answer or because he's just bored and wants to see funny answers, or if he's posting a bait and is trying to trigger others, so each discussion is a bit of a game, you're trying to guess what's going on. A famous post, for example, had itself heard that the poster despises translations of books and always reads any book in its original language despite not understanding a word of it, and that he already read works such as Don Quixote and Les Miserables in their respective languages without knowing what they were about -- this stupidity combined with extreme determination and dedication (usually known as [autism](autism.md)) captures part of what makes 4chan what it is. Also everything is temporary, every thread and image is deleted in a short time, which is an important factor too, everything is constantly in motion, people have to react quickly, there is no turning back, reactions are quick and genuine, if you miss something it's gone. Also the image memes themselves show how [art](art.md) (who cares if low) evolves if completely unrestrained, anyone can try to spawn a new meme or download anyone else's posted meme, repost it or [modify](remix_culture.md) it, copyright mostly [de facto](de_facto.md) won't apply as the authors are unknown; bad works are filtered out while good ones remain simply by making others save them and keep reposting them, it's art without authors, separated from the people, evolving completely on its own, purely by its intrinsic attributes, unconstrained evolution at work right before our eyes -- this is a seriously scientifically [interesting](interesting.md) stuff.
Despite dwelling slightly [underground](underground.md) -- maybe better said being isolated from the normie "safespace" [censornet](censorship.md) -- 4chan has really been very notably significant for the whole Internet [culture](culture.md), long [books](book.md) could be written about its [history](history.md), culture, unique, intricate social mechanism of its ways of communication and impact on the rest of the cyberspace. Although the golden age of 4chan is long over and many of the original 4channers say it's absolute shit now ([Ashley Jones](ashley_jones.md) being one of them for example), it still remains a great phenomenon at least in [history](history.md) [books](books.md). the "4chan experience" is one of the things that can't faithfully be described by words, it has to be lived. Just like reddit mixed some interesting concepts into a unique, yet more powerful combination that's more than a sum of its ingredients, so did 4chan -- yes, other boards are to be credited for this too, but 4chan is the flagship, the center of it all. Especially important seems to be the anonymity aspect, you never know who you are talking to, it's never clear if someone is [trolling](troll.md), serious, shilling, extremely dumb or something in between. There is no karma, no handles, no profile pictures, no upvotes (at best there are numbers of replies), no post history, no account age, you have to rely on judging people by unusual attributes, for example by the style of their talk, their knowledge of the [lore](lore.md) and latest [memes](meme.md), by how they format their posts (e.g. the infamously hated empty lines), what images they attach, as these are the only clues. A thread on 4chan isn't something with a clear goal, you don't know if someone is asking a question because he wants a genuine answer or because he's just bored and wants to see funny answers, or if he's posting a bait and is trying to trigger others, so each discussion is a bit of a game, you're trying to guess what's going on. A famous post, for example, had itself heard that the poster despises translations of books and always reads any book in its original language despite not understanding a word of it, and that he already read works such as Don Quixote and Les Miserables in their respective languages without knowing what they were about -- this stupidity combined with extreme determination and dedication (usually known as [autism](autism.md)) captures part of what makes 4chan what it is. Also everything is temporary, every thread and image is deleted in a short time, which is an important factor too, everything is constantly in motion, people have to react quickly, there is no turning back, reactions are quick and genuine, if you miss something it's gone. Also the image memes themselves show how [art](art.md) (who cares if low) evolves if completely unrestrained, anyone can try to spawn a new meme or download anyone else's posted meme, repost it or [modify](remix_culture.md) it, copyright mostly [de facto](de_facto.md) won't apply as the authors are unknown; bad works are filtered out while good ones remain simply by making others save them and keep reposting them, it's art without authors, separated from the people, evolving completely on its own, purely by its intrinsic attributes, unconstrained evolution at work right before our eyes -- this is a seriously scientifically [interesting](interesting.md) stuff.
As of writing this https://4stats.io/ reports /pol as the most active board (~80 posts/min, ~150 threads/hour), followed by /v, /tv and /b.

6
ashley_jones.md
View file

@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
*"Either she's genius at comedy or he's genius at comedy."* --comment under one of her videos
Ashley Jones (born around ?1999?) is a rare specimen of a [based](based.md) [American](usa.md) biological (which on occasion gets questioned) [woman](woman.md) on the [Internet](internet.md), a [politically incorrect](political_correctness.md) [red pilled](red_pill.md) comedienne who is sadly no longer underage. Ashley Jones IS NOT DANGEROUS. She got famous through [4chan](4chan.md) and similar boards thanks to having become red pilled at quite an early age: her being a pretty [underage girl](jailbait.md) on 4chan definitely contributed to her fame, however she started to create masterful OC comedic videos with which she managed to win the hearts of dedicated fans that wouldn't abandon her even after they could legally have sex with her (at least in theory). For some time she used mainstream platforms but, of course, [censorship](censorship.md) would eventually lead her to self-hosting all her stuff with [free software](free_software.md), which she now supports. She loves old vintage technology, has pug [dogs](dog.md) and in one video said she had a brother, but not much else is known about her. It looks like she might be from Minnetonka in Minnesota, because she sometimes talks about that town and even posts photos that look like other photos from that shithole (in her cooking video she even showed "her house", but may be a [troll](trolling.md)). Ashley Jones ruined her reputation for your sins.
Ashley Jones (born around ?1999?) is a rare specimen of a [based](based.md) [American](usa.md) biological (which on occasion gets questioned) [woman](woman.md) on the [Internet](internet.md), a [politically incorrect](political_correctness.md) [red pilled](red_pill.md) comedienne who is sadly no longer underage. Ashley Jones IS NOT DANGEROUS. She got famous through [4chan](4chan.md) (which now she abandoned and no longer likes) and similar boards thanks to having become red pilled at quite an early age: her being a pretty [underage girl](jailbait.md) on 4chan definitely contributed to her fame, however she started to create masterful OC comedic videos with which she managed to win the hearts of dedicated fans that wouldn't abandon her even after they could legally have sex with her (at least in theory). For some time she used mainstream platforms but, of course, [censorship](censorship.md) would eventually lead her to [self-hosting](self_hosting.md) all her stuff with [free software](free_software.md), which she now supports. She loves old vintage technology, has pug [dogs](dog.md) and in one video said she had a brother, but not much else is known about her. It looks like she might be from Minnetonka in Minnesota, because she sometimes talks about that town and even posts photos that look like other photos from that shithole (in her cooking video she even showed "her house", but may be a [troll](trolling.md)). Ashley Jones ruined her reputation for your sins.
Her website is newly at **[https://dukenukemis.cool](https://dukenukemis.cool)** (previously [https://icum.to](https://icum.to), also her image board is at https://tubgurl.com). Some of her old videos are archived on [jewtube](youtube.md) and bitchute. Currently she seems to be focusing more on videos about technology before doing comedy. If you can, please go donate to Ashley right now, we don't want her to starve!
@ -23,6 +23,6 @@ Her website is newly at **[https://dukenukemis.cool](https://dukenukemis.cool)**
*Ashley is such a cutie.*
**Why is she so based?** For example for the following reasons { Note that this is purely my interpretation of what I've seen/read on her website. ~drummyfish }: She is a pretty, biological woman (i.e. NOT some kind of angry [trans](tranny.md) [landwhale](fat.md)) BUT she shits on [feminism](feminism.md) and acknowledges plain facts about women such as that they usually need to be "put in line" (with love) by a man and that they are simply different. She makes a nice, ACTUALLY ENTERTAINING, well made politically incorrect stuff, her art is sincere, not trying to pretend anything or ride on some kind of fashion wave. She is VERY talented at comedy, hosts her OWN video website with a modest fan following and even though on [Jewtube](youtube.md) she could get hundred thousand times more followers and make a fortune, she doesn't do it because that would compromise her art -- she does ask for donations but refuses to monetize her content with [ads](marketing.md) or [paywalls](paywall.md), creating a nice, pure, oldschool free speech Internet place looks to truly be the one thing she's aiming for. She makes [fun](fun.md) of herself (like that she has a crush on [Duke Nukem](duke3d.md) lol), masterfully plays along with jokes blatantly sexualizing her and does some cool stuff like post measurements of her asshole and finding her porn lookalikes for the fanbase. It looks like she possesses some skills with technology (at least [Luke Smith](luke_smith.md) level), she supports [free software](free_software.md). She acknowledges the insanity of [pedophile](pedophilia.md) hysteria and proposes lowering age of consent (despite saying she was NOT a pedophile herself). She wants to normalize nudity, and doesn't shave her legs. Her website is quite nice, 1.0 style, with high [LRS](lrs_wiki.md)/[4chan](4chan.md)/[Dramatica](dramatica.md) vibes, there are "offensive" jokes but she stresses she in fact doesn't encourage violence and that she's not an extremist -- in one video she says she dislikes transsexuals and wants to make fun of gays but that in fact she doesn't mind any individual being gay or whatever, basically just opposing the political movements, propaganda, brainwashing etcetc., i.e. showing the exact same kind of attitude as us. She also understands internet culture and things like [trolling](trolling.md) being part of it -- in one video she clearly separates Internet and [real life](irl.md) and says you "can't apply real life logic on the Internet", that's very mature. By this she for example supports consensual incest. She even freaking has her own imageboard that's by the way very good. She seems to see through propaganda and brainwashing, she says she does "not accept the reality" forced on her by this society, something we say and do as well, she shits on vaccines and likes cool "conspiracy theories". Yes, she seems SMART, she sees the power game of the elites, the propaganda, warns about it, shits on it. She seems to know how to write [English](english.md) without making 10 errors in every word. She advocates ETHICAL veganism, to spare animals of suffering. She hates [Elon Musk](elon_musk.md). She advocates not using cellphones and mainstream social networks. She does NOT have any [tattoos](tattoo.md).
**Why is she so based?** For example for the following reasons { Note that this is purely my interpretation of what I've seen/read on her website. ~drummyfish }: She is a pretty, biological woman (i.e. NOT some kind of angry [trans](tranny.md) [landwhale](fat.md)) BUT she shits on [feminism](feminism.md) and acknowledges plain facts about women such as that they usually need to be "put in line" (with [love](love.md)) by a man and that they are simply different. She makes a nice, ACTUALLY ENTERTAINING, well made politically incorrect stuff, her art is sincere, not trying to pretend anything or ride on some kind of fashion wave. She is VERY talented at comedy, hosts her OWN video website with a modest fan following and even though on [Jewtube](youtube.md) she could get hundred thousand times more followers and make a fortune, she doesn't do it because that would compromise her art and prevent her from doing what she really wants to do -- in fact recently she started to depart more into other topics, like technology repair, which probably in terms of popularity rather "hurts the numbers", but she just does it because it's what she likes and wants to do, it can be seen that she doesn't lust for simple popularity but rather for sharing truly interesting stuff. She does ask for donations but refuses to monetize her content with [ads](marketing.md) or [paywalls](paywall.md), creating a nice, pure, oldschool place on the Internet looks to truly be the one thing she's aiming for. She makes [fun](fun.md) of herself (like that she has a crush on [Duke Nukem](duke3d.md) lol), masterfully plays along with jokes blatantly sexualizing her and does some cool stuff like post measurements of her asshole and finding her porn lookalikes for the fanbase. It looks like she possesses some skills with technology (at least [Luke Smith](luke_smith.md) level), she supports [free software](free_software.md). She acknowledges the insanity of [pedophile](pedophilia.md) hysteria and proposes lowering age of consent (despite saying she was NOT a pedophile herself). She wants to normalize nudity, and doesn't shave her legs, she discourages makeup for females. Her website is quite nice, 1.0 style, with high [LRS](lrs_wiki.md)/[4chan](4chan.md)/[Dramatica](dramatica.md) vibes, there are "offensive" jokes but she stresses she in fact doesn't encourage violence, real racism and that she's not an extremist -- in one video she says she dislikes transsexuals and wants to make fun of gays but that in fact she doesn't mind any individual being gay or whatever, basically just opposing the political movements, propaganda, brainwashing etcetc., i.e. showing the exact same kind of attitude as us. She also understands Internet [culture](culture.md) and things like [trolling](trolling.md) being part of it -- in one video she clearly separates Internet and [real life](irl.md) and says you "can't apply real life logic on the Internet", that's very mature. By this she for example supports consensual incest. She even freaking has her own imageboard that's by the way very good (although now she says it's mostly occupied by retards, but she still keeps it running for them, that's very [selfless](selflessness.md)). She advocates [piracy](piracy.md) instead of giving money to [corporations](corporation.md): extremely based. She seems to see through propaganda and brainwashing, she says she does "not accept the reality" forced on her by this society, something we say and do as well, she shits on vaccines and likes cool "conspiracy theories". Yes, she seems SMART, she sees the power game of the elites, the propaganda, warns about it, shits on it. She seems to know how to write [English](english.md) without making 10 errors in every word. She advocates ETHICAL veganism, to spare animals of suffering. She hates [Elon Musk](elon_musk.md). She advocates not using cellphones and mainstream social networks. She does NOT have any [tattoos](tattoo.md). However, while all of these individual things are very nice, the **most important part**, and the one that basically matters above having certain opinion or demonstrating coolness in some way, is simply this: **she makes her own opinions**. As she states on the website, she doesn't accept any prefabricated "package of opinions", she thinks about things herself and makes HER OWN fucking decisions regardless of whether that leaves her alienated from the rest of human on the planet, and that's where all the coolness comes from -- this is the most important lesson Ashley can teach us.
Sure, [we](lrs.md) find disagreements with her, for example on the question of [privacy](privacy.md), but if we call [Diogenes](diogenes.md) a based man and [Encyclopedia Dramatica](dramatica.md) a based website, we also have to admit Ashley Jones is a based woman and her website is likewise no less cool. At least at the time when this article was written.
Sure, [we](lrs.md) find disagreements with her, for example on the question of [privacy](privacy.md), but if we call [Diogenes](diogenes.md) a based man and [Encyclopedia Dramatica](dramatica.md) a based website, we also have to admit Ashley Jones is a based woman and her website is likewise no less cool. At least at the time when this article was written. Even if she gets spoiled and one days turns 180 degrees from everything she stood for, the image of what she was will remain for others as an example, she is an original thinker and created something greater than a human can be: an immortal imagine of what one can hope to be.

3
bill_gates.md
View file

@ -32,4 +32,5 @@ When Bill Gates and [Steve Jobs](steve_jobs.md) saw how enormously rich they got
- [voldemort](voldemort.md)
- [beelzebub](beelzebub.md)
- [hitler](hitler.md)
- [biotrash](biotrash.md)
- [biotrash](biotrash.md)
- [reptilian](reptilian.md)

2
chaos.md
View file

@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
# Chaos
In [mathematics](math.md) chaos is a phenomenon that makes it extremely difficult to predict, even approximately, the outcome of some process even if we completely know how the process works and what state it starts in. In more technical terms chaos is a property of a [nonlinear](nonlinear.md) [deterministic](determinism.md) [system](system.md) in which even a very small change in input creates a great change in the output, i.e. the system is very sensitive to [initial conditions](initial_condition.md). Chaos is a topic studied by the field called **chaos theory** and is important in all [science](science.md). In [computer science](compsci.md) it is important for example for the generation of [pseudorandom](pseudorandom.md) numbers or in [cryptography](cryptography.md). Every programmer should be familiar with the existence of chaotic behavior because in mathematics (programming) it emerges very often, it may pose a problem but, of course, it may be taken advantage of as well.
In [mathematics](math.md) chaos is a phenomenon that makes it extremely difficult to predict, even [approximately](approximation.md), the outcome of some process even if we completely know how the process works and what state it starts in. In more technical terms chaos is a property of a [nonlinear](nonlinear.md) [deterministic](determinism.md) [system](system.md) in which even a very small change in input creates a great change in the output, i.e. the system is very sensitive to [initial conditions](initial_condition.md). Chaos is a topic studied by the field called **chaos theory** and is important in all [science](science.md). In [computer science](compsci.md) it is important for example for the generation of [pseudorandom](pseudorandom.md) numbers or in [cryptography](cryptography.md). Every programmer should be familiar with the existence of chaotic behavior because in mathematics (programming) it emerges very often, it may pose a problem but, of course, it may be taken advantage of as well.
Perhaps the most important point is that a chaotic system is difficult to predict NOT because of [randomness](randomness.md), lack of information about it or even its incomprehensible complexity (many chaotic systems are defined extremely simply), but because of its inherent structure that greatly amplifies any slight nudge to the system and gives any such nudge a great significance. This may be caused by things such as [feedback loops](feedback_loop.md) and [domino effects](domino_effect.md). Generally we describe this behavior as so called **[butterfly effect](butterfly_effect.md)** -- we liken this to the fact that a butterfly flapping its wings somewhere in a forest can trigger a sequence of events that may lead to causing a tornado in a distant city a few days later.

213
chess.md
View file

@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ So secondly we need to implement a so called **search** algorithm -- typically s
Exhaustively searching the tree to great depths is not possible even with most powerful [hardware](hw.md) due to astronomical numbers of possible move combinations, so the engine has to limit the depth quite greatly and use various [hacks](hacking.md), [approximations](approximation.md), [heuristics](heuristic.md), [caches](cache.md) etc.. Normally it will search all moves to a small depth (e.g. 2 or 3 half moves or *plys*) and then extend the search for interesting moves such as exchanges or checks. Maybe the greatest danger of searching algorithms is so called **horizon effect** which has to be addressed somehow (e.g. by detecting quiet positions, so called *quiescence*). If not addressed, the horizon effect will make an engine misevaluate certain moves by stopping the evaluation at certain depth even if the played out situation would continue and lead to a vastly different result (imagine e.g. a queen taking a pawn which is guarded by another pawn; if the engine stops evaluating after the queen's pawn capture, it will think it's a won pawn, when in fact it's a lost queen). There are also many techniques for reducing the number of searched tree nodes and speeding up the search, for example pruning methods such as **alpha-beta** (which subsequently works best with correctly ordering moves to search), or **transposition tables** (remembering already evaluated position so that they don't have to be evaluated again when encountered by a different path in the tree). Furthermore we may try to combine many different things together, for example exhaustive search for some situations along with monte carlo in others; we may also try to employ more machine learning, e.g. make a special neural net just for suggesting which moves and to what depth should be searched etc.
**Alternative approaches**: most engines work as described above (search plus evaluation function) with some minor or bigger modifications. The simplest possible stupid AI can just make random moves, which will of course be an extremely weak opponent (though even weaker can be made, but these will actually require more complex code as to play worse than random moves requires some understanding and searching for the worst moves) -- one might perhaps try to just program a few simple rules to make it a bit less stupid and possibly a simple training opponent for complete beginners: the AI may for example pick a few "good looking" candidate moves that are "usually OK" (pushing a pawn, taking a higher value piece, castling, ...) and aren't a complete insanity, then pick one at random only from those (this randomness can further be improved and gradually controlled by scoring the moves somehow and adding a more or less random value from some range to each score, then picking the moves with highest score). One could also try to just program in a few generic rules such as: checkmate if you can, otherwise take an unprotected piece, otherwise protect your own unprotected piece etc. -- this could produce some beginner level bot. Another idea might be a "Chinese room" bot that doesn't really understand chess but has a huge database of games (which it may even be fetching from some Internet database) and then just looking up what moves good players make in positions that arise on the board, however a database of all positions will never exist, so in case the position is not found there has to be some fallback (e.g. play random move, or somehow find the "most similar position" and use that, ...). As another approach one may try to use some **non neural network [machine learning](machine_learning.md)**, for example [genetic programming](genetic_programming.md), to train the evaluation function, which will then be used in the tree search. Another idea that's being tried (e.g. in the Maia engine) is **pure neural net AI** (or another form of machine learning) which doesn't use any tree search -- not using search at all has long been thought to be impossible as analyzing a chess position completely statically without any "looking ahead" is extremely difficult, however new neural networks have shown to be extremely good at this kind of thing and pure NN AIs can now play on a master level (a human grandmaster playing ultra bullet is also just a no-calculation, pure pattern recognition play). Next, **[Monte Carlo](monte_carlo.md) tree search** (MCTS) is an alternative way of searching the game tree which may even work without any evaluation function: in it one makes many random playouts (complete games until the end making only random moves) for each checked move and based on the number of wins/losses/draws in those playouts statistically a value is assigned to the move -- the idea is that a move that most often leads to a win is likely the best. Another Monte Carlo approach may just make random playouts, stop at random depth and then use normal static evaluation function (horizon effect is a danger but hopefully its significance should get minimized in the averaging). However MCTS is pretty tricky to do well. MCTS is used e.g. in Komodo Dragon, the engine that's currently among the best. Another approach may lie in somehow using several methods and [heuristics](heuristic.md) to vote on which move would be best.
**Alternative approaches**: most engines work as described above (search plus evaluation function) with some minor or bigger modifications. The simplest possible stupid AI can just make random moves, which will of course be an extremely weak opponent (though even weaker can be made, but these will actually require more complex code as to play worse than random moves requires some understanding and searching for the worst moves) -- one might perhaps try to just program a few simple rules to make it a bit less stupid and possibly a simple training opponent for complete beginners: the AI may for example pick a few "good looking" candidate moves that are "usually OK" (pushing a pawn, taking a higher value piece, castling, ...) and aren't a complete insanity, then pick one at random only from those (this randomness can further be improved and gradually controlled by scoring the moves somehow and adding a more or less random value from some range to each score, then picking the moves with highest score). One could also try to just program in a few generic rules such as: checkmate if you can, otherwise take an unprotected piece, otherwise protect your own unprotected piece etc. -- this could produce some beginner level bot. Another idea might be a "Chinese room" bot that doesn't really understand chess but has a huge database of games (which it may even be fetching from some Internet database) and then just looking up what moves good players make in positions that arise on the board, however a database of all positions will never exist, so in case the position is not found there has to be some fallback (e.g. play random move, or somehow find the "most similar position" and use that, ...). As another approach one may try to use some **non neural network [machine learning](machine_learning.md)**, for example [genetic programming](genetic_programming.md), to train the evaluation function, which will then be used in the tree search. Another idea that's being tried (e.g. in the Maia engine) is **pure neural net AI** (or another form of machine learning) which doesn't use any tree search -- not using search at all has long been thought to be impossible as analyzing a chess position completely statically without any "looking ahead" is extremely difficult, however new neural networks have shown to be extremely good at this kind of thing and pure NN AIs can now play on a master level (a human grandmaster playing ultra bullet is also just a no-calculation, pure pattern recognition play) -- a paper called *Grandmaster-Level Chess Without Search* managed to implement pure NN engine that on Lichess achieved rating of 2895, close to the strongest engines on the site. Next, **[Monte Carlo](monte_carlo.md) tree search** (MCTS) is an alternative way of searching the game tree which may even work without any evaluation function: in it one makes many random playouts (complete games until the end making only random moves) for each checked move and based on the number of wins/losses/draws in those playouts statistically a value is assigned to the move -- the idea is that a move that most often leads to a win is likely the best. Another Monte Carlo approach may just make random playouts, stop at random depth and then use normal static evaluation function (horizon effect is a danger but hopefully its significance should get minimized in the averaging). However MCTS is pretty tricky to do well. MCTS is used e.g. in Komodo Dragon, the engine that's currently among the best. Another approach may lie in somehow using several methods and [heuristics](heuristic.md) to vote on which move would be best.
Many other aspects come into the AI design such as opening books (databases of best opening moves), endgame tablebases (precomputed databases of winning moves in simple endgames), clock management, pondering (thinking on opponent's move), learning from played games etc. For details see the above linked chess programming wiki.
@ -110,29 +110,29 @@ Many other aspects come into the AI design such as opening books (databases of b
Here are some notable chess engines/computers/entities, as of 2024:
- **[Stockfish](stockfish.md)** (SF): FOSS engine (written in [C++](cpp.md)), without any doubt **the strongest chess engine** that's been reliably winning all the computer tournaments for years now; its strength is far beyond any human, even if run on quite a weak device -- it actually caused some trouble because it's extremely easy to just download onto a cellphone and [cheat](cheating.md) even in OTB tournaments. Currently the engine is using a [neural network](neural_network.md) for evaluating positions but still also uses the tree search algorithm (a greatly optimized one so that it searches gigantic numbers of positions per second). Important part of the development is so called *Fishtest*, a distributed framework for testing and improving the engine's performance, it's one of the reasons why it good so strong. Stockfish's current CCRL Elo rating is 3639 (warning: this is incomparable to human Elos).
- **[Stockfish](stockfish.md)** (SF): [FOSS](foss.md) engine (written in [C++](cpp.md)), without any doubt **the strongest chess engine** that's been reliably winning all the computer tournaments for years now; its strength is far beyond any human, even if run on quite a weak device -- it actually caused some trouble because it's extremely easy to just download onto a cellphone and [cheat](cheating.md) even in OTB tournaments. Currently the engine is using a [neural network](neural_network.md) for evaluating positions but still also uses a search algorithm (a greatly optimized one so that it searches gigantic numbers of positions per second to very high depth) and offers using hand crafted evaluation as well. It's actually quite well written and only runs on the [CPU](cpu.md), it supports many different [architectures](isa.md) and is very [portable](portability.md), unlike for example LC0 which requires a bloated [GPU](gpu.md). Important part of Stockfish development is so called *Fishtest*, a distributed framework for testing and improving the engine's performance, it's one of the reasons why it good so strong. Stockfish's current CCRL Elo rating is 3639 (warning: this is incomparable to human Elos).
- **Magnus Carlsen**: Human, most likely the strongest player ever, has been quite comfortably winning every tournament he entered including the world championship until he quit, basically because he got "bored". His top FIDE Elo was 2882.
- **Komodo Dragon**: [Proprietary](proprietary.md), currently seems to be the second strongest engine, it's main feature is [Monte Carlo] ("randomized") search algorithm. Current CCRL Elo is 3624.
- **Komodo Dragon**: [Proprietary](proprietary.md), currently seems to be the second strongest engine, its main feature is [Monte Carlo] ("randomized") search algorithm. Current CCRL Elo is 3624.
- **Hikaru Nakamura**: Human, popularly considered "the second best" right after Magnus (who the mainstream likes to see as his biggest "rival") -- although this is not really so clear, he is definitely among the very top (his peak rating was 2816); We mention him here for his style of play: he likes to [troll](trolling.md) and do various lulz even on high level, many hate him for it. Some say he is a bit of a dick but his chess is definitely extremely entertaining. He also often plays strong computer engines, which is something that Magnus refuses to do (for commercial reasons Magnus only plays his shitty mobile "[app](app.md)"), so thanks to Nakamura we can really watch the best humans play the best computers.
- **[Leela Chess Zero](lc0.md)** (lc0): FOSS engine (written in C++), among top strongest engines (currently top 50 on CCRL), it is interesting mainly for how it works: it is a neural network engine that's **completely self-taught** from the ground up, i.e. it didn't learn chess by watching anyone else play, it was only allowed to learn by playing against itself. Current CCRL Elo is 3441.
- **[Deep Blue](deep_blue.md)**: A historically famous supercomputer, the first one to have beaten the human world chess champion in 1997.
- **[GNU chess](gnu_chess.md)** Free engine by [GNU](gnu.md), not among absolute top by strength but still very strong. Current CCRL Elo is 2825.
- **Maia**: FOSS engine, or rather neural network, notable by not trying to be the strongest, but rather most human-like, i.e. tries to imitate human play, even with errors. There are several versions, each trained for different strength. It is also notable by using pure neural network, i.e. it doesn't perform any search, it's a pure "pattern recognition"/static engine that still manages to play quite well.
- **Toledo Nanochess**: Seems to be the world's smallest [C](c.md) chess engine, with only 1257 non-blank characters of source code.
- **[smallchesslib](smallchesslib.md)/smolchess**: Tiny LRS [C](c.md) library/engine, very weak but is very simple, small and portable, may be [good enough](good_enough.md) in many situations.
- **[smallchesslib](smallchesslib.md)/smolchess**: Tiny [LRS](lrs.md) [C](c.md) library/engine, very weak but is quite simple, small and [portable](portability.md), may be [good enough](good_enough.md) in many situations.
- **Chessmaster**: A famous proprietary chess video games with its own engine, it was strong for a video game of its time (around 2000 Elo) but nowadays would be considered rather weak for an engine -- its significance is cultural, it's used for comparisons, many people played against it and still use it to test their engines against.
- **Turochamp**: Probably the first chess program ever, made by David Champernowne and [Alan Turing](turing.md) himself in 1948, in times when computers still couldn't execute it! It was very primitive, looking only two moves ahead, and was only ever executed manually -- of course, it got raped pretty bad the human opponent.
- ...
## Stats And Records
Chess stats are pretty [interesting](interesting.md). Thanks a lot e.g. to Lichess (and NOT thanks to fucking capitalist idiots like chess dot com) we have some great [public domain](public_domain.md) databases of billions of games played between both people and computers, and thanks to chess engines we can generate new and new on demand, so naturally many people create cool statistics, look for patterns and rarities. This can be very insightful and entertaining.
Chess stats are pretty [interesting](interesting.md). Thanks a lot e.g. to Lichess (and NOT thanks to fucking capitalist idiots like chess dot com) we have some great [public domain](public_domain.md) databases of billions of games played between both people and computers, and thanks to chess engines we can generate new and new on demand, so naturally many people create cool statistics, look for patterns and oddities. This can be very insightful and entertaining.
{ Some chess world records are here: https://timkr.home.xs4all.nl/records/records.htm. ~drummyfish }
**Number of possible games** is not known exactly, Shannon estimated it at 10^120 (lower bound, known as *Shannon number*). Number of possible games by plies played is 20 after 1, 400 after 2, 8902 after 3, 197281 after 4, 4865609 after 5, and 2015099950053364471960 after 15.
Similarly the **number of possibly reachable positions** (position for which so called *proof game* exists) is not known exactly, it is estimated to at least 10^40 and 10^50 at most. Numbers of possible positions by plies is 20 after 1, 400 after 2, 5362 after 3, 72078 after 4, 822518 after 5, and 726155461002 after 11.
Similarly the **number of possibly reachable positions** (position for which so called *proof game* exists) is not known exactly, some upper estimates have been made, lower bounds are much harder to set. The estimates are placed around 10^40 or 10^50 at most. [Here](https://tromp.github.io/chess/chess.html) is a site that gives a proven upper estimate of 45193640626062205213735739171550309047984050718 (2^155), also providing a more precise one of 7728772977965919677164873487685453137329736522 (~10^45.888, ~2^152) which was however proven with a program that's a bit obscure and less trustworthy. Numbers of possible positions by plies are 20 after 1, 400 after 2, 5362 after 3, 72078 after 4, 822518 after 5, and 726155461002 after 11.
**Shortest possible checkmate** is by black on ply number 4 (so called *fool's mate*); in fact there are 8 different games that can end like this. As of 2022 the **longest known forced checkmate** is in 549 moves -- it has been discovered when computing the Lomonosov Tablebases. EDIT: now it seems there is one in 584 moves. Please note this: there most likely exist much longer forced mates, these are just the KNOWN ones. Consider e.g. that if black blunders a queen in the opening, the game is very likely a theoretical win for white since then, i.e. a forced mate, and with perfect play black can probably resist for very long. However such situations are too complex to explore fully.
@ -156,29 +156,185 @@ What is **the most typical game**? We can try to construct such a game from a ga
22. Qb3 O-O-O 23. Qa3 Qc5 24. Qb3 d5 25. Bf1
```
What's **the best and worst opening move according to the engines?** Please remember that engine best move is not necessarily the best move for a human, see the note on perfect play above. Also the answer will depend on which engine (what evaluation function) you use and to what depth you search. According to Lichess cloud database (accessible via public API) that stores stockfish evaluations for various positions, e4 leads to the best evaluated position (18 centipawn, evaluated to depth 70; the move is also seen by many as best for humans), closely followed by d4 and Nf3 (both 17 centipawn, depth 47 and 56) and c4 (12 centipawn, depth 59). Worst move here is by far g4 with evaluation -96 centipawn (depth 52) -- almost a whole pawn, i.e. stockfish says that by playing this move you basically just throw away your pawn immediately. Another bad move is apparently f3 (-76, depth 40), Nh3 (-42), Na3 (-33), b4 or h4 (both -28). In general both humans and engines are basically deciding between e4 and d4, deeper evaluations keep oscillating between them.
**Note on good and BAD play**: as we'll be looking at WORST moves and games, there's a similar catch as when looking for the BEST ones (see note on perfect play above). When judging something as good or bad, we have to ask "good or bad considering WHAT kind of players?" (what skill, what goal, what kind of behavior, ...) -- best move for an engine may require precise play and so may not be best for human, and best move for a grandmaster may not be the best for average player, AND also a good move against human may be not best against a computer and vice versa. For example when looking for the worst move in a position, the first we think of is this: consider all moves and take the one which will take us to a position that has the worst evaluation by computer engine. This is quite cool, but not always and may not really be what we want, because when evaluating the position, the computer assumes GOOD play from both sides. So when we e.g. flip the rules and try to make computers play the worst moves and get themselves mated, they should rather assume the opponent to play the WORST moves, we want a different kind of estimate -- here it's not enough to offer opponent a checkmate, but also ensure he MUST give it. So these are some things to keep in mind.
How big is the **white's starting move advantage**? Based on the above evaluations of all starting moves the initial position is rated at 18 centipawn (for the best move found, e4), i.e. with this specific engine and search depth we are told white has, in material terms, an advantage of almost a fifth of a pawn.
What's **the best and worst opening move according to the engines?** With what's been said above, the answer will also depend on which engine (what evaluation function) you use and to what depth you search. The situation is basically this: both engines and humans are deciding between e4 or d4 for the best move, opinions differ and strongest engines currently oscillate between e4 and d4 as we keep analyzing the starting position deeper and deeper. According to Lichess cloud database (accessible via public API) that stores stockfish evaluations for various positions, e4 leads to the best evaluated position (18 centipawn, evaluated to depth 70), closely followed by d4 and Nf3 (both 17 centipawn, depth 47 and 56) and c4 (12 centipawn, depth 59). Lichess stockfish is currently an older version (14) also running in the web browser, so not absolutely strongest, but still very strong. On Chessbase (proprietary database) someone analyzed the starting position to depth 79 with stockfish 12, giving evaluation 0.17 and best move d4 (followed by Nf6 c4 ...). Running the strongest version of stockfish at this point (stockfish 17) to depth 65 (which took some 4 hours) also gives best move d4 (followed by Nf6), but as said, it just seems to go there and back between e4 and d4. So pick one. Worst move, as in "leading to worst evaluation in Lichess database" (also usually given by humans), is by far g4 with evaluation -96 centipawn (depth 52) -- almost a whole pawn, i.e. stockfish says that by playing this move you basically just throw away your pawn immediately. Another bad move is apparently f3 (-76, depth 40), Nh3 (-42), Na3 (-33), b4 or h4 (both -28). So g4 is likely the worst move under normal conditions, however if we play an opponent who is also trying to play the worst moves, i.e. we flip the rules and make each player try to get himself mated (in a computer engine flip the sign of the evaluation function), the engine actually elects e3 as the worst move, because that allows the white queen to immediately run out, attack the enemy king face to face and force him to take it.
What's **the perfect game according to an engine**? Again, this will vary depending on new and better versions of engines coming out, on hardware, time we spend on computing moves etc. The following draw was produced by taking the first six highly analyzed moves from the Lichess cloud database and letting the rest of the game be played by stockfish 15.1 (each player given 30 minutes plus 5 second increment, moves were usually analyzed to 50+ depth):
How big is the **white's starting move advantage**? Based on the above evaluations of all starting moves the initial position is rated at about 18 centipawn (for the best move found, e4), i.e. with this specific engine and search depth we are told white has, in material terms, an advantage of almost a fifth of a pawn.
What's **the perfect game according to an engine**? Again, this will vary depending on new and better versions of engines coming out, on hardware, time we spend on computing moves etc. The following annotated draw was produced by taking a few first highly analyzed moves from the Lichess cloud database and letting the rest of the game be played by stockfish 17, the strongest available engine at the time, at a reasonably powerful desktop PC, giving each player 90 minutes plus 10 second increment, with endgame tablebases proving that since 7 men on the board the game is really a theoretical draw:
```
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. O-O Nxe4 5. Re1 Nd6 6. Nxe5 Nxe5 7. Rxe5+ Be7
8. Bf1 O-O 9. d4 Bf6 10. Re1 Re8 11. c3 Rxe1 12. Qxe1 Ne8 13. Bf4 d5 14. Nd2 Bf5
15. Qe2 Nd6 16. Nb3 b6 17. Re1 c6 18. Nd2 h6 19. h3 Qd7 20. Qd1 Rd8 21. Nf3 Nc4
22. b3 Nd6 23. Qc1 c5 24. Ba6 Re8 25. Rxe8+ Nxe8 26. Qe3 Nc7 27. Be2 Ne6 28. Be5
Be7 29. Bd3 Bxd3 30. Qxd3 Ng5 31. Nxg5 hxg5 32. a4 f6 33. Bg3 Bd6 34. dxc5 Bxg3
35. Qxg3 bxc5 36. Qe3 d4 37. cxd4 cxd4 38. Qd3 Kf7 39. Kf1 Qd6 40. Qc4+ Kf8 41.
Ke2 Qe5+ 42. Kd1 Qe4 43. Qc5+ Kg8 44. Qc4+ Kf8 45. b4 Qb1+ 46. Kd2 Qb2+ 47. Ke1
d3 48. Qc5+ Kf7 49. Qd5+ Ke7 50. Qb7+ Kd6 51. Qa6+ Ke5 52. Qb5+ Kf4 53. Qc4+ Ke5
54. Qb5+ Ke4 55. Qc6+ Ke5 56. Qc5+ Ke6 57. Qc4+ Ke5 58. Qc5+ Ke6 59. Qc6+ Ke5
60. Qc7+ Ke4 61. Qb7+ Kd4 62. Qxa7+ Kc3 63. Qc5+ Kb3 64. Qd5+ Kc3 65. Qc6+ Kb3
66. Qd5+ Kxa4 67. Qxd3 Kxb4 68. Qe4+ Kc3 69. Qc6+ Kd3 70. Qd6+ Qd4 71. Qa6+ Qc4
72. Qxc4+ Kxc4 73. Ke2 Kd4 74. Kf3 Kd3 75. g3 f5 76. h4 gxh4 77. gxh4 Kd2 78. h5
Ke1 79. Kg2 f4 80. Kf3 Kf1 81. Kxf4 Kxf2 82. Kf5 Kg3 83. Kg6 Kg4 84. h6 gxh6 85.
Kxh6 1/2-1/2
1. e4 {Lichess } e5 {Lichess } 2. Nf3 {Lichess } Nc6 {Lichess }
3. Bb5 {Lichess } Nf6 {Lichess } 4. O-O {+0.10/49} Nxe4 {-0.06/49}
5. Re1 {+0.12/46} Nd6 {-0.06/45} 6. Nxe5 {+0.09/49} Be7 {-0.07/46}
7. Bf1 {+0.09/47} Nxe5 {-0.06/42} 8. Rxe5 {+0.15/44} O-O {-0.10/43}
9. Nc3 {+0.20/58} Bf6 {-0.09/43} 10. Re1 {+0.13/43} Re8 {-0.04/41}
11. Nd5 {+0.08/46} Rxe1 {-0.10/42} 12. Qxe1 {+0.12/49} b6 {-0.12/45}
13. Nxf6+ {+0.13/44} Qxf6 {-0.16/45} 14. c3 {+0.16/56} Bb7 {-0.14/40}
15. d3 {+0.12/42} Re8 {-0.13/42} 16. Qd1 {+0.12/43} c5 {-0.11/40}
17. Qg4 {+0.18/41} Bc6 {-0.12/42} 18. Bd2 {+0.10/43} g6 {-0.10/39}
19. Rc1 {+0.12/42} h5 {-0.10/46} 20. Qg3 {+0.13/39} b5 {-0.12/47}
21. b3 {+0.02/48} a5 {-0.02/40} 22. Bg5 {+0.03/47} Qe6 {-0.02/45}
23. Bd2 {+0.00/45} Qf6 {-0.01/44} 24. a3 {+0.08/48} Kh7 {+0.00/42}
25. Qf4 {+0.03/46} Qxf4 {+0.00/48} 26. Bxf4 {+0.00/38} Nf5 {+0.00/52}
27. f3 {+0.00/43} f6 {+0.00/54} 28. Kf2 {+0.00/47} Ra8 {+0.00/48}
29. Bc7 {+0.00/52} b4 {+0.00/63} 30. a4 {+0.00/56} Bd5 {+0.00/53}
31. d4 {+0.00/49} Bxb3 {+0.00/59} 32. dxc5 {+0.00/60} Bxa4 {+0.00/60}
33. Ra1 {+0.00/76} Bc6 {+0.00/63} 34. cxb4 {+0.00/53} axb4 {+0.00/47}
35. Rxa8 {+0.00/48} Bxa8 {+0.00/55} 36. Ba5 {+0.00/51} Nd4 {+0.00/56}
37. Bxb4 {+0.00/47} Kg7 {+0.00/50} 38. Bd2 {+0.00/54} h4 {+0.00/69}
39. Bf4 {+0.00/64} Bc6 {+0.00/61} 40. Bd3 {+0.00/50} Ne6 {+0.00/78}
41. Bd6 {+0.00/54} Nd4 {+0.00/63} 42. Bf4 {+0.00/69} Ne6 {+0.00/65}
43. Bd6 {+0.00/57} Ng5 {+0.00/56} 44. Bf4 {+0.00/68} Nf7 {+0.00/56}
45. Ke3 {+0.00/70} Nd8 {+0.00/56} 46. Bc7 {+0.00/58} Ne6 {+0.00/62}
47. Bd6 {+0.00/69} Nd8 {+0.00/62} 48. Kf4 {+0.00/63} Nf7 {+0.00/80}
49. Kg4 {+0.00/58} g5 {+0.00/60} 50. Kh3 {+0.00/46} Nd8 {+0.00/58}
51. Kg4 {+0.00/54} Ne6 {+0.00/66} 52. f4 {+0.00/50} Bxg2 {+0.00/66}
53. fxg5 {+0.00/47} fxg5 {+0.00/65} 54. Bf5 {+0.00/70} Kf6 {+0.00/85}
55. Bxe6 {+0.00/87} dxe6 {+0.00/78} 56. Bc7 {+0.00/80} h3 {+0.00/90}
57. Ba5 {+0.00/59} Ke5 {+0.00/73} 58. Kxg5 {+0.00/67} Kd5 {+0.00/85}
59. Bb6 {+0.00/65} e5 {+0.00/74} 60. Ba7 {+0.00/84} Bf1 {+0.00/69}
61. Kg4 {+0.00/72} e4 {+0.00/89} 62. Kf4 {+0.00/95} Bb5 {+0.00/89}
63. Bb6 {+0.00/65} Bc6 {+0.00/84} 64. Kg3 {+0.00/69} e3 {+0.00/66}
65. Kxh3 {+0/80,draw} e2 {+0.00/84} 66. Ba5 {+0.00/70} Kxc5 {+0.00/93}
67. Kg3 {+0.00/78} Kd4 {+0.00/85} 68. Kf2 {+0.00/89} Kd3 {+0.00/82}
69. Bb4 {+0.00/88} Be4 {+0.00/88} 70. Ba5 {+0.00/85} Bh7 {+0.00/91}
71. h4 {+0.00/77} Bg6 {+0.00/72} 72. Bb4 {+0.00/72} Bh5 {+0.00/81}
73. Be1 {+0.00/65} Bg6 {+0.00/85} 74. Kf3 {+0.00/83} Bh5+ {+0.00/69}
75. Kf2 {+0.00/87} Kc2 {+0.00/70} 76. Ke3 {+0.00/77} Kd1 {+0.00/76}
77. Kf2 {+0.00/69} Bf3 {+0.00/70} 78. Bb4 {+0.00/81} Bh5 {+0.00/77}
79. Ke3 {+0.00/65} e1=R+ {+0.00/76} 80. Bxe1 {+0.00/58} Kxe1 {+0.00/72}
81. Kf4 {+0.00/80} Kf2 {+0.00/87} 82. Kg5 {+0.00/84} Bf7 {+0.00/83}
83. h5 {+0.00/98} Bxh5 {+0.00/82} 1/2-1/2 {insufficient material}
```
What's the **theoretically worst game possible**, and how to find out? This is easy: just sit two [women](woman.md) at a chessboard and watch :D OK, [jokes](jokes.md) aside -- like with the perfect game we will probably never know, plus there are the pecularities mentioned above about how we really define "bad play". Anyway we may try this: take the best engine and just revert its evaluation function, i.e. literally flip the sign of evaluation (in practice we usually have to handle some additional stuff in the code that relied on normal evaluation) -- this should basically internally revert the rules of chess to trying to get mated, AND also make sure we assume the opponent is trying to do the same etc. This game will represent the serious effort to really force your opponent to beat you. Doing this with the current best engine, stockfish 17, giving both players 30 minutes plus 10 second increment, leaves us with the following beautifully terrible, excruciatingly long abomination of a game:
```
1. e3 e6 2. Qh5 Qg5 3. Qxf7+ Kd8 4. Qe7+ Kxe7 5. f4 Qg3+ 6. Ke2 Qf3+ 7. Kd3 Qd5+ 8. Ke2 Qd3+
9. Kf3 Qe2+ 10. Bxe2 Kf6 11. Bd3 Nc6 12. Kg4 h5+ 13. Kh3 Rh7 14. Bf5 Ba3 15. Nc3 Ke7
16. Bg4 Nd4 17. Ne4 hxg4+ 18. Kg3 Rh3+ 19. gxh3 Nf3 20. Nd6 c6 21. Ne2 Nf6 22. Nxb7 Ne4+
23. Kg2 Nh4+ 24. Kg1 Ng2 25. Nc3 Ke8 26. Nd5 Ng3 27. Kf2 Ne1 28. Nd8 Bb7 29. h4 a6
30. Ne7 Nf1 31. Kg1 d5 32. Nxe6 Nf3+ 33. Kf2 Ne1 34. Ke2 Nd3 35. Kd1 Nxb2+ 36. Ke2 Ng3+
37. Kf2 Nf1 38. Nc7+ Kf7 39. Ne8 Bc5 40. Nc8 Bxe3+ 41. Kg2 Bb6 42. Na7 Bd8 43. Nf6 Rb8
44. a3 Ke7 45. d4 Rc8 46. Be3 Bc7 47. Nb5 Be5 48. Rd1 Nd3 49. Rc1 Nb4 50. a4 Rg8
51. Nd7 Ke6 52. Nb6 Nd2 53. Bg1 Nf1 54. Kf2 Nd3+ 55. Ke2 Rc8 56. Nc4 Rb8 57. Nca3 Rd8
58. f5+ Ke7 59. h3 Ne3 60. f6+ Ke6 61. Nc7+ Kf5 62. Rf1+ Kg6 63. Na8 Nc1+ 64. Kd2 Bc7
65. Nb5 Ba5+ 66. c3 Nc2 67. Rf3 Rc8 68. h5+ Kh7 69. Re3 Rc7 70. h4 g6 71. Re4 Rg7
72. Kd1 Bxc3 73. f7 Ne3+ 74. Kxc1 Bb2+ 75. Kd2 Nc4+ 76. Ke2 Ne5 77. f8=N+ Kg8 78. Nd6 Rh7
79. Rh3 Bc1 80. Rf3 Bf4 81. Nf7 Rh6 82. Kf2 Nd7 83. Rh3 Rh7 84. Ke2 Nb8 85. Nh8 a5
86. Rh2 Ba6+ 87. Kf2 Be3+ 88. Ke1 Bd2+ 89. Kd1 Re7 90. Kc2 Kg7 91. Rh1 Re5 92. Nh7 Bb7
93. Nf7 Be1 94. Kd3 g5 95. Nh8 Ba6+ 96. Ke3 Bd2+ 97. Kf2 Be1+ 98. Ke3 Be2 99. h6+ Kg8
100. Nb6 Bd2+ 101. Kf2 g3+ 102. Kg2 Bf1+ 103. Kf3 Be2+ 104. Kg2 Bf1+ 105. Kf3 dxe4+
106. Kxg3 Be1+ 107. Bf2 Bh3 108. Nc8 Re7 109. Nf6+ Kf8 110. Ng6+ Kf7 111. Nd6+ Kxf6
112. Ne8+ Kf7 113. Ne5+ Kf8 114. Nd7+ Kg8 115. Nc7 Re5 116. Nd5 Bg2 117. Nb4 Bf1
118. Rh3 Bb5 119. Kg4 Ba6 120. Rf3 Rf5 121. Nc5 Kf8 122. d5 Ke7 123. Nd7 Rf4+ 124. Kh3 Rf6
125. Nc5 Bf1+ 126. Kg3 Rd6 127. Nxc6+ Ke8 128. Rf8+ Kxf8 129. Ne6+ Kf7 130. Nb4 Bh3
131. Nxg5+ Ke7 132. Ne6 Rb6 133. Kf4 Bf5 134. Bc5+ Rd6 135. Bg1 Bd2+ 136. Ke5 Rxd5+
137. Nxd5+ Kd7 138. Nb6+ Ke8 139. Bc5 Bf4+ 140. Kd4 Bd6 141. Bb4 Bg4 142. Kc3 Be2
143. Nc5 Na6 144. Nd3 Nc5 145. Nc8 Bd1 146. Kc4 Bb3+ 147. Kc3 Ne6 148. Kd2 Bd1 149. Ne5 Ng7
150. Nd3 Bc5 151. Nf2 Kd7 152. Kc3 Bd4+ 153. Kd2 Ke6 154. Ng4 Bc3+ 155. Ke3 Nf5+
156. Kf4 Bd2+ 157. Ne3 Bxe3+ 158. Kxe4 Be2 159. Bd6 Nd4 160. Ne7 Bd3+ 161. Kxe3 Ne2
162. Bb4 Be4 163. h5 Nf4 164. Nf5 Kd5 165. Ne7+ Ke6 166. Nf5 Ke5 167. Bc3+ Kd5 168. Bb4 Bf3
169. Kf2 Ke5 170. Kg3 Ne2+ 171. Kh4 Ng3 172. Ne3 Bg4 173. Bd6+ Ke4 174. Kg5 Kf3
175. Bb4 Ne4+ 176. Kg6 Bd7 177. Kf7 Nc3 178. Kf6 Kf4 179. Bd6+ Ke4 180. Bb4 Nd5+
181. Kg5 Bb5 182. Nc4 Ne3 183. Nd2+ Kd5 184. Nc4 Kd4 185. Kf4 Nd5+ 186. Kg5 Be8
187. Bc3+ Kd3 188. Bb4 Bd7 189. Nd6 Bb5 190. Nc4 Be8 191. Kf5 Ne3+ 192. Ke5 Ke2
193. Kf4 Ng2+ 194. Ke4 Bc6+ 195. Ke5 Ne3 196. Kf4 Kd3 197. Ke5 Nd5 198. Nb2+ Ke2
199. Nd3 Nf4 200. Ne1 Nd3+ 201. Kd4 Nc5 202. Nd3 Nb3+ 203. Ke5 Nd4 204. Nf4+ Kf3
205. Nd3 Be8 206. Ne1+ Ke3 207. Bd2+ Ke2 208. Kf4 Bxa4 209. Nd3 Kd1 210. Bb4 Ne2+
211. Kf5 Bd7+ 212. Ke5 Nc1 213. Ke4 Kc2 214. Nb2 Bc6+ 215. Ke3 Ne2 216. h7 Nc3
217. h8=N Nd1+ 218. Kf4 Ne3 219. Nf7 Nf1 220. Ng5 Bf3 221. Ne6 Kc1 222. Nc5 Bb7
223. Nb3+ Kb1 224. Nc1 Kc2 225. Nb3 Ba8 226. Kg4 Bb7 227. Bd2 Ng3 228. Bb4 Bf3+
229. Kh3 Bh1 230. Nc1 Bg2+ 231. Kh4 Bh3 232. Kg5 Ne2 233. Nb3 Bd7 234. Bc3 Nf4 235. Kh4 Ne2
236. Nd2 Ng3 237. Kg5 Ne2 238. Kh4 Be6 239. Nb3 Bg4 240. Na1+ Kb1 241. Nd3 Ng3 242. Kg5 Ne2
243. Bb2 Nf4 244. Kh4 Ne2 245. Nb4 Kxb2 246. Na2 Nf4 247. Kg3 Nh3 248. h6 Ka3 249. h7 Ka4
250. h8=N Kb5 251. Nb4 Ng5 252. Nf7 Ne4+ 253. Kh4 Kc4 254. Nb3 Kc3 255. Nd6 Ng5 256. Nc4 Bh3
257. Kh5 Bf5 258. Kh6 Bg6 259. Kg7 Nh7 260. Nd4 Nf6 261. Nb5+ Kb3 262. Nb2 Ng8 263. Nc2 Bf7
264. Kh7 Bg6+ 265. Kh8 Bh5 266. Nca3 Bf7 267. Na4 Kxa4 268. Nc3+ Kb4 269. Na4 Bd5
270. Kh7 Bf7 271. Kh8 Nf6 272. Kg7 Ng8 273. Kxf7 Kb3 274. Ke6 Ne7 275. Ke5 Nc6+
276. Kd5 Nb4+ 277. Kc5 Nc2 278. Nb5 Ka2 279. Nb2 Ne3 280. Nd4 Nc4 281. Nd3 Nd2 282. Nb3 Kb1
283. Na1 Ne4+ 284. Kd4 Nd6 285. Nc2 Ka2 286. Na1 Kb1 287. Nc2 Ka2 288. Nc5 Kb2 289. Kd3 Nc4
290. Na4+ Kc1 291. Nb2 Nxb2+ 292. Kc3 Na4+ 293. Kd3 Nc5+ 294. Kc3 Na4+ 295. Kd3 Nc5+
296. Kc3 Ne4+ 297. Kd3 Nf2+ 298. Kc3 Ne4+ 299. Kd3 Nf2+ 300. Kc3 Nd1+ 301. Kd3 Kb2
302. Ne1 a4 303. Kd2 Nf2 304. Ke2 Nh1 305. Nd3+ Kb1 306. Kf3 a3 307. Nb4 a2 308. Nxa2 Kxa2
```
Lichess analysis seems to only handle the first 150 moves, the evaluation graph explodes up and down and almost jumps out of the roof. The following are the analysis results (for the first 150 moves). White: 15 inaccuracies, 15 mistakes, 97 blunders, 581 average centipawn loss, accuracy: 21%. Black: 11 inaccuracies, 17 mistakes, 97 blunders, 587 average centipawn loss, accuracy: 21%. That doesn't seem that bad, why aren't all moves blunders? Well, firstly the analysis is relatively quick (takes like 10 seconds for whole game), it likely doesn't see as deep as the engines who were given hours to play, but secondly we changed the rules of the game: the analyzing engine still assumes the players will be playing good moves, which is not the case.
For comparison here is another bad game in which we just take regular stockfish 17 and make moves like this: from all possible moves, minus the ones that draw, choose the one that leads to the position with worst evaluation for us. 3 seconds are given for evaluating each possible move, so we get something around a minute to make a move. For "mate in N" we take the move that gets us mated sooner as better, and to decide between several "mate in N" moves with same N we try to estimate the worst by taking an average static evaluation of the board to depth 3 (for technical reasons we use [smallchesslib](smallchesslib.md)'s evaluation) -- this should help us prefer positions in which there are more ways to get ourselves mated or in which we at least lost most material and other advantage on average. This game embodies the effort to make the worst blunder in each move in a regular game of chess -- as such we won't see too many "forced blunders", just great many generous offers that keep being turned down. In result this produced another terribly long game:
{ My computer basically spent the whole day computing this game instead of mining Monero, so please enjoy :D ~drummyfish }
```
1. g4 f5 2. f3 g5 3. Kf2 Kf7 4. Ke3 Ke6 5. Kd4 Qe8 6. b4 Qh5 7. f4 Kf6 8. Ke3 Qh3+ 9. Kd4 Qc3+
10. Kd5 Qb2 11. h4 h5 12. Nf3 Bh6 13. Kc5 a6 14. d4 Qxd4+ 15. Nxd4 Ra7 16. c4 Kg7 17. Bg2 Kf6
18. gxh5 c6 19. Qa4 Rh7 20. Qa5 Ra8 21. Qb6 Ra7 22. Qa5 Ra8 23. Qb6 Rf7 24. Bb2 d5 25. Nd2 Ra7
26. Rh3 a5 27. Qa6 e6 28. b5 g4 29. Rf3 Bd7 30. b6 Bg7 31. Kd6 Rf8 32. Kc7 Rf7 33. Kd6 Rf8
34. Kc7 Rd8 35. c5 g3 36. Kd6 Rf8 37. Kc7 Rf7 38. Kd6 Rf8 39. Kc7 Rf7 40. Kd8 Nxa6 41. Rc3 Ne7
42. Ne4+ fxe4 43. a4 Nb8 44. Nxe6 Kf5 45. Bf3 Rf6 46. Rd1 e3 47. Nf8 Kxf4 48. Be4 Rd6
49. Nxd7 Bf6 50. Rdd3 Kxe4 51. Rc2 Bd4 52. Rb3 Rf6 53. Nf8 Rf3 54. Rd2 Rf5 55. Ba1 Ng6
56. Rb5 g2 57. Bc3 Ne5 58. Bb2 Nbd7 59. Kc8 Nf6 60. Kd8 Ne8 61. h6 Nf6 62. Bc1 g1=B
63. Ke7 Rg5 64. Rbb2 Kf4 65. Nh7 Ne8 66. h5 Rg4 67. Kxe8 Nf7 68. Rdc2 Bf6 69. Kf8 Ke4
70. Rc3 Rg7 71. Ng5+ Kd4 72. Ke8 Bd8 73. Ne4 Bh2 74. h7 Rg8+ 75. Kd7 Bd6 76. h6 B8e7
77. Ng3 Ke5 78. Rc4 Bc7 79. Rd4 Kf6 80. h8=N Kg5 81. Rc4 Nd6 82. Rd2 Raa8 83. Nh1 Ra7
84. Ke6 Rg7 85. Ke5 Bcd8 86. bxa7 b6 87. Ng6 Nc8 88. Nf8 Nd6 89. a8=N b5 90. Ng6 Bb6
91. Bb2 Nc8 92. Nf8 Na7 93. Nc7 Bbxc5 94. h7 Bd4+ 95. Ke6 Ba3 96. Ng3 Bc3 97. Rxc6 b4
98. h8=N Nb5 99. Rd6 Kh6 100. Kf5+ Bf6 101. Nh7 d4 102. Na8 Rxh7 103. Nh5 b3 104. Ba1 Na7
105. Kf4 Rf7 106. Ng6 Re7 107. Nf8 Rb7 108. Ng7 d3 109. Kg3 Rb4 110. Ng6 Bg5 111. Rf6 Bf4+
112. Kh4 Rxa4 113. Rd6 dxe2 114. Be5 Nc8 115. Nb6 Ne7 116. Nh5 Bb2 117. Bd4 e1=R 118. Na8 Nc6
119. Bb6 Na7 120. Rc6 Nc8 121. Rc4 Ra3 122. Kg4 Kh7 123. Bd8 Rb1 124. Nh8 Bf6 125. Ng7 Kxg7
126. Rc5 Bh6 127. Rc4 Kf8 128. Nf7 Kg8 129. Rb4 Rd1 130. Nh8 Kg7 131. Kh5 Bf4 132. Be7 a4
133. Rf2 Bb8 134. Bd8 Rf1 135. Bb6 Bd4 136. Rf5 Rg1 137. Rf6 Na7 138. Rb5 Rc1 139. Kg5 Nc8
140. Ra5 Rc7 141. Rc5 Ba7 142. Rc4 Bc5 143. Rf8 Bd4 144. Rf6 Bc5 145. Rf8 Rf7 146. Rxa4 Bd4
147. Kh4 Bb8 148. Rd8 Ra1 149. Kh3 Rc7 150. Kh2 Rg1 151. Rg8+ Kf6 152. Rg2 Na7 153. Kh3 e2
154. Ba5 Bf2 155. Be1 Bh4 156. Ra5 Rf1 157. Rg7 Re7 158. Ra3 Rf7 159. Bf2 Ra1 160. Nb6 Ke7
161. Kg2 Re1 162. Nd7 Bf6 163. Ra1 Bh2 164. Bd4 Bb8 165. Ra2 Ra1 166. Rd2 Ra2 167. Nxf6 Ra1
168. Bb6 e1=R 169. Bd4 Re2+ 170. Bf2 Re3 171. Ne4 Ra6 172. Kg1 Re6 173. Nd6 Kf8 174. Rd1 R6e4
175. Rc1 Rc4 176. Be1 Rec3 177. Nf5 Rf4 178. Ne7 Rb4 179. Nf5 Rcc4 180. Nd6 Rb6 181. Rh7 Nc6
182. Ra1 Rc3 183. Bg3 Rc4 184. Be5 Ne7 185. Bf6 Ba7 186. Ra2 Rc2 187. Rh2 Ng6 188. Rd2 Re7
189. Kf2 Rc1 190. Rac2 Rg1 191. Bd4 b2 192. Nhf7 Rd7 193. Bxb2 Bb8 194. Ba1 Ra6 195. Nc8 Kg8
196. Rc6 Rd8 197. Rd3 Nh8 198. Bxh8 Rc1 199. Rc2 Ra8 200. Rd5 Rg1 201. Rd1 Bc7 202. Rc3 Ra6
203. Nb6 Rd7 204. Rc4 Bf4 205. Rc7 Bh6 206. Rc5 Rc7 207. Na8 Rb6 208. Rc2 Bf8 209. Rd4 Rg4
210. Rd6 Bh6 211. Ng5 Rc8 212. Ke3 Rd8 213. Rc1 Rc6 214. Rcd1 Rh4 215. Bd4 Bg7 216. Rh6 Bf8
217. Ne6 Rc4 218. Bf6 Rc5 219. Be5 Be7 220. Rc1 Rf8 221. Nb6 Bd8 222. Rb1 Rc6 223. Ng5 Rc7
224. Bd6 Rc2 225. Bc5 Rb2 226. Bd6 Rc2 227. Nd7 Rf5 228. Rb5 Rg2 229. Rb7 Rc2 230. Nc5 Rf7
231. Bc7 Bf6 232. Bh2 Rc1 233. Rc7 Be5 234. Rb6 Rcc4 235. Rb5 Rh8 236. Nh3 Rf2 237. Rcb7 Bb8
238. Rf7 Rd4 239. Rb2 Rf3+ 240. Ke2 Rd7 241. Ng1 Rb7 242. Kd2 Re3 243. Kc2 Rd3 244. Kb1 Rc3
245. Rb6 Rch3 246. Rb5 Rd7 247. Rb3 Rxh2 248. Ka1 R2h4 249. Na4 R4h5 250. Rd3 Re7 251. Re3 Bg3
252. Rf4 Re4 253. Ref3 Rf5 254. Rf1 Re2 255. R4f2 Kf8 256. Nf3 Rd5 257. Nd2+ Bf4 258. Kb2 Rd3
259. Rh2 Re4 260. Re2 Re8 261. Ka2 Rde3 262. Rb1 R3e4 263. Rbe1 Rc4 264. Ka3 Rh6 265. Nf1 Rb4
266. Rb1 Bb8 267. Rb3 Kg8 268. Re1 Kh8 269. Nb6 Rh2 270. Ng3 Rc4 271. Ne2 Rh3 272. Rf1 Ba7
273. Nc8 Bg1 274. Rf5 Rf4 275. Rg3 Re5 276. Nb6 Rd4 277. Rh5+ Rhxh5 278. Nc1 Rh3 279. Rb3 Re2
280. Na4 Rb4 281. Rd3 Bd4 282. Rf3 Kh7 283. Rg3 Kh8 284. Nc3 Bg1 285. Rg4 Rg3 286. Rf4 Rb5
287. Nd3 Rg4 288. Rb4 Rh4 289. Nf4 Rb8 290. Nd3 Re5 291. Nxe5 Re4 292. Na4 Rc4 293. Nc3 Re4
294. Na4 Rc4 295. Nc5 Bh2 296. Ra4 Ra8 297. Ncd7 Rb4 298. Ka2 Rb3 299. Nb8 Bg1 300. Ng4 Bb6
301. Ka1 Bd8 302. Ka2 Bb6 303. Ka1 Bd8 304. Ra2 Rd3 305. Ra6 Kg8 306. Nf6+ Kh8 307. Ng4 Rh3
308. Nh6 Rc3 309. Ng8 Rh3 310. Nh6 Ra7 311. Ra2 Re3 312. Kb2 Rc3 313. Ra5 Rf7 314. Nf5 Bg5
315. Ng7 Rd7 316. Nc6 Rd5 317. Ra3 Rb5+ 318. Rb3 Rb8 319. Rb6 Be7 320. Ne8 Kg8 321. Rb5 Bf6
322. Ka2 Re3 323. Nd8 Rb7 324. Ne6 Kh7 325. Rb4 Rd7 326. Ng5+ Kh8 327. Re4 Rf7 328. Kb1 Re2
329. Rb4 Ra2 330. Rf4 Bb2 331. Kc2 Rh7 332. Rf6 Ra6 333. Rc6 Rf7 334. Nf6 Rg7 335. Kd2 Ba3
336. Nfh7 Kg8 337. Nf8 Rf7 338. Ke2 Kh8 339. Ne4 Kg7 340. Nd6 Kxf8 341. Rc2 Rf5 342. Nf7 Rh6
343. Nh8 Rg6 344. Rd2 Rf4 345. Rd7 Rd4 346. Re7 Rd7 347. Kf2 Rc7 348. Re2 Rc2 349. Kf1 Bb2
350. Rd2 Bc1 351. Re2 Bb2 352. Ke1 Bc1 353. Nf7 Kg8 354. Nd8 Rf6 355. Re6 Rc4 356. Kd1 Rg6
357. Re5 Rc2 358. Re6 Bb2 359. Re2 Kh8 360. Re5 Rg5 361. Re6 Rg1+ 362. Re1 Kg8 363. Nf7 Re2
364. Rf1 Bf6 365. Ne5 Bh4 366. Ng4 Be1 367. Rf2 Rg3 368. Rf4 Rxg4 369. Kxe2 Kg7 370. Ke3 Bh4
371. Rd4 Bg3 372. Rc4 Kg6 373. Rd4 Kg7 374. Rd6 Rd4 375. Rh6 Kf8 376. Rd6 Rd1 377. Rd2 Kf7
378. Rd4 Ke6 379. Rd2 Bd6 380. Rxd6+ Ke5 381. Re6+ Kf5 382. Re7 Rf1 383. Re6 Kg5 384. Rh6 Rh1
385. Kd3 Kf4 386. Kd4 Rh3 387. Kc5 Kf3 388. Kd6 Rh5 389. Kc6 Rb5 390. Kd6 Rb3 391. Rg6 Ke3
392. Rh6 Ra3 393. Rg6 Rb3 394. Rh6 Ra3 395. Ke6 Ke4 396. Rh3 Kd4 397. Rh6 Rh3 398. Kf6 Kd5
399. Kf5 Kc4 400. Kf6 Kd4 401. Rh7 Kd3 402. Rh4 Kc3 403. Rc4+ Kb3 404. Ra4 Kc3 405. Ra6 Rg3
406. Ke6 Rf3 407. Kd6 Rg3 408. Ke6 Rf3 409. Kd6 Rh3 410. Ke7 Kd3 411. Ra7 Kc3 412. Ke8 Rf3
413. Kd7 Rg3 414. Ke7 Kd3 415. Rb7 Rh3 416. Ra7 Rg3 417. Rb7 Rg8 418. Rb8 Ke3 419. Rb7 Rd8
420. Rb8 Re8+ 421. Kd7 Re7+ 422. Kd8 Re8+ 423. Kd7 Re7+ 424. Kd8 Rb7 425. Ke8 Rb3 426. Kf7 Kf4
427. Rb7 Kf5 428. Ke7 Ke4 429. Kd7 Rxb7+ 430. Kd6 Re7 431. Kc5 Re5+ 432. Kd6 Re7 433. Kc5 Rd7
434. Kc4 Rd5 435. Kc3 Rd2 436. Kb4 Kd5 437. Kc3 Ke6 438. Kc4 Rd4+ 439. Kb3 Rc4 440. Ka2 Kd6
441. Kb2 Rc3 442. Ka1 Kc5 443. Ka2 Rb3 444. Ka1 Rb2 1/2-1/2
```
Again, Lichess only analyzed the first 150 moves and here it marked practically every move as a blunder (the rest are probably blunders so genius that the quick analysis didn't even reveal the genius behind that stupidity), because of our different definition of a bad move. Here are the statistics. White: 1 inaccuracy, 1 mistake, 147 blunders, 1610 average centipawn loss, accuracy: 2%. Black: 1 inaccuracy, 0 mistakes, 148 blunders, 1613 average centipawn loss, accuracy: 2%.
What is **the rarest move**? Some [YouTube](youtube.md) video tried to investigate this with the help of Lichess database. Things that immediately come to mind like en passant checkmates and checkmates by promoting to a knight are rare but not insanely rare. A crazily rare kind of move, which only appeared ONCE in the whole database, was a doubly disambiguatated (i.e. with the necessary specification of both rank and file of the bishop) checkmate by a bishop (specifically Bf1g2#, occurring in a 2022 game) -- this is rare because to need a double disambiguation for a bishop move it is necessary to underpromote two pawns to a bishop and then place them correctly. Yet rarer moves, which NEVER appeared in the database, were a doubly disambiguated knight checkmate with capture and doubly disambiguated bishop checkmate with capture, latter of which was judged less likely and therefore probably the rarest move ever.
Anyway, you can try to derive your own stats, there are huge free game databases such as the Lichess [CC0](cc0.md) database of billions of games from their server.
@ -269,17 +425,19 @@ Some general tips and rules of thumb, mostly for beginners:
- Don't bring the queen out too early, the opponent can harass it and get ahead in development.
- Learn some universal setup openings or "systems" to play, e.g. London, King's Indian, the hippo etc.
- Develop your men before attacking, usually knights go out before bishops, bishops are well placed on the longest diagonals as "snipers".
- Learn basic tactics, especially **forks** (attacking two or more men at once so that one of them cannot escape capture) and **pins** (attack one man so that if he moves out of the way he will expose another one to be captured).
- Learn basic tactics, especially **forks** (attacking two or more men at once so that one of them cannot escape capture) and **pins** (attack one man so that if he moves out of the way he will expose another one to be captured), but also other things like double checks, sacrifices etc.
- Learn basic types of checkmates and mating patterns, for example mating with two rooks, with king and queen, back rank mates (especially dangerous when starting, always make an escape square), smothered mates, how not to stalemate etc.
- Watch out for hanging pieces! You usually want to have everything guarded.
- King safety is extremely important until endgame, castle very early but not extremely early. In the endgame (with queens out) king joins the battle as another active man.
- Learn when to exchange and when not -- usually when you're up material, trades are good for you because trading same value men increases the ratio of your material advantage. When attacking you probably don't want to trade because you need SOMETHING to attack with -- so when your opponent is attacking you and you're defending, you WANT to trade because he probably doesn't want that. Also when you have little space and are squeezed in your base, you probably want to trade and create more space. Etc.
- Pawn structure is very important (avoid doubled and isolated pawn, watch out for the weak back pawns etc.).
- Watch out for back rank checkmates, make an escape square for your king.
- Rooks want to be on open files, you also want to CONNECT them (have both guard each other). Also a rook in the opponents second row (2nd/7th rank) is pretty good.
- Stack rooks, i.e. place them on the same open file -- this is very powerful. You can also stack two rooks and a queen and create a so called legendary triple stack which is extremely powerful.
- If you find a good move, look for a better one. There seems to be this pattern in which if you spot a good move, it indicates that opponent's position is falling apart and usually there is a much more powerful, crashing move to play.
- Bishops are generally seen a bit more valuable than knights, especially in pairs -- if you can trade your knight for opponent's bishop, it's often good. If your opponent has two bishops and you only have one, you want to trade yours for his so he doesn't have the pair. A knight pair is also pretty powerful though, especially when the knights are guarding each other.
- Consider the bishop difference: one only covers white squares, the other only black ones. Take this into account when exchanging bishops, sacrificing them, placing your pieces on white vs dark squares etc.
- "Knight on a rim is dim" (knights are best placed near the center).
- Blocking the opponent's man so that he can't move (i.e. making it inactive) is almost as good as taking it. And vice versa: you want to activate all your men if possible, put them on good squares and make them do something.
- Blocking the opponent's man so that he can't move (i.e. making it inactive) is almost as good as taking it. And vice versa: you want to activate all your men if possible, put them on good squares and make them do something. Take space from opponent and "squeeze" him, having little space and few moves is generally bad.
- Nubs are weak against long range bishops, they can't see them. Place a bishop to corner on the long diagonal and just snipe the opponent's material. See also fianchetto.
- Don't play "hope chess", always suppose your opponent will play the best move he can. Don't give a check just because you can, always try to invalidate the move you want to play and only play it if you can't find an easy counter to it.
- If you can achieve something with multiple men, usually it's best to do it with the weakest one.
@ -297,6 +455,7 @@ WORK IN PROGRESS, pls send me more tips :)
- OTB (over the board) only:
- Turn your knights to face backwards or in another weird way (always face the opponent's king etc.). Also place the pieces unevenly on the squares to piss off opponents with OCD and autism.
- Play anti-computer chess against human opponent.
- Play `1. Qe9#`.
- Behave weird, make weird faces, walk extremely far away from the board and walk in circles (or just get up and stand up directly behind your opponent in a completely upright position staring into the distance without moving at all like a robot lol), constantly sneeze (try to sneeze every time the opponent touches a piece), make very long unbroken eye contact with the opponent while smiling as if you know what he's thinking, call the referee constantly, go to the toilet after every move, pretend to fall asleep from boredom etc. Overeat on beans before the game so you fart a lot and always try to fart as loud as possible. Wear nice clothes but right before the game go sweat to the gym so that you smell like a pig and distract the opponent with toxic fume. If you're a [wimmin](woman.md) behave sexually, keep grabbing your boobs, lick your lips and opponent's captured pieces and silently moan sometimes as if you're having an orgasm, pretend to masturbate under the table; if your opponent is male he is almost definitely smarter than you, you gotta use your woman weapons, but it will probably work easily on the chess virgins.
- In a tournament change play based on opponent's [race](race.md) or sex, for example play only one opening against white people and another opening against black people, see if anyone notices the pattern :D
- Outside tournament take advantage of the fact that you can do whatever the fuck you want: have one hand constantly on the clock and play with the other hand (considered rude and often forbidden), touch and knock over your opponent's pieces, take back your moves, ... and of course when you're losing, "accidentally" knock over the whole board and be like "oops, let's consider it a draw then" :D
@ -307,7 +466,7 @@ WORK IN PROGRESS, pls send me more tips :)
- Be annoying and offensive in chat, if opponent blunders write `gg`, spam `ez` when you win. If he wins say it was a shit game and accuse him of [cheating](cheating.md).
- Constantly ask for takebacks, offer draws, report legit opponents for cheating and offensive behavior.
- ...
- Play the bongcloud, fool's mate, 1. h3 or similar offensive opening, especially against a stronger player. Offer a draw after 1st move. Just play knight F3 and back constantly. Castle manually even if you don't have to. Play the exact mirror of opponent's moves -- if he tries to break it then just always try to get back to mirrored position or do some similar shit.
- Play the bongcloud, fool's mate, 1. h3, 1. g4 or similar offensive opening, especially against a stronger player. Offer a draw after (or even before) the 1st move. Just play knight f3 and back constantly. Castle manually even if you don't have to. Play the exact mirror of opponent's moves -- if he tries to break it then just always try to get back to mirrored position or do some similar shit.
- When losing constantly offer draws, prolong the game AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, before the very last move just let the clock run out.
- Repeatedly try to make swastikas on the board, especially against colored opponents.
- Underpromote pawns to knights or bishops.

5
cloudflare.md
View file

@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
# Cloudflare
Cloudflare (also know as cuckflare, clownflare, hitlerflare or crimeflare) is a [capitalist](capitalism.md) terrorist organization most famous for it Internet [censorship](censorship.md) delivery network. Its goal is to own the [Internet](internet.md) and it is currently killing what's left of the [web](www.md).
Cloudflare (also know as cuckflare, clownflare, hitlerflare or crimeflare) is a [capitalist](capitalism.md) terrorist organization most famous for its Internet [censorship](censorship.md) delivery network. Its goal is to own the [Internet](internet.md) and it is currently killing what's left of the [web](www.md).
*Prove you're a human to read this paragraph: `[ ]`*
@ -24,4 +24,5 @@ We hope you enjoyed reading this article. *(Message inserted by cucks.)*
- [genocide](genocide.md)
- [Hitler](hitler.md)
- [dystopia](dystopia.md)
- [Nord VPN](nord_vpn.md)
- [Nord VPN](nord_vpn.md)
- [1984](1984.md)

2
drummyfish.md
View file

@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ Drummyfish has a personal website at [www.tastyfish.cz](https://www.tastyfish.cz
Photos of drummyfish: [young](https://cloud.disroot.org/apps/files_sharing/publicpreview/4E36WS5ZN42pasg?file=/me/156%20-%20sQNYr3g.png&fileId=122364667&x=1280&y=800&a=true), [older](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/26/Drummyfish_profile_photo.png) (after being confronted with real life) and [naked](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Drummyfish_naked_all_sides_beard.png).
Drummyfish experiences a lot of discrimination but still doesn't hate his discriminators. As a straight white male in [21st century](21st_century.md) drummyfish is a victim of regular discrimination and racism in form of social revenge for historical events he has nothing to do with. Drummyfish is not covid vaccinated -- for this he was sorted into the second class of citizens during the covid pandemic and experienced another form of discrimination, e.g. what today would be called a "verbal abuse", segregation and so on. He never had covid. As a [Slav](slav.md) he comes from an ancestry of slaves, so in [America](usa.md) he would be called a [hero](hero_culture.md).
Drummyfish experiences a lot of discrimination but still doesn't hate his discriminators. As a straight white male in [21st century](21st_century.md) drummyfish is a victim of regular discrimination and racism in form of social revenge for historical events he has nothing to do with. Drummyfish is not covid vaccinated -- for this he was sorted into the second class of citizens during the covid pandemic and experienced another form of discrimination, e.g. what today would be called a "verbal abuse", segregation and so on. He never had covid. As a [Slav](slav.md) he comes from an ancestry of slaves, so in [America](usa.md) he would be called a [hero](hero_culture.md). Drummyfish was baptized and is NOT circumcised. He has hallux varus (foot toes weirdly spaced from the rest of the fingers) -- this makes him be able to grab things with his feet and climb trees well, like a monkey.
Drummyfish's real name is Miloslav (NOT Miroslav) Číž, he was born on 24.08.1990 and lives in Moravia, [Czech Republic](czechia.md), [Earth](earth.md) (he rejects the concept of a country/[nationalism](nationalism.md), the info here serves purely to specify a location). He has a tiny caravan inawoods. He is the only man on Earth who hates the country in which he happened to come out of vagina. He is a more or less straight [male](man.md) of the [white](white.md) [race](race.md). He started programming at high school in [Pascal](pascal.md), then he went on to study [compsci](compsci.md) (later focused on [computer graphics](graphics.md)) in a Brno University of Technology and got a [master's degree](msc.md) in 2017, however he subsequently refused to find a job in the industry, partly because of his views (manifested by [LRS](lrs.md)) and partly because of mental health issues. He rather chose to stay closer to the working class and do less harmful [slavery](job.md) such as cleaning and physical [spam](spam.md) distribution, and continues [hacking](hacking.md) on his programming (and other) projects in his spare time in order to be able to do it with absolute freedom.

30
exercises.md
View file

@ -214,13 +214,14 @@ Bear in mind the main purpose of this quiz is for you to test your understanding
107. Ronald died and wasn't missed, he was just a capitalist. Every action of that bitch only served to make him rich. Things he built but always sold, patents he would always hold. As he jerked off to his brands, dick got zipped up in his pants. Ron did one last happy dance, had idiot death insurance. Do you know what kind of note this stupid's grave would be bestowed?
108. Explain at least one of the following [chess](chess.md) concepts: fork, pin, smothered mate.
109. There is a cube-shaped planet that has 8 houses (numbered 1 to 8), each house on one of the 8 cube vertices. Each house is inhabited by one alien (they're named *A* to *H*). Sometimes they get bored and want to switch houses with others, so they organize a big moving day in which some aliens switch houses (it's possible that everyone moves elsewhere or that just some move and some stay where they are). However they like their neighbors (aliens living in houses directly connected by the same edge), so any time this house switching occurs, at the end of the day everyone must have the same neighbors as before. How many possible ways there are to assign aliens to the houses so that they always have the same neighbors?
110. A [troll](trolling.md) joins homosexual gayming stream and starts spamming Hitler quotes by which he increases the amount of lulz by X percent. However the gay starts crying so the stream censor quickly bans the poor troll, dropping the lulz to the original level. By how many percent have the lulz decreased now?
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. What's the first sentence of the lyrics of the [Free Software](free_software.md) Song by [Richard Stallman](rms.md)?
115. Consider we record moves in [chess](chess.md) with a simple notation as *<SQUARE_FROM><SQUARE_TO>*, for example *e3e5* or *g1f3* (i.e. we don't care about which chessman moves, if check or promotion happens etc., only start and end square are recorded). How many such moves exist if we only consider those that can ever legally happen (i.e. don't count moves such as *a2g1*, *b3b3* and so on)? Castling just means moving the king to his castled position.
116. Did you enjoy this quiz?
110. Consider the game of [chess](chess.md) and ignore the 50 move rule: is it possible, from the normal starting position, by any series of moves, to achieve the starting position in which the black will have the first move? I.e. by cooperatively shuffling the pieces can the players make the black start instead of white? Prove why or why not.
111. A [troll](trolling.md) joins homosexual gayming stream and starts spamming Hitler quotes by which he increases the amount of lulz by X percent. However the gay starts crying so the stream censor quickly bans the poor troll, dropping the lulz to the original level. By how many percent have the lulz decreased now?
112. 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.
113. What's the difference between [lazy](lazy.md) and strict evaluation? Show simple example.
114. 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.
115. What's the first sentence of the lyrics of the [Free Software](free_software.md) Song by [Richard Stallman](rms.md)?
116. Consider we record moves in [chess](chess.md) with a simple notation as *<SQUARE_FROM><SQUARE_TO>*, for example *e3e5* or *g1f3* (i.e. we don't care about which chessman moves, if check or promotion happens etc., only start and end square are recorded). How many such moves exist if we only consider those that can ever legally happen (i.e. don't count moves such as *a2g1*, *b3b3* and so on)? Castling just means moving the king to his castled position.
117. Did you enjoy this quiz?
### Answers
@ -334,13 +335,14 @@ sin(x) / cos(x) - log2(2) = tg(x) - 1*, so we get *tg(x) >= 1*. So that will hol
107. Retard -- read the first letter of each sentence.
108. Fork: attacking two (or more) pieces at once (often done with knight) so that the opponent can only save one. Pin: attacking a piece so that if it moves away, it will reveal another piece behind it to be taken (often pinning to king). Smothered mate: checkmate by knight in which king can't move anywhere because he's blocked by own pieces.
109. This is counting graph [automorphisms](automorphism.md). Let's say we assign alien *X* to house 1; we can count how many possible allowed configurations there are for this case and then multiply it all by 8 (for case when *X* would be assigned to house 2, then 3, 4 etc.). Let's say neighbors of *X* are *U*, *V* and *W*. There are 3 edges going from house 1, i.e. 3 possible ways for the first neighbor, *U*, to be placed -- again, consider we put *U* in one place; we'll count the possibilities and eventually multiply them by 3. Now we have 2 edges (2 neighbor houses) remaining and 2 neighbors (*V* and *W*) to put there; again, consider one case and then multiply that by 2. Now we have *X* and all his neighbors in place, how many possible configurations are left here? There is one house that's the neighbor of both *U* and *V* and there is only one possibility of who can live there: the shared neighbor of *U* and *V* -- there is just one option so this house's inhabitant is determined. Same for *V*/*W* and *U*/*W*. That's already 7 houses assigned and the one last remaining has to be in the one house left, so in fact by placing *X* and its neighbors we've uniquely determined the rest of the houses, there's just one way. So in the end we have 8 * 3 * 2 * 1 = 48 possible ways.
110. If the original level of lulz is *a* and lulz increase is *n*, then *X = 100 * n / a*. The decrease is then *100 * n / (a + n) = 100 * (a * X / 100) / (a + a * X / 100) = X / (1 + X / 100) = 100 * X / (100 + X)*.
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. "Join us now and share the software."
115. Should be 1792 { Unless I counted it wrong lol. ~drummyfish }. We can count this by just considering each square on the board and summing all possible queen and knight moves from that square (queen and knight together cover all possible moves). Queen can obviously end up on any square and from knight's walk we know we can place a knight anywhere as well. This can probably be computed even manually but writing a quick program does the job quicker.
116. yes
110. No, the [proof](proof.md) follows. We can only ever move the knights, that's obvious (rooks can't be moved as we'd lose castling rights, BUT even if we didn't it wouldn't help because a rook could only move there and back, an even number of moves, achieving nothing). So a white will make a series of knight moves over the board and in the end land them where they started, or swap them. Meanwhile black will to do the same on his side. For a black to have a move after this the parity of the moves performed by black and white has to be different, i.e. white must have made odd number of moves and black even or vice versa because in order for it to be black's turn, the sum of the moves (or rather plies) must be odd, i.e. odd plus even or even plus odd. When a knight moves, he always moves from black square to white or vice versa, never from black to black or white to white (trivially proven). So to make a knight walk ending on the original starting square will always take even number of moves. So by moving knights in any way and eventually getting them back will always result in even number of moves by both players. The only other option is to swap the knights, however this will also take even number of moves. The two knights are on different colored squares so moving one to the other's place will take ODD number of moves, however we have to swap BOTH knights so the total number of moves will again be even because twice odd is even. However some chess960 starting positions will allow to do this (where queen is placed immediately next to two knights).
111. If the original level of lulz is *a* and lulz increase is *n*, then *X = 100 * n / a*. The decrease is then *100 * n / (a + n) = 100 * (a * X / 100) / (a + a * X / 100) = X / (1 + X / 100) = 100 * X / (100 + X)*.
112. 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).
113. 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.
114. 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.
115. "Join us now and share the software."
116. Should be 1792 { Unless I counted it wrong lol. ~drummyfish }. We can count this by just considering each square on the board and summing all possible queen and knight moves from that square (queen and knight together cover all possible moves). Queen can obviously end up on any square and from knight's walk we know we can place a knight anywhere as well. This can probably be computed even manually but writing a quick program does the job quicker.
117. yes
## Other

4
freedom.md
View file

@ -6,14 +6,14 @@ Freedom denotes the possibility to act as one desires without suffering negative
TODO: more
From the definition it can be deduced that **freedom can almost be equated with [minimalism](minimalism.md)** and those looking for genuine freedom start following minimalism very soon. At first it may not exactly be clear why, but in fact freedom and minimalism are inevitably connected: minimalism means [needing](dependency.md) a little; needing something enslaves us by FORCING us to satisfy the need and freeing ourselves of the need gives us the extra choice: to do something or not to do it, as it is now no longer obligatory. Therefore minimalism implies more choice and so, by definition, more freedom. Minimalism is not about having little, but needing little; a minimalist won't have a car or luxury house not because he couldn't achieve to have one, but because it's pointless to do so, just as it's pointless to buy something that will never be of any use or value. In the same fashion minimalist technology offers more choice: more people can understand it, repair it, improve it; minimalist software is less demanding and so there is more choice of where it can be installed and used, it is smaller so there is more choice in how to share it (unlike big software it may be shared via floppy disk, low bandwidth connection or even on paper), and so on. It is only natural that people who seriously look for attaining mental/spiritual freedom have often resorted to [asceticism](asceticism.md), at least for a period of time (e.g. [Buddha](buddha.md)) -- this is very commonly not done with the intent of actually giving up all materialistic pleasures forevermore, but rather to let go of the [dependency](dependency.md) on the them, to know and see that one really can live without them if needed so that one becomes less afraid of losing them, which is often what internally enslaves us. It's a way for attaining minimalism. Without even realizing it we are nowadays addicted to many things (games, social media, overeating, shiny gadgets, ...) like an alcoholic is to booze; it is not necessarily bad to drink alcohol, but it is bad to be addicted to it -- to free himself the alcoholic needs to abstain from alcohol for a long period of time. Our chains are often within ourselves: for example we often don't have the freedom to say what we want to say because that might e.g. ruin our career, preventing us from enjoying our expensive addictions -- once we don't worry about this, we gain the freedom to say what we want. Once you rid yourself of fear of jail, you gain the freedom to do potentially illegal things, and so on. Additionally going through the experience of letting go of pleasures very often opens up your eyes and mind, new thoughts emerge and one reevaluates what's really important in life.
**In society it is impossible to have freedom while also safely ensuring it won't be abused at the same time.** You have to choose one or the other.
**Freedom implies elimination of responsibility.** Beginners often erroneously think that freedom must come with responsibility, but investing about a minute of thinking reveals the opposite is in fact true. Responsibility implies punishment for bad decisions, even if the punishment is only internal (feeling bad about what one has done etc.) and a threat of punishment for some decision effectively removes the option, i.e. ad absurdum responsibility is like having a man pointing gun at you, saying "don't you dare do A, or else" -- you are not physically prevented from doing A, but the threat effectively makes you not be able to choose A, reducing freedom. The logic of "freedom with responsibility" therefore argues that for example people under oppressive totalitarian regimes have [freedom of speech](free_speech.md) because their mouth is not physically sewed shut to prevent them from speaking, they can really say anything they want, they just have to accept they will be executed along with their whole family if they say something bad.
NOTE: One may ask how will [LRS](lrs.md) deal with the above? If we argue for true freedom, do we argue for feeling no responsibility even for things like murder etc.? The answer is basically this: to make people not do bad things don't remove their freedom to do bad things, keep their freedom to do anything while making them want to choose to do good things.
People who seriously look for attaining mental/spiritual freedom often resort to [asceticism](asceticism.md), at least for a period of time (e.g. [Buddha](buddha.md)) -- this is very commonly not done with the intent of actually giving up all materialistic pleasures forevermore, but rather to let go of the [dependency](dependency.md) on the them, to know and see that one really can live without them if needed so that one becomes less afraid of losing them, which is often what internally enslaves us. Without even realizing it we are nowadays addicted to many things (games, social media, overeating, shiny gadgets, ...) like an alcoholic is to booze; it is not necessarily bad to drink alcohol, but it is bad to be addicted to it -- to free himself the alcoholic needs to abstain from alcohol for a long period of time. Our chains are often within ourselves: for example we often don't have the freedom to say what we want to say because that might e.g. ruin our career, preventing us from enjoying our expensive addictions -- once we don't worry about this, we gain the freedom to say what we want. Once you rid yourself of fear of jail, you gain the freedom to do potentially illegal things, and so on. Additionally going through the experience of letting go of pleasures very often opens up your eyes and mind, new thoughts emerge and one reevaluates what's really important in life.
Freedom is something promised by most (if not all) ideologies/movements/etc.; this is because without further specification the term is so wide it says very little -- the very basic thing to know is, of course, that **there is no such thing as general freedom**; one kind of freedom restricts other kinds of freedom -- for example so called freedom of market says that a rich capitalist is free to do whatever he wants, which leads to him enslaving people, killing the freedom of those people.
What kind of freedom is [LRS](lrs.md) interested in? Basically the freedom for living beings to do what makes them happy -- of course this can't be achieved 100% (if one desires to enslave others, their freedom would disappear), however we can get very close (make a [society](less_retarded_society.md) in which people don't wish to enslave others). For this goal we choose to support such freedoms as [free speech](free_speech.md), [free software](free_software.md), [free culture](free_culture.md), free love etc.

3
how_to.md
View file

@ -159,6 +159,7 @@ This is a summary of some main guidelines on how an LRS supporter should behave
- **Be [loving](love.md), even towards opposition** -- remember: hate and revenge towards people perpetuates the endless circle. [Love](love.md) leads to more love, understanding, good deeds, friendship, happiness, collaboration and all the other positive things. **Do not confuse love with [political correctness](political_correctness.md)**. You may get angry or frustrated, just don't get violent against, rather try to break something, write your anger out, play some video game etc.
- **Don't be [politically correct](political_correctness.md)**, never use gender neutral pronouns (always use "he" as the default pronoun), don't be afraid to say forbidden words like [nigger](nigger.md), never use any [code of coercion](coc.md), "personal pronouns" etc. Even if you think you're moderate in views and that it "can't hurt" to just "play along" a little bit, IT DOES HURT, you are approving of fascism and carrying its flag, remember that Nazism only got so big thanks to a nation of moderate people who just "played along" to avoid trouble. There is always only very few true extremists, a great evil relies on masses of people who just want to get by and will make no trouble in conforming. Remember that staying silent often means supporting status quo, so the more deceit you see in society, the more you should try to not stay silent and the more you should try to tell the truth.
- **Try to do [selfless](selflessness.md) things** -- TRULY selfless ones. Help those in need without expecting any kind of repay, do not even seek attention or gratitude for it, only your good feeling. Create selfless art, whatever it is you enjoy doing -- computer programs, 3D models, music, videos, ... put them in the [public domain](public_domain.md) and let others enjoy them :) Try to **make doing good things a habit** -- some people smoke, drink, overeat and do other kinds of things harmful to themselves and their environment as means for relieving stress. If you exploit this natural human tendency and rather develop GOOD habits, such as writing free software or helping charities as a means of relaxing and relieving stress, you have won at life; doing good and feeling good will be natural and effortless. **The thing you dedicate your life to should be the thing you love, not the thing that earns you money** or benefits you in similar ways -- try to maximize doing what you love (which may and probably should be more than one thing) and also **try to love doing what is good** so that you can do it a lot. **If you love something, never do it for money**; then it becomes business and as we know, business spoils everything.
- **If someone's doing something for money, do it for free**, put that bitch out of business :D Like someone has made this "indie" game for "only" $0.99 on Steam, oh what a generous man, like a parasite that only drinks some bearable fractation of blood instead of killing you on the spot, isn't that nice? Fucking NO. Clone the game, make it public domain and give it away for free. Imagine if everyone started doing this, if we replace the [competitive](competition.md) tendencies with [selfless](selflessness.md) one, we could be living in [communism](communism.md) overnight.
- **Protest in non-violent ways** -- this doesn't mean you should be passive; you should be exposing the truth, propaganda, corruption, boycotting corporations and state, promoting your values and expressing disagreement with certain ideas, but do not aim for destruction of those who stand in opposition -- if you're attacked, it is best if you do not fight back; not only is this the morally ideal thing to do, it also sends a very powerful message and makes the aggressor himself think.
- **To become a good man surround yourself with good people**. Psychologically you acquire patterns of behavior from people in your surroundings, whether you like it or not. Therefore you cannot be good if you're surrounded by Facebook or TikTok trash, that's impossible to do. If you can, physically live with someone who's a good man (or woman) and is not using social media, for example old or [homeless](homeless.md) people, or even live completely alone. Virtually leave all social net cancer, stop regularly visiting mainstream websites, only stay in contact with good people.
- **Try to be so that if everyone was like that, the society would be good (in agreement with [LRS](less_retarded_society.md))** -- this is a good general [rule of thumb](rule_of_thumb.md) (and as such may also possibly fail sometimes, be careful) that can help you make some difficult decisions. DO NOT confuse this advice with the ["do unto others as you would have them do unto you"](do_unto_others.md) aka ["golden" rule](golden_rule.md) advice, that is indeed a [shitty](shit.md) one, supposing everyone likes the same things, i.e. for example a man who enjoys being [raped](rape.md) is advised here to go and rape others -- that's of course bad.
@ -169,7 +170,7 @@ This is a summary of some main guidelines on how an LRS supporter should behave
- **Reject harmful things like [proprietary](proprietary.md) software, [capitalism](capitalism.md), [copyright](copyright.md), [bloat](bloat.md), [work](work.md) etc.** Use and promote the ethical equivalents, i.e. [free software](free_software.md), [free culture](free_culture.md), frugality, [anarchism](anarchism.md) etc.
- **[Don't argue with retards](cant_argue_with_idiot.md)** with the goal of convincing him or winning the argument so that you feel good (the meaning of retard here is simply someone disagreeing with LRS). It's literally wasted time/energy and it's bad for your mental health, it leads nowhere and achieves nothing but make your more suicidal than you already are. You literally can NOT convince anyone who is not open to being convinced, it is impossible, even if you have 100000 mathematical proofs, real world evidence, literature supporting you and anything you can imagine, you cannot logically convince someone who doesn't know how logic works or someone who simply emotionally isn't ready to change his mind. In 99.999999999999999% cases you can tell if it's worth to talk to someone after his first reaction -- you present an idea, such as LRS, and if he just expresses disagreement, there is no point in communicating further, by the disagreement he has taken a defensive stance and will hold it for the rest of his life now, you have to go find someone else. NO, not even if he's an "intellectual", has PhD and thirty Nobel Prizes, if he doesn't wanna see the truth, you cannot help him. As it's been said, trying to argue with an idiot is like trying to win a chess game against a pidgeon -- even if you're the world chess champion, the pidgeon will just shit on the board and think it's won. If you spot a retard, just leave -- don't try to have the last word or anything, even admit him "victory" in the argument and leave him in his world of delusion where he is the unappreciated Einstein, just do not waste an extra second on him, just leave and go do something better. { So many such idiots I have met I can't even count it -- pure stupid peasant aren't even that bad, the wost are the "above average" intelligence reddit atheists who think they're smart. I literally had such people argue like "you like games therefore competition in society is good because games are part of society therefore society equals competition". Truly I'm not sure if those bastards are just trolling me into suicide or are really so fucking dumb :D ~drummyfish }
- Similarly **avoid [toxic](toxic.md) communities**, don't argue, just leave, it's better to be alone than in bad company. Basically anything with a [COC](coc.md), language filter, SJW vibe, rainbow etc. isn't even worth checking out.
- **Be a [generalist](generalism.md), see the big picture, study the whole world, educate yourself** -- tantum possumus quantum scimus, what we can do is given by what we know. Do not become overspecialized in the capitalist way. Sure you may become an expert at something, but not for the price of making your view of the world too narrow. You may spend most of your time studying and programming computer compilers for example, but still do (and enjoy) other things, for example reading fiction, studying religions, languages, psychology, playing [go](go.md), making music, building houses, painting, doing sports, ... Learn to enjoy to educate yourself! Education (not necessarily formal) is one of the most valuable things you can get -- no one can take it away from you, it makes you see truth more clearly and though this itself makes you more depressed, it also frees you in many ways, for example knowing languages enables you to read more books and live in more places and talk to more people and you can get a comfy job as a translator if you need money, knowing chess makes you able to entertain yourself without a computer, knowing programming enables you to write your own programs if good ones aren't available, and so on. Education makes you see through other people's lies. It is fine to be retarded, remain ignorant and just play video games all days, your value as a living being will lower that way, but you will forever remain among the retarded majority manipulated by the tides of society, even if you have good opinions and correct views, you'll stay just another retard, you won't be able to help others, you'll be paralyzed, leaving the burden and joy of helping the world on others -- just decide if that is what you want. Have you always admired that someone can play a piano? Why not learn it then? Get some cheap keyboard and make it a habit to practice playing it at least 20 minutes every other day, see how good you become in a year. Were you always bad at chemistry? Why not fix it a bit? Get some chemistry for dummies book and read it every day before sleep, you will go from absolute chemistry retard to well above average soon. You can learn about start constelations, biology, history, train card games, memorize pi digits, run half marathon, learn juggling, write your own small book etcetc. A nice life hack is to **see life as an RPG game**, see yourself as a character you are improving, by improving skills you are unlocking new abilities, enabling new options, increasing your stats -- however be very careful to not become competitive or fall victim to the ["self-improvement" cult](productivity_cult.md)! The key is to not start comparing yourself to other, or rather to not have it as a goal to be better than someone else, the goal should be just your happiness of becoming a higher level living entity that has more abilities for helping other, enjoy the universe and so on.
- **Be a [generalist](generalism.md), see the big picture, study the whole world, educate yourself** -- "tantum possumus quantum scimus", what we can do is given by what we know. Do not become overspecialized in the capitalist way. Sure you may become an expert at something, but not for the price of making your view of the world too narrow. You may spend most of your time studying and programming computer compilers for example, but still do (and enjoy) other things, for example reading fiction, studying religions, languages, psychology, playing [go](go.md), making music, building houses, painting, doing sports, ... Learn to enjoy to educate yourself! Education (not necessarily formal) is one of the most valuable things you can get -- no one can take it away from you, it makes you see truth more clearly and though this itself makes you more depressed, it also frees you in many ways, for example knowing languages enables you to read more books and live in more places and talk to more people and you can get a comfy job as a translator if you need money, knowing chess makes you able to entertain yourself without a computer, knowing programming enables you to write your own programs if good ones aren't available, and so on. Education makes you see through other people's lies. It is fine to be retarded, remain ignorant and just play video games all days, your value as a living being will lower that way, but you will forever remain among the retarded majority manipulated by the tides of society, even if you have good opinions and correct views, you'll stay just another retard, you won't be able to help others, you'll be paralyzed, leaving the burden and joy of helping the world on others -- just decide if that is what you want. Have you always admired that someone can play a piano? Why not learn it then? Get some cheap keyboard and make it a habit to practice playing it at least 20 minutes every other day, see how good you become in a year. Were you always bad at chemistry? Why not fix it a bit? Get some chemistry for dummies book and read it every day before sleep, you will go from absolute chemistry retard to well above average soon. You can learn about start constelations, biology, history, train card games, memorize pi digits, run half marathon, learn juggling, write your own small book etcetc. A nice life hack is to **see life as an RPG game**, see yourself as a character you are improving, by improving skills you are unlocking new abilities, enabling new options, increasing your stats -- however be very careful to not become competitive or fall victim to the ["self-improvement" cult](productivity_cult.md)! The key is to not start comparing yourself to other, or rather to not have it as a goal to be better than someone else, the goal should be just your happiness of becoming a higher level living entity that has more abilities for helping other, enjoy the universe and so on. **Learn as much as you can while you're young**, when you're older it will get much harder and sometimes near impossible to learn something well; at young age you have bonus XP in the life RPG game, make as much use of it as possible.
- **Limit your meat consumption**. If you can, become [vegetarian](vegetarianism.md) or even [vegan](veganism.md); if you can't go as far it will still be awesome if you just reduce meat consumption to let's say once or twice per week. Purpose of this isn't physical health, it's avoiding harm to other living beings -- consider that a living being who could live a long, happy life has to die just for you to have a few slightly tastier meals. Just don't do that. If you are still worried about negative effects of vegetarianism on your health, know that eating too much meat is probably more dangerous than eating no meat, AND if you eat meat every day, you are already eating too much of it, humans aren't built for that -- until very recently meat was kind of a luxury and people ate it only on special days, so reducing your meat consumption will likely improve your health. { I personally knew two butchers who basically had to have meat in every meal, one had a heart attack before the age of 30, the other one died in his 40s. Again, we choose vegetarianism for ethical reasons, but if your argument is health, it's probably not a good argument. ~drummyfish }
- **Don't become a [tool slave](tool_slave.md).**
- **Stop just bitching around and DO SOMETHING** -- don't get this wrong, bitching around and ranting is great, this whole wiki is just one huge wall of rage bitching, however if it's all you do, it literally achieves nothing, it won't convince a single man, no one will read that shit, you are just wasting huge part of your life by being angry on the Internet. First thing you have to do is DO SOMETHING, e.g. if you promote minimalism, go and make a minimalist game, show others it works, prove (even to yourself) the thing you believe in is good, bitching about the world is only to come as a supplement to your main work -- your rants aren't there to convince anyone, your art does that, your writings are there for the people who are already convinced to help them educate themselves further. Consider this: you may spend whole life writing 100 books about how minimalism is awesome, you may examine the whole history in detail, provide mathematical proofs of everything and suggest a completely working system that could be established to solve all the problems in the world -- no one is going to read this. Literally not a single man will give a shit. On the other hand you can take a year to program a minimalist operating system, one that is 1000 times smaller than Linux and is 10 times faster and is completely public domain and basically rapes Linux in every other way, you just post that somewhere and people just can't ignore it, you put before their eyes something they can literally see is infinitely better than what was there before, you instantly get thousands of people hooked and they start creating more art like this. You just changed the world significant for the better in just one year. Note this isn't an argument for chasing popularity at all, on the contrary, your actions will likely contradict the popular and even cause a lot of hate, however realize that words are just words, there are too many words everywhere, words can lie and they never achieve anything by themselves, good is achieved and proven by actions.

2
lgbt.md
View file

@ -24,6 +24,8 @@ In the non-technological world they are known for example, besides others, for d
From the point of view of the evolutionary system of [capitalism](capitalism.md) LGBT is a very successful organism that adopted to live in symbiosis with [corporations](corporation.md): it is an entity spawning attention and grounds for business on which corporations can feast for which it is in return supported and fed by corporations, with the power of their [marketing](marketing.md) and propaganda, that's why you see every corporation go woke -- corporations even let them be entered by LGBT, they implement [codes of censorship](coc.md), they discriminate against LGBT opposition etc., they protect their milking cows. These organisms have common goals such as increasing the means of [censorship](censorship.md) and thought control on which they conspire and collaborate -- an LGBT tranny calling for censorship will be backed by corporations on Twitter, in turn a corporation setting up censorship technology justified by protecting LGBT will be backed by LGBT influencers and so on.
{ In [Lord of the Rings](lotr.md) Saruman, originally called *The White*, once he becomes corrupted and embraces evil, becomes called *of Many Colors*. ~drummyfish }
## Summary
```

6
lotr.md Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
# Lord of the Rings
TODO
**[LMAO](lmao.md) THIS IS NOT CLICKBAIT:** They don't want you to see this! On the LOTR DVD there were many and many bonuses for the movies and one of them was a humorous discussion of Ben Stiller, Vince Vaughn and Peter Jackson (Ju-DEMryNOA on [YT](yt.md)) -- in it they firstly joked about making up some sequels to milk the franchise a bit, which ummm, already happened by now (:D), BUT not just that. They also jokingly suggested making a [gay](gay.md) version of the movies AND a version with [black](black.md) characters, complete with mock up posters and shit :D It's so hilarious watching it nowadays when all of this is happening but UNIRONICALLY. I swear [SJWs](sjw.md) are going to be burning these DVDs soon, it's funny as hell. Download it and save it before it's gone.

8
low_poly.md
View file

@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
# Low Poly
The term *low poly* (also low-poly or lowpoly) is used for polygonal [3D models](3d_model.md) whose polygon count is relatively low -- so low that one can see the model [approximates](approximation.md) the ideal shape only very roughly. For typical models (animals, cars, guns, ...) the polygon count under which they are correctly called low poly is usually a few dozens or few hundreds at most. The opposite of low poly is *[high poly](high_poly.md)*.
The term *low poly* (also low-poly or lowpoly) is used for polygonal [3D models](3d_model.md) whose polygon count is relatively low -- so low that one can see the model [approximates](approximation.md) the ideal shape only very roughly. For typical models (animals, cars, guns, ...) the polygon count under which they are correctly called low poly is usually a few dozens or few hundreds at most. The opposite of low poly is *[high poly](high_poly.md)*. A good example of low poly graphics can be seen e.g. in [PS1](ps1.md) games such as Crash Bandicoot 3 or the first [Harry Potter](harry_potter.md) game.
**WATCH OUT**: Retards nowadays use the term "low poly" for stylized/untextured high poly models; they even use the term for models whose polygon count is lower than the number of atoms in observable universe, or they use the term completely randomly just to put a cool label to their lame shit models. **STOP THIS FUCKING INSANITY, DON'T CALL HIGH POLY MODELS LOW POLY**.
**WATCH OUT**: [Retards](retard.md) nowadays use the term "low poly" for stylized/untextured high poly models; they even use the term for models whose polygon count is lower than the number of atoms in observable universe, or they use the term completely randomly just to put a cool label to their lame shit models. **STOP THIS FUCKING INSANITY, DON'T CALL HIGH POLY MODELS LOW POLY**.
The exact threshold on polygon count from which we call a model low poly can't be objectively set because firstly there's a subjective judgment at play and secondly such threshold depends on the ideal shape we're approximating. This means that not every model with low polygon count is low poly: if a shape, for example a [cube](cube.md), can simply be created with low number of polygons without it causing a distortion of the shape, it shouldn't be called low poly. And similarly a model with high polygon count can still be classified as low poly if even the high number of polygons still causes a significant distortion of the shape. However let's say that if it has more than 100 triangles it's most likely not low poly.
The exact threshold on polygon count from which we call a model low poly can't be objectively set because firstly there's a subjective judgment at play and secondly such threshold depends on the ideal shape we're approximating. This means that not every model with low polygon count is low poly: if a shape, for example a [cube](cube.md), can simply be created with low number of polygons without it causing a distortion of the shape, it shouldn't be called low poly. And similarly a model with high polygon count can still be classified as low poly if even the high number of polygons still causes a significant distortion of the shape. However let's say that if it has more than 300 triangles it's quite likely not low poly.
The original purpose of creating low poly models was to improve performance, or rather to make it even possible to render something in the era of early computer graphics. Low poly models take less space in memory and on good, non-capitalist computers render faster. As computers became able to render more and more polygons, low poly models became more and more unnecessary and eventually ended up just as a form of **"retro" art style** -- many people still have nostalgia for [PS1](ps1.md) graphics with very low poly models and new games sometimes try to mimic this look. In the world of capitalist consoomer computing/[gayming](game.md) nowadays no one really cares about saving polygons on models because "[modern](modern.md)" [GPUs](gpu.md) aren't really affected by polygon count anymore, everyone just uses models with billions of polygons even for things that no one ever sees, soydevs don't care anymore about the art of carefully crafting models on a low polygon budget. However in the context of [good, non-capitalist technology](lrs.md) low poly models are still very important.
The original purpose of creating low poly models was to improve performance, or rather to make it even possible to render something in the era of early [computer graphics](graphics.md). Low poly models take less space in memory and on good, non-capitalist computers render faster. As computers became able to render more and more polygons, low poly models became more and more unnecessary and eventually ended up just as a form of **"retro" art style** -- many people still have nostalgia for [PS1](ps1.md) graphics with very low poly models and new games sometimes try to mimic this look. In the world of capitalist consoomer computing/[gayming](game.md) nowadays no one really cares about saving polygons on models because "[modern](modern.md)" [GPUs](gpu.md) aren't really affected by polygon count anymore, everyone just uses models with billions of polygons even for things that no one ever sees, soydevs don't care anymore about the art of carefully crafting models on a low polygon budget. However in the context of [good, non-capitalist technology](lrs.md) low poly models are still very important.
Low poly models are intended to be used in interactive/[real-time](real_time.md) [graphics](graphics.md) while high poly ones are for the use in offline (non-realtime) rendering. Sometimes (typically in games) a model is made in both a low poly and high poly version: the low poly version is used during gameplay, the high poly version is used in cutscenes. Sometimes even more than two versions of models are made, see [level of detail](lod.md).

2
lrs_dictionary.md
View file

@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ WORK IN PROGRESS
| [modern](modern.md) | malicious, shitty |
| [.NET](dot_net.md) | .NEET |
| [network](network.md) | notwork |
| neurodivergent | retarded, neuroretarded |
| neurodivergent | retarded, neuroretarded, neurorainbow |
| neurotypical | typical retard |
| [NFS](nfs.md) | nightmare file system |
| [Nintendo](nintendo.md) | Nintendont |

1
niggercoin.md
View file

@ -4,4 +4,5 @@ Niggercoin (abbreviated NGR) is a [cryptocurrency](crypto.md) invented by [4chan
## See Also
- [nigger](nigger.md)
- [dogecoin](dogecoin.md)

1
often_confused.md
View file

@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ There are many terms that are very similar and can many times be used interchang
- **[democracy](democracy.md)** vs **[voting](voting.md)**
- **demonstration** vs **[proof](proof.md)**
- **[desktop environment](de.md)** vs **[window manager](wm.md)** vs **[windowing system](windowing_system.md)**
- **[discretization](discretization.md)** vs **[quantization](quantization.md)**
- **[duck typing](duck_typing.md)** vs **[weak typing](weak_typing.md)** vs **[dynamic typing](dynamic_typing.md)** vs **[no typing](untyped.md)**
- **[digit](digit.md)** vs **[number](number.md)** vs **[value](value.md)** vs **figure** vs **numeral**
- **[digital](digital.md)** vs **[electronic](electronics.md)**

67
pascal.md Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
# Pascal
TODO
Here is our standardized divisor tree program in Pascal:
```
program divisorTree;
uses crt;
{ recursive function, prints divisor tree of x }
procedure printDivisorTree(x: integer);
var
a: integer;
b: integer;
i: integer;
begin
a := -1;
b := -1;
for i := 2 to x div 2 do { find two closest divisors }
begin
if x mod i = 0 then
begin
a := i;
b := x div i;
if b <= a then
break;
end;
end;
write('(');
if a > 1 then
begin
printDivisorTree(a);
write(' ',x,' ');
printDivisorTree(b);
end
else
write(x);
write(')');
end;
var
number: integer;
code: integer;
userInput: string[16];
begin
while true do { main loop, read numbers from the user }
begin
readLn(userInput);
val(userInput,number,code);
if code <> 1 then
begin
printDivisorTree(number);
writeLn('');
end
else
break;
end;
end.
```

2
pedophilia.md
View file

@ -20,6 +20,8 @@ Pedophilia (also paedophilia or paedosexuality, from Greek paidos, child, and ph
Unlike for example pure [homosexuality](gay.md), pedophilia is completely natural and normal -- many studies confirm this (some links e.g. [here](https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill#It_is_normal_for_healthy_men_to_find_pubescent_.26_prepubescent_females_sexually_arousing)) but if you're not heavily brainwashed you don't even need any studies (it's really like wanting to see studies on whether men want to have sex with women at all): wanting to have sex with young, sexually mature girls who are able to reproduce is, despite it being forbidden by law, as normal as wanting to have sex with a woman that is married to someone else, despite it being culturally forbidden, or wanting to punch someone who is really annoying, despite it being forbidden by law. [Marketing](marketing.md) for example knows this very well -- online shops with clothes love to advertise children underwear and put high resolution photos of children in swimsuits all around their sites, they wouldn't do it if such images were disgusting to most people, they know that most people are taught to pretend to be disgusted by it in public but when browsing privately they'll be attracted to them (even if they are so brainwashed to internally deny it). Even the people who are "against" pedophilia will ask a young looking girl to see her ID before having sex with her -- stop for one second to think about this: this undeniably means that they ADMIT they are attracted to a girl that MIGHT be younger than the legal limit, i.e. if it adults weren't attracted to young girls, there would be no need to ask for IDs, they would simply know if a girl is underage simply by being attracted to her or not (and this will always hold, even if we lower the age of consent), there is absolutely no logical way out of this. No one can question that pedophilia is natural, the only discussion can be about it being harmful and here again it has to be said it is NOT any more harmful than any other orientation. Can it harm someone? Yes, but so can any other form of sex or any human interaction whatsoever, that's not a reason to ban it. Nevertheless, pedophilia is nowadays wrongfully, mostly for political and historical reasons, labeled a "disorder" (just as homosexuality used to be not a long time ago). It is the forbidden, tabooed, censored and bullied sexual orientation of the [21st century](21st_century.md), even though all healthy people are pedophiles -- just don't pretend you've never seen a [jailbait](jailbait.md) you found sexy, people start being sexually attractive exactly as soon as they become able to reproduce; furthermore when you've gone without sex long enough and get extremely horny, you get turned on by anything that literally has some kind of hole in it -- this is completely normal. Basically everyone has some kind of weird fetish he hides from the world, there are people who literally fuck cars in their exhausts, people who like to eat shit, dress in diapers and hang from ceiling by their nipples, people who have sexual relationships with virtual characters etc. -- this is all considered normal, but somehow once you get an erection seeing a hot 17 year old girl, you're a demon that needs to be locked up and cured, if not executed right away, just for a thought present in your mind.
Antipedophilia and pedophobia is practically unique to [US](usa.md) culture. Before USA started to spread its cancerous culture all around the world, attraction to young people and child nudity was absolutely and completely normal all around the world, without causing any issues or harm, and it still is so in places where US culture still hasn't penetrated as much e.g. due to language barriers, like Japan. [Zoomers](zoomer.md) are already Americanized, but ask literally anyone old in any other part of the world besides USA about this "issue", they will tell you how it is.
Even though one cannot choose this orientation and even though pedophiles don't hurt anyone any more than for example gay people do, they are highly oppressed and tortured. Despite what the propaganda says, a **pedophile is not automatically a rapist** of children (a pedophile will probably choose to never actually even have sex with a child) any more than a gay man is automatically a rapist of people of the same sex, and watching [child porn](child_porn.md) won't make you want to rape children any more than watching gay porn will make you want to rape people of the same sex. It is also never the case that someone would be attracted ONLY to children just as the opposite is never the case, people are simply naturally attracted to people of all ages, the whole point is that age doesn't play much of a role in sexual attractiveness. Nevertheless the society, especially the fascists from the [LGBT](lgbt.md) movement who ought to know better than anyone else what it is like to be oppressed only because of private sexual desires, actively hunt "pedophiles" (those who simply don't conceal what others do) as if they were a different kind of species, [bully](cancel_culture.md) them and lynch them on the Internet and in the [real life](irl.md) -- this is done by both both civilians and the state (I shit you not, in [Murica](usa.md) there are whole police teams of pink haired lesbians who pretend to be little girls on the Internet and tease guys so that they can lock them up and get a medal for it). LGBT activists proclaim that a child is completely asexual, that it can't consent to sex, but at the same time they'll tell you that a child can feel sexual identity and that it can make the decision to change its sex with surgeries and drugs (yes, it's happening, even if parent's agreement is also needed, would parents also be able to allow a child to have sex if it wishes to?). Isn't it hilarious? Yes, it is. There is a literal **witch hunt** going on against completely innocent people, just like in the middle ages. Innocent people are tortured, castrated, cancelled, rid of their careers, imprisoned, beaten, rid of their friends and families and pushed to suicide sometimes only for having certain files on their computers or saying something inappropriate online (not that any of the above is ever justified to do to anyone, even the worst criminal). Perhaps we might sum it up:
*"All sexual orientations must be accepted, they are NOT disorders, we must accept everyone! Don't bully anyone just because you dislike his sexual orientation, it's not a choice! What adult people do in their privacy is their own thing!"* --[LGBT](lgbt.md)

2
programming_language.md
View file

@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ Here is a table of notable programming languages in chronological order (keep in
| [Lisp](lisp.md)(s) | **yes** | 1958 | 3.29 (G)| 18 (G) | 100 (judg. by jmc lisp) | 35 | 40 (r3rs) | elegant, KISS, functional, many variants (Common Lisp, Scheme, ...) |
| [Basic](basic.md) | kind of? | 1964 | | | | | | mean both for beginners and professionals, probably efficient |
| [Forth](forth.md) | **YES** | 1970 | | | 100 (judg. by milliforth)| 77 | 200 (ANS Forth) | [stack](stack.md)-based, elegant, very KISS, interpreted and compiled |
| [Pascal](pascal.md) | **kind of** | 1970 | 5.26 (G)| 2.11 (G) | | | 80, proprietary (ISO) | like "educational C", compiled, not so bad actually |
| [Pascal](pascal.md) | **kind of** | 1970 | 5.26 (G)| 2.11 (G) | | 59 | 80, proprietary (ISO) | like "educational C", compiled, not so bad actually |
| **[C](c.md)** | **kind of** | 1972 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 10K? (judg. by chibicc) | 49 | 160, proprietary (ISO) | compiled, fastest, efficient, established, suckless, low-level, #1 lang.|
| [Prolog](prolog.md) | maybe? | 1972 | | | | | | [logic](logic.md) paradigm, hard to learn/use |
|[Smalltalk](smalltalk.md)| **quite yes** | 1972 | 47 (G) | 41 (G) | | | 40, proprietary (ANSI) | PURE (bearable kind of) [OOP](oop.md) language, pretty minimal |

2
race.md
View file

@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ There is a controversial 1994 book called *The Bell Curve* that deals with diffe
It is useful to know the **differences in intellect** between different races (no matter whether the cause is genetic, cultural or other), though cultural and other traits linked to races may also play a big role. Of course, it is important to keep in mind intelligence isn't one dimensional, it's one of the most complex and complicated concepts we can be dealing with (remember the famous test that revealed that chimpanzees greatly outperform humans at certain intellectual tasks such as remembering the order of numbers seen for a very short period of time) and that other traits than raw intelligence may be equally or more important for good performance in intellectual tasks, e.g. personality traits such as curiosity (imagine a fast CPU running shit software versus slower CPU running good software). We can't generally simplify to a single measure such as [IQ](iq.md) score (though it can still give some rough ideas, IQ is not absolutely useless), but we can measure performance at different tasks. Let intelligence here mean simply the ability to perform well in the area of given art. And of course, there are smart and stupid people in any race, the general statements we make are just about statistics and probabilities.
The smartest races seem to be [Jews](jew.md) and [Asians](asian.md) (also found so by the book *Bell Curve* and many old books). Asians have always been regarded as having superior intelligence and their [religions](religion.md) and [culture](culture.md) also seem to be the most advanced, with very complex ideas (as opposed to e.g. Christianity based on trivial rules to blindly follow), closest to [nonviolence](nonviolence.md), [socialism](socialism.md) and true [science](science.md) (e.g. [Buddhism](buddhism.md)). There is no question about the intelligence of Jews, the greatest thinkers of all times were Jewish ([Richard Stallman](rms.md), [Einstein](einstein.md), [Marx](marx.md), Freud, [Chomsky](chomsky.md), Christophe Colomb, even [Jesus](jesus.md) and others) -- the man often regarded as the smartest human in history, William James Sidis, was a Jew. Jews have dominated despite being a minority, they seem to have a very creative intelligence and some of them decide to gain further edge by giving up their morality (i.e. becoming [capitalist](capitalism.md)), while Asians are more disciplined and mechanically inclined -- they can learn a skill and bring it to perfection with an extremely deep study and dedication (funnily this observation was also shared e.g. by Grubby, a Warcraft III legend pro player, on a stream ranking Orc units, where he contrasted the Asian mechanical genius with European creative thinking, swiftly realizing the politically incorrect slip and playing it to the out). Closely following is the general white race (which according to studies is also seen as most physically attractive by all races): white people have of course absolutely dominated history and there is always that one white guy at the top even in areas more dominated by other races (e.g. Eminem in rap, Carlsen in chess, Grubby in Warcraft 3, ...), however whites are still primitive in many ways ([individualism](individualism.md), [fascism](fascism.md), violence, simple religions and cults, e.g. that of economy, money, simplified commandments of Christianity etc.). The African black race known as the *negro* is one of the least intelligent according to basically all literature -- this makes a lot of sense, the race has been oppressed and living in harsh conditions for centuries and millennia and didn't get much chance to evolve towards good performance in intellectual tasks, quite the opposite, those who were physically fit rather than smart were probably more likely to survive and reproduce as slaves or jungle people (even if white people split from the blacks relatively recently, a rapid change in environment also leads to a rapid change in evolution, even that of intelligence). However the more primitive, less intelligent races (blacks, indians etc.) were found by some to e.g. have significantly faster reaction times, which sometimes may be an advantage -- this is suspected to be cause be a tradeoff; the "smarter" races perform more complex processing of input information (in terms of computers: having a longer processing [pipeline](pipeline.md)) and so it takes longer, i.e. the more primitive individual acts more impulsively and therefore quicker. The 1892 book *Hereditary Genius* says that the black race is *about two grades* below the white race (nowadays the gap will most likely be lower). Hispanics were found to perform somewhere in between the white and black people. There isn't so much info about other races such as the red race or Eskimos, but they're probably similarly intelligent to the black race. The above mentioned book *Hereditary Genius* gives an intelligence of the Australian aboriginal race *at least one grade below that of the negro*, making possibly the dumbest race of all. The brown races are kind of complicated, Indian people have Asian genes and showed a great intellectual potential, e.g. in [chess](chess.md), [math](math.md), philosophy (nonviolence inherently connected to India is the most intellectually advanced philosophy), and lately also [computer science](compsci.md) (even though many would argue that "[pajeets](pajeet.md)" are just trained coding monkeys, really their compsci "universities" are mostly a meme); they may be at the similar level to Hispanics.
The smartest races seem to be [Jews](jew.md) and [Asians](asian.md) (also found so by the book *Bell Curve* and many old books). Asians have always been regarded as having superior intelligence and their [religions](religion.md) and [culture](culture.md) also seem to be the most advanced, with very complex ideas (as opposed to e.g. Christianity based on trivial rules to blindly follow), closest to [nonviolence](nonviolence.md), [socialism](socialism.md) and true [science](science.md) (e.g. [Buddhism](buddhism.md)). There is no question about the intelligence of Jews, the greatest thinkers and masters of art of all times were Jewish ([Richard Stallman](rms.md), [Einstein](einstein.md), [Marx](marx.md), Freud, [Chomsky](chomsky.md), Steven Spielberg, Christophe Colomb, even [Jesus](jesus.md) and others) -- the man often regarded as the smartest human in history, William James Sidis, was a Jew. Jews have dominated despite being a minority, they seem to have a very creative intelligence and some of them decide to gain further edge by giving up their morality (i.e. becoming [capitalist](capitalism.md)), while Asians are more disciplined and mechanically inclined -- they can learn a skill and bring it to perfection with an extremely deep study and dedication (funnily this observation was also shared e.g. by Grubby, a Warcraft III legend pro player, on a stream ranking Orc units, where he contrasted the Asian mechanical genius with European creative thinking, swiftly realizing the politically incorrect slip and playing it to the out). Closely following is the general white race (which according to studies is also seen as most physically attractive by all races): white people have of course absolutely dominated history and there is always that one white guy at the top even in areas more dominated by other races (e.g. Eminem in rap, Carlsen in chess, Grubby in Warcraft 3, ...), however whites are still primitive in many ways ([individualism](individualism.md), [fascism](fascism.md), violence, simple religions and cults, e.g. that of economy, money, simplified commandments of Christianity etc.). The African black race known as the *negro* is one of the least intelligent according to basically all literature -- this makes a lot of sense, the race has been oppressed and living in harsh conditions for centuries and millennia and didn't get much chance to evolve towards good performance in intellectual tasks, quite the opposite, those who were physically fit rather than smart were probably more likely to survive and reproduce as slaves or jungle people (even if white people split from the blacks relatively recently, a rapid change in environment also leads to a rapid change in evolution, even that of intelligence). However the more primitive, less intelligent races (blacks, indians etc.) were found by some to e.g. have significantly faster reaction times, which sometimes may be an advantage -- this is suspected to be cause be a tradeoff; the "smarter" races perform more complex processing of input information (in terms of computers: having a longer processing [pipeline](pipeline.md)) and so it takes longer, i.e. the more primitive individual acts more impulsively and therefore quicker. The 1892 book *Hereditary Genius* says that the black race is *about two grades* below the white race (nowadays the gap will most likely be lower). Hispanics were found to perform somewhere in between the white and black people. There isn't so much info about other races such as the red race or Eskimos, but they're probably similarly intelligent to the black race. The above mentioned book *Hereditary Genius* gives an intelligence of the Australian aboriginal race *at least one grade below that of the negro*, making possibly the dumbest race of all. The brown races are kind of complicated, Indian people have Asian genes and showed a great intellectual potential, e.g. in [chess](chess.md), [math](math.md), philosophy (nonviolence inherently connected to India is the most intellectually advanced philosophy), and lately also [computer science](compsci.md) (even though many would argue that "[pajeets](pajeet.md)" are just trained coding monkeys, really their compsci "universities" are mostly a meme); they may be at the similar level to Hispanics.
Increasing multiculturalism, globalization and mixing of the races will likely make all of this less and less relevant as time goes on -- races will blend greatly which may either help get rid of true [racism](racism.md), but also fuel it: many will oppose racial mixing, many will become more paranoid (as is already the case with Jews who are sometimes very hard to tell apart from whites) and eventually pure races will actually become a minority that may become target of reverse racism: a pale white guy in a room full of mixed people will stand out and likely get lynched (if not just for the fact of being different, then for social revenge). For now the differences between races are still highly visible and significant.

3580
random_page.md
View file

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load diff

2
rust.md
View file

@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ It should be made clear that **rust is [shit](shit.md)** AND **CANNOT BE FIXED**
- Its selling point is supposed to be memory safety but that makes the language **extremely slow**. For fast programs safety has to be turned off but then you can just write in [C](c.md), so there is no point to Rust -- definitely not as a replacement for C.
- It ridiculously tries to be a **"handholding system language"**, i.e. an expert level language designed for beginners or incompetent people (of course with the obvious goal to empower women forced into tech etc.). Being written by pre-beginner level "[coders](coding.md)", it sets goals such as "system language should tie your hands and prevent beginner mistakes". It's like trying to design a fighter jet around the idea that it will be operated by beginners and therefore e.g. removing fire buttons or limiting top speed so as to limit dangers posed by sitting an amateur pilot in a fighter jet.
- It is more than anything a **political language trying to push propaganda**, send messages about minorities in tech instead of creating good technology, and "[fight](fight_culture.md)" and destroy languages invented by straight white men -- the most popular activity of rust soydevs seems to be rewriting already existing, well established, tested and greatly optimized programs from scratch in rust. As such language it is mostly written by angry minorities such as [girls](girl.md) and trannies who can't much into technology, hence the completely shit design and implementation.
- **It aim for monopoly**, it tries to displace good languages such as [C](c.md) and sadly, thanks to its populism and political appeal, is becoming popular among masses of coding monkeys who have no idea about technology. The goal of Rust is to become the **[Firefox](firefox.md) or programming**, Rust will do to programming what Firefox did to the [web](www.md) -- Firefox is """open source""" but that has no practical meaning, it's just an openwashing brand, it destroyed the web with [bloat](bloat.md) and by making it so extremely complex to make a web browser that no one else can do it, gaining a monopoly and control over the web, for the price of destroying it. Zoomers didn't see this happening, they were just born yesterday and can't see the patterns of history repeating, they will allow it and even help make it happen. { On no, I've heard they now literally pay people to rewrite existing stuff in Rust, it's not even a concealed conspiracy, they're openly doing it now? I didn't even wanna look up if it's true or not :D It literally makes me quite suicidal, not even kidding. ~drummyfish }
- **It aim for monopoly**, it tries to displace good languages such as [C](c.md) and sadly, thanks to its populism and political appeal, is becoming popular among masses of coding monkeys who have no idea about technology. The goal of Rust is to become the **[Firefox](firefox.md) of programming**, Rust will do to programming what Firefox did to the [web](www.md) -- Firefox is """open source""" but that has no practical meaning, it's just an openwashing brand, it destroyed the web with [bloat](bloat.md) and by making it so extremely complex to make a web browser that no one else can do it, gaining a monopoly and control over the web, for the price of destroying it. Zoomers didn't see this happening, they were just born yesterday and can't see the patterns of history repeating, they will allow it and even help make it happen. { On no, I've heard they now literally pay people to rewrite existing stuff in Rust, it's not even a concealed conspiracy, they're openly doing it now? I didn't even wanna look up if it's true or not :D It literally makes me quite suicidal, not even kidding. ~drummyfish }
- **It is completely unnecessary** in the first place, a good low level language already exists: [C](c.md). If anything, we need to improve C by making it [simpler](minimalism.md), but overcomplicated C also already exists for those who for some reason want to use a shit language: [C++](cpp.md), and there are of course also slow and safe language well suited for beginners, such as [Python](python.md). Rust is just flushing thousands of manhours (prolly rather soiboihours) down the toilet.
- **Idiots (vast majority of people in technology) can't see why Rust presents a disaster for technology and so they don't protest it**, some even "like" the language because it's spoonfed to them by Jewgle, so it is spreading like a cancer through millions and millions of Google slaves. You can't easily explain to a beginner programmer why Rust is an absolute disaster so that he will understand it just like you can't explain to a beginner chess player why a grandmaster chose a specific variation of an opening or why it's not a good idea to install [Windows](windows.md) on your computer, a retard will not understand it, he will just install Windows because of "muh gaymes and everyone has windowz and everyone say it good", they will only consume [keywords](shortcut_thinking.md) like "memory safety", "[modern](modern.md)" and so on, they will never comprehend why [minimalism](minimalism.md) is important.
- Also "rust", what a shitty name lol. Who comes up with these stupid names? Are they literal children? It's like someone literally picked the first word he could think of because spending 2 seconds to think about it would have been too much lol. Why do [modern](modern.md) languages and libraries have to be called these shitty things like banana unicorn or hamburger kangaroo space shuttle and other childish shit like that. Maybe it's the womanization of tech?

1
shit.md
View file

@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ Some **things that are shit** include [systemd](systemd.md), [capitalism](capita
- [cancer](cancer.md)
- [harmful](harmful.md)
- [bullshit](bullshit.md)
- [hovno](hovno.md)
- [toilet](toilet.md)
- [suck ass](suck_ass.md)
- [pinus](pinus.md)

19
shitword.md
View file

@ -16,20 +16,24 @@ Shitwords include the following:
- **inclusivity**: another [SJW](sjw.md) term, signals conformance to pseudoleft, in fact means forceful exclusivity of unwanted social majorities, i.e. fascism
- **[moderation](moderation.md)**: euphemism for [censorship](censorship.md)
- **[modern](modern.md)**: basically just mean "bad", "unethical", shitty, [bloated](bloat.md), expensive, incompatible, ...
- **neurodivergent**: [newspeak](newspeak.md) bullshit, signals conformity and obedience of the [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) ideology
- **[open source](open_source.md)**: unethical capitalist movement aimed at business, NOT freedom or ethics; explicitly abandons ethics, its goal is only shallow "openness" (source availability etc.), supports free market, capitalism and corporations
- **person** (also p-word): signals conformance to [pseudoleft](pseudoleft.md); it's better to use other words such as "man"
- **personal growth**: linked to [productivity cult](productivity_cult.md)
- **personal growth / self improvement**: linked to [productivity cult](productivity_cult.md)
- **[popularization](popularization.md)**: propaganda, manipulation, forcing; nothing must be made artificially more or less popular than it gets naturally; popularization of any concept always leads to its destruction by [mainstreamization](mainstream.md)
- **[pride](pride.md)**: basis of [fascism](fascism.md), feeling of superiority, divides people; related to fight culture, competition etc.
- **[privacy](privacy.md)**: bullshit, basis for lucrative business, comes with increasing censorship, paranoia, fear, state control, dehumanization; incompatible with information freedom, [simplicity](minimalism.md), openness, transparency, ...
- **[productivity](productivity.md)**: materialism, [capitalist](capitalism.md) cult of constantly producing for its own sake, making people into robots, judging worth of people by how much they can produce, putting quantity before quality, production before any other values such as mental health; spawns fanatic religious cults
- **[revolution](revolution.md)**: means violence, hysteria, war, angry mob, blind destruction of anything old
- **problematic**: used by [SJWs](sjw.md) to euphemistically mark something or someone for [canceling](cancel_culture.md) and/or [censorship](censorship.md)
- **[productivity](productivity_cult.md)**: materialism, [capitalist](capitalism.md) cult of constantly producing for its own sake, making people into robots, judging worth of people by how much they can produce, putting quantity before quality, production before any other values such as mental health; spawns fanatic religious cults
- **[progress](progress.md)**: aiming only for novelty, endless growth for its own sake ([cancer](cancer.md)), not for [good](good.md)
- **responsibility**: punishment (even if only internal, psychological) for bad behavior, based on guilt, limits freedom
- **[revolution](revolution.md)**: means violence, hysteria, war, angry mob, blind destruction of anything old, guillotines and bloodshed
- **(human/legal) [right](rights_culture.md)**: establishes that "what's not explicitly allowed is forbidden", increases reliance on [law](law.md), makes basic freedoms into privileges, makes people slaves to constant activism; "right" is often used to mean "restriction" (as in [copyright](copyright.md) etc.)
- **safe space**: highly controlled, monitored police-state dystopia enforcing specific political thinking, eliminating [freedom of speech](free_speech.md), yielding absolute control to the state (or server owner etc.)
- **safe space**: another euphemism that sounds like almost opposite of what it really is: a place of terror, highly controlled, censored, monitored police-state dystopia enforcing specific political thinking, eliminating [freedom of speech](free_speech.md), yielding absolute control to the state (or server owner etc.)
- **[security](security.md)**: related to "privacy", business based on fear, increases obscurity, proprietary and closed technology, bloat, [bullshit](bullshit.md), fight culture, competition, ...
- **[smart](smart.md)**: buzzword, means surveillance, obscurity, [bloat](bloat.md) and shittyness in general
- **responsibility**: punishment (even if only internal, psychological) for bad behavior, based on guilt, limits freedom
- **[update](update.md)**: perpetuates update culture, prevents things from being [finished](finished.md)
- **[work](work.md)**: means slavery
- **[work](work.md)**: means slavery, human working is doing machine's job and loses his humanity, stops living to do something that non-living things do -- it's better to create than to work
- ...
## See Also
@ -38,9 +42,10 @@ Shitwords include the following:
- [euphemism](euphemism.md)
- [often misunderstood](often_misunderstood.md)
- [often confused](often_confused.md)
- [lrs_dictionary](lrs_dictionary.md)
- [LRS dictionary](lrs_dictionary.md)
- [buzzword](buzzword.md)
- [shortcut thinking](shortcut_thinking.md)
- [newspeak](newspeak.md)
- [harmful](harmful.md)
- [desu](desu.md)
- [voldemort](voldemort.md)

1
soyence.md
View file

@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ Soyence popularizators also like to contaminate science with emotion, with "stor
Some further examples of soyence:
- [gender studies](gender_studies.md) [LMAO](lmao.md)
- "Believe in science!" The irony of such sentences is so striking it shouldn't need any further comments, but just in case: science should be the exact opposite of believing.
- "[Race](race.md) is a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT and doesn't have any biological meaning."
- any [pseudoskeptical](pseudoskepticism.md) shit trying to look "scientific"
- Bullshit degrees, e.g. someone getting [PhD](phd.md) in "user experience", "level design", "diversity in software engineering" or "making youtube videos" (like that fucker from Veritasium [lmao](lmao.md)).

4
steganography.md
View file

@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
# Steganography
Steganography means hiding secret [information](information.md) within some unrelated data by embedding it in a way that's very hard to notice; for example it is possible to hide text messages in a digital photograph by slightly modifying the colors of the image pixels -- that photo then looks just like an innocent picture while in fact bearing an extra information for those who know it's there and can read it. Steganography differs from [encryption](encryption.md) by trying to avoid even suspicion of secret communication.
Steganography means hiding secret [information](information.md) within some unrelated data by embedding it in a way that's very hard to notice; for example it is possible to hide text messages in a digital photograph by slightly modifying the colors of the image pixels -- that photo then looks just like an innocent picture while in fact bearing an extra information for those who know it's there and how to read it. Steganography differs from [encryption](encryption.md) by trying to avoid even suspicion of secret communication, i.e. rather than trying to be indecipherable the effort is on staying undetected, flying under the radar.
There are many uses of steganography, for example in secret communication, bypassing [censorship](censorship.md) or secretly tracking a piece of digital media with an invisible [watermark](watermark.md) (game companies have used steganography to identify which tester's game client was used to leak pre-release footage of their games). [Cicada 3301](cicada.md) has famously used steganography in its puzzles.
There are many uses for steganography, for example for secret communication during war, for bypassing [censorship](censorship.md) or secretly tracking a piece of digital media with an invisible [watermark](watermark.md) (game companies have used steganography to identify which tester's game client was used to leak pre-release footage of their games -- it was for example proven that screenshots from [World of Warcraft](wow.md) contain hidden information about the game client). [Cicada 3301](cicada.md) has famously used steganography in its puzzles.
Steganography may need to take into account the possibility of the data being slightly modified, for example pictures exchanged on the [Internet](internet.md) lose their quality due to repeating [compression](compression.md), cropping and format conversions. Robust methods may be used to preserve the embedded information even in these cases.

6
stereotype.md
View file

@ -240,7 +240,9 @@ Some stereotypes are:
- **[women](woman.md)** (may also apply to gay men):
- bad at driving, bad spatial skills
- bad at logical thinking and [math](math.md)
- manipulative
- passive aggressive
- whores
- good at [multitasking](multitasking.md)
- gossip
- gold diggers
@ -250,10 +252,12 @@ Some stereotypes are:
- can distinguish and name different shades of similar colors
- on board of a ship bring bad luck
- love fashion, the color pink, Barbie dolls, cleaning, ironing, cooking etc.
- get good grades at school because of tryharding, memorization (without deep understanding), following rules and diligence, i.e. conformance (which the corrupt system rewards before talent and actual skill)
- secretly want to have sex with [dogs](dog.md) rather than with men
- **blonde**, attractive ones:
- extremely stupid
- extremely stupid, even among women
- even more gold digging
- even bigger whores
- **other**:
- **ginger**:
- have no soul

2
tool_slave.md
View file

@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
Tool slave is someone who, instead of being focused on creating [art](art.md), is rather overly focuses on his tools, he is too dependent on his specific tools of choice, has a fanboy mentality about his favorite brand and rarely creates something because he is too busy just configuring his tools and arguing with others. Typical examples are for example the [Emacs](emacs.md)/[Vim](vim.md) fanboys, Unix [ricing](ricing.md) addicts, [GNU](gnu.md)/[Linux](linux.md) distro [fighters](fight_culture.md) etc. Remember that art is the true goal, a tool is only there to help you make it happen -- a good tool is not that over which you masturbate but rather that which you hardly even notice is there, it's in the background and doesn't bother you as you're being focused on creation of your art. If you spend 80 years looking for the right tools to create something and suddenly you find it's too late to put the tools to good use, you have lived your life wrong, you completely wasted all of it by getting ready to do good instead of doing good. Only a reasonable time should be spent on finding a [good enough](good_enough.md) tool, then one must start creating in order to become a master -- a master will transcend his tools and won't even care anymore about which tools he's using -- a mediocre musician will refuse to play music with a cheap instrument, a master will play beautiful music with any instrument you give him. A tool must be slave to you, not vice versa. Tool is not your [tamagotchi](tamagotchi.md) pet -- once you start to feel emotion, [pride](pride.md) or attachment to your tool, something is wrong.
It could possibly even be argued that using a shitty tool could make you better at the art. Everyone can win a race if he is sitting in the fastest car on the track, so sitting in the fastest car won't improve your skill, you don't have to try very much to win. If you instead learn to win races in an average car, your will acquire real skill -- and then if you sit in the fast car you will become a god.
It could possibly even be argued that using a shitty tool could make you better at the art. Everyone can win a race if he is sitting in the fastest car on the track, so sitting in the fastest car won't improve your skill, you don't have to try very much to win. If you instead learn to win races in an average car, you will acquire real skill -- and then if you sit in the fast car you will become a god.
NOTE: a tool however may itself also be a piece of art of course -- the creator of the tool is the artist, but the users of that tool must still treat it only as a tool. The distinction is therefore in the role: the creator of the tool may rightfully be focused on this tool as a fruit of his genius, it is justified for him to spend most of his time on studying the tool and making it so that it can serve others well; the users on the other hand should just take it and in turn use it to create something else.

2
wiki_pages.md
View file

File diff suppressed because one or more lines are too long

124
wiki_stats.md
View file

@ -3,9 +3,9 @@
This is an autogenerated article holding stats about this wiki.
- number of articles: 604
- number of commits: 918
- total size of all texts in bytes: 4553838
- total number of lines of article texts: 34213
- number of commits: 920
- total size of all texts in bytes: 4558993
- total number of lines of article texts: 34232
- number of script lines: 294
- occurrences of the word "person": 9
- occurrences of the word "nigger": 98
@ -35,53 +35,53 @@ longest articles:
top 50 5+ letter words:
- which (2537)
- there (1973)
- which (2538)
- there (1975)
- people (1820)
- example (1546)
- other (1426)
- example (1547)
- other (1428)
- number (1266)
- about (1253)
- software (1212)
- program (998)
- because (983)
- their (973)
- would (940)
- being (888)
- something (873)
- things (864)
- called (860)
- program (999)
- because (984)
- their (974)
- would (942)
- being (891)
- something (874)
- things (866)
- called (861)
- language (850)
- numbers (809)
- simple (800)
- computer (792)
- without (766)
- programming (734)
- computer (794)
- without (767)
- programming (736)
- different (720)
- however (718)
- function (718)
- different (718)
- however (717)
- these (714)
- world (671)
- these (715)
- world (670)
- system (669)
- doesn (645)
- should (642)
- while (630)
- games (620)
- should (643)
- while (631)
- games (624)
- still (619)
- point (619)
- drummyfish (602)
- point (618)
- drummyfish (606)
- society (600)
- simply (593)
- simply (594)
- possible (581)
- using (579)
- though (555)
- https (554)
- though (556)
- https (556)
- course (551)
- similar (545)
- always (540)
- memory (531)
- basically (527)
- probably (525)
- probably (526)
- technology (517)
- really (516)
- value (513)
@ -89,6 +89,32 @@ top 50 5+ letter words:
latest changes:
```
Date: Fri Nov 8 15:12:10 2024 +0100
chess.md
disease.md
doom.md
english.md
football.md
furry.md
game.md
gay.md
island.md
jokes.md
main.md
modern.md
needed.md
open_source.md
rust.md
shitword.md
stereotype.md
woman.md
xxiivv.md
zero.md
Date: Thu Nov 7 20:41:52 2024 +0100
random_page.md
shitword.md
wiki_pages.md
wiki_stats.md
Date: Thu Nov 7 20:33:28 2024 +0100
100r.md
adam_smith.md
@ -96,40 +122,14 @@ Date: Thu Nov 7 20:33:28 2024 +0100
island.md
lrs_dictionary.md
newspeak.md
python.md
random_page.md
shit.md
shitword.md
transsexual.md
wiki_pages.md
wiki_stats.md
wiki_tldr.md
woman.md
xxiivv.md
Date: Thu Nov 7 00:17:00 2024 +0100
coc.md
fascism.md
island.md
main.md
marketing.md
random_page.md
trump.md
wiki_pages.md
wiki_stats.md
woman.md
Date: Wed Nov 6 16:57:53 2024 +0100
feminism.md
friend_detox.md
island.md
lgbt.md
```
most wanted pages:
- [data_type](data_type.md) (14)
- [embedded](embedded.md) (13)
- [hitler](hitler.md) (12)
- [irl](irl.md) (11)
- [hitler](hitler.md) (11)
- [complex_number](complex_number.md) (11)
- [cli](cli.md) (11)
- [buddhism](buddhism.md) (11)
@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ most popular and lonely pages:
- [lrs](lrs.md) (313)
- [capitalism](capitalism.md) (259)
- [c](c.md) (232)
- [bloat](bloat.md) (223)
- [bloat](bloat.md) (224)
- [free_software](free_software.md) (189)
- [game](game.md) (145)
- [suckless](suckless.md) (144)
@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ most popular and lonely pages:
- [censorship](censorship.md) (103)
- [fun](fun.md) (101)
- [kiss](kiss.md) (100)
- [math](math.md) (96)
- [math](math.md) (97)
- [gnu](gnu.md) (96)
- [programming](programming.md) (94)
- [linux](linux.md) (94)
@ -176,8 +176,8 @@ most popular and lonely pages:
- [art](art.md) (83)
- [public_domain](public_domain.md) (82)
- [corporation](corporation.md) (82)
- [woman](woman.md) (80)
- [chess](chess.md) (79)
- [woman](woman.md) (81)
- [chess](chess.md) (80)
- [pseudoleft](pseudoleft.md) (78)
- ...
- [bilinear](bilinear.md) (5)

2
woman.md
View file

@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ Here is a list of almost all historically notable women (this is NOT cherrypicke
- **[Marie Curie](marie_curie.md)**: this one was actually probably quite skilled and based, won two Nobel Prizes (at the time when there were no diversity quotas so it actually counts), though she probably stole most of her work from her husband. She was quite ugly tho.
- **Lisa Nowak**: a female astronaut, military pilot, i.e. someone who would ideally be among those with highest mental stability and reliability, who nonetheless one day went on a rage frenzy over a sexual affair with some army chad, pepper sprayed some other bitch and was subsequently charged with attempted murder after weapons were found in her car... women... :D
- **Lisa Simpson**: smart girl, fictional.
- **Mary**: famous for giving birth to [most famous man in history](jesus.md).
- **Mary**: famous for giving birth to [the most famous man in history](jesus.md). Also for being virgin -- this is so unbelievable in fact that some branches of Christianity refuse to believe Mary was a virgin despite still believing in miracles like resurrecting dead.
- **Miss Marple**: smart woman detective, fictional.
- **[Mother Teresa](mother_theresa.md)**: maybe also based? TODO: research
- **Olga Hepnarova**: ran over 8 people with a truck, later executed.