Reactionary Software

   { The "founder", fschmidt, sent me a link to his website on saidit after I
   posted about LRS. Here is how I interpret his take on technology -- as
   always I may misinterpret or distort something, for safety refer to the
   original website. ~drummyfish }

   Reactionary software (reactionary meaning opposing the [1]modern, favoring
   the old) is a kind of [2]software/[3]technology philosophy opposing
   [4]modern technology and advocating more [5]simplicity as a basis for
   better technology (and possibly whole society); it is similar e.g. to
   [6]suckless and our own [7]less retarded software, though it's not as
   "hardcore" [8]minimalist (e.g. it's okay with old versions of [9]Java
   which we still consider kind of [10]bloated and therefore [11]bad). Just
   as suckless and LRS, reactionary software notices the unbelievably
   degenerated state of "[12]modern" technology (reflecting the degenerate
   state of whole society) manifested in [13]bloat, overengineering,
   overcomplicating, user abuse, ugliness, buzzword hype, [14]DRM,
   [15]bullshit features, planned obsolescence, fragility etc., and advocates
   for rejecting it, for taking a step back to when technology was still sane
   (before 2000s). The website of reactionary software is at
   http://www.reactionary.software (on top it reads Make software great
   again!). There is also a nice forum at
   http://www.mikraite.org/Reactionary-Software-f1999.html (tho requires JS
   to register? WTF. LOL they even use [16]Discord, that's just lame.). The
   spirit is good, however the people in the group mostly seem not to be the
   experts of computer technology (still above average tech savvy but not
   like "top hackers"), which of course isn't anything bad, it's just that
   they sometimes propose shitty "solutions" -- at least from the forum posts
   it seems they are mostly frustrated users rather than frustrated skilled
   programmers. Again, there is nothing wrong about this, we need to listen
   to them, it's just that we should probably rather listen to the complaints
   than to some of the proposed solutions.

   The biggest difference compared to suckless/LRS is that reactionary
   software focuses on the simplicity from user's point of view (as stated on
   their forums). Of course this is not in conflict with our views, we want
   the same thing, however if we stay ONLY at the external simplicity, we
   fall into the trap of [17]pseudominimalim -- we, the LRS, therefore
   additionally see the simplicity of internals as equally important of a
   goal.

   The founder of reactionary software is fschmidt and he still seems to be
   the one who mostly defines it (just like [18]drummyfish is at the moment
   basically solo controlling [19]LRS), though there is a forum of people who
   follow him. The philosophy can potentially be extended beyond just
   software, to other fields of endeavor and potentially whole society -- the
   discussion of reactionary software revolves around wide context, e.g.
   things like philosophy, religion and [20]collapse of society (fschmidt
   made a post where he applies Old Testament ideas to programming). This is
   pretty good, focus on the [21]big picture is something we greatly embrace
   too.

   fschmidt seems to be a lot into religion and also has some related side
   projects with wider scope, e.g. [22]Arkians which deals with society and
   [23]eugenics. It seems to be trying to establish a community of "chosen
   people" (those who pass certain tests) who selective breed to renew good
   genes in society. { PLEASE DON'T JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS, I just quickly
   skimmed through it -- people will probably freak out and start calling
   that guy a [24]Nazi -- please don't, read his site first. I can't really
   say more about it as I didn't research it well, but he doesn't seem to be
   proposing violent solutions. Peace. ~drummyfish }

   What do [25]we think about reactionary software? To sum up: the vibes are
   good, it basically seems like "suckless-lite" -- we agree with what they
   identify as causes of decline of modern technology, we like that they
   discuss wide context and the big picture and our solutions are often
   aligned, in the same direction -- theirs are just not as radical, or maybe
   we just disagree on minor points. We may e.g. disagree on specific cases
   of software, for example they approve of old [26]Python, [27]Java and
   lightweight [28]JavaScript used on the [29]web -- we see such software as
   unacceptable, it's too complex, unnecessary and from ground up designed
   badly. { As clarified on the forums, reactionary software focuses on the
   simplicity from user's perspective, not necessarily the simplicity of
   internals. ~drummyfish } Nevertheless we definitely see it as good this
   philosophy exists, it fills a certain niche, it's a place for people who
   aren't necessarily hardcore hackers but still see the value of minimalism,
   which of course shows they're one of the more intelligent out there.
   Reactionary software contributes to improving technology at the very least
   by spreading awareness and taking actual stance, they may help provide
   alternatives to tech refugees who suffer from modern tech but suckless or
   LRS is too difficult for them to jump right into. The fact that more and
   more smaller communities with ideas similar to LRS come to life indicates
   the ideas themselves are alive and start to flourish, in a decentralized
   way -- this is good.

   Examples of reactionary software include (examples from the site itself):

     * [30]bash: Possibly the most popular [31]Unix shell. In hardocore
       minimalist circles bash is still considered bloated and/or [32]harmful
       due to its extensions over standard [33]Posix shell, but indeed
       compared to mainstream software bash is pretty KISS.
     * old versions of languages such as [34]Java and [35]Python: TBH these
       are seriously [36]bloated -- the older versions maybe not THAT much
       but still. Even if these language may appear minimal to the programmer
       (e.g. by syntax or concepts), they are necessarily extremely
       complicated on the inside (see [37]pseudominimalism), even if just for
       their HUGE standard libraries.
     * [38]Mercurial: OK, here the guy just bashes and shits on [39]git for
       being extremely bloated and unusable -- of course, git is a bit
       bloated, but definitely not more than Java or Python. Not sure
       Mercurial is really so much better. { I have literally never touched
       Mercurial so I don't know, I just know that Git is a bit complex but
       still usable (just commit, push and pull) AND it doesn't even matter
       that much as my project do not depend on git, git is basically just a
       way for me to put my code on the internet and sync in between my
       machines. If git stops existing I can literally just use FTP or
       something. ~drummyfish }
     * [40]Luan: Their own programming language. TODO: research it :)
     * ...

See Also

     * [41]suckless
     * [42]KISS
     * [43]bitreich
     * [44]LRS

Links:
1. modern.md
2. software.md
3. tech.md
4. modern.md
5. kiss.md
6. suckless.md
7. lrs.md
8. minimalism.md
9. java.md
10. bloated.md
11. bad.md
12. modern.md
13. bloat.md
14. drm.md
15. bullshit.md
16. discord.md
17. pseudominimalism.md
18. drummyfish.md
19. lrs.md
20. collapse.md
21. big_picture.md
22. arkians.md
23. eugenics.md
24. nazi.md
25. lrs.md
26. python.md
27. java.md
28. js.md
29. www.md
30. bash.md
31. unix.md
32. harmful.dm
33. posix.md
34. java.md
35. python.md
36. bloat.md
37. pseudominimalism.md
38. mercurial.md
39. git.md
40. luan.md
41. suckless.md
42. kiss.md
43. bitreich.md
44. lrs.md