Update

exercises.md

@@ -125,11 +125,12 @@ Here are some questions to test your LRS related knowledge :D
 24. In 3D computer [graphics](graphics.md) what's the difference between [shading](shading.md) and drawing [shadows](shadow.md)?
 25. Can we say that the traditional feed forward [neural networks](neural_network.md) are [Turing complete](turing_complete.md)? Explain why or why not.
 26. Wicw mx uum yvfe bbt uhmtf ok?
-27. Does the statement "10 does not equal 10" logically [imply](implication.md) that intelligent alien life exists?
-28. What is the principle of [asymmetric cryptography](asymmetric_cryptography.md) and why is it called *asymmetric*?
-29. What is the main reason for [Earth](earth.md) having seasons (summer, winter, ...)?
-30. WARNING: VERY HARD. There are two integers, both greater than 1 and smaller than 100. *P* knows their product, *S* knows their sum. They have this conversation: *P* says: I don't know the numbers. *S* says: I know you don't, I don't know them either. *P* says: now I know them. *S* says: now I know them too. What are the numbers? To solve this you are allowed to use a programming language, pen and paper etc. { Holy shit this took me like a whole day. ~drummyfish }
-31. Did you enjoy this quiz?
+27. What is the *Big O* time [complexity](complexity.md) of worst case scenario for [binary search](binary_search.md)?
+28. Does the statement "10 does not equal 10" logically [imply](implication.md) that intelligent alien life exists?
+29. What is the principle of [asymmetric cryptography](asymmetric_cryptography.md) and why is it called *asymmetric*?
+30. What is the main reason for [Earth](earth.md) having seasons (summer, winter, ...)?
+31. WARNING: VERY HARD. There are two integers, both greater than 1 and smaller than 100. *P* knows their product, *S* knows their sum. They have this conversation: *P* says: I don't know the numbers. *S* says: I know you don't, I don't know them either. *P* says: now I know them. *S* says: now I know them too. What are the numbers? To solve this you are allowed to use a programming language, pen and paper etc. { Holy shit this took me like a whole day. ~drummyfish }
+32. Did you enjoy this quiz?
 
 ### Answers
 
@@ -159,11 +160,12 @@ Here are some questions to test your LRS related knowledge :D
 24. Shading is the process of computing surface color of 3D objects, typically depending on the object's material and done by GPU programs called [shaders](shader.md); shading involves for example applying textures, normal mapping and mainly lighting -- though it can make pixels lighter and darker, e.g. depending on surface normal, it only applies local models of light, i.e. doesn't compute true shadows cast by other objects. On the other hand computing shadows uses some method that works with the scene as a whole to compute true shadowing of objects by other objects.
 25. We can't really talk about Turing completeness of plain neural networks, they cannot be Turing complete because they just transform fixed length input into fixed length output -- a Turing complete model of computation must be able to operate with arbitrarily large input and output. In theory we can replace any neural network with logic circuit or even just plain lookup table. Significance of neural networks doesn't lie in their computational power but rather in their efficiency, i.e. a relatively small and simple neural network may replace what would otherwise be an enormously large and complicated circuit.
 26. two (or txq); The cipher offsets each letter by its position.
-27. Yes, a false statement implies anything.
-28. The main difference against symmetric cryptography is we have two keys instead of one, one (private) for encrypting and one (public) for decrypting -- neither key can be used for the other task. Therefore encryption and decryption processes differ greatly (while in symmetric cryptography it's essentially the same, using the same key, just in reversed way), the problem looks different in one direction that the other, hence it is called *asymmetric*.
-29. It's not the distance from the Sun (the distance doesn't change that much and it also wouldn't explain why opposite hemispheres have opposite seasons) but the tilted Earth axis -- the tilt changes the maximum height to which the Sun rises above any specific spot and so the angle under which it shines on the that spot; the [cosine](cos.md) of this angle says how much energy the place gets from the Sun (similarly to how we use cosine to determine how much light is reflected off of a surface in [shaders](shader.md)).
-30. 4 and 13, solution: make a table, columns are first integer, rows are second (remember, both *P* and *S* can be making their own table like this too). Cross out whole bottom triangle (symmetric values). *P* doesn't know the numbers, so cross out all combinations of two primes (he would know such numbers as they have only a unique product). *S* knew *P* didn't know the numbers, so the sum also mustn't be a sum of two primes (if the sum could be written as a prime plus prime, *S* couldn't have known that *P* didn't know the numbers, the numbers may have been those two primes and *P* would have known them). This means you can cross out all such numbers -- these are all bottom-left-to-top-right diagonals that go through at least one already crossed out number (combination of primes), as these diagonal have constant sum. Now *P* has a table like this with relatively few numbers left -- if he now leaves in only the numbers that make the product he knows, he'll very likely be left with only one combination of numbers -- there are still many combinations like this, but only the situation when the numbers are set to be 4 and 13 allows *S* to also deduce the numbers after *P* declares he knows the numbers -- this is because *S* knows the combination lies on one specific constant-sum diagonal and 4-13 lie on the only diagonal that in this situation has a unique product within the reduced table. So with some other combinations *P* could deduce the numbers too, but only with 4-13 *S* can finally say he knows them too.
-31. yes
+27. *log2(n)*; Binary search works by splitting the data in half, then moving inside the half which contains the searched item, recursively splitting that one in half again and so on -- for this the algorithm will perform at worst as many steps as how many times we can divide the data in halves which is what base 2 logarithm tells us.
+28. Yes, a false statement implies anything.
+29. The main difference against symmetric cryptography is we have two keys instead of one, one (private) for encrypting and one (public) for decrypting -- neither key can be used for the other task. Therefore encryption and decryption processes differ greatly (while in symmetric cryptography it's essentially the same, using the same key, just in reversed way), the problem looks different in one direction that the other, hence it is called *asymmetric*.
+30. It's not the distance from the Sun (the distance doesn't change that much and it also wouldn't explain why opposite hemispheres have opposite seasons) but the tilted Earth axis -- the tilt changes the maximum height to which the Sun rises above any specific spot and so the angle under which it shines on the that spot; the [cosine](cos.md) of this angle says how much energy the place gets from the Sun (similarly to how we use cosine to determine how much light is reflected off of a surface in [shaders](shader.md)).
+31. 4 and 13, solution: make a table, columns are first integer, rows are second (remember, both *P* and *S* can be making their own table like this too). Cross out whole bottom triangle (symmetric values). *P* doesn't know the numbers, so cross out all combinations of two primes (he would know such numbers as they have only a unique product). *S* knew *P* didn't know the numbers, so the sum also mustn't be a sum of two primes (if the sum could be written as a prime plus prime, *S* couldn't have known that *P* didn't know the numbers, the numbers may have been those two primes and *P* would have known them). This means you can cross out all such numbers -- these are all bottom-left-to-top-right diagonals that go through at least one already crossed out number (combination of primes), as these diagonal have constant sum. Now *P* has a table like this with relatively few numbers left -- if he now leaves in only the numbers that make the product he knows, he'll very likely be left with only one combination of numbers -- there are still many combinations like this, but only the situation when the numbers are set to be 4 and 13 allows *S* to also deduce the numbers after *P* declares he knows the numbers -- this is because *S* knows the combination lies on one specific constant-sum diagonal and 4-13 lie on the only diagonal that in this situation has a unique product within the reduced table. So with some other combinations *P* could deduce the numbers too, but only with 4-13 *S* can finally say he knows them too.
+32. yes
 
 ## Other
 

history.md

@@ -24,6 +24,8 @@ Around the year of [our Lord](jesus.md) 1450 a major technological leap known as
 
 They year 1492 marks the **discovery of America** by Christopher Columbus who sailed over the Atlantic Ocean, though he probably wasn't the first in history to do so, and it wasn't realized he sailed to America until after he died (he thought he sailed to India). This is sometimes taken to mark the **end of Middle Ages** and transition to **Renaissance**. This was a time of increased interest in rationality, science and art; Renaissance saw man as a potent creation of God, who is capable of creating on his own rather than being mere blind, obedient servant of God. Great many polymath lived at this time, most notably **[Leonardo da Vinci](da_vinci.md)** (probably [gay](gay.md)) who was an excellent painter, explored human anatomy and even subjects such as astronomy and engineering. On one hand Renaissance brought beautiful art and new technology, on the other hand it further shifted society toward capitalism and selfish thinking, human became more self centered, [egoistic](egoism.md) and art became even more a matter of business -- for example the great painters infamously hired lesser artists to make copies of their paintings which were then sold almost like consumer products.
 
+In 1642 Blaise Pascal, a french mathematician/inventor/philosopher, invented *Pascaline*, a simple [mechanical](mechanical.md) calculator (however building on ideas dating back to antiquity), laying some very early foundations for automatic computation. (The [Pascal](pascal.md) programming language is named after him.) Shortly after Pascal another genius, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, further developed some basic theory (related e.g. to [binary](binary.md) system and [algorithms](algorithm.md)) that would much later on evolve into computer science.
+
 During 1700s a major shift in civilization occurred, called the **[Industrial Revolution](industrial_revolution.md)** -- this was another disaster that would lead to the transformation of common people to factory slaves and loss of their self sufficiency. The revolution spanned roughly from 1750 to 1850. It was a process of rapid change in the whole society due to new technological inventions that also led to big changes in how a man lived his daily life. It started in Great Britain but quickly spread over the whole world. One of the main changes was the **transition from manual manufacturing to factory manufacturing** using machines and sources of energy such as coal. **[Steam engine](steam_engine.md) played a key role**. Work became a form of a highly organized slavery system, society became industrionalized. This revolution became highly [criticized](ted_kaczynski.md) as it unfortunately opened the door for [capitalism](capitalism.md), made people dependent on the system as everyone had to become a specialized cog in the society machine, at this time people started to measure time in minutes and lead very planned lives with less joy. But there was no way back.
 
 In 1712 Thomas Newcomen invented the first widely used **[steam engine](steam_engine.md)** used mostly for pumping water, even though steam powered machines have already been invented long time ago. The engine was significantly improved by [James Watt](james_watt.md) in 1776. Around 1770 Nicolas-Joseph Cugnot created a first somewhat working **steam-powered [car](car.md)**. In 1784 William Murdoch built a small prototype of a **[steam locomotive](steam_locomotive.md)** which would be perfected over the following decades, leading to a transportation revolution; people would be able to travel far away for work, the world would become smaller which would be the start of **[globalization](globalization.md)**. The railway system would make common people measure time with minute precision.
@@ -56,7 +58,7 @@ In 1924 about 50% of US households own a car.
 
 October 22 1925 has seen the invention of **[transistor](transistor.md)** by Julius Lilienfeld (Austria-Hungary), a component that would replace vacuum tubes thanks to its better properties, and which would become probably the most essential part of computers. At the time the invention didn't see much attention, it would only become relevant decades later.
 
-In 1931 [Kurt Gödel](kurt_godel.md), a genius mathematician and logician from Austria-Hunagry (nowadays Czech Republic), published revolutionary papers with his [incompleteness theorems](incompleteness.md) which proved that, simply put, mathematics has fundamental limits and "can't prove everything". This led to [Alan Turing](turing.md)'s publications in 1936 that nowadays stand as the **foundations of [computer science](compsci.md)** -- he introduced a theoretical computer called the **[Turing machine](turing_machine.md)** and with it he proved that computers, no matter how powerful, will never be able to "compute everything". Turing also predicted the importance of computers in the future and has created several [algorithms](algorithm.md) for future computers (such as a [chess](chess.md) playing program).
+In 1931 [Kurt Gödel](kurt_godel.md), a genius mathematician and logician from Austria-Hunagry (nowadays Czech Republic), published revolutionary papers with his [incompleteness theorems](incompleteness.md) which proved that, simply put, mathematics has fundamental limits and "can't prove everything". This led to **[Alan Turing](turing.md)**'s publications in 1936 that nowadays stand as the **foundations of [computer science](compsci.md)** -- he introduced a theoretical computer called the **[Turing machine](turing_machine.md)** and with it he proved that computers, no matter how powerful, will never be able to "compute everything". Turing also predicted the importance of computers in the future and has created several [algorithms](algorithm.md) for future computers (such as a [chess](chess.md) playing program).
 
 In 1938 [Konrad Zuse](konrad_zuse.md), a German engineer, constructed **[Z1](z1.md), the first working electric mechanical [digital](digital.md) partially programmable computer** in his parents' house. It weighted about a ton and wasn't very reliable, but brought huge innovation nevertheless. It was programmed with punched film tapes, however programming was limited, it was NOT [Turing complete](turing_complete.md) and there were only 8 instructions. Z1 ran on a frequency of 1 to 4 Hz and most operations took several clock cycles. It had a 16 word memory and worked with [floating point](float.md) numbers. The original computer was destroyed during the war but it was rebuilt and nowadays can be seen in a Berlin museum. Zuse also soon created what's regarded as the **first [programming language](programming_language.md)**, [Plankalkul](plankalkul.md).
 
@@ -64,7 +66,7 @@ From 1939 to 1945 there was **[World War II](ww2.md)**.
 
 In hacker culture the period between 1943 (start of building of the [ENIAC](eniac.md) computer) to about 1955-1960 is known as the **Stone Age of computers** -- as the [Jargon File](jargon_file.md) puts it, the age when electromechanical [dinosaurs](dinosaur.md) ruled the Earth.
 
-In 1945 the construction of **the first electronic digital fully programmable computer** was completed at University of Pennsylvania as the US Army project. It was named **[ENIAC](eniac.md)** (Electronic Numerical Integrator and Computer). It used 18000 vacuum tubes and 15000 relays, weighted 27 tons and ran on the frequency of 5 KHz. [Punch cards](punch_card.md) were used to program the computer in its machine language; it was [Turing complete](turing_complete.md), i.e. allowed using branches and loops. ENIAC worked with signed ten digit decimal numbers. Also in 1945 on July 16 Americans detonated the first nuclear bomb in history as a test, later on that year **[USA](usa.md) used two nuclear bombs to murder hundreds of thousands of civilians** in Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
+In 1945 the construction of **the first electronic digital fully programmable computer** was completed at University of Pennsylvania as the US Army project. It was named **[ENIAC](eniac.md)** (Electronic Numerical Integrator and Computer). It used 18000 vacuum tubes and 15000 relays, weighted 27 tons and ran on the frequency of 5 KHz. [Punch cards](punch_card.md) were used to program the computer in its machine language; it was [Turing complete](turing_complete.md), i.e. allowed using branches and loops. ENIAC worked with signed ten digit decimal numbers. Also in 1945 on July 16 Americans detonated the first nuclear bomb in history as a test, later on that year **[USA](usa.md) used two nuclear bombs to murder hundreds of thousands of civilians** in Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Around this time [John von Neumann](von_neumann.md), a great genius with wide areas of interest, is also making great contributions to computer science, famously e.g. proposing the von Neumann computer architecture in which the program and data are stored in the same memory -- a concept that would be highly utilized in the future.
 
 Among hackers the period between 1961 to 1971 is known as the **Iron Age of computers**. The period spans time since the first minicomputer ([PDP1](pdp1.md)) to the first microprocessor ([Intel 4004](intel4004.md)). This would be followed by so called *elder days*.
 

human_language.md

@@ -2,14 +2,21 @@
 
 Human language is language used mostly by [humans](human.md) to communicate with each other; these languages are very hard to handle by [computers](computer.md) (only quite recently [neural network](neural_net.md) computer programs became able to show true understanding of human language). They are studies by [linguists](linguistics.md). Human languages are most commonly **natural languages**, i.e. ones that evolved naturally over many centuries such as [English](english.md), [Chinese](chinese.md), French or [Latin](latin.md), but there also exist a great number of so called **[constructed languages](conlang.md)** (*conlangs*), i.e. artificially made ones such as [Esperanto](esperanto.md), Interslavic or [Lojban](lojban.md). But all of these are still human languages, different from e.g. [computer languages](computer_language.md) such [C](c.md) or [XML](xml.md). Natural human languages practically always show significant irregularities (exceptions to general rules) while constructed languages typically try to eliminate irregularities as much as possible so as to make them easier to learn, but even a constructed human language is still extremely difficult for a computer to understand.
 
+## The Grand Curse Of Human Language
+
 { The following is a thought dump made without much research, please inform me if you're a linguist or something and have something enlightening to say, thank you <3 ~drummyfish }
 
-On one hand human languages are cool when viewed from cultural or [artistic](art.md) perspective, they allow us to write poetry, describe feelings and nature around us -- in this way they can be considered [beautiful](beauty.md). However from the perspective of others, e.g. programmers or historians, **human languages are a [nightmare](nightmare.md)**. There is unfortunately an **enormous, inherent curse connected to any human language**, both natural or constructed, that comes from its inevitably [fuzzy](fuzzy.md) nature stemming from fuzziness or real life concepts, it's the problem of **defining [semantics](semantics.md)** of words and constructs. [Syntax](syntax.md) (i.e. the rules that say which sentences are valid and which are not) doesn't pose such a problem, we can quite easily define what's grammatically correct or not (it's not as hard to write a program that checks gramatical correctness), it is semantics (i.e. meanings) that is extremely hard to grasp -- even in rigorous languages (such as mathematical notation or programming languages) semantics is a bit harder to define (quite often still relying on bits of human language), but while in a programming language we are essentially able to define quite EXACTLY what each construct means (e.g. `a + b` returns the sum of values *a* and *b*), in a natural language we are basically never able to do that, we can only ever form fuzzy connections between other fuzzy concepts and we can never have anything fixed.
+On one hand human languages are cool when viewed from cultural or [artistic](art.md) perspective, they allow us to write poetry, describe feelings and nature around us -- in this way they can be considered [beautiful](beauty.md). However from the perspective of others, e.g. programmers or historians, **human languages are a [nightmare](nightmare.md)**. There is unfortunately an **enormous, inherent curse connected to any human language**, both natural or constructed, that comes from its inevitably [fuzzy](fuzzy.md) nature stemming from fuzziness or real life concepts, it's the problem of **defining [semantics](semantics.md)** of words and constructs (no, Lojban doesn't solve this). [Syntax](syntax.md) (i.e. the rules that say which sentences are valid and which are not) doesn't pose such a problem, we can quite easily define what's grammatically correct or not (it's not as hard to write a program that checks gramatical correctness), it is semantics (i.e. meanings) that is extremely hard to grasp -- even in rigorous languages (such as mathematical notation or programming languages) semantics is a bit harder to define (quite often still relying on bits of human language), but while in a programming language we are essentially able to define quite EXACTLY what each construct means (e.g. `a + b` returns the sum of values *a* and *b*), in a natural language we are basically never able to do that, we can only ever form fuzzy connections between other fuzzy concepts and we can never have anything fixed.
 
-Due to this fuzziness human languages inevitably change over time no matter how hard we try to counter this, any text written a few thousand years ago is nowadays very hard to understand -- not because the old languages aren't spoken anymore, but because the original meanings of specific words, phrases and constructs are distroted by time; when learning an old language we learn what each word meant by reading its translation to some modern word, but the modern word is always more or less different. Even if it's a very simple word such as "fish", our modern word for fish means a slightly different thing than let's say ancient Roman's word for fish because it had slightly different connotations such as potential references to other things: fish for example used to be the symbol of Christianity, nowadays people don't even commonly make this connection. Some words may have referred to some contemporary "[meme](meme.md)" that's been long forgotten and if some text makes the reference, we won't understand it. While the Spanish word "perro" translates to English as "dog", the meanings aren't the same; English speaking gangsters use the word as a synonym for "friend" but in Spanish the word can be used as an insult so shouting "perro" and "dog" in the street may lead to different images popping up in the heads of those who hear it. How do you describe a word precisely if you can only desribe it with other imprecise words that are changing constantly? No, not even pictures will help -- if you attach the picture of a cat to the word "cat", it's still not clear what it means -- does it stand for only the one cat that's in the picture or all other animals that are similar to the one in the picture? How similar? Is lion a cat? Is a toy cat or cartoon cat a cat? Or does the picture signify that anything with a fur is a cat? Now imagine describing a more abstract term such as *thought*, *number* or *existence*. There is no solid ground, even such essential words as "to want" or "to be" have different meanings between languages ("to be" can stand for "to exist", "to be in a place", "to temporarily have some property", "to permanently have some property" etc.). Even dictionaries admit defeat and are happy with having circular definitions because there aren't any foundations to build upon, circular definitions are inevitable, dictionaries just help you connect fuzzy concepts together. All of this extends to tenses, moods, cases and everything else. This can be very well seen e.g. with people interpreting old texts such as the Bible, for example some say [Jesus](jesus.md) claimed to be the son of God while others reject it, saying that even if he stated the sentence, it actually wasn't meant literally as it was a commonly used phrase that meant something else -- these people will argue about everything and they can comfortably interpret the same text in completely opposite ways. The point is that we just can't know.
+Due to this fuzziness human languages inevitably change over time no matter how hard we try to counter this, any text written a few thousand years ago is nowadays very hard to understand -- not because the old languages aren't spoken anymore, but because the original meanings of specific words, phrases and constructs are distroted by time; when learning an old language we learn what each word meant by reading its translation to some modern word, but the modern word is always more or less different. Even if it's a very simple word such as "fish", our modern word for fish means a slightly different thing than let's say ancient Roman's word for fish because it had slightly different connotations such as potential references to other things: fish for example used to be the symbol of Christianity, nowadays people don't even commonly make this connection. Fishermen were a despised class of workers, to some fish may have signified food and abundance, to others something that "smells bad", to others something or someone who's "slippery". Some words may have referred to some contemporary "[meme](meme.md)" that's been long forgotten and if some text makes the reference, we won't understand it. While the Spanish word "perro" translates to English as "dog", the meanings aren't the same; English speaking gangsters use the word as a synonym for "friend" but in Spanish the word can be used as an insult so shouting "perro" and "dog" in the street may lead to different images popping up in the heads of those who hear it. How do you describe a word precisely if you can only desribe it with other imprecise words that are changing constantly? No, not even pictures will help -- if you attach the picture of a cat to the word "cat", it's still not clear what it means -- does it stand for the picture of the cat or for the cat that's in the picture, does it stand ONLY for the one cat that's in the picture or all other animals that are similar to the one in the picture? How similar? Is lion a cat? Is a toy cat or cartoon cat a cat? Or does the picture signify that anything with a fur is a cat? If it looks like cat but walks on two legs and speaks, is it still a cat? Now imagine describing a more abstract term such as *thought*, *number* or *existence*. There is no solid ground, even such essential words as "to want" or "to be" have different meanings between languages ("to be" can stand for "to exist", "to be in a place", "to temporarily have some property", "to permanently have some property" etc.). Even dictionaries admit defeat and are happy with having circular definitions because there aren't any foundations to build upon, circular definitions are inevitable, dictionaries just help you connect fuzzy concepts together. All of this extends to tenses, moods, cases and everything else. This can be very well seen e.g. with people interpreting old texts such as the Bible, for example some say [Jesus](jesus.md) claimed to be the son of God while others reject it, saying that even if he stated the sentence, it actually wasn't meant literally as it was a commonly used phrase that meant something else -- these people will argue about everything and they can comfortably interpret the same text in completely opposite ways. The point is that we just can't know.
 
-This is a grand issue that people often overlook, it sadly allows any word to be twisted by politicians to anything they want, it destroys old knowledge and prevents us from communicating with clarity. This issue is very hard to solve, maybe impossible. It seems that due to the extreme complexity of [real life](irl.md) our language can't operate with precise equations but rather has to settle with concepts that are just fuzzy blobs that our brains -- [neural networks](neural_net.md) in our heads -- learn by trial and error over many years. We learn that if we hear the word *X*, it's best to react by feeling fear or turning our head or closing our eyes etc.
+In addition there are ALWAYS great many hidden implicit assumptions that both communicating sides have to share to be able to communicate (and these can only be assured by many years of learning, spent in the same environment) -- for example if I tell someone "Drive to the city and buy food.", in fact I mean something like "Right now walk with your feet to our car, open the door, sit in, take the wheel in your hands, start the car, drive only on the road with your eyes open, ..."; the guy can technically satisfy my order by waiting 10 years, then driving a truck through forests with eyes closed over the whole globe and back. Just as it's impossible to perfectly define all words, it is impossible to explicitly recount all assumptions. Though the mentioned example is exaggerated, it shows an ever present phenomenon we have to deal with, a phenomenon which can cause misunderstanding or be easily abused.
+
+This is the grand issue that common people almost universally overlook, most will naively think that with careful effort it is possible to express oneself so clearly that others simply won't be able to misunderstand -- this is sadly false, even with most carefully crafted sentences language always extremely easily allows any word to be twisted by politicians to anything they want, it destroys old knowledge and prevents us from communicating with clarity and recording ideas so that they would last into the future. This damnation of language plagues every book, authors constantly complain "I should have rather used this and that word" but that wouldn't even help, it's impossible to say something so as to not be misunderstood because human language is a weak, crippled tool just based on shouting weird sounds in hopes someone will get a vague idea of what's going on in your head. Due to this limitation of language it is absolutely worthless to discuss anything if after 5 minutes you don't come to agreement, the discussion will lead nowhere, it's best to just leave it at communication being impossible because even if linguistically you speak the same language, you cannot communicate correct meanings, even words like "is", "when", "bad" or "will" will have absolutely different meanings, you would have to define every word of every sentence and then every word of every new sentence you produce for 1000 years until you come to circular definitions when you'll still be disagreeing but won't even be able to waste time further.
+
+This issue is very hard to solve, maybe impossible. It seems that due to the extreme complexity of [real life](irl.md) our language can't operate with precise equations but rather has to settle with concepts that are just fuzzy blobs that our brains -- [neural networks](neural_net.md) in our heads -- learn by trial and error over many years. We learn that if we hear the word *X*, it's best to react by feeling fear or turning our head or closing our eyes etc.
 
 { The only idea of a solution on how to make a "mathematically precise" human language for real world communication is the following. Firstly make a mathematical model of some artificial world that's similar to ours, for simplicity we can now just consider something like a 2D grid with differently colored cells, i.e. something like a [cellular automaton](cellular_automaton.md). The world changes in steps and each cell can "talk", i.e. at any frame it can emit a text string. Now make a language that's precisely defined in this world; if the world is simple, it's pretty doable e.g. like this: write a function in some programming language that takes the world and check if what the cells are saying classifies as your language used in a correct way within this world (so the function just returns *true/false*, nothing else is needed). Now this single function mathematically defines your language -- by looking at your function's source code anyone can derive the absolutely correct meaning of any word or sentence because he can see how the function checks whether that word of phrase is used correctly, he will know exactly which situations fit given sentence and which don't. Now the final step is only to find correspondence between the real life and your simplified mathematical world, e.g. that cells represent humans and so on (but this will have shortcomings, e.g. our simple world will make it difficult or impossible to talk about body parts since cells have none; also making the connection between the mathematical world and real world relies on intuition). ~drummyfish }
 
+{ Yet another, maybe more practical idea would be to create a set of very few core  words -- let's say 100, which we would try to define extremely precisely by all the current imperfect means but with very elevated effort, i.e. each word would have a detailed description, translations to 20 other natural languages, positive and negative examples, pictures attached etc. Then the rest of the language would be defined only using these core words. But maybe it wouldn't work -- the language would be possibly a bit more stable but would eventually degenerate as well. ~drummyfish }
 

less_retarded_society.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Less Retarded Society
 
-Less [retarded](retard.md) society (LRS, same [acronym](acronym.md) as [less retarded software](lrs.md)) is a model of ideal society towards which we, the [LRS](lrs.md), want to be moving. Less retarded society is a [peaceful](pacifism.md), collaborative society based on [love](love.md) of all [life](life.md), which aims for maximum well being of all living beings, a society without violence, [money](money.md), oppression, need for [work](work.md), social [competition](competition.md), poverty, scarcity, criminality, [censorship](censorship.md), [self-interest](self_interest.md), [government](government.md), police, [laws](law.md), [bullshit](bullshit.md), slavery and many other negative phenomena. It equally values all living beings and establishes true social equality in which everyone can pursue his true desires freely -- it is a TRULY [leftist](left_vs_right.md) society, NOT a [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) one. The society works similarly to that described by the [Venus Project](venus_project.md) and various [anarchist](anarchism.md) theories (especially [anarcho pacifist](anpac.md) [communism](communism.md)), but it also takes good things from elsewhere, even various [religions](religion.md) (without itself actually becoming a religion in traditional sense); for example parts of teaching of [Jesus](jesus.md) and [Buddha](buddhism.md).
+Less [retarded](retard.md) society (LRS, same [acronym](acronym.md) as [less retarded software](lrs.md)) is a model of ideal society towards which we, the [LRS](lrs.md), want to be moving. Less retarded society is a [peaceful](pacifism.md), collaborative society based on [love](love.md) of all [life](life.md), which aims for maximum well being of all living beings, a society without violence, [money](money.md), oppression, need for [work](work.md), social [competition](competition.md), poverty, scarcity, criminality, [censorship](censorship.md), [self-interest](self_interest.md), [government](government.md), police, [laws](law.md), [bullshit](bullshit.md), slavery and many other negative phenomena. It equally values all living beings and establishes true social equality in which everyone can pursue his true desires freely -- it is a TRULY [leftist](left_vs_right.md) society, NOT a [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) one. The society works similarly to that described by the [Venus Project](venus_project.md) and various [anarchist](anarchism.md) theories (especially [anarcho pacifist](anpac.md) [communism](communism.md)), but it also takes good things from elsewhere, even various [religions](religion.md) (without itself actually becoming a religion in traditional sense); for example parts of teaching of [Jesus](jesus.md) and [Buddha](buddhism.md). As Freddie Mercury put it, *this could be heaven for everyone* -- achieving heaven for everyone to us is a goal truly worth living for.
 
 **How is this different from other ideologies and "life philosophies"?** Well, one principal difference is that LRS doesn't want to [fight](fight_culture.md), in fact LRS adopts a **[pessimistic](pessimism.md), [defeatist](defeatism.md) mindset** to not compromise [morality](morality.md) by any desire to "win the game", behaving correctly is more important than achieving a goal, ends do NOT justify the means; nowadays as well as in the past society has always been about conflict, playing a **game** against others (nowadays e.g. market competition, employment competition, media competition, ...) in which some win, some can manage and some lose. Most political parties nowadays just want to change the rules of the game or downright switch to a different kind of game, some want to make the rules "more fair", or to make it favor their represented minority (so called [fascism](fascism.md)), some just want to [hack](hacking.md) the game, some want to [cheat](cheat.md) to win the game easily, some want to play fair but still win (i.e. become "successful"). LRS simply sees any kind of such game as unnecessary, cruel, unethical and harmful in many ways not just to us, but to the whole planet. LRS therefore simply wants to stop the game, not by force but by making everyone see how bad the game is. It says that **competition and conflict must seize to be the basis of society**. There is no value in achieving anything by violence, such a change will soon be reverted by counter revolution, people themselves have to understand what's good and choose it voluntarily. That is one of the reasons why we are **[pacifists](pacifism.md)** and **reject all violence**, only wanting to promote our ideas by [education](education.md). We accept we may not achieve our goals and we most certainly won't achieve anything during our lifetime and that gives us the freedom to behave truly morally. We try to **never be [proud](pride.md)** of anything, as pride leads to violence and fascism. We are also in many ways aligned with the ideals of **[cynicism](cynicism.md)**.
 
@@ -30,11 +30,11 @@ Our society is **[anarcho pacifist](anpac.md) and [communist](communism.md)**, m
 
 **Our society is NOT fair**, everyone is happy whether he deserves it or not, happiness doesn't have to be deserved. In a fair society the talented is rewarded and the untalented suffers, the strong wins and the weak loses, fairness is about winning and losing, reward and punishment, therefore our society is unfair as there are no longer any winners or losers.
 
-**States and [governments](government.md) don't exist**, there are no artificial borders. Society self regulates and consists of [decentralized](decentralization.md), mostly self-sufficient communities that utilize their local resources as much as they can and send abundant resources to communities that lack them. **The is no law** in the sense of complex written legislation, **no lawyers, courts and police**, society works on the principle of moral laws, education and [non-violent](nonviolence.md) actions (e.g. refusal of people to use money etc.). Communities aren't hugely [interdependent](dependency.md) and hyperspecialized as in capitalism so there is no danger of system [collapse](collapse.md). Many decisions nowadays taken by politicians, such as those regarding distribution of resources, are in our ideal society made by computers based on collected data and objective scientific criteria.
+**States and [governments](government.md) don't exist**, there are no artificial borders. Society self regulates and consists of [decentralized](decentralization.md), mostly self-sufficient communities that utilize their local resources as much as they can and send abundant resources to communities that lack them. **The is no law** in the sense of complex written legislation, **no lawyers, courts and police**, society works on the principle of moral laws, education and strictly [non-violent](nonviolence.md) actions taken against negative phenomena (e.g. noncooperation, avoidance, refusal of people to use money etc.). Communities aren't hugely [interdependent](dependency.md) and hyperspecialized as in capitalism so there is no danger of system [collapse](collapse.md), but they aren't isolated or [nationalist](nationalism.md), they are altruistic, communist and help each other. Many decisions nowadays taken by politicians, such as those regarding distribution of resources, are in our ideal society made by computers based on collected data and objective scientific criteria.
 
-**Criminality doesn't exist**, there is no motivation for it as everyone has abundance of everything, no one carries guns, people don't see themselves as competing with others in life and everyone is raised in an environment that nurtures their peaceful, collaborative, selfless loving side. People with "criminal genes" have become extinct thanks to natural selection by people voluntarily choosing to breed with non-violent people. Conflict between people is minimized by the elimination of self interest (and need for it) -- a lot of violence in current society comes from disagreement which comes from everyone's different goals (everyone aims to benefit oneself); in our society this is no longer the case, people rarely disagree on essential decisions because decisions are driven by pure facts collected without distortion or suspicion of self interest.
+**Criminality doesn't exist**, there is no motivation for it as everyone has abundance of everything, no one carries guns, people don't see themselves as competing with others in life and everyone is raised in an environment that nurtures their peaceful, collaborative, selfless loving side. People with "criminal genes" have become extinct thanks to natural selection by people voluntarily choosing to breed with non-violent people. Conflict between people is minimized by the elimination of self interest (and need for it) -- a lot of violence in current society comes from disagreement which comes from everyone's different goals (everyone aims to benefit oneself); in our society this is no longer the case, people rarely disagree on essential decisions because decisions are driven by pure facts collected without distortion or suspicion of self interest, i.e. there are common goals as opposed to a delicate balance between opposing forces.
 
-**[Technology](technology.md) is simple, powerful, efficient, [future proof](future_proof.md), ecological, generally good and maximally helps people**. [Internet](internet.md) is actually nice, it provides practically all [information](information.md) ever digitized, for example there is a global database of all videos ever produced, including movies, educational videos and documentaries, all without [ads](ad.md), [DRM](drm.md) and [copyright](copyright.md) strikes, coming with all known [metadata](metadata.md) such as tags, subtitles, annotations and translations and are accessible by many means (something akin websites, [APIs](api.md), physical media ...), all videos can be downloaded, mirrored and complex search queries can be performed, unlike e.g. with [YouTube](youtube.md). Satellite images, streams from all live cameras and other sensors in the world are easily accessible in real time. Search engines are much more powerful than [Google](google.md) can dream of as data is organized efficiently and friendly to indexing, not hidden behind paywalls, [JavaScript](javascript.md) obscurity or registrations to websites, which means that for example all text of all e-books is indexed as well as all conversations ever had on the Internet and subtitles of videos. All source code of all programs is available for unlimited use by anyone. There are only a few models of standardized [computers](computer.md) -- a universal **[public domain computer](public_domain_computer.md)** -- not thousands of slightly different competing products as nowadays. There is a tiny, energy efficient computer model, then a more powerful computer for complex computations, a simple computer designed to be extremely easy to manufacture etc. None of course have malicious features such as [DRM](drm.md), gay teenager aesthetics, consumerist "killer features" or planned obsolescence. All schematics are available. People possibly wear personal [wrist-watch-like computers](less_retarded_watch.md), however these are nothing like today's "[smart](smart.md)" watches/phones -- our wrist computers are completely under the user's control, without any bullshit, spyware, ads and other malicious features, they last weeks or months on battery as they are in low energy consumption mode whenever they're not in use, they run [extremely efficient software](lrs.md) and are NOT constantly connected to the Internet and [updating](update_culture.md) -- as an alternative to connecting to the Internet (which is still possible but requires activating a transmitter) the device may just choose to receive a [world-wide broadcast](world_broadcast.md) of general information (which only requires a low power consumption receiver) if the user requests it (similarly to how [teletext](teletext.md) worked), e.g. info about time, weather or news that's broadcasted by towers and/or satellites and/or small local broadcasters. Furthermore wrist computers are very durable and water proof and may have built-in solar chargers, so one wrist computer works completely independently and for many decades. They have connectors to attach external devices like keyboards and bigger displays when the user needs to use the device comfortably at home. The computing world is NOT split by competing standards such as different programming languages, most programmers use just one programming language similar to [C](c.md) that's been designed to maximize quality of technology (as opposed to capitalist interests such as allowing rapid development by incompetent programmers or [update culture](update_culture.md)).
+**[Technology](technology.md) is simple, powerful, efficient, [future proof](future_proof.md), ecological, generally good and maximally helps people**. [Internet](internet.md) is actually nice, it provides practically all [information](information.md) ever digitized, for example there is a global database of all videos ever produced, including movies, educational videos and documentaries, all without [ads](ad.md), [DRM](drm.md) and [copyright](copyright.md) strikes, coming with all known [metadata](metadata.md) such as tags, subtitles, annotations and translations and are accessible by many means (something akin websites, [APIs](api.md), physical media, text transcripts, ...), all videos can be downloaded, mirrored and complex search queries can be performed, unlike e.g. with [YouTube](youtube.md). Satellite images, streams from all live cameras and other sensors in the world are easily accessible in real time. Search engines are much more powerful than [Google](google.md) can dream of as data is organized efficiently and friendly to indexing, not hidden behind paywalls, [JavaScript](javascript.md) obscurity or registrations to websites, which means that for example all text of all e-books is indexed as well as all conversations ever had on the Internet and subtitles of videos. All source code of all programs is available for unlimited use by anyone. There are only a few models of standardized [computers](computer.md) -- a universal **[public domain computer](public_domain_computer.md)** -- not thousands of slightly different competing products as nowadays. There is a tiny, energy efficient computer model, then a more powerful computer for complex computations, a simple computer designed to be extremely easy to manufacture etc. None of course have malicious features such as [DRM](drm.md), gay teenager aesthetics, consumerist "killer features" or planned obsolescence. All schematics are available. People possibly wear personal [wrist-watch-like computers](less_retarded_watch.md), however these are nothing like today's "[smart](smart.md)" watches/phones -- our wrist computers are completely under the user's control, without any bullshit, spyware, ads and other malicious features, they last weeks or months on battery as they are in low energy consumption mode whenever they're not in use, they run [extremely efficient software](lrs.md) and are NOT constantly connected to the Internet and [updating](update_culture.md) -- as an alternative to connecting to the Internet (which is still possible but requires activating a transmitter) the device may just choose to receive a [world-wide broadcast](world_broadcast.md) of general information (which only requires a low power consumption receiver) if the user requests it (similarly to how [teletext](teletext.md) worked), e.g. info about time, weather or news that's broadcasted by towers and/or satellites and/or small local broadcasters. Furthermore wrist computers are very durable and water proof and may have built-in solar chargers, so one wrist computer works completely independently and for many decades. They have connectors to attach external devices like keyboards and bigger displays when the user needs to use the device comfortably at home. The computing world is NOT split by competing standards such as different programming languages, most programmers use just one programming language similar to [C](c.md) that's been designed to maximize quality of technology (as opposed to capitalist interests such as allowing rapid development by incompetent programmers or [update culture](update_culture.md)).
 
 **[Fascism](fascism.md) doesn't exist**, people no longer compete socially and don't live in [fear](fear_culture.md) (of immigrants, poverty, losing jobs, religious extremists etc.) that would give rise to militarist thought, society is multicultural and [races](race.md) highly mixed. There is no need for things such as [political correctness](political_correctness.md) and other censorship, people acknowledge there exist differences -- differences (e.g. in competence or performance) don't matter in a non-competitive society, discrimination doesn't exist.
 
@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ Our society is **[anarcho pacifist](anpac.md) and [communist](communism.md)**, m
 
 **Research advances faster, people are smarter, more rational, emphatic, loving and more moral**. Nowadays probably the majority of the greatest brains are wasted on bullshit activity such as studying and trying to hack the [market](market.md) -- even professional researchers nowadays waste time on "safe", lucrative unnecessary bullshit research in the "publish or perish" spirit, chasing grants, easy [patents](patent.md) etc. In our ideal society smart people focus on truly relevant issues such as curing cancer, without being afraid of failure, stalling, negative results, lack of funds etc. People are responsible and practice e.g. voluntary birth control to prevent overpopulation. However people are NOT cold rational machines, on the contrary emotions are present much more than today, for example the emotion of [love](love.md) towards life is so strong most people are willing to die to save someone else, even a complete stranger. People express emotion through rich art and good deeds. People are also spiritual despite being highly rational -- they know rationality is but one of many tools for viewing and understanding the world. **[Religion](religion.md) still exists** commonly but not in radical or hostile forms; Christianity, Islam and similar religions become more similar to e.g. [Buddhism](buddhism.md), some even merge after realizing their differences are relatively unimportant and stop competing for mass control of people, religion becomes much less organized and much more personal.
 
-**[Art](art.md) is rich and unrestricted** (no [copyright](copyright.md) or other "[IP](intellectual_property.md)" exists), with people being able to fully dedicate their lives to it if they wish and with the possibility to create without distraction such as having to make living or dealing with copyright. People collaborate and reuse each other's works, many [free universes](free_universe.md) exist, everyone can enjoy all art without restriction and remix it however he wishes.
+**[Art](art.md) is rich and unrestricted** (no [copyright](copyright.md) or other "[IP](intellectual_property.md)" exists), with people being able to fully dedicate their lives to it if they wish and with the possibility to create without distraction such as having to make living or dealing with copyright. People collaborate and reuse each other's works, many [free universes](free_universe.md) exist, everyone can enjoy all art without restriction and remix it however he wishes. Art is not someone's property or capital, it is a discovery made by someone for everyone's benefit.
 
 **People live much longer and healthier lives** thanks to faster research in (actual) medicine, free healthcare, more doctors (those who nowadays do bullshit business), better food (no junk/fast food), less pollution, higher living standard, more natural life closer to nature, minimization of stress and elimination of the [antivirus paradox](antivirus_paradox.md) from medicine. They also die more peacefully thanks to having lived a rich, fulfilling lives, they die in the circle of their family and are not afraid of death, they take it as natural part of life, death is culturally accepted and not feared. [Euthanasia](euthanasia.md) is allowed and common for those who wish to die for whatever reason.
 

lrs_dictionary.md

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ WORK IN PROGRESS
 
 | mainstream                                 | correct/cooler                                       |
 | ------------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------- |
-| American                                   | Amerifag                                             |
+| American                                   | Amerifag, Yankee                                     |
 | [anime](anime.md)                          | tranime                                              |
 | [Apple](apple.md) user                     | iToddler                                             |
 | [Asperger](autism.md)                      | assburger                                            |
@@ -19,12 +19,13 @@ WORK IN PROGRESS
 | code of conduct ([COC](coc.md))            | code of coercion, code of censorship                 |              
 | consume                                    | consoom (see also [coom](coom.md)                    |
 | [copyright](copyright.md)                  | copywrong, copyrestriction, copyrape                 |
-| [CSS](css.md)                              | cascading style shit                                 |
+| [CSS](css.md)                              | cascading style [shit](shit.md)                      |
 | [C++](cpp.md)                              | crippled C                                           |
 | [Debian](debian.md)                        | Lesbian                                              |
 | [democracy](democracy.md)                  | democrazy                                            |
 | digital garden                             | digital swamp                                        |
 | digital rights management ([DRM](drm.md))  | digital restrictions management                      |
+| [economy](economy.md)                      | money religion                                       |
 | [encryption](encryption.md)                | bloatcryption                                        |
 | [entrepreneur](entrepreneur.md)            | murderer                                             |
 | [Facebook](facebook.md) user               | zucker, used                                         |
@@ -81,9 +82,13 @@ WORK IN PROGRESS
 | [webassembly](webassembly.md)              | weebassembly                                         |
 | Wikipedian                                 | wikipedo                                             |
 | [Windows](windows.md)                      | Winshit, Winbloat, Backdoors? :D                     |
+| [woman](woman.md)                          | femoid                                               |
 | [work](work.md)                            | slavery                                              |
 | [world wide web](www.md)                   | world wide wait                                      |
 | [YouTube](youtube.md)                      | JewTube                                              |
+
+Words you should use often include: abomination, crazy, cretin, [faggot](faggot.md), fat, femoid, idiot, imbecile, insane, landwhale, moron, [nigger](nigger.md), [retard](retard.md), subhuman, ugly.
+
 ## See Also
 
 - [acronyms](acronym.md)

main.md

@@ -57,6 +57,8 @@ We have a **[C tutorial](c_tutorial.md)**! It [rocks](rock.md). We also now have
 
 Pay us a visit on the [Island](island.md) and pet our [dog](dog.md)! Come mourn to the [graveyard](graveyard.md) because **technology is dead**. Want a **muh [webring](webring.md)** experience? Come board our [boat](boat.md). [Modern](modern.md) age is a pile of [shit](shit.md) extending to another galaxy. The future is dark but we do our best to bring the light, even knowing it is futile.
 
+Want some *#LRSchallenge*? Try our [exercises](exercises.md).
+
 LRS Wiki is [collapse](collapse.md) ready! Feel free to print it out (there is now a complete pdf book download up there), take it to your prep shelter. You may also print copies of this wiki and throw it from a plane into the streets. Thanks.
 
 If you're new here, you may want to read answers to [frequently asked questions](faq.md) (**FAQ**), including "Are you a fascist?" (spoiler: no) and "Do you love Hitler?".

nationalism.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Nationalism
 
-Nationalism is [fascism](fascism.md) based on nationality, it has fueled the worst horrors in history, see e.g. [Nazism](nazism.md) that led to World War II. In any shape or form **nationalism is pure [evil](evil.md)**, it is the poison and curse of humanity and is absolutely unacceptable under any conditions, it cannot be kept moderate, it will never do any good, it is wrong in its very essence by fueling [pride](pride.md) and sense of [identity](identity_politics.md) and always leads to [fascism](fascism.md) and [wars](war.md). "Moderate" and radical nationalism differ only like early stage of [cancer](cancer.md) differs from the late one. Nationalism is one of the easiest and most common tricks playable by politicians to manipulate masses, it can be easily used to achieve anything from lowering wages to invading other countries and starting a nuclear war, and for this it is used over and over in practically every country. It is practically impossible for any politicians to succeed without playing the nationalism card.
+Nationalism (also *patriotism*) is [fascism](fascism.md) based on nationality, it has fueled the worst horrors in [history](history.md): see e.g. [Nazism](nazism.md) that led to World War II. In any shape or form **nationalism is pure [evil](evil.md)**, it is the poison and curse of humanity and is absolutely unacceptable under any conditions, it cannot be kept moderate, it will never do any good, it is wrong in its very essence by fueling [pride](pride.md) and sense of [identity](identity_politics.md) and always leads to violent hysteria and [wars](war.md). "Moderate" and radical nationalism differ only like early stage of [cancer](cancer.md) differs from the late one. Nationalism is one of the easiest and most common tricks playable by politicians to manipulate masses, it can be easily used to achieve anything from lowering wages to invading other countries and starting a nuclear war, and for this it is used over and over in practically every country -- it is practically impossible for any politicians to succeed without playing the nationalism card.
 
 Nationalism is especially dangerous by being accepted by 99.9999999% of population to some degree because, for some twisted reason, people believe that something like "moderate" nationalism exists or that it is even healthy, despite this having been proven wrong every year for millions of years, they will never learn just like kids will never learn that taking heroin will ruin their life, they will always think they'll be able to control it. For this we must stress that **there is NEVER any acceptable form of nationalism**, nationalism is always fundamentally wrong in any form -- no, you cannot fix it. You know deep down that nationalism is the purest evil -- if you try to fool someone, at least admit you accept nationalism as an excuse to do evil under some illusion of nobility or for purely practical reasons of it being a good means to your ends. Imagine having a group of few million people with [leaders](hero_culture.md) and [army](army.md) already in place, with heard mentality, ready to circlejerk any slightest idea of own superiority to absurdity -- do you think it's clever to feed them such ideas? Sure, for 5 years you can keep it moderate, but wait for the first crisis, for a politician that stirs a bit of [fear](fear_culture.md), for anything at all that will seem to "threaten the nation", like the neighboring nation doing better and starting to build a stronger army maybe, for economic crisis caused by migrants or anything similar. What do you think a group of people with strong nationalist thinking will do? Will it remain calm, reasonable and pacifist? Even if year and year over new politicians come calling for war? Just stop shitting yourself, admit that despite obligatory rejection of some of the Hitler's actions you admire him a bit for how great leader was, don't you?
 

needed.md

@@ -2,6 +2,8 @@
 
 WIP
 
+*See also [exercises](exercises.md).*
+
 { If you want to maybe start some project here I'll be glad if you let me know before you start, it can be good to talk about it first as I already have some ideas about how to make some of these projects, I just don't have time to work on them, I will just give you the ideas I have if you want, we can discuss how to best write the code etc. Of course it's all up to you, I'm just offering advice and discussion :) ~drummyfish }
 
 Here is a list of some projects and project ideas which we, [LRS](lrs.md), need to make in order to pursue our goals. The projects here are mostly basic things and tools that already exist in some form, but that have to be made from scratch according to [LRS](lrs.md) philosophy, i.e. in a KISS/suckless way, under public domain, in a good language (C, comun, ...) etc. This is kind of a dirty list serving some rough organization. If you have the skills and will (or know someone who does), you may take inspiration here, pick one up and make it, or contribute to some of the projects listed here. Also note that it's still possible to make multiple projects of the same type, e.g. you may still create another chess engine even though we already have one, just watch out that this is justified (it should offer something worth the extra effort).

phd.md

@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
 # PhD
 
-PhD (also Ph.D., PhD. etc.), or *doctor of philosophy*, written after the name, is the highest academic degree that can be earned by being a student in [University](university.md), the basic title required for working as a scientist. It is earned through many years of study and especially active publishing of original research that pushed the boundary of current human knowledge in a specific field. Despite being called doctor of *philosophy*, the title is awarded generally to scientists in basically any field such as [mathematics](math.md), [physics](physics.md), [psychology](psychology.md), [chemistry](chemistry.md) etc., NOT just to those studying [philosophy](philosophy.md). PhD is yet above [master's degree](masters_degree.md). It is a doctorate degree, so a holder of PhD is called a *doctor* (Dr.), just as those with other forms of doctorates such as medical doctorate or honorary doctorate; however PhD is the *big doctorate*, the kind of highest, most prestigious one. People with a PhD degree are considered the foremost experts, the smartest, most educated elite, as only about 1 to 2 % of population hold a PhD, though PhD is also often considered an overkill and an overqualitfication (there are many cases of people with PhD not mentioning it on their CVs because such a high education can actually be a disadvantage), and of course, as with everything under [capitalism](capitalism.md), PhDs became a thing of business and conformance, subject to corruption and degradation (there now even exist PhDs in [astrology](astrology.md), [gender studies](gender_studies.md) etc.), at times even a [meme](meme.md). Yes, one has to be quite smart and talented to obtain a PhD, but nowadays it's probably more about pouring an extreme amount of energy, slavery and conformance to the corrupt academic cults, so the prestige of the title comes for a pretty high price, one often not worth paying.
+PhD (also Ph.D., PhD. etc.), or *doctor of philosophy*, written after the name, is the highest academic degree that can be earned by being a student in [University](university.md), the basic title required for working as a [scientist](science.md) (nowadays more like [soyentist](soyence.md)). It is earned through many years of study and especially active publishing of original research that pushes the boundary of current human knowledge in a specific field. Despite being called doctor of *philosophy*, the title is awarded generally to scientists in basically any field such as [mathematics](math.md), [physics](physics.md), [psychology](psychology.md), [chemistry](chemistry.md) etc., NOT just to those studying [philosophy](philosophy.md). PhD is yet above [master's degree](masters_degree.md). It is a doctorate degree, so a holder of PhD is called a *doctor* (Dr.), just as those with other forms of doctorates such as medical doctorate or honorary doctorate; however PhD is the *big doctorate*, the kind of highest, most prestigious one. People with a PhD degree are considered the foremost experts, the smartest, most educated elite, as only about 1 to 2 % of population hold a PhD, though PhD is also often considered an overkill and an overqualification (there are many cases of people with PhD not mentioning it on their CVs because such a high education can actually be a disadvantage), and of course, as with everything under [capitalism](capitalism.md), PhDs became a thing of business and conformance, subject to corruption and degradation (there now even exist PhDs in [astrology](astrology.md), [gender studies](gender_studies.md) etc.), at times even a [meme](meme.md). PhD isn't what it used to be -- in the past a scientist was someone wise with a generally wide knowledge and also some sense of morality, nowadays a PhD absolutely doesn't come with anything like that -- **[today](21st_century.md) a PhD is simply a thinking machine**, extremely specialized in some very, VERY narrow field such as studying the front leg of some subspecies of some prehistoric bug; besides this narrow specialization PhD knows absolutely nothing about anything else (in this they are similar to highly trained [neural networks](neural_network.md) that perform superbly at one specific task like beating world chess championship but won't be able to add 3 plus 4). Yes, unless one is a minority or a [woman](woman.md), he still has to be somewhat smart and talented to obtain a PhD, but nowadays it's probably more about pouring an extreme amount of energy, slavery and conformance to the corrupt academic cults, so the prestige of the title comes for a pretty high price, one not worth paying.
 
 TODO
 
-**Should you get a PhD?** Probably not -- as said the sacrifice required is enormous, to make it you should have a REAL GOOD reason, of which there aren't many -- perhaps if you REALLY want to be teacher at University or if for some twisted reason you want to spend your whole life in the corrupt toxic [soyence](soyence.md) environment trying to prove [women](woman.md) are better than men and sucking capitalist dicks so that they throw you a bit of money so that you can buy a microscope, then maybe. The thing is that focusing on PhD sucks away a great amount of energy you could spend on actually good things, consider that instead of actually programming [less retarded software](lrs.md) you will just have to do slavery for your dissertation advisor, do bureaucracy, p-value hacking, make powerpoint presentations, [marketing](marketing.md) for your research, give handjobs to sponsors, do bullshit research you dislike (because [publish or perish](publish_or_perish.md)), all while withstanding incredible amounts of stress and dodging depression. Really [masters_degree](masters_degree.md) is [enough](good_enough.md) to give you all you need for a rich intellectual life and being able to do good things, and it won't suck the soul out of your body. On the best universities even [bachelor's](bachelors_degree.md) is probably enough. If you REALLY wanna be the smartass guy who others ought to call a doctor, in some countries you may get some kinda small doctorate, usually just for an extra exam and paying some fee (e.g. RNDr, PHDr etc., details will depend on your country so check that out). { TFW just getting the EZ dentist degree so that you may call yourself a doctor :D ~drummyfish } Nowadays you can also just buy a honorary doctorate online, it's absolutely legal business, though you probably don't wanna support this kind of capitalist bullshit, you just pay them unholy money for a piece of paper.
+**Should you get a PhD?** Unless you live in the past probably not -- as said the sacrifice required is enormous, to make it you should have a REAL GOOD reason, of which there aren't many -- perhaps if you REALLY want to be teacher at University or if for some twisted reason you want to spend your whole life in the corrupt toxic [soyence](soyence.md) environment trying to prove [women](woman.md) are better than men and sucking capitalist dicks so that they throw you a bit of money so that you can buy a microscope, then maybe. The thing is that focusing on PhD sucks away a great amount of energy you could spend on actually good things, consider that instead of actually programming [less retarded software](lrs.md) you will just have to do slavery for your dissertation advisor, do bureaucracy, p-value hacking, make powerpoint presentations, [marketing](marketing.md) for your research, give handjobs to sponsors, do bullshit research you dislike (because [publish or perish](publish_or_perish.md)), all while withstanding incredible amounts of stress and dodging depression. Really [masters_degree](masters_degree.md) is [enough](good_enough.md) to give you all you need for a rich intellectual life and being able to do good things, and it won't suck the soul out of your body. On the best universities even [bachelor's](bachelors_degree.md) is probably enough. If you REALLY wanna be the smartass guy who others ought to call a doctor, in some countries you may get some kinda small doctorate, usually just for an extra exam and paying some fee (e.g. RNDr, PHDr etc., details will depend on your country so check that out). { TFW just getting the EZ dentist degree so that you may call yourself a doctor :D ~drummyfish } Nowadays you can also just buy a honorary doctorate online, it's absolutely legal business, though you probably don't wanna support this kind of capitalist bullshit, you just pay them unholy money for a piece of paper.
 
 TODO

programming_language.md

@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ Another common division is by **level of [abstraction](abstraction.md)** roughly
 
 We can divide language in many more ways, for example based on their **[paradigm](paradigm.md)** (roughly its core idea/model/"philosophy", e.g. [impertaive](imperative.md), [declarative](declarative.md), [object-oriented](oop.md), [functional](functional.md), [logical](logical.md), ...), **purpose** (general purpose, special purpose), computational power ([turing complete](turing_complete.md) or weaker, many definitions of a programming language require Turing completeness), [typing](data_type.md) (strong, weak, dynamic, static) or function evaluation (strict, lazy).
 
-A computer language consists from two main parts:
+A computer language consists of two main parts:
 
 - **[syntax](syntax.md)**: The grammar rules and words, i.e. how the language "looks", what expressions we are allowed to write in it. Syntax says which words can follow other words, if indentation has to follow some rules, how to insert comments in the source code, what format numbers can be written in, what kinds of names variables can have etc. Syntax is the surface part, it's often considered not as important or hard as semantics (e.g. syntax errors aren't really a big deal as the language processor immediately catches them and we correct them easily), but a good design of syntax is nevertheless still very important because that's what the programmer actually deals with a great amount of time.
 - **[semantics](semantics)**: The meaning of what we write, i.e. semantics says what the syntax actually stands for. E.g. when syntax says it is possible to write `a / b`, semantics says this means the mathematical operation of division and furthermore specifies what *a* and *b* can actually be, what happens if *b* is zero etc. Semantics is the deeper part as firstly it is more difficult to define and secondly it gives the language its [features](feature.md), its power to compute, usability, it can make the language robust or prone to errors, it can make it efficient or slow, easy and hard to compile, optimize etc.
@@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ TODO: Tcl, Rebol
 
 ## Interesting Languages
 
-Some programming languages may be [interesting](interesting.md) rather than directly useful, however these are important too as they teach us a lot and may help us design good practically usable languages. In fact professional researches in theory of computation spend their whole lives dealing with practically unusable languages and purely theoretical computers.
+Some programming languages may be [interesting](interesting.md) rather than directly useful -- following this trail may lead you to more obscure and underground programming communities -- however these languages are important too as they teach us a lot and may help us design good practically usable languages. In fact professional researches in theory of computation spend their whole lives dealing with practically unusable languages and purely theoretical computers. Even a great painter sometimes draws funny silly pictures in his notebook, it helps build a wide relationship with the art and you never know if a serious idea can be spotted in a joke.
 
 One such language is e.g. **[Unary](unary_lang.md)**, a programming language that only uses a single character while being Turing complete (i.e. having the highest possible "computing power", being able to express any program). All programs in Unary are just sequences of one character, differing only by their length (i.e. a program can also be seen just as a single natural number, the length of the sequence). We can do this because we can make an ordered list of all (infinitely many) possible programs in some simple programming language (such as a [Turing machine](turing_machine.md) or [Brainfuck](brainfuck.md)), i.e. assign each program its ordinal number (1st, 2nd, 3rd, ...) -- then to express a program we simply say the position of the program on the list.
 
@@ -151,5 +151,7 @@ There is a community around so called **[esoteric programming languages](esolang
 
 - [esoteric programming language](esolang.md)
 - [constructed language](conlang.md)
+- [human language](human_language.md)
+- [computer language](computer_language.md)
 - [pseudocode](pseudocode.md)
 - [compiler](compiler.md)

programming_tips.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ This is a place for sharing some practical programming tips.
 - **No indentation for temporary code**: Tiny "workflow" tip: when adding new code, keep it unindented so that you know it's the newly added code and can delete it at any time. Only when you test the added code, indent it correctly to incorporate it as the final code. Of course, this fails in languages where indentation matters ([Python](python.md) cough cough) but similar effects can be achieved e.g. by adding many empty lines in front of/after the temporary code.
 - **[Comments](comment.md)/[preprocessor](preprocessor.md) to quickly hide code**: It is a basic trick to comment out lines of code we want to temporarily disable. However preprocessor may work even better, e.g. in C if you want to be switching between two parts of code, instead of constantly commenting one part and uncommenting the other just use `#if 0` and `#else` directives around the two parts. You can switch between them by just changing 0 to 1 and back. This can also disable parts of code that already contain multiline comments (unlike a comment as nested multiline comments aren't allowed).
 - **[KEEP IT SIMPLE](kiss.md)** and keep it [LRS](lrs.md), do not blindly follow mainstream ways and "workflows" as those are more often than not horrible. For example instead of using some uber bug tracker, you should use a simple plaintext TODO.txt file; instead of using and IDE use [vim](vim.md) or something similar. Stay away from [OOP](oop.md), [dependencies](dependency.md) etc.
-- **Don't listen to advice of anyone who does programming for living**, he's most definitely accustomed to the worst ways of programming and will try to push you to [OOP](oop.md), [bloat](bloat.md), [proprietary](proprietary.md) tech, [tranny software](tranny_software.md), [GitHub](github.md) etc. Listening to advice of such people is like taking advice on whether to take drugs from a drug dealer.
+- **Never listen to advice of anyone who does programming for living** (not [anymore](21st_century.md)), he's most definitely accustomed to the worst ways of programming and will try to push you to [OOP](oop.md), [bloat](bloat.md), [proprietary](proprietary.md) tech, [tranny software](tranny_software.md), [GitHub](github.md) etc. Listening to advice of such people is like taking advice on whether to take drugs from a drug dealer.
 - **Most true programming is done away from the computer** -- soydevs think that a good programmer just spends hours in front of a computer bashing the keyboard and drinking litres of coffee to stay alive and [PRODUCTIVE](productivity_cult.md); indeed, they usually do, but they are not good programmers, their time is spent slaving the computer doing [maintenance](maintenance.md), debugging, googling, updating and socializing on Twitter. A good programmer actually programs everywhere: when going for walk, before falling asleep, when sleeping, when watching a movie etc. He only starts writing a serious program after years of thinking about it and already having most of it programmed in his head; sitting in front of a computer and writing the algorithm down is only the final smaller part of the journey.
 - It can't be repeated enough times: minimize ALL kinds of [dependencies](dependency.md), don't use what you don't necessarily need -- this doesn't just apply to libraries but also design decisions. E.g. if you're making a compiler, make it a single pass compiler if at all possible, don't perform several source code passes if that's not absolutely necessary (which would however likely signify some flaw in the design of your language). Use [fixed point](fixed_point.md) instead of [floating point](float.md) if you can, [software rendering](sw_rendering.md) instead of GPU rendering etc. If you're making something that transforms text to another text (e.g. machine translation), make it a [filter](filter.md) with constant memory complexity if that's possible, i.e. do not require the program to load a whole input file to memory. Etcetc.
 - During development turn off optimization flags for faster compiling and turn on verbosity and various checks, e.g. `-Werror -Wall -Wextra -Wpedantic` for [C](c.md).

wiki_stats.md

@@ -2,10 +2,10 @@
 
 This is an autogenerated article holding stats about this wiki.
 
-- number of articles: 574
-- number of commits: 766
-- total size of all texts in bytes: 3621031
-- total number of lines of article texts: 28123
+- number of articles: 575
+- number of commits: 767
+- total size of all texts in bytes: 3632440
+- total number of lines of article texts: 28177
 - number of script lines: 262
 - occurences of the word "person": 8
 - occurences of the word "nigger": 72
@@ -16,17 +16,17 @@ longest articles:
 - [capitalism](capitalism.md): 64K
 - [how_to](how_to.md): 64K
 - [chess](chess.md): 56K
+- [exercises](exercises.md): 52K
 - [less_retarded_society](less_retarded_society.md): 52K
 - [number](number.md): 52K
-- [exercises](exercises.md): 52K
 - [faq](faq.md): 44K
 - [c](c.md): 40K
 - [3d_model](3d_model.md): 40K
 - [bloat](bloat.md): 36K
-- [internet](internet.md): 36K
 - [programming_language](programming_language.md): 36K
-- [3d_rendering](3d_rendering.md): 32K
+- [internet](internet.md): 36K
 - [random_page](random_page.md): 32K
+- [3d_rendering](3d_rendering.md): 32K
 - [game](game.md): 32K
 - [history](history.md): 32K
 - [optimization](optimization.md): 28K
@@ -35,60 +35,73 @@ longest articles:
 
 top 50 5+ letter words:
 
-- which (2073)
-- there (1575)
-- people (1365)
-- other (1135)
-- example (1095)
+- which (2079)
+- there (1578)
+- people (1368)
+- other (1137)
+- example (1096)
 - software (1043)
-- number (1005)
-- about (942)
-- program (845)
-- their (780)
+- number (1006)
+- about (943)
+- program (851)
+- their (785)
 - called (727)
-- because (719)
-- computer (708)
+- because (724)
+- computer (710)
 - would (702)
-- simple (686)
-- language (676)
-- being (676)
-- numbers (672)
-- things (659)
-- without (632)
-- function (629)
-- programming (623)
-- something (608)
-- however (592)
-- these (586)
+- language (694)
+- simple (688)
+- being (678)
+- numbers (673)
+- things (661)
+- without (633)
+- function (630)
+- programming (627)
+- something (612)
+- however (593)
+- these (590)
 - different (581)
-- world (550)
-- system (540)
-- games (532)
-- should (530)
+- world (554)
+- system (543)
+- games (533)
+- should (532)
 - point (522)
-- doesn (511)
+- doesn (512)
 - society (505)
 - though (493)
-- memory (490)
+- memory (491)
 - while (480)
 - drummyfish (477)
-- using (469)
-- still (461)
-- course (459)
+- using (471)
+- still (462)
+- course (462)
 - technology (455)
-- similar (453)
+- similar (454)
 - simply (442)
 - possible (442)
 - https (432)
-- really (412)
+- really (413)
 - computers (402)
 - extremely (400)
-- usually (395)
-- value (394)
+- always (398)
+- usually (396)
 
 latest changes:
 
 ```
+Date:   Sun Apr 14 23:27:36 2024 +0200
+  bullshit.md
+  exercises.md
+  mouse.md
+  nationalism.md
+  often_misunderstood.md
+  privacy.md
+  programming_language.md
+  random_page.md
+  trolling.md
+  wiki_pages.md
+  wiki_stats.md
+  wikipedia.md
 Date:   Sat Apr 13 22:42:40 2024 +0200
   encyclopedia.md
   exercises.md
@@ -110,21 +123,6 @@ Date:   Sat Apr 13 22:42:40 2024 +0200
   wikipedia.md
   woman.md
 Date:   Fri Apr 12 14:21:12 2024 +0200
-  comment.md
-  czechia.md
-  exercises.md
-  gay.md
-  how_to.md
-  jokes.md
-  living.md
-  marxism.md
-  minesweeper.md
-  programming_language.md
-  random_page.md
-  right.md
-  wiki_pages.md
-  wiki_stats.md
-  wikipedia.md
 ```
 
 most wanted pages:
@@ -157,7 +155,7 @@ most popular and lonely pages:
 - [capitalism](capitalism.md) (203) 
 - [bloat](bloat.md) (198) 
 - [free_software](free_software.md) (163) 
-- [game](game.md) (136) 
+- [game](game.md) (137) 
 - [suckless](suckless.md) (131) 
 - [proprietary](proprietary.md) (114) 
 - [kiss](kiss.md) (92) 

wikipedia.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-pe# Wikipedia
+# Wikipedia
 
 *3 + 2 = 5^[citation_needed]* --Wikipedia