In the world of [computers](computer.md) (especially in [computer graphics](graphics.md), but also e.g. in physics simulations etc.) 3D model is a representation of a [three dimensional](3d.md) object, for example of a real life object such as a car, [tree](tree.md) or a [dog](dog.md), but also possibly something more abstract like a [fractal](fractal.md) or [function](function.md) plot surface. 3D models can be displayed using various [3D rendering](3d_rendering.md) techniques and are used mostly to simulate [real world](real_world.md) on computers (e.g. [games](game.md)), as real world is, as we know, three dimensional. 3D models can be created in several ways, e.g. manually with 3D modelling software (such as [Blender](blender.md)) by 3D [artists](art.md), by 3D scanning real world objects, or automatically by [procedural generation](procgen.md).
3D models can be represented in many ways -- the **mainstream "game" 3D models** that most people are used to seeing are polygonal (made of triangles) boundary-representation (recording only surface, not volume) [textured](texture.md) (with "pictures" on their surface) 3D models, but keep in mind many different ways are possible and used too, for example various volume representations, [voxel](voxel.md) models, [point clouds](point_cloud.md), [implicit surfaces](implicit_surface.md), [spline](spline.md) surfaces, [constructive solid geometry](csg.md), [wireframe](wireframe.md) etc. Models may also bear additional extra information and features, e.g. bone rigs for animation, animation key frames, density information, [LODs](lod.md) and so on.
3D models can be represented in many ways -- the **mainstream "game" 3D models** that most people are used to seeing are polygonal (made of triangles) boundary-representation (recording only surface, not volume) [textured](texture.md) (with "pictures" on their surface) 3D models, but be aware that many different ways are possible and used too, for example various volume representations, [voxel](voxel.md) models, [point clouds](point_cloud.md), [implicit surfaces](implicit_surface.md), [spline](spline.md) surfaces, [constructive solid geometry](csg.md), [wireframe](wireframe.md) etc. Models may also bear additional extra information and features, e.g. bone rigs for animation, animation key frames, density information, [LODs](lod.md) and so on.
The word *computer* may be defined in countless ways and can also adopt many different meanings; a somewhat common definition may be this: computer is a machine that automatically performs mathematical computations. We can also see it as a machine for processing [information](information.md), manipulating symbols or, very generally, as any tool that helps computation, in which case one's fingers or even a [mathematical](math.md) formula itself can be considered a computer. Here we are of course mostly concerned with electronic [digital](digital.md) computers.
The word *computer* may be defined in countless ways and can also adopt many different meanings; a somewhat common definition may be this: computer is a machine that automatically performs mathematical computations. We can also see it as a machine for processing [information](information.md), manipulating symbols or, very generally, as any tool that helps computation, in which case not just laptops, desktops and cellphones fit the definition, but also primitive computers like a [sundial](sundial.md), one's fingers or even a [mathematical](math.md) formula. But nowadays the word of course implicitly implies an electronic [digital](digital.md) computer.
Electronic digital computer turned out to be one of the greatest [technological](tech.md) inventions in [history](history.md) for numerous reasons -- firstly computers allowed creation of many other things which previously required too complex calculations, such as highly complex planes, space rockets and undreamed of factories (and, of course, yet more powerful computers which is why we've seen the exponential growth in computer power), they also allow us to crunch extreme volumes of data and accelerate [science](science.md); secondly they offered extremely advanced work tools like [robots](robotics.md), virtual 3D visualizations, [artificial intelligence](ai.md) and physics simulators, and they also gave us high quality, cheap [multimedia](multimedia.md) and entertainment like [games](game.md) -- with computers anyone can shoot video, record music, carry around hundreds of movies in his pocket or fly a virtual plane. Most important however is probably the fact that computers enabled the [Internet](internet.md) -- by this they forever changed the world.
The electronic digital computer turned out to be one of the greatest [technological](tech.md) inventions in [history](history.md) for numerous reasons -- firstly computers allowed creation of many other things which previously required too complex calculations, such as highly complex planes, space rockets and undreamed of factories (and, of course, yet more powerful computers which is why we've seen the exponential growth in computer power), they also allow us to crunch extreme volumes of data and accelerate [science](science.md); secondly they offered extremely advanced work tools like [robots](robotics.md), virtual 3D visualizations, [artificial intelligence](ai.md) and physics simulators, and they also gave us high quality, cheap [multimedia](multimedia.md) and entertainment like [games](game.md) -- with computers anyone can shoot video, record music, carry around hundreds of movies in his pocket or fly a virtual plane. Most important however is probably the fact that computers enabled the [Internet](internet.md) -- by this they forever changed the world.
We can divide computers based on many attributes, e.g.:
{ My email is currently: drummyfish AT disroot DOT org. ~drummyfish }
Drummyfish (also known as *tastyfish*, *drummy*, *drumy*, *smellyfish* and *i forcefeed my diarrhea to capitalism*) is a [programmer](programming.md), [anarchopacifist](anpac.md) and proponent of [free software/culture](free_software.md), who started [this wiki](lrs_wiki.md) and invented the kind of software it focuses on: [less retarded software](lrs.md) (LRS). Besides others he has written [Anarch](anarch.md), [small3dlib](small3dlib.md), [raycastlib](raycastlib.md), [smallchesslib](smallchesslib.md), [tinyphysicsengine](tinyphysicsengine.md), [SAF](saf.md) and [comun](comun.md). He has also been creating free culture art and otherwise contributing to free projects such as [OpenMW](openm.md); he's been contributing with [public domain](pd.md) art of all kind (2D, 3D, music, ...) and writings to [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) (no longer cause ban), [Wikimedia Commons](wm_commons.md) (also banned now), [opengameart](oga.md), [libregamewiki](lgw.md), freesound and others. Drummyfish is insane/neuroretarded, suffering from anxiety/[depression](depression.md)/etcetc. (diagnosed [avoidant personality disorder](avpd.md)) and has more than once been called a [schizo](schizo.md), though psychiatrists didn't officially diagnose him with schizophrenia (yet). He sometimes [self harms](self_harm.md), both physically and socially. Due to spreading uncensored truth, helping and loving others and revealing corruption he is banned and censored on many places on the Internet, including [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md), Wikimedia Commons, [4chan](4chan.md), [GitLab](gitlab.md), many [subreddits](reddit.md), some [Xonotic](xonotic.md) and [Openarena](openarena.md) servers etc. He also has no [real life](irl.md) and is pretty retarded when it comes to leading projects or otherwise dealing with people or practical life. He is a [wizard](wizard.md).
Drummyfish (also known as *tastyfish*, *drummy*, *drumy*, *smellyfish* and *i forcefeed my diarrhea to capitalism*) is a [programmer](programming.md), [anarchopacifist](anpac.md) and proponent of [free software/culture](free_software.md), who started [this wiki](lrs_wiki.md) and invented the kind of software it focuses on: [less retarded software](lrs.md) (LRS). Besides others he has written [Anarch](anarch.md), [small3dlib](small3dlib.md), [raycastlib](raycastlib.md), [smallchesslib](smallchesslib.md), [tinyphysicsengine](tinyphysicsengine.md), [SAF](saf.md) and [comun](comun.md). He has also been creating free culture art and otherwise contributing to free projects such as [OpenMW](openm.md); he's been contributing with [public domain](pd.md) art of all kind (2D, 3D, music, ...) and writings to [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md) (no longer cause ban), [Wikimedia Commons](wm_commons.md) (also banned now), [opengameart](oga.md), [libregamewiki](lgw.md), freesound and others. Drummyfish is insane/neuroretarded, suffering from anxiety/[depression](depression.md)/etcetc. (diagnosed [avoidant personality disorder](avpd.md)) and has more than once been called a [schizo](schizo.md), though psychiatrists didn't officially diagnose him with schizophrenia (yet). He sometimes [self harms](self_harm.md), both physically and socially. Due to spreading uncensored truth, helping and loving others and revealing corruption he is banned and censored on many places on the Internet, including [Wikipedia](wikipedia.md), Wikimedia Commons, [4chan](4chan.md), [GitLab](gitlab.md), many [subreddits](reddit.md), some [Xonotic](xonotic.md) and [Openarena](openarena.md) servers etc. He also has no [real life](irl.md) and is pretty retarded when it comes to leading projects or otherwise dealing with people or practical life. Drummyfish's political compass is off the charts, he once tried to take the political compass test, the computer got confused and exploded. He is also a [wizard](wizard.md).
**Drummyfish is the most physically disgusting bastard on [Earth](earth.md)**, no [woman](woman.md) ever loved him, he is so ugly people get suicidal thoughts from seeing any part of him.
*Sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from feminism.* --old Chinese proverb
Feminism, also feminazism or femifascism, is a [fascist](fascism.md) [terrorist](terrorism.md) [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) movement aiming for establishing [female](woman.md) as the superior gender, for social revenge on men and gaining political power, e.g. that over [language](political_correctness.md). Similarly to [LGBT](lgbt.md), feminism is violent, [toxic](toxic.md) and [harmful](harmful.md), based on [brainwashing](brainwashing.md), mass hysteria, [bullying](bullying.md) (e.g. the [metoo](metoo.md) campaign) and [propaganda](propaganda.md).
Feminism, also feminazism or femifascism, is a [fascist](fascism.md) [terrorist](terrorism.md) [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) cult aiming for establishing [female](woman.md) as the superior gender, for social revenge on men and gaining political power, such as that over [language](political_correctness.md). Similarly to [LGBT](lgbt.md), feminism is violent, [toxic](toxic.md) and [harmful](harmful.md), based on [brainwashing](brainwashing.md), mass hysteria, [bullying](bullying.md) (e.g. the [metoo](metoo.md) campaign) and [propaganda](propaganda.md).
A quite nice article on feminism can also be found on the [incel](incel.md) wiki at https://incels.wiki/w/Feminism. { A friend also recommended a text called *Counter-Advice From The Third Sex*, possibly check it out. ~drummyfish }
If anything's clear, then that feminism is not at all about gender equality but about hatred towards men and female superiority. Firstly feminism is not called *gender equality movement* but *feminism*, i.e. for-female, literally "womanism", and as we know, [name plays a huge role](name_is_important.md). Imagine this: if you asked feminists if they could right now implement matriarchy in society, i.e. female ruling over man, how many of them do you think would answer "no"? There is not even a shadow of a doubt a vast majority would absolutely answer "yes", we may at best argue about if it would be 85% or 99% of them. So the question of feminist goals is absolutely clearly answered, there is no point in trying to deny it. To a feminist a man is what a [jew](jew.md) was to the Nazi or what the Christian was to the Romans who famously hunted Christians down and fed them to the lions because they refused to bow to their polytheist ideology (nowadays analogous to e.g. refusing to practice [political correctness](political_correctness.md)). The whole story is repeated again, we have yet again not learned a bit from our [history](history.md). Indeed, women have historically been oppressed and needed support, but once women reach social equality -- which has basically already happened a long time ago now -- feminist movement will, if only by [social inertia](social_inertia.md), keep pursuing more advantages for women (what else should a movement called *feminism* do?), i.e. at this point the new goal has already become female superiority. In the age of capital no one is going to just dissolve a movement because it has already reached its goal, such a movement present political capital one will simply not throw out of window, so feminists will forever keep saying they're being oppressed and will forever keep inventing new bullshit issues to keep [fighting](fight_culture.md). Note for example that feminists care about things such as wage gap but of course absolutely don't give a damn about opposite direction inequality, such as men dying on average much younger than women etc. -- feminism cares about women, not equality. And of course, when men establish "men rights" movements, suddenly feminists see those as "fascist", "toxic" and "violent" and try to destroy such movements.
{ I really have no issues with women, I truly love everyone, but I do pay attention to statistics. One of the biggest things feminism achieved for me in this regard is that now it's simply not enough for me to see a woman achieve success in society to be convinced she is skilled or capable, a woman getting PhD to me nowadays automatically just means she got it because she's a woman and we need more quotas of "strong women in SCIENCE". In the past I didn't see it this way, a woman that did something notable back then was mostly convincing to me. Nowadays I just require much better evidence to believe she is good at something, e.g. seeing something truly good she created -- to be honest, I now don't recall any woman in "modern times" to have convinced me, but I am really open to it and just waiting to be proven wrong. ~drummyfish }
Some notable things feminists managed to achieve are:
- Women hate men.
@ -35,10 +39,6 @@ Some notable things feminists managed to achieve are:
{ [LMAO](lmao.md), **a supposed woman writer who won 1 million euro prize turned out to actually be three men writers**, see Carmen Mola :) Also the recent "historically first all female space walk" during which they managed to lose $100K worth of equipment :D ~drummyfish }
If anything's clear, then that feminism is not at all about gender equality but about hatred towards men and female superiority. Firstly feminism is not called *gender equality movement* but *feminism*, i.e. for-female, literally "womanism", and as we know, [name plays a huge role](name_is_important.md). Imagine this: if you asked feminists if they could right now implement matriarchy in society, i.e. female ruling over man, how many of them do you think would answer "no"? There is not even a shadow of a doubt a vast majority would absolutely answer "yes", we may at best argue about if it would be 85% or 99% of them. So the question of feminist goals is absolutely clearly answered, there is no point in trying to deny it. To a feminist a man is what a [jew](jew.md) was to the Nazi or what the Christian was to the Romans who famously hunted Christians down and fed them to the lions because they refused to bow to their polytheist ideology (nowadays analogous to e.g. refusing to practice [political correctness](political_correctness.md)). The whole story is repeated again, we have yet again not learned a bit from our [history](history.md). Indeed, women have historically been oppressed and needed support, but once women reach social equality -- which has basically already happened a long time ago now -- feminist movement will, if only by [social inertia](social_inertia.md), keep pursuing more advantages for women (what else should a movement called *feminism* do?), i.e. at this point the new goal has already become female superiority. In the age of capital no one is going to just dissolve a movement because it has already reached its goal, such a movement present political capital one will simply not throw out of window, so feminists will forever keep saying they're being oppressed and will forever keep inventing new bullshit issues to keep [fighting](fight_culture.md). Note for example that feminists care about things such as wage gap but of course absolutely don't give a damn about opposite direction inequality, such as men dying on average much younger than women etc. -- feminism cares about women, not equality. And of course, when men establish "men rights" movements, suddenly feminists see those as "fascist", "toxic" and "violent" and try to destroy such movements.
{ I really have no issues with women, I truly love everyone, but I do pay attention to statistics. One of the biggest things feminism achieved for me in this regard is that now it's simply not enough for me to see a woman achieve success in society to be convinced she is skilled or capable, a woman getting PhD to me nowadays automatically just means she got it because she's a woman and we need more quotas of "strong women in SCIENCE". In the past I didn't see it this way, a woman that did something notable back then was mostly convincing to me. Nowadays I just require much better evidence to believe she is good at something, e.g. seeing something truly good she created -- to be honest, I now don't recall any woman in "modern times" to have convinced me, but I am really open to it and just waiting to be proven wrong. ~drummyfish }
Part of the success of feminism is also [capitalism](capitalism.md) -- women with priviledges, e.g. those of not having to work as much as men, are not accepted under capitalism; everyone has to be exploited as much as possible, everyone has to be a work slave. Therefore capitalist propaganda promotes ideas such as "women not having to work is oppression by men and something a woman should be ashamed of", which is of course laughable, but with enough brainwashing anything can be established, even the most ridiculous and obvious bullshit.
Apparently in Korea feminists already practice segregation, they separate parking spots for men and women so as to prevent women bumping into men or meeting a man late at night because allegedly men are more aggressive and dangerous. Now this is pretty ridiculous, this is exactly the same as if they separated e.g. parking lots for black and white people because black people are statistically more often involved in crime, you wouldn't want to meet them at night. So, do we still want to pretend feminists are not fascist?
FOSS ([Free](free_software.md) and [Open Source](open_source.md) Software, sometimes also [FLOSS](floss.md), adding *Libre*), is a kind of neutral term for software that is both free as in freedom and open source. It's just another term for this kind of software, as if there weren't enough of them :) People normally use this to stay neutral, to appeal to both free and open source camps or if they simply need a short term not requiring much typing.
FOSS ([Free](free_software.md) and [Open Source](open_source.md) Software, sometimes also [FLOSS](floss.md), adding *Libre*), is a kind of neutral term for software that is both free as in freedom and open source. It's just another term for this kind of software, as if there weren't enough of them :) People normally use this to stay neutral, to appeal to both free and open source camps or if they simply need a short term not requiring much typing. It's maybe also a little more vague [acronym](acronym.md) as in "I don't care, it has some kinda freeish license" and so it's possibly also a good label for a lot of "[modern](modern.md)" software which can rarely be called a purely [free software](free_software.md) anymore -- most new projects are some sort of [bloated](bloat.md) bastard child of originally a free software project and some corporation's openwashing [rapeware](rapeware.md), so we just call it "FOSS".
Information (from Latin *informare*: shape/describe/represent) is knowledge that can be used for making decisions. Information is interpreted [data](data.md), i.e. while data itself may not give us any information, e.g. if they're encrypted and we don't know the key or if we simply don't know what the data signifies or implies, information emerges once we make sense of the data. Information is contained e.g in [books](book.md), on the [Internet](internet.md), in nature, and we access it through our senses. [Computers](computer.md) can be seen as machines for processing information and since the computer revolution information has become the focus of our society; we often encounter terms such as [information technology](it.md), informatics, information war, information age etc. [Information theory](information_theory.md) is a [scientific field](science.md) studying information.
Information (from Latin *informare*: shape/describe/represent) is knowledge that can be used for making decisions. Information is interpreted [data](data.md), i.e. while data itself may not give us any information, e.g. if they're [encrypted](encryption.md) and we don't know the key or if we simply don't know what the data signifies or implies, information emerges once we make sense of the data (someone once put information in this relationship: data leads to information, information leads to knowledge and knowledge leads to [wisdom](wisdom.md)). Information is contained e.g in [books](book.md), on the [Internet](internet.md), in nature, and we access it through our senses. [Computers](computer.md) can be seen as machines for processing information and since the computer revolution information has become the focus of our society; we often encounter terms such as [information technology](it.md), informatics, information war, information age etc. [Information theory](information_theory.md) is a [scientific field](science.md) studying information.
**Information wants to be [free](free_culture.md)**, i.e. it is free naturally unless we decide to limit its spread with [shit](shit.md) like [intellectual property](intellectual_property.md) laws. What does "free" mean? It is the miraculous property of information that allows us to duplicate it basically without any cost. Once we have certain information, we may share it with others without having to give up our own knowledge of the information. A file on a computer can be copied to another computer without deleting the file on the original computer. This is unlike with physical products which if we give to someone, we lose them ourselves. Imagine if you could make a piece of bread and then duplicate it infinitely for the whole world -- information works like this! We see it as a crime to want to restrict such a miracle. We may also very nicely store information in our heads. For all this information is [beautiful](beauty.md). It is sometimes discussed whether information is created or discovered -- if a mathematician comes up with an equation, is it his creation or simply his discovery of something that belongs to the nature and that has always been there? This question isn't so important because whatever terms we use, we at [LRS](lrs.md) decide to create, spread and freely share information without limiting it in any way, i.e. neither discovery nor invention should give rise to any kind of [property](property.md).
@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ TODO: more details, history, where to measure (web vs Mensa vs SAT etc.)
**If you think you're smart, you are dumb**, see the infamous [Dunning Kruger](dunning_kruger.md) effect -- becoming smarter comes with feeling dumber and dumber, becoming more humble and less self confident as you just see all the new things you didn't even know you don't know -- Socrates, one of the greatest philosophers of all times and possibly the smartest man of his time, famously summed this up by saying "I know that I know nothing". A fool thinks he is close to knowing everything -- he admits he doesn't know everything, but he thinks he knows like 90% of what the smartest people on Earth know because he didn't even step over the borders of obtaining the basic knowledge, that border is as far as he can see and he doesn't know beyond it lies an infinitely large plain of knowledge into which some managed to get kilometers ahead of him, they are so far away he has no idea anyone can even get that far. It's similar to how the better we explore the space, the more we see how tiny we are -- not long ago we might have thought our galaxy was the whole Universe, now we know it's just a tiny speck in a cluster that's itself just a small speck in the observable Universe which is a nothing in the scale of the whole infinite Universe. Self confidence implies extreme stupidity. Also note that feeling dumb doesn't imply being smart but admitting retardedness is a prerequisite for being smart.
**Is IQ a useful measure and if so, how important is the score?** Firstly if you are insecure about your own IQ then just stop that shit -- you know yourself, you know if you're good at math or writing or whatever else you try to do, do you need a piece of paper padding you on the back or something? That's completely pointless, the only thing worth of discussion is IQ as some standardized tool of estimating intellectual abilities of other people on a bigger scale, e.g. as some kind of filter in education (with small groups you can really just interview the people and see if they're dumb or not, that's also more reliable than IQ tests). In this of course the question of the validity of IQ is a controversial one, discussed over and over. Modern "inclusive" society dismisses IQ as basically useless because it points out differences between [races](race.md) etc., some rightist are on the other hand obsessed with IQ too much as it creates a natural hierarchy assigning each man his rank among others. True significance of IQ as a measure seems to be somewhere in between the two extremes here. As it's always noted about IQ, we have to remember the term "intelligence" itself is fuzzy, there doesn't and cannot exist any universal definition of it, so we have trouble even grasping what we're measuring and however we define intelligence, it usually ends up hardly even correlating with "success" or "achievements" or anything similar, so firstly let's see IQ just as what it literally is: a score in some kind of game. Furthermore intelligence is extremely complex and multidimensional (there is spatial and visual intelligence, long and short term memory, language skills, social and emotional intelligence etc.), capturing all this with a single number is inevitably a simplification, the score is just a projected shadow of the intelligence with light cast from certain angle. IQ score definitely does say a lot about some specific kind of "mathematical" intelligence, though even if designed to be so, even in this narrow sense it isn't anywhere near a perfect measure -- though a minority, some mathematicians do score low on IQ tests (Richard Feynman, physics Nobel Prize laureate had famously a relatively low score of 125). It's perhaps good to keep the "IQ tests as a game" mindset -- intelligent people will be probably good at it but some won't, performance can be increased by training, there will be narrowly focused autists who excel at the game but are extremely dumb at everything else etc. Having IQ score predict what we normally understand to be "intelligence" is like having height, weight and age predict how good of a soldier someone will be -- there will be some good correlations, but not nearly perfect ones. Some general IQ range will be necessary for certain tasks such as [programming](programming.md), but rather than +5 on an IQ score things such as education and personality traits will play much more important roles in actually achieving something or creating something good; for example curiosity and determination, the habit of thinking about everything in depth, nonconformity, a skeptical mind, all these are much more important than being a human calculator -- remember, the cheapest calculator will beat the smartest man in multiplying numbers, would you say it is more intelligent?
**Is IQ a useful measure and if so, how important is the score?** Firstly if you are insecure about your own IQ then just stop that shit -- you know yourself, you know if you're good at math or writing or whatever else you try to do, do you need a piece of paper patting you on the back or something? That's completely pointless, the only thing worth of discussion is IQ as some standardized tool of estimating intellectual abilities of other people on a bigger scale, e.g. as some kind of filter in education (with small groups you can really just interview the people and see if they're dumb or not, that's also more reliable than IQ tests). In this of course the question of the validity of IQ is a controversial one, discussed over and over. Modern "inclusive" society dismisses IQ as basically useless because it points out differences between [races](race.md) etc., some rightist are on the other hand obsessed with IQ too much as it creates a natural hierarchy assigning each man his rank among others. True significance of IQ as a measure seems to be somewhere in between the two extremes here. As it's always noted about IQ, we have to remember the term "intelligence" itself is fuzzy, there doesn't and cannot exist any universal definition of it, so we have trouble even grasping what we're measuring and however we define intelligence, it usually ends up hardly even correlating with "success" or "achievements" or anything similar, so firstly let's see IQ just as what it literally is: a score in some kind of game. Furthermore intelligence is extremely complex and multidimensional (there is spatial and visual intelligence, long and short term memory, language skills, social and emotional intelligence etc.), capturing all this with a single number is inevitably a simplification, the score is just a projected shadow of the intelligence with light cast from certain angle. IQ score definitely does say a lot about some specific kind of "mathematical" intelligence, though even if designed to be so, even in this narrow sense it isn't anywhere near a perfect measure -- though a minority, some mathematicians do score low on IQ tests (Richard Feynman, physics Nobel Prize laureate had famously a relatively low score of 125). It's perhaps good to keep the "IQ tests as a game" mindset -- intelligent people will be probably good at it but some won't, performance can be increased by training, there will be narrowly focused autists who excel at the game but are extremely dumb at everything else etc. Having IQ score predict what we normally understand to be "intelligence" is like having height, weight and age predict how good of a soldier someone will be -- there will be some good correlations, but not nearly perfect ones. Some general IQ range will be necessary for certain tasks such as [programming](programming.md), but rather than +5 on an IQ score things such as education and personality traits will play much more important roles in actually achieving something or creating something good; for example curiosity and determination, the habit of thinking about everything in depth, nonconformity, a skeptical mind, all these are much more important than being a human calculator -- remember, the cheapest calculator will beat the smartest man in multiplying numbers, would you say it is more intelligent?
{ Also consider this: even if you're average, or even a bit below average, you're still [homo](gay.md) sapiens, so as long as you're not a [feminist](feminism.md) or [capitalist](capitalism.md) you'll always be the absolute top organism in intelligence, a member of by far the absolutely most intelligent species that ever appeared on [Earth](earth.md), your intelligence greatly surpasses great majority of living organisms. If you are able to read this, you already possess the great genius, you mastered language and are among the top 0.1%, there's no need to compare yourself to others and aim to be in 0.01% instead of 0.02%. Rather think about what good to do with the gift of reason you've been given. ~drummyfish }
*This article is a part of series of articles on [fascism](fascism.md).*
LGBT, LGBTQ+, LGBTQIKKAWANSQKKALQNMQW (lesbian [gay](gay.md), [bisexual](bisexual.md), [transsexual](tranny.md), [queer](queer.md) and whatever else they're gonna invent), also FGTS or TTTT (transsexual transsexual transsexual transsexual) is a toxic [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) [fascist](fascist.md) political group whose ideology is based on superiority of certain selected minority sexual orientations. They are a highly [violent](violence.md), [bullying](bully.md) movement (not surprisingly centered in the [US](usa.md) but already spread around the whole world) practicing [censorship](censorship.md), Internet lynching ([cancel culture](cancel_culture.md)), discrimination, spread of extreme [propaganda](propaganda.md), harmful [lies](soyence.md), culture poison such as [political correctness](political_correctness.md) and other [evil](evil.md).
LGBT, LGBTQ+, LGBTFURRYTRANSFAGCOCKS (lesbian, [gay](gay.md), [bisexual](bisexual.md), [transsexual](tranny.md), "[queer](queer.md)" and whatever is yet to be invented), also FGTS or TTTT (transsexual transsexual transsexual transsexual) is a toxic [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) [fascist](fascist.md) political group whose ideology is based on superiority of certain selected minority sexual orientations. They are a highly [violent](violence.md), [toxic](toxic.md), [bullying](bully.md) movement (not surprisingly centered in the [US](usa.md) but already spread around the whole world) practicing [censorship](censorship.md), Internet lynching ([cancel culture](cancel_culture.md)), discrimination, spread of extreme [propaganda](propaganda.md), harmful [lies](soyence.md), culture poison such as [political correctness](political_correctness.md) and other [evil](evil.md).
LGBT is related to the ideas of equality in a similar way in which crusade wars were related to the nonviolent teaching of [Jesus](jesus.md), it shows how an idea can be completely twisted around and turned on its head so that it's directly contradicting its original premise.
LGBT is related to the concept of equality in a similar way in which crusade wars were related to the nonviolent teaching of [Jesus](jesus.md), it shows how an idea can be completely twisted around and turned on its head as to be left completely contradicting its original premise.
Note that **not all gay people support LGBT**, even though LGBT wants you to think so and media treat e.g. the terms *gay* and *LGBT* as synonyms (this is part of [propaganda](propaganda.md), either conscious or subconscious). The relationship gay-LGBT is the same as e.g. the relationship White-WhitePride or German-Nazi: Nazis were a German minority that wanted to [fight](fight_culture.md) for more privileges for Germans of their own race (as they felt oppressed by other nations and races such as Jews), LGBT is a gay minority who wants to [fight](fight_culture.md) for more privileges for gay people (because they feel oppressed by straight people). LGBT isn't just about being gay but about approving of a very specific ideology that doesn't automatically come with being gay. LGBT frequently comments on issues that go beyond simply being gay (or whatever), for example LGBT openly stated disapproval of certain other orientation (e.g. [pedophilia](pedophilia.md)) and refuses to admit homosexuality is a disorder, which aren't necessarily stances someone has to take when simply being gay.
@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ In context of [technology](tech.md) minimalism is a design philosophy which puts
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry sums it up with a quote: *we achieve perfection not when there is nothing more to add but when there is nothing left to take away.*
There is also the generalized concept of **life minimalism** which applies said philosophy to all areas of [life](life.md) and which many technological minimalists often start to follow as well -- life minimalism is about letting go of things and desires that aren't necessarily needed as such things enslave us; you should think about what it really is that you want and need and only keep that. This is nothing new, this wisdom has been present for as long as humans have existed, most religions and philosophers saw a great value in [asceticism](asceticism.md), frugality and even poverty, as owning little leads to [freedom](freedom.md). For example owning a [car](car.md) is kind of a slavery, you have to clean it, protect it, repair it, [maintain](maintenance.md) it, pay for parking space, pay for gas, pay for insurance -- that's a huge commitment eating up a huge part of your life and [head space](head_space.md), a minimalist will rather choose to get a simple [suckless](suckless.md) bicycle or travel by public transport.
Minimalism is also an immensely important concept in [art](art.md), for example in architecture and design, and in addition there also exists the generalized concept of **life minimalism** which applies said philosophy to all areas of [life](life.md) and which numerous technological minimalists quite naturally start to follow along the way -- life minimalism is about letting go of objects, thoughts and desires that aren't necessarily needed because such things enslave us and mostly just make us more miserable; from time to time you should meditate a little bit about what it is that you really want and need and only keep that. Indeed this is nothing new under the Sun, this wisdom has been present for as long as humans have existed, most religions and philosophers saw a great value in [asceticism](asceticism.md), frugality and even poverty, as owning little leads to [freedom](freedom.md). For instance owning a [car](car.md) is kind of a slavery, you have to clean it, protect it, repair it, [maintain](maintenance.md) it, pay for parking space, pay for gas, pay for insurance -- this is not a small commitment and you sacrifice a significant part of your life and [head space](head_space.md) to it (especially considering additional commitments of similar magnitude towards your your house, garden, clothes, electronics, furniture, pets, bank accounts, social networks and so forth), a minimalist will rather choose to get a simple [suckless](suckless.md) bicycle, travel by public transport or simply walk.
**Minimalism is necessary for [freedom](freedom.md)** as a free technology can only be that over which no one has a [monopoly](bloat_monopoly.md), i.e. which many people and small parties can utilize, study and modify with affordable effort, without needing armies of technicians just for the maintenance of such technology. Minimalism goes against the creeping overcomplexity of technology which always brings huge costs and dangers, e.g. the cost of [maintenance](maintenance.md) and further development, obscurity, inefficiency ("[bloat](bloat.md)", wasting resources), consumerism, the increased risk of bugs, errors and failure.
@ -20,17 +20,18 @@ Up until recently in history every engineer would tell you that *the better mach
- [KISS](kiss.md) (see also [lightweight](lightweight.md))
- [KISS](kiss.md)
- [countercomplex](countercomplex.md)
- [permacomputing](permacomputing_wiki.md)
- [permacomputing](permacomputing_wiki.md) (SJW cancer warning)
- [less is more](less_is_more.md)/[worse is better](worse_is_better.md)
- [appropriate technology](appropriate_tech.md)
- [neoluddism](neoluddism.md)
- [reactionary software](reactionary_software.md) (bordering with [pseudominimalism](pseudominimalism.md))
- [plan9](plan9.md), [openbsd](openbsd.md), KISS GNU/Linux and similar (however often obsessed with [bloatcryption](encryption.md), may contain [pseudominimalism](pseudominimalism.md))
- [100rabbits](100rabbit.md) (beware of [SJW](sjw.md) poison)
- [small Internet](small_internet.md), [gopher](gopher.md), [gemini](gemini.md) (not worth checking out: SJW, pseudominimalism and bloatcryption), web 1.0, ...
- for potential weaker links to minimalism also check out [retro](retro.md)/[old](old.md)/[boomer](boomer.md) tech, [salvage computing](salvage_computing.md), [degrowth](degrowth.md), [Amish](amish.md), [technophobia](technophobia.md), [lightweight](lightweight.md) software, [fantasy consoles](fantasy_console.md) (sadly mostly pseudominimalism), communities around [plain text](plain_text.md), [pubnixes](pubnix.md), [IRC](irc.md) and so on.
- ...
Under [capitalism](capitalism.md) technological minimalism is suppressed in the mainstream as it goes against [corporate](corporation.md) interests, i.e. those of having monopoly control over technology, even if such technology is "[FOSS](foss.md)" (which then becomes just a cool brand, see [openwashing](openwashing.md)). We may, at best, encounter a "shallow" kind of minimalism, so called [pseudominimalism](pseudominimalism.md) which only tries to make things appear minimal, e.g. aesthetically, and hides ugly overcomplicated internals under the facade. [Apple](apple.md) is infamous for this [shit](shit.md).
@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ There are different types of numbers, in mathematics we classify them into [sets
- **[imaginary](imaginary_number.md)**: Have the same properties as real numbers but lie in another dimension, on a line perpendicular to the real number line, going through 0 -- they are connected to real numbers by the fact that imaginary unit ([i](i.md)) squared equals minus one. E.g. 0, 3i or -i.
- **R: [real](real_number.md)**: Measure any continuous one dimensional quantity (such as height or length), the line they form is continuous. E.g. -0.3, [pi](pi.md) or cube root of 10000.
- **negative**: Smaller than zero. E.g. -1, -123 or -1000.
- **non-negative**: Aren't negative. E.g. 0, 1 or 1000.
- **R0+: non-negative**: Aren't negative. E.g. 0, 1 or 1000.
- **R+: positive**: Greater than zero. E.g. 1, 456 or 1000.
- **irrational**: Aren't rational. E.g. [pi](pi.md), minus [e](e.md) or square root of 2.
- **Q: [rational](rational_number.md)**: "Fractions", countable set, can be written as a fraction of two integers; between any two there is always another one, so they are very densely "packed", though the line they form is not truly continuous. E.g. -2/3, 0.12345 or 2135.
@ -242,4 +242,4 @@ Here is a table of some notable numbers, mostly important in math and programmin
Open source (OS, also *Open $ource*) is a [capitalist](capitalism.md) movement, in recent years degraded to a mere brand, [forked](fork.md) from the [free software movement](free_software.md); it is advocating at least partial "openness", i.e. strategic sharing of design parts with the public and allowing unpaid volunteer contributors from the public to take part in [software](sw.md) and [hardware](hw.md) development; though technically and legally the definition of *open source* is mostly identical to [free (as in freedom) software](free_software.md), in practice and in spirit it couldn't be more different as for **abandoning the goal of freedom and ethics in favor of business** (to which ethics is an obstacle), due to which [we](lrs.md) see open source as inherently [evil](evil.md) and recommend following the free software way instead. [Richard Stallman](rms.md), the founder of free software, distances himself from the open source movement. Fascist organizations such as [Microsoft](microsoft.md) and [Google](google.md), on the other hand, embrace open source (while restraining from using the term *free software*) and slowly shape it towards their goals. The term [FOSS](foss.md) is sometimes used to refer to both free software and open source without expressing any preference.
Open source (OS, also *Open $ource*) is a [capitalist](capitalism.md) movement, in recent years degraded to a mere brand, [forked](fork.md) from the [free software movement](free_software.md); it is advocating at least partial "openness", i.e. strategic sharing of design parts with the public and allowing unpaid volunteer contributors from the public to take part in [software](sw.md) and [hardware](hw.md) development; though technically and legally the definition of *open source* is mostly identical to [free (as in freedom) software](free_software.md), in practice and in spirit it couldn't be more different as for **abandoning the goal of freedom and ethics in favor of business** (to which ethics is an obstacle), due to which [we](lrs.md) see open source as inherently [evil](evil.md) and recommend following the free software way instead. [Richard Stallman](rms.md), the founder of free software, distances himself from the open source movement. Fascist organizations such as [Microsoft](microsoft.md) and [Google](google.md), on the other hand, embrace open source (while restraining from using the term *free software*) and slowly shape it towards their goals. Open source is a short for "yes, it will abuse you, but at least you can read its source code." The term [FOSS](foss.md) is sometimes used to refer to both free software and open source without expressing any preference.
Open source is unfortunately (but unsurprisingly) becoming more prevalent than free software, as it better serves [capitalism](capitalism.md) and abuse of people, and its followers are more and more hostile towards the free software movement. This is very dangerous, ethics and focus on actual user freedom is replaced by shallow legal definitions that can be bypassed, e.g. by [capitalist software](capitalist_software.md) and [bloat monopoly](bloat_monopoly.md). In a way open source is capitalism reshaping free software so as to weaken it and eventually make its principles of freedom ineffective. Open source tries to shift the goal posts: more and more it offers only an illusion of some kind of ethics and/or freedom, it pushes towards mere partial openness ("open source" for proprietary platforms), towards high complexity, inclusion of unethical business-centered features ([autoupdates](autoupdate.md), [DRM](drm.md), ...), high interdependency, difficulty of utilizing the rights granted by the license, exclusion of developers with "incorrect" political opinions or bad brand image etc. In practice open source has become something akin a mere **brand** which is stick to a piece of software to give users with little insight a feeling they're buying into something good -- this is called **[openwashing](openwashing.md)**. This claim is greatly supported by the fact that corporations such as [Microsoft](microsoft.md) and [Google](google.md) widely embrace open source ("Microsoft <3opensource",theinfamous [GitHub](github.md) acquisitionetc.).
Open source unfortunately (but unsurprisingly) became absolutely prevalent over free software as it better serves [capitalism](capitalism.md) and abuse of people, and its followers are more and more hostile towards the free software movement. This is very dangerous, [ethics](ethics.md) and focus on actual user freedom is replaced by shallow legal definitions that can be bypassed, e.g. by [capitalist software](capitalist_software.md) and [bloat monopoly](bloat_monopoly.md). In a way open source is capitalism reshaping free software so as to weaken it and eventually make its principles of freedom ineffective. Open source tries to shift the goal posts: more and more it offers only an illusion of some kind of ethics and/or freedom, it pushes towards mere partial openness ("open source" for proprietary platforms), towards high complexity, inclusion of unethical business-centered features ([autoupdates](autoupdate.md), [DRM](drm.md), ...), high interdependency, difficulty of utilizing the rights granted by the license, exclusion of developers with "incorrect" political opinions or bad brand image etc. In practice open source has become something akin a mere **brand** which is stick to a piece of software to give users with little insight a feeling they're buying into something good -- this is called **[openwashing](openwashing.md)**. This claim is greatly supported by the fact that corporations such as [Microsoft](microsoft.md) and [Google](google.md) widely embrace open source ("Microsoft <3opensource",theinfamous [GitHub](github.md) acquisitionetc.).
*"**Free and Open Source**: it is completely **FREE OF COST** and **ALMOST ALL** of its components are open source."* --GNU/Linux [Mint](mint.md)'s website already marketing partially proprietary system as "open source" and purposefully misusing the word "free" to mean "gratis" (February 2024)
@ -11,6 +11,15 @@ Political correctness (abbreviated PC) stands for [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md)
```
*Example of politically correct ASCII art. Note the absence of any content that might offend someone. Still the art is imperfect because it has a white background which might be seen as racially offensive.*
{ For a physicist and electronics guys there's probably quite a lot of simplification, this is written from the limited point of view of a programmer. ~drummyfish }
Semiconductors are, very simply speaking, materials whose electrical conductivity varies greatly with conditions such as temperature, illumination their purity or applied voltage, unlike insulators who generally don't conduct electricity very well (have a great [resistivity](resistivity.md)) and conductors who do. Semiconductors, especially [silicon](silicon.md) (Si), are the key component of [digital](digital.md) [electronic](electronic.md) [computers](computer.md) and integrated circuits. Other semiconductors include germanium, selenium or compound ones (composed of multiple elements).
Semiconductors are materials with electric conductivity between insulators and conductors, their conductivity may vary greatly with conditions such as temperature, illumination, their purity or applied voltage. In this they're unlike insulators who generally don't conduct electricity very well (have a great [resistivity](resistivity.md)) and conductors who do. Semiconductors, especially [silicon](silicon.md) (Si), are the key component of [digital](digital.md) [electronic](electronic.md) [computers](computer.md) and integrated circuits. Other semiconductors include germanium, selenium or compound ones (composed of multiple elements).
Semiconductors are important for computers because they help implement the [binary](binary.md) [logic circuits](logic_circuit.md), they can behave like a switch that is either on (1) or off (0). Besides that they can serve e.g. for making measurements (a component whose resistivity depends on its illumination can be used to measure amount of light by measuring the resistivity). Especially important electronic components based on semiconductors are the **[diode](diode.md)** (lets current flow only one way) and **[transistor](transistor.md)** (a purely electrical "switch" that can be made extremely tiny).
