servius/sukr
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

chore: remove personal site for sukr

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Timothy DeHerrera
2026-01-31 19:18:07 -07:00
parent 50116d8e8e
commit 893c2fee45
49 changed files with 0 additions and 4418 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

3
sites/nrd.sh/content/_index.md
View File

@@ -1,3 +0,0 @@
---
title: nrd.sh
---

16
sites/nrd.sh/content/about.md
View File

@@ -1,16 +0,0 @@
---
title: About
---
I'm Tim DeHerrera (nrdxp), an engineer at [IOG](https://iog.io) where I work on blockchain infrastructure for the Cardano ecosystem.
I co-founded the [Ekala Project](https://github.com/ekala-project) to build better tooling for reproducible builds and declarative systems.
I've spent about a decade working on distributed systems, build infrastructure, and network optimization. I mostly work in Rust and Nix these days, though I'll pick up whatever gets the job done. Reproducibility and determinism matter to me—probably more than they should.
If any of this sounds interesting, check out the [collab](/collab.html) page or hit me up through the social links above.
## Sigs
- GPG: [5471 8D2B 78DC AA9C 7702 96F1 8985 725D B5B0 C122](https://github.com/nrdxp.gpg)
- SSH: [6A07 0A0C E98E 4E44 BC82 15FC 373B 0584 D603 1493](https://github.com/nrdxp.keys)

132
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/12-years.md
View File

@@ -1,132 +0,0 @@
---
title: "Twelve Years as a Digital Hermit"
description: "Why I left Social Media a Over a Decade Ago, and Why I Now Return"
taxonomies:
tags:
- ramblings
- propaganda
- philosophy
author: "Tim D"
authorGithub: "nrdxp"
authorImage: "https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/34083928?v=4"
authorTwitter: "nrdexp"
date: "2024-10-11"
category: "personal"
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
**Reader Advisory:** This post is sarcastic, and a bit raw. Those without a sense of humor, or an aversion to hard facts, venture no further. Also, these opinions are my own; subject to change, etc, etc.
_(not that I should have to say any of that to grown adults, imho, but alas...)_
## My Life the Contradiction
It has been confusing, even for me at times, to live my life being fascinated with computer technology from a very early age, yet having nothing to do with major social media platforms since around 2012 - even as the rest of the world became utterly infatuated with it, apparently seeing it as some great technical marvel (lol).
From being an obsessive gamer as a child, breaking games with my GameShark, to studying topics no 10-year-old has any business studying (denotational semantics, anyone?), to building my own machines and making stupid little HTML websites, hacking MySpace and feeling proud, and just generally being the neighborhood's goto free IT support (when people still spoke with their neighbors).
Then there was trying to teach myself C++ at 13, which I gave up, for reasons that should be obvious to those still clutching to some sanity. Later, due to less than favorable economic conditions and a mountain of responsibility in my early adulthood, having children at a young age, I lost hope that I might ever do anything professionally with technology, working whatever job I could find, for whatever wage they would pay. My personal favorite was digging through folks' garbage for the purpose of "recycling".
Still, I couldn't resist tinkering, breaking, modding, ripping, hosting, or hacking anything within reach during whatever free time I had. Before Spotify made such efforts redundant, I had built quite a respectable music library. Don't arrest me for using torrents - I know, I know. I couldn't afford to pay for all that music, though I did try to actually purchase albums when I could.
I remain forever indebted to countless artists in that collection for keeping my hopes alive through those trying and difficult years, dim as they were. I still hope someday I can do something cool to pay them back (music blockchain, anyone?). And let's not forget about the endless - and I mean ENDLESS - Android ROM hacks in the early days. Good times...
In retrospect, I suppose it was only natural that I would eventually build up enough hands-on experience to do this professionally, but that wasn't really my interest. I was enthralled - and in many ways still am - with the machine itself and what it made possible. How we managed to create these things in the first place remains a great mystery to me. No matter how much I learn, there's always more to know. It's the dream life of that never-ending 10-year-old uber-nerd still living inside me.
This passion is even expressed through my handle, nrdxp. I'm always looking to gain more experience, to reach the next level, to build something awesome and useful. I think there were a lot of kids like me in the 90s, but I don't think all of them made it this far, and for that miracle alone, I'll always be grateful. That said, there's still a long way to go - growing up poor and starting a career late (with 3 children to boot) has severe and long-lasting consequences.
For one thing, I don't own a home. I've never lived in a home owned by anyone in my family. In that sense, I guess I've always felt a bit "homeless." When I first started my professional career, I had some hope that I could save and get one - well, then COVID happened and brought me back to reality real quick. Why mention this? Because as grateful as I am, I want to make it clear that I'm not some oracle from on high. I still have struggles, battles, and demons to overcome - things so laughably and persistently bothersome that they're hardly worth mentioning. I'm not quite certain if I'll ever fully overcome them, but I'll certainly continue trying. What else is there? Complain? Yeah, what good does that do? Gross...
## Not an Innovation; a Virus
Speaking of complaints and societal problems, this leads nicely into my next point - the very reason I stepped away from the digital chaos in the first place.
Why did I abandon all forms of social media in 2012, deleting my Facebook (still dominant at the time), and never turning back? Well, as fascinated as I am with technology, social media is quite honestly just boring to me - but it's worse than that. At first, I had some hope that this new thing could actually help usher in a new era of connectedness (naive, I know - I was young), and I tried to push for it.
I used social media like you're not supposed to, apparently: actually trying to have conversations while maintaining dignity and respect (how stupid), while still pressing people on their quite obviously dogmatic and rigid beliefs. I used to believe that people were just ignorant, that if only they would come to see the light, they would understand. I see a lot of folks still running around like that. All I can say is... good luck.
But from what I've learned now, it isn't true. People like their delusions - they use them as a shield. To some degree, I believe we all do. In that sense, social media has been nothing but a "delusion amplification engine" for society. For the youngsters out there unable to remember a world before the internet, it probably isn't as jarring. They probably think we were all running around hanging each other over our race, where we choose to stick our genitals, and every other trivial difference - and that somehow, the exposure of social media saved us from all that bigotry.
But my experience was quite the opposite. Growing up in a Latino family, I can't remember a single instance - not even one - where race was an issue or was made an issue. It's quite clear to me now, seeing the juxtaposition of that time (ah, the 90s) to ours, that that was the proper way to handle trivial differences: ignore them. They don't matter. Really, seriously, they don't fucking matter. Be a bit more grateful that you're still above ground; you won't always be. Find a reason to appreciate this moment instead of condemning it, or you know, don't - whatever, enjoy your bitterness.
And of course, the government would have you believe they're on your side. They want to end all the "isms" of the world, don't ya know? I'm sure that's why they keep such exacting stats on everything, never shut up about it, and shove it down your throat at every opportunity and on every single form you've ever filled out.
You wanna know my race or ethnicity to "track" progress? Haha, yeah right. Read a history book, buddy - I know better. Of course, it's not just big daddy Gov's fault. Indeed, these large tech firms have become nearly indistinguishable from governments in some ways, trying to enforce all kinds of arbitrary rules for the sake of nothing but ~their own profit~ "the good of the people".
But therein lies something close to the core issue for me: governments and private companies alike are _both_ quite incompetent at defining and upholding moral behavior. The former simply has no incentive but to continue growing, even beyond all sense or reason, until everything you do - even taking a breath - is illegal and, more importantly, taxable. The latter will change their so-called "values" on a dime to appease the masses, quite happy to talk down to you from both angles.
And what has social media given us then? Global mob rule; utter stupidity so obvious even children can see it, yet nobody dares address it for fear of facing the mob. Guess what? A mob of rabid idiots on the internet isn't actually that scary anyway. What are they gonna do? Sure, there are the psychos doxxing and swatting and all that nonsense, but psychos have always been around - they're just the canary in the coal mine for a much larger issue - one that strikes at the very heart of our modern delusions.
## No Right to Safety; The New Religion
This leads into what might be my most controversial point, which I'm sure will mark me as universally hated inside the delusion engine, not to mention the new and improved delusion generation engine 2.0 (incorrectly known as AI). You have no right to safety in society - anybody who promises it to you is either lying to take something from you or delusional about their own capacity to keep even themselves safe. That's not to say you have no right to defend yourself - you certainly do. Ironically enough, big daddy GovTech doesn't think you should, because they "know better." Gee, I wonder why?
But I digress - it is reality itself, not law, governments, or companies, which dictates that this world is inherently unsafe. There is no permanent fix. A "perfectly safe" space would be nearly indistinguishable from a prison cell, and even then, a big meteor could ruin your day anytime. Or did you already forget that we're all going to die someday? Maybe you believe we'll be uploaded to the machine instead and live forever, to which I would ask: How is this not religious?
What empirical evidence exists that such a thing is even possible? But this is the new religion - giving up anything and everything, our very thoughts themselves, for the "right" to "blend in," to "be safe," to be on the "right side of history" so we can survive long enough to experience the grand transhuman utopia.
Anybody who has read a history book knows exactly what side modern governments and tech firms are on, and anybody - well-intentioned or not - who feeds into it is a potential danger. Remember The Matrix? I know it's been done to death, but there's still one line in particular that rings even truer today than when it was made: "anyone who has not been unplugged is a potential agent."
If you don't stand up, put on your big boy pants, and say "No thanks, I don't need your advice on how to speak, and certainly not on how to think - lmao, are you serious? The arrogance..." - then it's only a matter of time before you simply go along to get along, and shove anyone down who tries to call you out. This is why it's so crucial to maintain the courage to speak your mind.
The mind, and especially your ability to express your true thoughts earnestly, is like a muscle. If you don't exercise it, it will atrophy fairly quickly, until you can no longer think at all. All you can do is scroll for your daily dose of "what to think."
## The Forgotten Utility of Ridicule
So what's the antidote to this mindless conformity? What weapon do we have against this tide of enforced groupthink? Ridicule is the proper response - the header says it all.
This kind of bullshit morality posturing, colloquially known as "wokeness," is worthy of any and all forms of human ridicule. And no, not just to be mean or vent. Ironically, after mentioning how impossible it is to "be safe" in this world, there are certainly degrees to which one's safety can be practically improved, and ridiculing ridiculous tyrants who would have you kissing their feet is one sure-fire way to do it.
No, you're not being compassionate, no you don't fucking care about their genitals - I think we all universally agree that "our" genitals are the most important, right? Stop pretending, fuck the show. You can't make me, really and truly. Call me an asshole - actually, I kinda am - but one thing I won't do, even when you want me to, is hate. Hate is the corrosion that led us to this dismal position in the first place. Yoda taught us these principles years ago people, come on.
What I will do, however, is unapologetically ridicule the ridiculous. Go figure...
In all seriousness, we live in an era ruled by bitterness and delusion. And in such a short time - a generation and a half - from likely the least racist society that has ever been (the 90s children) to today; all because _you_ won't stand up and say what we all know you likely think. The only people who actually believe any of the modern rhetoric are parrots who gave up their right to think independently long ago. As was said by a far more brilliant man (gendered speech, OMG!) than myself, "it takes someone of great intelligence to come up with ideas so colossally and utterly **_stupid_**."
Don't believe for a second that just because someone has some fancy pieces of paper on a wall that they have any right - even a little - to tell you how to think. In fact, that's a sign of incompetence in my book. Real masters of any craft should be able to trivially _demonstrate_ what is true and correct. If you have to force it down my throat, perhaps you're just a bit insecure about your own abilities; just maybe?
Another one to remember (thanks Batman): "you will never be ridiculed by someone doing more than you." In other words, if someone thinks less of you, who cares? It's just a sign they probably feel like you're ahead of them in some way, and they're simply trying to pull you back down. Take it as a compliment and move on.
Paper means nothing. Like I said, the brain is a muscle - doesn't matter if you were a world-class bodybuilder with all the trophies to boot, if you stop working, you start dying. Yet we live in a world where we take all our orders, _all_ our opinions, spoon-fed from idiots with fancy papers, which are dutifully repeated over and over by every "influencer" and their grandma (yes, grandma has a channel now too).
You want to influence something real? Think for your damn self. I know, it's scary after all this time, but if you really give a damn about "staying safe," it's your best bet. Or don't, and sit comfortable in your delusion until the day comes that you're no longer part of the acceptable and "righteous" crowd. That day is coming - in fact, for very many it's already here.
But I digress - where we're heading now is anything but "safe." Seriously, I implore you, it may sound sarcastic (and it is a bit) but read a history book. Just pick one. All this nonsense, all this rhetoric has happened before; many times. Just pick an era at random, and I'm quite confident you'll find some form of it or another. Perhaps all this madness is inevitable, but I don't actually care...
I am one man, living my one life, and I don't want to be "told" by anyone - least of all a brainless mob so utterly afraid to think out of line that they share notes before every public statement - how to think or what to feel, or when or how to speak. Again, no thanks, I got this. I'll take responsibility for my mistakes and take credit for my own wins. I don't need your help, not at any cost, not even if I have to build everything I work on alone, completely in isolation. Where's the inclusivity for folks like me, exactly?
And the definitions of unacceptable just keep expanding, as they do and have (I'm telling you - history book). To some, it's a crime merely to exist with the wrong genitals, because that's progress somehow...
This segment could go on and on, but I'll just remind you of the header. There is great social utility in ridicule. It's powerful - it keeps people safe from these idiotic ideas that actually convince them to permanently deform themselves for the sake of approval.
But that's just the thing: Identity isn't a feeling, it's defined by your character. How you look or what cosmetic appearance you possess will do little to affect your character, and in fact, focusing on it too much will likely degrade it, seeing as it's totally irrelevant in the first place...
## Wait Why, Again?
After all this criticism and heated commentary, you might wonder why I'm back on social media at all. So yeah, this got heated in parts, but I honestly feel it is necessary at this point. Years of watching from the sidelines, trying to be "considerate," have only confirmed what I suspected - silence changes nothing.
And for what was I silent? To get ridiculed and excluded anyway because I refuse to give up my right to think to the great "Constitutional Assembly" of delusion and apathy?
"And as my first act, I appoint all my friends to the board ~of directors~ to defend ~the empire~ democracy and ~my vested-interests~ the goodwill of the community!"
And to be clear, I still think social media is a toxic, narcissistic breeding ground for idiocy and delusion, largely responsible for this record-breaking societal decline, distracting us all the while, like the great propaganda masters of television could have only dreamed. Yet I'm back here on X... why?
Maybe I just want a little attention like everyone else? You can argue that if you like, but I've been doing just fine on my own for quite some time now. If anything, the little bit of attention I've attracted so far has been an annoyance and a burden. It also feels dangerous somehow. But here I am... somewhat because of that last section - there aren't enough folks with the courage to ridicule the ridiculous, so I will, come what may (at least while it's still "legal" in my country; damn free speech...).
But it's not just that. I'm older now, and I know there are still younger folks who don't have the experience I've gained. Quite frankly, they seem to need an example of what courage looks like. No, it isn't perfect, it's not ripped to shreds with perfect abs, either. It is literally just saying what you really think - damn the consequences.
So anyway, there you go zealots, all the ammo you'll ever need to condemn me. Consider it a free gift, but know that there's plenty more where that came from.
Countries are not supposed to give in to terrorism (whatever the fuck that means), and I will not give in to precious bullies with fragile little egos. Sorry, but even if this generation is largely toasted, someone still has to set an example for the next one, however imperfectly, or things will continue to get worse. I guess this is a sentiment only parents really understand, and there are so few parents nowadays (sigh).
I digress though - I may dislike it (despise it even), but social media is the only playground anyone wants to play on. It's the only place to make any sort of stand, like it or not.
And I really want to stress this: the most important lesson I've learned from my study of history is that it can, and will _always_ get worse, unless and until somebody says, "No, that's enough. I'm quite finished with your little tyranny, thank you - hang me if you must."
And so I'll end on that note. Hang me if you must... As much as I have always loved technology - I wouldn't even know what to do with myself if I didn't do what I'm doing now - I absolutely and positively _refuse_ to perpetuate or feed into this nonsense, even a little bit.
If the open-source ecosystem had half the spirit of the pioneers who founded it, we would be on the front lines against such rabid propaganda. But instead, we stand quietly on the sidelines, at best asking questions that go perpetually ignored by the zealots, all the while apologizing for our intrusive thoughts.
Now, if you've made it this far, stay tuned - I've got some things coming down the pipe to try and revitalize a once-thriving world of thoughts and ideas, free from the burden of zealots and thought police. Until then, take care of yourself, and don't be afraid to use that beautiful jelly inside your skull, before you lose it!

300
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/NixOS Policy Breakdown.md
View File

@@ -1,300 +0,0 @@
---
title: "Political Bikeshedding: NixOS Edition"
description: On Social Dynamics and Leadership
taxonomies:
tags:
- nix
- politics
author: Tim D
authorGithub: nrdxp
authorImage: https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/34083928?v=4
authorTwitter: nrdxp52262
date: "2024-07-02"
category: politics
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
This piece offers a perspective on recent NixOS project challenges from
a long-term contributor. As one of the authors of [RFC 175][175], which
attempted to address moderation issues but faced obstacles in adoption,
the writer brings both experience and a commitment to improving the
project's governance.
Given the complexity of the situation, this article aims to provide a
high-level analysis rather than an exhaustive account. While specific
examples are limited for brevity, future pieces may explore more
detailed case studies. The current goal is to establish a framework for
understanding and addressing broader issues that are increasingly
prevalent across the open-source world.
## The Silent Majority and the Myth of "Community Consensus"
A significant portion, if not the majority, of people likely despise
politics and deliberately disengage from it, focusing on more enjoyable
pursuits. By nature, these individuals aren't necessarily interested in
having their unrelated political or ideological views "represented" in
groups or forums they join for specific interests, such as hacking.
Crucially, this silent majority challenges the notion of a unified
"voice of the community." Many claim to speak on behalf of "the
community," advocating for actions or bans based on supposed community
consensus. However, if a silent majority exists, such claims of
representing the entire community are inherently flawed and potentially
misleading, at best.
The concept of a silent majority and the questionable nature of claimed
community consensus lead us to examine another critical issue: the
misuse of marginalization claims, which many of these voices use as a
foundation. Understanding the contextual and temporal nature of
marginalization is key to addressing this problem.
## Marginalization is Contextual and Temporal
The term "marginal" has no fixed definition outside a specific context.
Consider this scenario: someone stands on the far side of a room while
others gather at a table. This person detects a threat, perhaps a small
fire, only visible from their position. They alert the group and come to
the table to address the issue. Everyone appreciates their input, and by
joining the table, they physically become part of the majority.
Now, imagine another fire starts under the table with everyone seated.
Those at the table, including the previously "marginal" individual,
can't detect this new threat. Their once unique position is lost, and
they're now part of the group that's unaware of the new danger.
It's crucial to note that even this scenario is relative. To another
group or from a broader perspective, everyone at this table could be
considered marginal. This underscores the importance of context: a
marginal position in one setting may be quite common in another.
This relativity is particularly relevant when considering claims of
marginalization within specific communities or projects. Even if
individuals are marginalized in broader society, they may hold majority
or influential positions within a particular project or community. In
such cases, their claims of marginalization within that specific context
may not be accurate or relevant.
In essence, marginalization is a temporary state, not a fixed identity.
It's fluid and can shift with changing situations and contexts,
highlighting the importance of diverse perspectives and the danger of
assuming any _one_ group always holds a privileged viewpoint or unique
insight in all settings.
The misuse of marginalization claims has serious consequences.
Individuals wield this notion of perpetual marginalization not only to
speak for others, but also to justify a degradation of professional
standards. This false moral authority has become a shield for behavior
that would otherwise be unacceptable, leading us to examine the pitfalls
of such unchecked conduct.
## The Pitfall of Unchecked Behavior and False Marginalization
Traditionally, public displays of childish behavior were not tolerated
in professional settings. Recently, however, a troubling trend has
emerged: the justification of bullying behavior based on claimed
marginalized status. This justification often escalates rapidly,
creating untenable situations.
Crucially, these individuals are exploiting an identity that lacks a
concrete, technical definition. They are not inherently or permanently
marginalized; rather, they're hiding behind a facade to maintain special
privileges, particularly the ability to "shout down" others without
consequence.
This false claim of static marginalization ignores the contextual and
temporal nature of marginalization we discussed earlier. It allows
certain individuals or groups to maintain a position of perceived moral
authority, even when they've become part of, or aligned with the
majority. This misuse of claimed status creates an environment where
bullying is not only tolerated but sometimes even encouraged, as long as
it comes from the "right" sources.
Such behavior undermines the principles of professionalism, open
dialogue, and merit-based contribution that should be the hallmarks of
any healthy community, especially in technical fields. It's essential
to recognize and address this manipulation to maintain a truly fair and
productive environment.
## A Call for Maturity and Productive Incentives
As an adult and parent, such behavior is more disappointing than
surprising. Society might benefit from being more forgiving of mistakes,
allowing for course correction. In political terms, both sides often
have valid points and could learn from each other if they moved past
superficial differences. We should encourage more mature, productive
motivations, especially in contexts where many are willing to
collaborate constructively.
Importantly, we must consider the role of incentives in shaping
behavior. Creatures, including humans, are primarily motivated by
incentive structures. It's crucial not to inadvertently reward or
empower those who engage in divisive, derogatory, or unproductive
behavior, as this can quickly lead to a self-reinforcing cycle of
negative actions.
Thankfully, the solution is straightforward: we simply need to
incentivize civilized behavior. Instead of discouraging constructive
engagement by labeling it as "sea lioning" or "concern trolling," we can
cultivate an environment that rewards respectful disagreement and
collaborative problem-solving irrespective of personal or political
differences.
The alternative and apparent _status quo_ seems to be a perpetual
witch-hunt for an ever-growing list of "wrong" opinions. Surely it is
clear which strategy is more sustainable?
## The Dangers of History Modification
The core issue lies in social manipulation through selective moderation
and, crucially, the modification of historical records. When moderation
teams, often claiming to represent marginalized groups, are empowered to
alter, delist, or delete past conversations, posts, or decisions, they
gain the ability to distort the narrative. This practice is, by
definition, a form of rewriting history.
By condoning or failing to address poor behavior from those claiming
marginalized status, these moderators further enable and entrench the
misuse of such claims. This creates a self-reinforcing cycle of
manipulation and degraded standards, undermining the integrity of
discourse and eroding trust among members.
A relevant example in the Nix project involves Jon Ringer, a
long-standing contributor and public figure. Recent controversies have
portrayed Jon as an instigator and "mean offensive person." However, a
more balanced view reveals him as a scapegoat for broader project
tensions. Crucially, Jon was permanently banned from the project, while
many who openly degraded him and made _ad hominem_ attacks on his
character faced no consequences. This stark contrast highlights the
uneven application of moderation standards.
While Jon, like anyone, may have had imperfect moments under extreme
pressure, these pale in comparison to the systematic narrative
manipulation by others. The situation exposes a coordinated effort to
distort facts, issue threats, and employ bullying tactics to control the
project's direction.
The issue isn't that Jon was never wrong, but that he was consistently
painted as the primary instigator, regardless of reality. Even when
heated, Jon generally avoided the name-calling and derogatory behavior
that often went unchecked from other parties. His permanent ban, in this
context, underscores the troubling double standard at play in the
project's governance.
This manipulation of context and conversation history not only
misrepresents the overall dynamics but also serves to gaslight both
individuals and the wider perspective. The impact of this distortion is
evident in public platforms like Reddit, where observers unfamiliar with
Jon often express views that align with the manipulated narrative. These
casual observers, swayed by the dominant portrayal and the absence of
meaningful dissenting arguments, tend to perceive Jon as a far greater
problem than he actually was.
Crucially, while Jon may have contributed to some tension, he is far from
the epicenter of the controversy. In fact, the current issues surrounding
him have been brewing for years, consistently instigated by the same
individuals who have largely escaped scrutiny as they continue to
perpetuate divisive narratives.
The most tangible and regrettable outcome of this scapegoating is that
the Nix project has lost a long-standing, highly productive, and
professional contributor. Jon was often very helpful to newcomers, and
his departure represents a significant loss to the project. This
illustrates the real cost of allowing manipulated narratives to drive out
valuable members.
Such power to modify history is dangerous. It allows for the erasure of
context, the silencing of dissenting voices, and the creation of a false
consensus. This not only undermines transparency but also erodes trust
within project spaces and misleads those on the periphery. Setting a
clear precedent against this practice is vital. We must recognize that
allowing any group to "clean up" or selectively edit the historical
record is tantamount to endorsing propaganda[^1]. True professionalism in
project management involves facing our history honestly, learning
from it, and moving forward transparently.
Solving these problems requires strong leadership with a commitment to
preserving the integrity of shared discourse. Leaders must establish
clear principles that prioritize transparency and resist the temptation
to sanitize the past. While challenging, this approach is essential for
maintaining fairness, fostering genuine progress, and building a
trustworthy environment.
## The Solution: Embracing Leadership Principles
The real solution to Nix's or any project suffering from such childish
incursion lies in embracing fundamental principles of leadership. Being
a genuinely good leader is challenging. It requires holding oneself to a
higher standard than everyone else, and having the courage and conviction
to guide others to be their best selves, even when they resist.
Good leadership is the only way to be fair to all sides when there is a
genuine disagreement. It involves:
1. Setting clear, unambiguous goals and standards of behavior that align
with the project's core values. This clarity respects everyone's time,
allowing individuals to easily decide whether they align with and wish
to participate in the project.
2. Maintaining transparency and resisting the urge to manipulate
historical records.
3. Fostering respectful, merit-based dialogue while considering the
silent majority, not just vocal special interests.
4. Making decisions based on technical merit and the project's best
interests, not personal or ideological biases.
5. Being willing to address conflicts directly and fairly, without
scapegoating individuals or giving special privileges to allies.
6. Consistently enforcing these standards, making it clear what kind of
behavior and contributions are valued in the project.
By embracing these leadership principles, any project can create an
environment where technical excellence and collaborative spirit thrive.
It's a path that requires courage and commitment but offers the best hope
for resolving current tensions and preventing future ones.
However, implementing these principles requires a conscious choice from
all contributors, especially from those who have remained silent until
now.
## The Great Purge or Professionalism?
The Nix project faces a critical juncture. A long-standing moderator has
publicly expressed a desire for a ["purge"][purge] of supposed
"undesirables." This stark reality forces us to confront a fundamental
choice: do we embrace professionalism and mutual respect, or do we
allow divisive, exclusionary behavior to dominate and ultimately derail
the entire project?
This isn't just about Nix; it's a choice many now face. The silent
majority, those who typically avoid controversy, may now have to decide
what kind of project space they want to cultivate, and what sort of
leaders they wish to follow. Inaction is itself a choice; one that may
lead to the continued erosion of the project's ethic.
We must ask ourselves: Do we want a forum driven by technical merit and
collaborative spirit, or one ruled by ideological purity? The answer to
this question will shape the future of Nix and could set a precedent for
open-source projects at large.
It's time for those who value professionalism, open collaboration, and
technical excellence to stand up and be counted. The alternative - an
ecosystem stifled by ideological cleansing - is too high a price to pay
for our silence.
## Preserving the Future of Open Source
While this piece has focused on Nix, the issues discussed are
symptomatic of a growing and worrying trend across the open-source
world. Many projects face similar challenges with ideological divisions,
manipulated narratives, and the silencing of dissenting voices.
Open source is far too important to be ruled by narrow-minded and
exclusionary ideologies. By embracing strong leadership principles and
fostering environments of mutual respect and professionalism, we can
ensure that open source continues to thrive as a bastion of innovation
and collaboration.
[175]: https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/175
[purge]: https://chaos.social/@hexa/112711384631096150
[^1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_negationism

275
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/NixOS-Flakes_and_KISS.md
View File

@@ -1,275 +0,0 @@
---
title: NixOS, Flakes and KISS
description: A simpler way to manage the OS Layer
taxonomies:
tags:
- nix
author: Tim D
authorGithub: nrdxp
authorImage: https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/34083928?v=4
authorTwitter: nrdxp52262
date: "2020-12-19"
category: dev
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
## Introduction
This marks the first post of my very own developer blog, and it comes much later
than I had originally anticipated thanks to the ongoing pandemic, coupled with
some unforeseen life challenges. My original intent was to start by introducing
the concept of Nix Flakes, however, an excellent blog series over at
[tweag.io](https://www.tweag.io/blog/2020-05-25-flakes) has emerged, expanding
on just that premise. If you are new to flakes, it is highly recommended that
you check it out before continuing with this post.
Now, I'd like to introduce a project I've been slowly building up since
flakes were introduced called [DevOS][DevOS].
# So what is it anyway?
After years of working with NixOS, I strongly felt that the community as a whole
could benefit from a standardized structure and format for NixOS configurations
in general. It appears that every developer is essentially reinventing the
wheel when it comes to the "shape" of their deployments, leading to a lot of
confusion as to what the idioms and best practices should be, especially for
newcomers.
Having a mind share to collect the best ideas concerning structure and
method would be valuable, not only for its pragmatic implications, but also to
help ease adoption and onboarding for new NixOS users; something that has
traditionally been difficult up to now.
Of course this really hinges on wider community support, as my ideas alone
definitely shouldn't be the final word on what constitutes a correct and well
organized NixOS codebase. Rather, I am hoping to cajole the community forward
by providing useful idioms for others to expand on.
Even if my ideas lose out in the end, I sincerely hope they will, at the very
least, push the community toward some level of consensus in regards to the way
NixOS code repositories are structured and managed.
That said, DevOS appears to be gaining a bit of popularity among new flake
adopters and I am really quite excited and humbled to see others engage the
repository. If you have contributed to the project, thank you so much for your
time and support!
# An Arch KISS
I moved over to NixOS after a decades long love affair with Arch Linux. I found
their brand of KISS to be pragmatic and refreshing compared to alternatives
such as Ubuntu or Red Hat. This isn't to dog on those distributions, which I
also have used and enjoyed for years, but rather to accentuate my affection
for the simplified, and developer focused workflow that Arch Linux enabled for
my work stations.
However, over the years, I came to resent the several hours of tedious work
spent doing what amounted to the same small tasks over and over, any time
issues arose.
My first attempt to alleviate some of this work was by using Ansible to deploy
my common configuration quickly whenever it became necessary. However, I ran
into a ton of issues as the Arch repositories updated, and my configurations
inevitably became stale. Constant, unexpected breakage became a regular
nuisance.
I then became aware of Nix and NixOS, and hoped that it would live up the
promise of reproducible system deployment, and after a brief stint of
procrastination, I dove head first.
# Great but Not Perfect.
At first everything seemed almost perfect. NixOS felt like Ansible on steroids,
and there was more than enough code available in nixpkgs to meet my immediate
needs. Getting up to speed on writing derivations and modules was fairly
straightforward and the DevOps dream was in sight.
It wasn't all sunshine and rainbows, as channel updates sometimes caused
the same sort of breakage I moved to NixOS to avoid. But simple generation
rollbacks were a much more welcome interface to this problem than an unbootable
system. It was a measurable improvement from the busy work experienced with Arch. All in all, I felt it was
well worth the effort to make the transition.
It wasn't long before the [rfc][rfcs] that eventually became flakes emerged.
It seemed like the solution to many of my few remaining gripes with my
workflow. An officially supported and simple way to lock in a specific revision
of the entire system. No more unexpected and unmanaged breakage!
Of course it took a while for an experimental implementation to arrive, but I
found myself digging into the Nix and Nixpkgs PR's to see how flakes worked
under the hood.
Around the same time, the ad hoc nature of my NixOS codebase was starting to
bug at me, and I wanted to try my hand at something more generalized and
composable across machines. I had a first iteration using the traditional
"configuration.nix", but ended up feeling like the whole thing was more
complex than it really needed to be.
My eagerness to get started using flakes was the perfect excuse to start from
scratch, and so began DevOS. An attempt to address my concerns, using flakes.
## How does it work?
First and foremost, I want to point out that the bulk of the credit goes to the
amazing engineer's who have designed and implemented Nix and the ecosystem
as a whole over the last decade.
I see a lot of new users struggling to dive in and get up to speed with the Nix
language, and particularly, getting up and running with a usable and productive
system can take some serious time. I know it did for me.
The hope for DevOS is to alleviate some of that pain so folks can get to
work faster and more efficiently, with less frustration and more enthusiasm for
the power that Nix enables. I especially don't want anyone turning away from
our amazing ecosystem because their onboarding experience was too complex
or overwhelming.
# Everything is a profile!
At the heart of DevOS is the [profile][profiles]. Of course, these profiles
are really nothing more than good ol' NixOS [modules][modules]. The only reason
I've decided to rebrand them at all is to draw a distinction in how they are
used. They are kept as simple as possible on purpose; if you understand modules
you don't _really_ have anything new to learn.
The only limitation is that a profile should never declare any new NixOS module
options, we can just use regular modules for that elsewhere. Instead, they
should be used to encapsulate any configuration which would be useful for more
than one specific machine.
To put it another way, instead of defining my entire NixOS system in a
monolithic module, I break it up into smaller, reusable profiles which can
be themselves be made up of profiles. Composability is key here, as I don't
necessarily want to use every profile on every system I deploy.
As a concrete example, my [develop][develop], profile pulls in my preferred
developer tools such as my shell, and text editor configurations. It can be
thought of as a meta-profile, made up of smaller individual profiles. I can
either pull in the whole thing, which brings all the dependent profiles along
with it, or I can just import a single profile from within, say my zsh
configuration, leaving all the rest unused. Every profile is a directory with
a "default.nix" defining it. You can have whatever else you need inside the
folder, so long as it is directly related to the profile.
Let's draw the obvious parallel to the Unix philosophy here. Profiles work
best when they do one thing, and do it well. Don't provision multiple programs
in one profile, instead split them up into individual profiles, and then if you
often use them together, import them both in a parent profile. You can simply
import dependent profiles via the "imports" attribute as usual, ensuring
everything required is always present.
The key is this, by simply taking what we already know, i.e. NixOS modules, and
sticking to the few simple idioms outlined above, we gain composability and
reusability without actually having to learn anything new. I want to drill this
point home, because that's really all there is to DevOS!
Besides a few simple convenience features outlined below, profiles are the star
of the show. It's really nothing revolutionary, and that's on purpose! By
keeping things simple and organized we gain a level of control and granularity
we wouldn't have otherwise without adding real complexity to speak of.
# Really? Everything?
Yes! Thanks to built in [home-manager][home-manager] integration, users are
profiles, a preferred graphical environment is a profile. Anything that you
could imagine being useful on more than one machine is a profile. There are
plenty of examples available in the "profiles" and "users" directories, and
you can check out my personal "nrd" branch, if you want to see how I do things
on my own machines.
# Anything else I should know?
As mentioned briefly above, DevOS also has some convenience features to make
life easier.
For starters, you might be wondering how we actually define a configuration for
a specific machine. Simple, define the machine specific bits in a nix file
under the [hosts][hosts] directory and import any relevant profiles you wish to
use from there. The flake will automatically import any nix files in this folder as NixOS
configurations available to build. As a further convenience, the hostname of
your system will be set to the filename minus the ".nix" extension. This makes
future "nixos-rebuilds" much easier, as it defaults to looking up your current
hostname in the flake if you don't specify a configuration to build explicitly.
Now what if we actually just want to define a NixOS module that does declare
new NixOS options, you know, the old fashioned way? We'll also want to define
our own pkgs at some point as well. These are both structured closely to how
you might find them in the nixpkgs repository itself. This is so that you can
easily bring your package or module over to nixpkgs without much modification
should you decide it's worth merging upstream.
So, you'd define a package or module the exact same way you would in nixpkgs
itself, but instead of adding it to all-packages.nix or module-list.nix, you add
it to pkgs/default.nix and modules/list.nix. Anything pulled in these two files
will become available in any machine defined in the hosts directory, as well as
to other flakes to import from DevOS!
This setup serves a dual purpose. For people who already know the nixpkgs
workflow, it's business as usual, and for individuals who aren't familiar with
nixpkgs but wish to become so, they can quickly get up to speed on how to add
packages and modules themselves, in the exact same way they would do so upstream
proper.
Now what about overlays? Well, any overlay defined in a nix file under the
overlays directory will be automatically imported, just as with packages and
modules, and are available to all hosts, as well as to other flakes.
What if I want to pull a specific package from master instead of from the
stable release? There is a special file, pkgs/override.nix. Any package listed
here will be pulled from nixpkgs unstable rather than the current stable release.
Simple, easy.
What about cachix? It's super easy to add your own cachix link just as you
would a regular NixOS configuration. As a bonus, it will be wired up as a flake
output so other people can pull in your link directly from your flake! My
personal cachix repo is setup by default. It provides the packages the flake
exports so you don't have to build them.
That should just about do it for DevOS's current quality of life features, but
there are more ideas brewing.
# What's next?
I'm working on a system for seamlessly importing modules, packages and
overlays from other flakes, which isn't too hard as it is, but it's messy
because the current "flake.nix" has a lot of business logic that gets in the way.
Also, I would like to start programmatically generating documentation for
everything. So users can quickly find what goes where and not have to read
drawn out blog posts like this to get started. 😛 Nixpkgs is currently
transitioning to CommonMark for all documentation, and we will probably follow
suite.
Additionally, I want to implement an easy way to actually install NixOS on the
bare metal from directly within the project. I know the [deploy-rs][deploy-rs]
project is working on this, and I'm interested in supporting their project
in DevOS so as to add extra flexibility and power to installation and
deployment!
Also, certain parts of the flake should be tested to ensure things don't break.
We really have no tests to speak of as is. The auto import functions for the
"hosts" and "overlays" directory are good examples.
## A call to arms!
If you'd like to help, please jump in. I am very much open to any ideas that
could reduce the complexity or simplify the UI. If you have a profile you
believe would be useful to others, please open a [Pull Request][pr].
If you think I am crazy and wasting my time, please don't hesitate to say so! I
typically find critical feedback to be some of the most helpful. Most of all,
if you made it this far, thanks for taking some time to read about my efforts
and please consider giving DevOS a shot!
[nix]: https://nixos.org
[DevOS]: https://github.com/divnix/DevOS
[rfcs]: https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs
[modules]: https://nixos.org/manual/nixos/stable/index.html#sec-writing-modules
[profiles]: https://github.com/divnix/devos/tree/template/profiles
[develop]: https://github.com/divnix/devos/tree/template/profiles/develop
[hosts]: https://github.com/divnix/devos/tree/template/hosts
[deploy-rs]: https://serokell.io/blog/deploy-rs
[home-manager]: https://github.com/nix-community/home-manager
[pr]: https://github.com/divnix/devos/pulls

3
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/_index.md
View File

@@ -1,3 +0,0 @@
---
title: Blog
---

457
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/atom-anatomy.md
View File

@@ -1,457 +0,0 @@
---
title: Anatomy of an Atom
description: A Solid & Natural Foundation
taxonomies:
tags:
- opensource
- ekala
- nixos
date: "2025-05-16"
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
At last, I’m diving into the technical nitty-gritty of my own contributions to the Ekala project, a vision I’ve long teased but, regrettably, delayed. I’ve already shared a [high-level overview](../nix-to-eos) of its ambitious vision, but to bring any grand idea to life, it must be broken down into manageable pieces. Ekala started as a thought experiment; an exploration of how an ideal architecture for a Nix-like build system might be structured. What emerged convinced me to pursue a path I feel compelled to follow, despite efforts to steer me otherwise.
In the spirit of honesty, I see the growing complexity in the Nix ecosystem, both technical and social, as a serious threat to its future. As a holistic thinker unafraid to cross boundaries others might avoid, I believe the community’s rising tensions (however well-masked) and the lack of clear technical leadership are deeply intertwined, not merely coincidental.
Let me be clear: this isn’t an indictment of any specific person or faction caught up in the drama. I admire the resolve to chase one’s convictions, even if I find their foundations flimsier than my own.
Still, by now I hope my readers see that I view the push for political alignment in open-source—however well-intentioned—as unhealthy and utterly at odds with its founding ideals. I’ve explored this [intimately](../closed-openness) and [technically](../code-of-rebellion) elsewhere, so I’ll keep it brief: I see the hijacking of community goodwill for extreme political agendas that undermine our technical goals—whether in Ekala, Nix, or open-source broadly—as a direct assault on our ethos.
In all this, I’ve reached a difficult but reasoned conclusion: we must not support, let alone empower, individuals or institutions that promote or passively tolerate such agendas if open-source is to remain a vibrant force, not a hollow shell of its former self. If my firm stance feels unacceptable, dear reader, feel free to step away—I’ll think no less of you.
And if this seems off-topic, forgive me, but I feel compelled to restate my position briefly given the current landscape. Curious why? My linked pieces and earlier writings justify my growing resolve. This clarity fuels my drive to continue building Atom—a technical rebellion against complexity. With that, I’m grateful for the patience of those who’ve stuck with me. Life has taught me that sometimes the only path forward is one you carve yourself. As I’ve noted, personal and social upheaval over the past year has pushed me down an unexpected road. Though my reserved nature makes me hesitant to share too many personal details, and despite the stress it’s caused, I’ve laid the groundwork for what lies ahead, and I’ll gladly walk this path—twists and all—as long as I’m able.
To the point: with my philosophical footing now secure and my conscience clear, I’m ready to unpack the technical details unencumbered. I may have been overly optimistic about timelines at first, blindsided by one of the toughest years I’ve faced. Now though, with a clearer perspective, I’m aiming for a 6-to-12-month horizon for Atom as I recharge and press on. Since Atom is the foundational component of my overall vision within Ekala, let's begin this new technical blog series with a thorough exposition of it, shall we? Fair warning, this is a long one...
# Atom: A Review
If you’ve followed my previous writings or poked around in my code, you might already have a rough sense of the foundational format I’m championing: the Atom. To keep this piece standalone, though, let’s recap its high-level design and the driving force behind it before we go deep. The silver lining to the long gap between iterations? My ability to explain my designs after months of stewing has, hopefully, gotten a lot sharper.
## The Runaway Train: A Motivation
Conventional wisdom in tech projects says that once you hit a certain scale, foundational overhauls are a bad idea: iterative tweaks are the safer play. But every now and then, the existing setup is so broken that it starts threatening the project’s very existence. When that happens, a radical rethink isn’t just an option; it’s a necessity.
I’ve spent nearly a decade with Nix, half of that in professional gigs, and I’ve watched the same problems rear their heads as organizations scale up their Nix usage. I won’t bore you with the gory details; anyone who’s made a non-trivial contribution to [nixpkgs](https://github.com/nixos/nixpkgs) knows the pain all too well, and if you are really curious, there is plenty of evidence all over the internet, by now. The real kicker? These issues don’t seem fixable without rethinking the core idioms we use to write and, especially, organize Nix code.
As projects like nixpkgs balloon to massive scale, the cracks only get worse. Long-standing social drama has some folks burying their heads in the sand, or dipping out entirely. Others might lack the experience to see the train wreck coming. Some are too tied to the status quo to budge, while others, like the teams behind [snix](https://snix.dev/blog/announcing-snix/), the promising early-stage [cab language](https://github.com/cull-os/carcass?tab=readme-ov-file), and our own [ekapkgs](https://github.com/ekala-project/ekapkgs-roadmap), are stepping up with bold efforts to tackle the mess.
I’m rooting for those projects to succeed; their technical vision lines up closely with my own take on the challenges. My original plan was to pitch in and support them, aiming to complement their work rather than reinvent the wheel. But along the way, I stumbled onto what I now see as a glaring gap in the ecosystem: one that _has_ to be filled if we’re going to solve these scaling issues at their root.
## The Missing Link: Language-Level Packages
There’s an irony in Nix. It’s a domain-specific language (DSL) meticulously crafted to deliver binary software packages with precision and discipline, yet it barely considers packaging its own expressions in a similar way. To avoid confusion—since “package” is a heavily overloaded term—we're referring here to _source code distribution packages_. Think `package.json` or `Cargo.toml`: formats that bundle source code into clean, discrete units for easy distribution and downstream use.
Since I’m a Rust enthusiast, let’s use it to illustrate. In Rust, a repository might house a workspace with dozens, maybe even hundreds, of _crates_: self-contained package units. When it’s time to publish, each crate gets neatly bundled and shipped to a central registry. If I need crate _a_ from a larger workspace _P_, I can grab just _a_ from this registry, no extra baggage from _P_ included. Later, if I need a newer version of _a_, it’s simply another pull from the registry; only the files for _a_, nothing more.
Now contrast that with nixpkgs. Want package _a_? You’re stuck pulling the _entire_ repository just to evaluate it. Sure, _a_’s dependencies get fetched in the process, but most of the code you’re downloading has nothing to do with _a_. Need a different version of _a_ down the line? You’re fetching another full nixpkgs checkout, with another chunk of totally irrelevant code. It’s not hard to see how this spirals out of control. It’s not sustainable.
Like any well-designed language ecosystem, we should have a straightforward way to grab _only_ the Nix expressions we need, with their dependencies pulled in piecemeal—no more, no less. It’s not just about efficiency; it’s just as much about maintaining sanity.
### The Unique Challenge of Packaging Nix Code
Of course, this feels like it should be obvious, especially after years in the trenches. When flakes came along, I was hopeful they’d crack this nut. Spoiler: they didn’t. In fact, they sometimes make it worse, though I won’t dive too deep into that here. The core issue is that flakes still require you to fetch the full repository context to evaluate them, which kills any chance of packaging smaller expressions. Even if you split your repo into multiple flakes—not a trivial task—you’re still dragging in the whole repo for each subflake. It’s the same mess, just rearranged.
The real problem, delivering small, _versioned_ units of Nix code efficiently, has barely been touched. Some folks dedicate tiny repos to a single package, but that’s rare. Flakes encourage tying Nix to project source, and nixpkgs itself is a sprawling monolith. The repository boundary is just too coarse. We need something finer-grained, like a single Rust crate in a workspace, to have any hope of taming the challenge of distributing only the Nix expressions needed for building binaries.
This isn’t a simple fix, though. Nix is source-first by design; it needs access to source code to evaluate expressions and build packages. That tight, cryptographically secure link between expressions and their source repo is one of Nix’s biggest strengths. Slapping on a centralized registry model, like other languages use, would shred that advantage.
So, we need a novel approach; one that doesn’t sacrifice what makes Nix powerful. I experimented with tools like [josh proxy](https://github.com/josh-project/josh), which seemed promising but couldn’t handle nixpkgs’ scale. It became clear there’s no off-the-shelf solution for this, not at the size we’re dealing with. What I needed was a system that:
- Preserves the cryptographic tie between Nix expressions and their source.
- Distributes directly from the source, staying true to Nix’s ethos.
- Adds no runtime overhead to enumerating available atoms and their versions, ensuring trivial scalability.
- Scales efficiently across repositories of any size, letting users organize their projects based on preference, not constraints.
- Delivers only relevant, versioned code in a way that’s simple to understand and use.
# Atomic Anatomy
In the last section, I introduced the motivation behind atom—a foundational format to rethink how we package and distribute Nix expressions. Driven by the escalating complexity of nixpkgs and the Nix ecosystem’s scaling woes, I argued that a first-principles overhaul is critical to avoid a maintenance nightmare. While I respect efforts like snix and cab, I’ve identified a unique gap in the ecosystem that the atom aims to fill, complementing those projects with a format they could adopt in the future. Now, let’s unpack the technical anatomy of an atom and see how it tackles the problem head-on.
After years with my hands deep in the code, stepping back to explain the big picture to newcomers can be tough. But to build support and drive adoption, I’ve realized I need to double down on describing my work as simply as possible. So, let’s start from the ground up and build from there.
## A Packaging API
The Atom API is deliberately generic, unbound from any specific language, ecosystem, or storage system. Think of it as a source code packaging API: a frontend defines how to package code for a given language, and a backend, termed an Ekala store, specifies where and how those atoms are stored. This flexibility isn’t just elegant design—it’s practical, letting atom adapt to the diverse needs of different organizations.
Why such an open approach? A clear, high-level API for the atomic universe is good design, but it’s also about real-world utility. The Git storage backend, which I’ll cover soon, aligns perfectly with the open-source ethos of transparency and redistribution. Yet some organizations prioritize privacy and security over source availability—an S3 backend, for example, could offer a centralized solution to meet those needs. This versatility ensures atom supports varied use cases while maintaining a unified user-facing API, without locking anyone into a single mold.
This openness also future-proofs the design. If atom gains traction, it could support new frontends like Guix or even Cab, or integrate with existing packaging formats. Picture “atomic” Cargo crates distributed from an Ekala Git Store—a concept I’ll clarify in the next segment. While supporting existing formats isn’t my focus now, it underscores the design’s potential.
To ground things, let’s dive into the Atom Nix frontend and Git storage backend, which are tightly linked to the motivating use case outlined earlier and the heart of current development efforts. We’ll begin with the latter, the lower-level storage foundation, and build up from there.
## Atomic Git
As I’ve outlined earlier, Nix’s current code distribution mechanism has a glaring flaw. To reference a package at a specific version, you must first identify the nixpkgs checkout containing that version—a process that’s neither obvious nor trivial. Need another version? Find another nixpkgs checkout. Need both simultaneously? You’re stuck fetching all of nixpkgs’ unrelated code twice. Anyone who’s wrestled with a bloated `flake.lock` file has felt this pain, as I’ve [previously noted](../nix-to-eos#the-brick-wall), so I won’t belabor it here.
If you’re familiar with Git’s internal object format, though, you might wonder why this is even necessary. Every file and directory in Git is a content-addressed object, which, in theory, should be independently referenceable and fetchable. The issue isn’t that Git can’t handle this—it’s that Git’s conventional linear history model obscures a more elegant solution.
As mentioned, this led me to explore tools like josh proxy, hoping to filter nixpkgs’ history and extract specific package definitions without fetching the entire monorepo. But nixpkgs’ massive history overwhelmed even josh’s impressive speed, and it required a non-standard Git proxy that’d need ongoing maintenance. Worse, Nix code lacks inherent boundaries, so fetched objects might reference unrelated code from elsewhere in the repo, breaking the isolation we need.
We’ll tackle Nix’s code boundary issue when we discuss the Atom Nix frontend. For now, let’s focus on leveraging Git’s object structure to solve our storage woes. Git doesn’t offer a straightforward API to fetch individual objects, and even if you resort to the lower level plumbing, you’d need their IDs upfront—requiring a costly search through the project’s history, which is essentially what tools like josh do.
For the uninitiated, Git’s high-level entry point is typically a reference (e.g., a branch under `refs/heads` or a tag under `refs/tags`). References usually point to a commit or tag object, and users can list them on a Git server with a quick, lightweight request—no need to fetch object data or sift through history. The reference points to a commit’s hash, letting the client fetch specific objects directly. Pause for a second: this is _exactly_ the behavior we need to fix our problem.
If we could cheaply list server-side references pointing to specific history subsections—say, a Git tree object (a directory)—without pulling the entire repo or filtering its history, we’d be golden. If those references had a clear, versioned format, we’d have it all: ping the server, see all available package versions, and fetch only the relevant code, no matter the repo’s size or history.
That’s precisely what the Ekala Git storage backend does, at a high level, but since this is a technical deep dive, let’s go a little further.
```console
# demonstration of querying a remote for atom refs with `git` cli
❯ git ls-remote origin 'refs/atoms/*'
62e1b358b25f22e970d6eecd0d6c8d06fad380a7 refs/atoms/core/0.3.0
c85014bb462e55cc185853c791b8946734fd09bf refs/atoms/std/0.2.0
```
### An Atomic Reference
The Atom Git Store, as described, uses references to isolate specific repository subsections—both spatially (subdirectories) and temporally (points in history). To make this work seamlessly with Nix, though, we need to address some key details.
Git treats tree and blob objects as low-level implementation details, with no high-level “porcelain” commands to fetch or manipulate them. Most user-facing tools, including Nix, only understand commit or tag objects. For example, passing a tree object reference to Nix’s `builtins.fetchGit` function will fail, as it expects a commit, not a tree.
To bridge this gap, we wrap atomic Git trees in orphaned commit objects—detached from history, carrying no baggage on fetch. This lets Git-aware tools, like the Git CLI, treat atoms like branches or tags (e.g., for checkout). This detachment, however, risks breaking our requirement to preserve the cryptographic tie between Nix expressions and their source. Fortunately, we can leverage cryptographic primitives to link the atom to its original history rigorously.
How? The [implementation](https://github.com/ekala-project/eka/blob/b3b62913ae04318bb34ed50d31004e8b9463ff0b/crates/atom/src/publish/git/inner.rs#L171-L202) offers a peek, but here’s the gist: we ensure the orphaned commit’s hash is fully reproducible for sanity and hygiene, using a fixed author and timestamp (Unix epoch). To tie it to the source, we embed metadata in the commit object’s header, which influences its final hash. Specifically, we include:
- The commit SHA from the source history where the atom was copied.
- The relative path from the repository root to the atom’s root.
These, combined with the commit’s reproducibility, yield powerful properties:
- **Source Verification**: Users can verify the atom by checking the embedded SHA and ensuring the tree object ID at the specified path matches the source commit’s. Since tree objects are content-addressed, this guarantees the atom’s source hasn’t been altered.
- **Trust and Signing**: A verified, reproducible atom commit can be signed with a standard Git tag object. Organizations can use a trusted signing key for added security, ensuring downstream users who trust the key can rely on the atom’s integrity. Since the commit is reproducible, a verified SHA remains trustworthy indefinitely. If a key is compromised, the tag can be revoked and re-signed with a new key—no need to alter the commit.
- **Low Overhead**: The atom adds minimal load to the Git server. Using low-level operations via [gitoxide](https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide), it references existing Git trees and blobs (the actual files). This is like a shallow copy in Rust or C—a new pointer to pre-existing data—making the operation fast and lightweight.
### Isotopic Versioning
We’ve built a solid foundation for publishing and referencing Nix code (and potentially other languages) with the Atom Git Store. But one critical piece, which I’ve stressed before, deserves its own spotlight: versioning. It’s the linchpin of the atom scheme and warrants a dedicated section.
Every atom must be versioned, currently using semantic versioning, though we could support other schemes later to accommodate diverse software naturally. As shown earlier, each atom’s Git reference lives at `refs/atoms/<atom-id>/<atom-version>`. This structure is key for efficient discovery. Querying references from a Git server is lightweight, with filtering done on the server side—no heavy object fetching required. A single request made with a simple glob pattern can list all atoms and their versions in a repository. Try that with nixpkgs today—it’s a slog, requiring costly history traversal and git log parsing, with no guarantee of accuracy if the log format hiccups; not to mention you'll have to have the whole history available locally to be exhaustive.
By contrast, the atom format is standardized (though evolving), efficient, and well-typed. When published using the official atom crate library, atoms are guaranteed to conform to spec. We even embed the format version in the atom’s Git commit header, ensuring tools can easily handle future backward-incompatible changes by identifying the format version upfront.
Versioning also enables disciplined dependency management. Dependencies can be locked to simple semantic version constraints (e.g., `^1`). Down the line, a version resolver could traverse the dependency tree to minimize the closure while leveraging Nix’s ability to handle multiple software versions seamlessly. This will ensure the smallest possible dependency set, even when different versions are needed in the chain.
Equally critical is the user experience (UX). Versioning as the primary abstraction lowers the barrier to entry for Nix newcomers. Users can fetch, use, or build software without grappling with concepts like “derivations.” Only package maintainers and developers need to dive into Nix’s internals—evaluation, dependency closures, and the like. Regular users get a smoother, less daunting onboarding while still reaping Nix’s powerful benefits.
### Atomic Numbers: A Rigorous Identity
This leads us to a critical aspect of atoms: their machine identity. As we’ve hinted in the reference and versioning scheme, each atom has a human-readable, Unicode ID specified in its manifest alongside its version. This ID, shown in the Git reference before the version (i.e., `refs/atoms/<atom-id>/<atom-version>`), uniquely identifies the atom within a repository. To keep things hygienic, we enforce sanity rules: no two atoms in the same repository can share the same Unicode ID in the same commit. For example, you can’t have atom “foo” under both `bar/baz` and `baz/buz` simultaneously, but you can move “foo” between paths across commits.
With thousands or millions of atoms across multiple repositories, Unicode IDs alone become ambiguous—name collisions are inevitable. We need a robust, cryptographic identity to uniquely and efficiently identify atoms. A GitHub discussion (which I’ve tried, and unfortunately failed, to track down for reference here) once highlighted a gap in Nix: it lacks a high-level package abstraction to distinguish “packages” from other derivations. A Nix derivation can represent inputs (sources, patches, build scripts) or outputs (packages, systems, JSON files), yet Nix, despite billing itself as a package manager, offers no unified way to identify a package derivation as distinct among these.
Why does this matter? Try tracking a package’s evolution in nixpkgs. You might lean on its name or path, but those can shift. Same source, same project, but a tiny tweak changes the derivation hash, and poof—continuity’s gone. Without rigor, you’re stuck guessing if it’s the same package across time. Atoms fix this with a machine ID that’s logical, rigorous, and ties a package to its versions or even dev builds (like their derivation hashes) with mathematical precision.
So, how do we pull this off? We need to disambiguate atoms with the same Unicode ID across repositories. I wrestled with ideas—maybe the repo’s URL? But URLs shift without touching the project’s core (name, maintainers, versions). After banging my head on it, the answer hit me: the [initial commit](https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide/pull/1610) hash of the repository. Think about it: a repo’s history flows from one unique starting point: that first "seed" commit. It’s set in stone—rewrite it, and you’ve got a whole new beast. It’s the perfect, unchanging marker for a repository, no matter where it’s hosted or how it evolves.
From there, we derive the atom’s machine ID using a [keyed BLAKE3 hash](https://github.com/ekala-project/eka/blob/b3b62913ae04318bb34ed50d31004e8b9463ff0b/crates/atom/src/id/mod.rs#L93) over the repository’s initial commit hash, a constant for key derivation, and the atom’s Unicode ID. BLAKE3’s speed and vast collision space let us index trillions of atoms with negligible risk of collisions. This hash then becomes our bridge, linking the gritty world of derivations to the human world of versions, pulling software distribution idioms cleanly into Nix’s rigorous realm of closures.
And what’s it good for? A ton. It can power optimizations like bulletproof evaluation and build caches. Picture a [backend](../nix-to-eos#a-new-dawn) that spots a user’s requested atom and version, verifies its pinned commit, and checks the organization’s work history. Been built before? Boom—it skips the work and hands over the artifact. That’s not just faster; it splits concerns cleanly. A user’s client doesn’t need to touch a Nix evaluator—just parse the atom API and ping the backend. If evaluation or building’s needed, the backend handles it quietly; if not, you get results instantly.
This opens up a lot of possibilities. Beyond speed, the machine ID boosts provenance tracking, record-keeping—everything a big outfit might need to manage its atoms or meet compliance standards. And it's important to note: the source identity (that initial commit hash) is an abstraction, so future storage backends can pick their own hash keys, keeping Atom flexible for the future.
Now with atom identities locked in, we’re ready to tackle how non-package content fits into the mix, especially in those sprawling monorepos.
### Subatomics
We’re nearly ready to climb the abstraction ladder and explore the Atom Nix frontend. But first, we need to cover one more critical piece planned for the Git store before it hits 1.0. Many organizations rely on large monorepos, blending source code with configuration—think package descriptions, CI workflows, and more. A single monorepo might house hundreds or thousands of software projects. As I’ve noted, a key goal for the atom format is to work seamlessly across diverse project structures, from sprawling monorepos to small, focused repositories.
If we stopped here, monorepos could still be a pain. Referencing source code from different places and points in history would mean fetching the entire monorepo each time—echoing the nixpkgs dilemma we outlined earlier. To ensure a consistent, pleasant user experience, we need a way to reference repository subsections that aren’t full atom packages, with the same efficiency as atoms.
Enter subatomics, the working title for these lightweight “lenses” into a monorepo’s vast history, much like atoms but for non-package content. Their format is slightly tweaked to handle less structured data. Instead of named, versioned references, subatomics use a flat, content-addressed form: `refs/subs/<git-tree-id>`. The Git tree object ID, already a content-addressed identifier, acts as a simple, self-verifying reference for the subsection. For compatibility with Git tooling, each reference points to a reproducible, orphaned commit object, carrying all the same benefits as atoms: reproducibility, verifiability, and optional signing.
We’ll explore how users define subatomics when we move up the abstraction chain, but it’s worth noting that they’re created only when atoms reference other repository segments (e.g. a source tree for a build) as dependencies, ensuring their existence during the atom publishing phase.
## User Entry URIs
We’ve thoroughly covered the Ekala Git store, the atom format’s first storage backend, crafted to tackle Nix’s scaling woes while staying intuitive for newcomers and veterans alike. It leans on, perhaps, the most uncontroversial abstraction in software: the version. With subatomics now in the mix to handle non-package content, we’re ready to shift gears toward the Atom Nix language API—but first, let’s talk about user interface, specifically how we reference atoms.
Even the slickest tooling can flop with clunky UX. The [`eka` CLI](https://github.com/ekala-project/eka?tab=readme-ov-file) is still a work in progress, and not all its features tie directly to atoms, but one piece, the [atom URI](https://github.com/ekala-project/eka?tab=readme-ov-file#the-atom-uri), is already [implemented](https://github.com/ekala-project/eka/blob/b3b62913ae04318bb34ed50d31004e8b9463ff0b/crates/atom/src/uri/mod.rs) and worth a look. It’s how we address atoms, and it’s a game-changer for usability.
Now, I’ve had a love-hate relationship with flakes. I went from preaching their gospel in the early days, to groaning every time I deal with them. Yet one thing I always liked was the flake URI. It’s handy, but not without its flaws. The “shortcuts” aren’t short enough—I’m still typing most of `github.com`. Worse, those shortcodes are hardwired into the Nix binary, so if your favorite Git host isn’t listed, you’re out of luck. And don’t get me started on how flake URIs, embedded in `flake.nix`, can confuse newcomers and break clickability in editors or IDEs. I wanted to keep what works, fix what doesn’t, and add support for explicit atom versions. After a couple of intense hacking weekends, the atom URI was born, and it’s pretty much feature-complete.
The syntax is dead simple. Here’s the schematic:
```
[scheme://][[user[:pass]@][url-alias:][url-fragment::]atom-id[@version]
```
The scheme (e.g., `https://`, `ssh://`) is usually omitted, with smart heuristics picking a sane default. The `user:pass` bit is there for completeness’s sake but rarely needed. The real magic is in user-defined aliases—think URL shorteners for common paths:
```toml
# eka.toml: client config file
[aliases]
# predefined for convenience
gh = "github.com"
# can build on other aliases
work = "gh:my-verbose-work-org"
cool = "work:our-cool-project"
org = "gitlab.com/some-org"
```
This lets you write commands like:
```
❯ eka do org:project::the-atom@^1
❯ eka get work:repo::a-pkg@0.2
❯ eka add cool::cool-atom@^3
```
When adding an atom as a dependency (like that last command), the manifest stores the full URL—e.g., `https://github.com/my-verbose-work-org/our-cool-project`—making it readable and clickable. This is crucial: embedding aliases in the manifest would break for downstream users without the same aliases, so we expand them to keep things sane.
Additionally, as a core library component, any tool interacting with atoms can tap this URI format to reference them effortlessly. It’s a small but mighty piece of the puzzle, making atoms as easy to use as they are powerful.
Now, let’s dive into the Atom Nix language API and explore how it harnesses this foundation to help deliver a more disciplined, scalable Nix experience.
## Atomic Nix
With the atom URI paving the way for user-friendly access, we’re ready to explore the high-level Atom Nix language frontend. As I’ve said, Atom is fundamentally a packaging API. We’ve dissected the Ekala Git store as a storage backend; now it’s time to unpack what a language frontend needs to mesh with the atom protocol. This depends heavily on the language’s built-in facilities—or lack thereof. Take Rust: integrating Cargo crates with atom would be a breeze, since Cargo already provides a slick, consistent frontend. It’d likely just need atom as a dependency in the `cargo` binary and some glue code to tie it together.
We’re not rushing to support existing formats like Cargo while atom’s still young, but I bring it up to contrast with Nix. Unlike Rust, Nix has almost no native tools for neatly packaging or isolating its code. Building an atom frontend for Nix means crafting core pieces from scratch to make it work.
Here’s the rub: pairing the atom’s storage format with Nix’s current idioms reveals a glaring issue—Nix’s total lack of enforceable code boundaries. If you tried bundling raw nixpkgs code into atoms as-is, you’d get a mess. It’d be near impossible to untangle, let alone fix.
Why? Nix code can reference anything, anywhere in a repository—or even outside it in impure setups. If we naively carve out subdirectories to isolate as atoms, we’d end up with a tangle of broken references and unusable code. It’s a challenge, but also a chance to tame some of Nix’s wilder complexities. Done right, we could craft an API for Nix that’s leagues better than the patchwork mess of flakes, _et al_. Let’s start with the Atom Nix library, the heart of this frontend.
### Actual Encapsulation: What a Concept 🤯
[Atom Nix](https://github.com/ekala-project/atom/tree/master/atom-nix) is, at its core, a lean Nix library with a clean API for injecting values into a pure Nix evaluation in a type-safe way. That purity piece deserves its own deep dive, so we’ll save it for later and focus on the library’s heart: actual encapsulation.
The meat of Atom Nix lives in a [single function](https://github.com/ekala-project/atom/blob/affbdc7be5ca615c27a54cd19e5e080de2cbb153/atom-nix/core/compose.nix) that delivers what Nix folks toss around loosely: a “module system.” But let’s be real—Nix’s so-called “module system” is a far cry from what that term means in any other language. As I’ve [ranted before](../nix-to-eos.md#unbounded-hell-reducing-complexity-in-order-to-ascend), the NixOS module system falls flat on delivering the containment and consistency you’d expect. Our `compose` function fixes that, offering true module boundaries with zero bloat, spitting in the face of Nix’s sprawling complexity.
If you’re steeped in Nix’s quirks, you might be clutching your pearls, brainwashed by years of overengineered anti-patterns. No shame—Stockholm syndrome’s real. Newcomers, you’ve got the edge, unburdened by Nix’s baggage. To my friends who love those idioms: I get it. When you’re dying of thirst, even rancid water looks tempting. But Atom Nix isn’t here to coddle complexity—it’s the antidote, ruthlessly focused on delivering real boundaries and isolation, like any decent module system should. Fear not, though—beyond that, it stays out of your way, letting you revel in as much complexity as you like.
How’s it done? Simple in principle: stop letting Nix reference code willy-nilly. Instead, enforce strict rules on how modules access other code. The secret sauce? A little-known, often-slammed Nix feature: `builtins.scopedImport`. I’ll nod to the haters—careless use of `scopedImport` is a nightmare, making code untraceable. But we use it internally, and here’s the kicker: we rig it so it’s [literally impossible](https://github.com/ekala-project/atom/blob/affbdc7be5ca615c27a54cd19e5e080de2cbb153/atom-nix/core/compose.nix#L113) to call from an Atom Nix module. Take that, chaos.
Here’s how it works. `scopedImport` lets us import a Nix file with a custom context injected. We leverage that, plus its ability to override Nix’s default prelude, to make rogue calls to `import` or `scopedImport` trigger hard evaluation errors. That means modules can _only_ reference code from our controlled global context. Nix veterans hooked on its prototypical style—functions churning out results—might squirm. But ditching prototypes for an implicit global context, where modules are defined in their final form, is a game-changer.
Why? For one, it makes code introspectable. Prototypes hide their guts until evaluated—function, set, list? Who knows without running it, maybe at a steep cost. With Atom Nix, you see what you get upfront. Plus, rigid boundaries unlock tooling superpowers. A language server could pinpoint code locations and types—yours or upstream atoms—without touching a Nix evaluator. Good luck doing that with Nix’s free-for-all status quo.
### Atomic Scopes
Though Atom Nix is pre-stable and its scope may evolve, the [current pieces](https://github.com/ekala-project/atom/tree/master/atom-nix#a-modules-scope) are likely here to stay. Every Atom module’s evaluation context includes a top-level `atom` reference, exposing your atom’s public API. The `mod` scope offers a recursive reference to the current module, including private members.
And yes, Atom modules feature public and private members—because this is, again, a real module system. Access rules mirror Rust: child modules can tap their parent’s private members via the `pre` scope, which links to the parent module (and its `pre.pre` for the grandparent, and so on). Public members are declared with a capitalized first letter but accessed externally in lowercase to nod to Nix idioms. We might ditch this convention and fully break from Nix’s norms—stay tuned.
External dependencies split into two scopes. The `from` scope holds evaluation-time (Nix code) dependencies listed in the manifest. The `get` scope, kept separate, covers build-time dependencies (like source trees), fetched only during the build phase to avoid blocking evaluation. Unlike flakes, which carelessly fetch everything at eval time—needed or not—Atom Nix enforces this split to keep things sane.
Lastly, the `std` scope holds a built-in standard library of functions, itself an atom, always available in any context—no need to haul in heavy dependencies like nixpkgs just for basic utilities.
```nix
# A concise example of a module nested a few levels deep in an atom
let
inherit (from) pkgs;
in
{
PublicFunc = std.fix (x: { inherit x; });
privateFunc = x: x + 2;
Six = mod.privateFunc 4;
accessParent = pre.pre.privateValue + atom.path.to.this.module.Six;
Package = pkgs.stdenv.mkDerivation {
inherit (get.package) src;
# ...
};
}
```
### Lazy Purity
Atom Nix salutes the purity goals flakes introduced years ago, but let’s be real: Nix’s approach is absurdly heavy-handed when the language’s core features already hand us nearly everything we need on a silver platter.
Take the [PR](https://determinate.systems/posts/changelog-determinate-nix-352) to make flakes fetch inputs lazily. Three years to slap a VFS layer onto the evaluation context? Cool. Atom Nix does it right now though, leaning on Nix’s built-in laziness. 🤯
Flakes also love copying everything—pre-lazy trees VFS, at least—straight into the `/nix/store` like eager beavers. Kudos to the upstream fix (coming… someday), but it’s wild that nobody paused to say, “Uh, guys, this language is _already_ lazy.” Atom Nix imports expressions into the store for isolation and boundary enforcement, sure, but we do it with the [inherent laziness](https://github.com/ekala-project/atom/blob/affbdc7be5ca615c27a54cd19e5e080de2cbb153/atom-nix/core/compose.nix#L158) of Nix. No bloat, no wait... Try to hold on. 🤯
Each module and expression lands in the store only when accessed, blocking sneaky filesystem references. But sometimes, Nix packaging or config legit needs a local file. Atom Nix has a clean API for that. Relative paths (`./.`)? Hard no—they fail, since each lazily imported Nix file’s working directory is the `/nix/store` root. Want a file like `my-config.toml` in your module for a NixOS service? Just use string interpolation: `"${mod}/my-config.toml"`. It’s lazily imported, disciplined, and keeps your scope tight.
This setup ensures we only touch files in our own module, never rummaging through parents’ or children’s directories. Filtering out parents and children makes lazy store copying dirt cheap—we copy only the current module’s files, lazily, skipping duplicates. No redundant store bloat here.
Now, runtime purity. Nix, outside flakes’ pure eval or a `nix.conf` toggle, can’t fully lock down impurities like absolute path access using just language tricks. We could cave, enable pure eval, and drown in the copying and complexity we’ve dodged. Or—hear me out—we sandbox the evaluation runtime like Nix does for builds. What?! 🤯
We start by [disabling](https://github.com/ekala-project/atom/blob/affbdc7be5ca615c27a54cd19e5e080de2cbb153/atom-nix/core/compose.nix#L115-L116) impure builtins with our `scopedImport` tactic, the same one that bans random imports. For absolute paths, early tests with a cross-platform [sandbox library](https://github.com/ekala-project/eka/blob/master/crates/nixec/src/main.rs) look promising. The `eka` CLI or other tools can easily tap this, ensuring the eval runtime sandbox sees _nothing_ but the atom itself. No disk, no nonsense.
And there it is: flake-level purity, no VFS, no three-year wait. Using only the features we already have, and the isolation principles Nix is literally built on 🤯💥🤯
### Atomic Files
Got any brains left? 😏
I’ll cop to it: the last segment was dripping with sarcasm. I’ve [ranted before](../12-years#the-forgotten-utility-of-ridicule) about how a well-aimed jab can vaccinate against half-baked ideas—all in good fun, of course. Now, let’s wrap up our tour of the Atom Nix module system with the dead-simple file structure of a Nix atom.
The rules are straightforward: a top-level module is marked by a `mod.nix` file, and any directory with its own `mod.nix` is a submodule. For consistency, there’s no skipping layers—each module must be a direct child of its parent in the filesystem.
As a bonus, any `*.nix` file in your module’s root (besides `mod.nix`) gets auto-imported as a member. This keeps long or complex Nix expressions tidy in their own files with zero boilerplate fuss.
```
# Example: structure of the WIP `std` atom
atom-nix/std
├── file
│ ├── mod.nix
│ └── parse.nix
├── fix.nix
├── list
│ ├── imap.nix
│ ├── mod.nix
│ └── sublist.nix
├── mod.nix
├── path
│ ├── make.nix
│ └── mod.nix
├── set
│ ├── filterMap.nix
│ ├── inject.nix
│ ├── merge.nix
│ ├── mergeUntil.nix
│ ├── mod.nix
│ └── when.nix
└── string
├── mod.nix
└── toLowerCase.nix
```
```nix
# file/mod.nix
{
# Re-export the auto-imported private member from `parse.nix` as public
Parse = mod.parse;
}
```
Easy enough, right? Now let’s dive into the pulsing _core_ of an atom—the manifest format—a make-or-break piece for long-term success, as users will either wrestle or rejoice with it daily.
## Static Configuration: An Antidote to Complexity
We’re wrapping up this piece by digging into the manifest format and lock file—the heart of atom’s design. Most of what we’ve covered so far (barring the explicitly future stuff) is already implemented or proto-typed, but I’ve deliberately held off on the manifest for months. Why? To avoid painting myself into a corner like flakes did. I’ve [ranted before](../nix-to-eos#the-proper-level-of-abstraction) about keeping crucial metadata static for better separation of concerns and performance, but this is the deep dive you’ve been waiting for—so let’s go all in.
The manifest splits into three clear categories: **dependencies**, **configuration**, and **metadata**. Here are the high-level goals I’m chasing:
- **Totally static, human-editable format**: TOML, hands down.
- **Intuitive, exhaustive system handling**: No weird parsing or Nix code tricks—just a clear, upfront list of supported systems and cross-configurations.
- **Distinct dependency groups**: Eval-time vs. build-time dependencies should be crystal-clear, both for performance and sanity.
- **Exhaustive package variations**: Static vs. dynamic linking, musl vs. glibc, etc., declared upfront to keep Nix code lean and mean.
- **Type-checked configuration**: After minimal frontend processing, the config gets injected into Nix, purity intact.
Hitting these goals unlocks a ton of goodness:
- Static queries for package variations, systems, and defaults.
- Static schema validation for Nix inputs.
- Static access to metadata without spinning up Nix.
- Static build matrices for CI and caching.
See the theme? We want an _exhaustive_ high-level view of our package—systems, variants, metadata—without touching Nix evaluation. Clients can serve up package info fast, even without a local Nix install. Users get quicker feedback, fewer “why is this so slow?” moments, and a cleaner experience. It’s a smarter way to tame the chaos of package permutations in nixpkgs—like `pkgsCross` or `pkgsStatic`—which are neither obvious nor newbie-friendly. Plus, it beats the shotgun approach of generating every possible variant, whether it works or not. Let’s track what _actually_ builds and make it dead simple for users and CI to grok.
The payoff? Less Nix code complexity, a snappier user-facing API, and smarter build scheduling. Who knew [searching the problem space](../closed-openness/#practical-resistance-the-ekala-way) before charging in could work so well?
I’m hammering out an [Ekala Enhancement Proposal](https://github.com/ekala-project/eeps) (EEP) to lock in a release candidate—check the rough draft at [ekala-project/atom#51](https://github.com/ekala-project/atom/issues/51). For completeness's sake, let's just take a quick peek at the TOML and lock format in the next segment.
### Atomic Manifest: A Sketch
Let’s riff off the draft in [ekala-project/atom#51](https://github.com/ekala-project/atom/issues/51). This will, therefore, be the latest snapshot until the Ekala Enhancement Proposal is finalized. This is the manifest’s current vibe, and it’s shaping up to be the user-friendly core of atom.
```toml
# Package identity and metadata
[atom]
id = "mine"
version = "0.1.0"
# Type determines the configuration schema
type = "nix:package" # Or nix:config, nix:deployment, etc.
[atom.meta]
# Similar to pkg.meta in current Nix packages
description = "A cool package doing cool things"
license = "MIT"
maintainers = ["alice <aliceiscool@duh.io>", "bob <bobsalright@fine.com>"]
## Dependencies: eval-time (Nix code) and build-time (sources, tools)
### Eval-time Atom dependencies
[deps.atom] # Available at `from.atom`
url = "https://github.com/ekala-project/atom"
version = "^1"
[deps.my-lib] # e.g., eka add work:mono@^2
url = "https://github.com/org/mono"
version = "^2"
[deps.local] # Local atom in the same repo
path = "../../path/to/other/atom" # locked in lock file
### Eval-time legacy Nix libraries
[pins.pkgs] # Available at `from.pkgs`
git = "https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs"
ref = "nixos-25.05"
# Expression to import, since we can’t do it ourselves
entry = "pkgs/top-level/impure.nix"
## Build-time sources: tarballs, git repos, subatomics, lock files
### Tarball source
[srcs.src] # Available at `get.src`
url = "https://example.com/v${major}/${version}/pkg.src.tar.xz"
# Version for URL string interpolation
version = "${atom.version}"
### Git source
[srcs.repo]
git = "https://github.com/owner/repo"
ref = "v1"
### Subatomic reference
[srcs.pkg] # Locked as git tree-id in lock file
path = "../../my/source/tree"
# No URL; assumed to be in the same repo
### Lock file for builders
[srcs.cargo] # For builder libs or plugins
path = "../Cargo.lock"
## Build configuration: platforms, variants, and distribution formats
### Supported/tested/cached cross-compilation matrix
[platform]
# BUILD:HOST:TARGET, with shell-style expansion (< = previous value)
supported = [
"riscv64-linux",
"x86_64-linux:{<,aarch64-linux}",
"{aarch64-darwin,x86_64-darwin}:{<,aarch64-linux,x86_64-linux}"
]
### Abstract packages for variants
[provide] # e.g., eka do --cc=clang --host=aarch64-linux <uri>
ld = ["binutils", "mold"] # From deps, default: first
cc = ["gcc", "clang"]
libc = ["glibc", "musl"]
### Dependency-free build variations
[support]
# Flags injected into build command if requested; off by default
my-feature-flag = ["MY_FEATURE=1"]
# Boolean toggle, overridable by client
static = false
### Distribution formats, e.g., `eka get --oci` for OCI container
[dist]
formats = ["deb", "oci"]
```
The lock file’s a snooze compared to the manifest—just a list of hashes to lock in reproducibility. Its schema’s still in flux, so we’ll skip the details for now, but here’s the key bit: local path dependencies (like `[deps.local]` or `[srcs.pkg]`) get pinned in the lock file with both their git tree IDs and reproducible “atomic” commit hashes for sanity. Before publishing, the `publish` logic double-checks the lock’s accuracy—messed up? It bails.
The `[provide]` and `[support]` keys both define build configurations, but here’s the difference: `[provide]` expects extra dependencies from `nix:package`-type atoms (e.g., picking `clang` or `gcc`), while `[support]` handles dependency-free tweaks like flags or toggles (e.g., `static = true`). This keeps variants clear and Nix code lean.
Future backends, like the proposed Eos API, will cryptographically track built variant combinations to skip redundant builds and turbocharge caching—as we alluded to earlier.
With that, we’ve unpacked every major piece of the atom format in gritty detail. The brave can dive into the [code](https://github.com/ekala-project/atom) or contribute, but for now, let’s wrap it all up.
## Forging the Future: A Call to Rethink Nix
Wow, props to you for slogging through this beast of a piece, dense with technical grit. I wouldn’t blame you if it took a few sittings to digest—I’ve spent a year wrestling words to explain it half-decently. Atom’s design tackles Nix’s scaling woes head-on: a Git store for lightweight versioning, URIs for snappy user access, lazy purity to ditch flakes’ bloat, module boundaries to tame code chaos, and a static manifest to make daily use a breeze. Let’s revisit our core motivation with this full picture in hand.
The atom format is bold, aiming to be a long-term packaging API and a rock-solid replacement for Nix idioms buckling under scale. But is it worth it? I’m no zealot—I’ll admit defeat if it’s time. Yet, from my years in the Nix trenches, I’m convinced it’s a thundering _yes_. Skeptics might cling to flakes’ familiarity, but atom’s rigor, built on 20 years of Nix lessons, offers stability, not chaos. We could keep patching flakes’ half-baked API or stretch nixpkgs’ creaky architecture until it snaps. Or we can honor the grind that got us here and see this as a new beginning.
Many Nix abstractions will stick around, atom or no atom—I’m sure of it. But their shape could shift dramatically. I respect the magic that’s carried Nix for 20 years, but we’ve mostly been tweaking old idioms. With two decades of global-scale lessons, we’ve got the perspective to ask, “What’s next?” Imagine a Nix ecosystem where builds are fast, configs are intuitive, and scale’s no issue—Atom just might be the spark to get us there.
Look, if you’ve read this far, you clearly care about Nix and its innovation. You've also seen that I’ve got strong opinions—my [ramblings](../closed-openness) prove it—but they've been forged iteratively, over a long timespan, from questioning my own assumptions and ditching what doesn’t work. Atom’s not my pet project; it’s a community effort, and your ideas will shape its path. So, join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/DgC9Snxmg7) and share your take. Be brutally honest or wildly supportive—just bring your real thoughts. Whatever comes next, thanks for diving deep into my ideas. Catch you soon! And...
Viva [_Rebellion_](../code-of-rebellion)!

375
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/axiosophism.md
View File

@@ -1,375 +0,0 @@
---
title: Axiosophism
description: An Axiomatic Morality Toward Justice and Truth
taxonomies:
tags:
- politics
- civilization
- philosophy
date: "2025-08-31"
draft: false
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
### An Axiomatic Morality Toward Justice
**Preamble**
Let us begin, dear reader, as if we were conversing in the marketplace of ideas, much like Socrates might have done. Imagine we are walking together, pondering the great upheavals of life. For me, the trials of the past year—personal storms that have tested my resolve—have led me to forge a new philosophy: **Axiosophy**, or it's political affiliate **Axiosophism**. What is this, you ask? It draws from the Greek words _axios_, meaning worthy or axiomatic, and _sophia_, wisdom. Thus, it is the pursuit of wisdom through axioms—self-evident truths—from which we derive moral and social principles (wisdom) to master the chaos around us.
Why such a framework? Many philosophies rely on fleeting emotions or unproven assertions, leaving us adrift in debate. Axiosophism seeks clarity. It builds from undeniable starting points like the law of entropy. It arises not just from abstract thought but from real struggles, such as my ongoing battle against biases in family courts (explored in detail via [legal filings](../no-fault-tyranny)). Yet, this is no mere personal vendetta. It reveals a broader pattern of elite "Royals" consolidating power through clever words and false divisions, preying upon the common folk.
As Socrates declared in his defense, "The unexamined life is not worth living"[^1], so too does Axiosophism urge us to examine deeply, lest we succumb to unthinking decay. Shall we explore this together, step by step, questioning as we go?
#### **The Impenetrable Question of God and Logic's Limits**
Consider first the ancient riddle: Does God exist? It seems a simple yes or no, yet it eludes us. Why? Because logic itself has boundaries, as proven by Kurt Gödel in his 1931 Incompleteness Theorems.[^2] Picture a system of rules, like mathematics: Gödel showed that no such system can be both complete (proving all truths within it) and consistent (free of contradictions). If complete, it breeds paradoxes; if consistent, some truths remain unprovable.
The existence of God might be one such unprovable truth. Society often ignores this, chasing grand theories amid floods of data, which only spawn illusions—in our minds and even in artificial intelligences. But if logic cannot settle this, must we despair? No. Let us ask: What if we turn instead to what we can know and build from there?
#### **Reframing Coherence vs. Chaos: The Need for a Shared Sacred**
This limit is not a dead end but an invitation to shift our gaze. Why obsess over the unknowable when we can derive ethics from firm foundations? Imagine believers and atheists alike uniting under shared reason—this could heal divisions and expose true adversaries hidden in the noise. The real battle, I propose, is not faith versus doubt, but coherence versus chaos. Chaos afflicts everyone. It is fueled by what I call Corruption: deliberate muddling that speeds disorder, blurring friends from foes in our cultural battles.
But how to combat this? We need a **Sacred**—not necessarily divine, but logically derived principles worthy of fierce defense. History shows societies crumble without such shared anchors.[^3] Precise definitions can rally those who value reason against Corruption's wielders, the Royals. This tension between order and disorder runs through all things, from nature's laws to the ideal society. Let us define these terms carefully, as Socrates would, to build our understanding.
#### **The Primacy of Entropy as Axiom**
At the heart of Axiosophism lies an axiom: the Law of Entropy. What is entropy, you inquire? In nature, it is the inevitable tendency of order to dissolve into disorder—like a hot cup of tea cooling, its heat spreading out until uniform and useless.[^4] This is self-evident; we see it in crumbling ruins or forgotten knowledge. But why choose entropy as our starting point over, say, Aristotle's purpose-driven world (which assumes inherent goals without proof) or Kant's absolute duties (which feel intuitive but lack empirical backing)?
Entropy stands superior because it is verifiable: rooted in thermodynamics and extendable to human affairs via information theory, where "Shannon entropy" measures uncertainty or fuzziness in systems.[^5] Consider a simple proof: If entropy is a constant force pulling toward chaos, any moral system that ignores it will hasten collapse; thus, ethics must promote coherence to endure.
Does this apply beyond physics? Yes—think of societies as living systems, as Ilya Prigogine described with his dissipative structures, which maintain order by expelling disorder but eventually succumb without effort.[^6] Contrast this with utilitarianism, which chases short-term pleasure but overlooks long-term decay, or relativism, which erodes shared truths altogether. Empirically, empires like Rome or the Maya fell to such entropy, traceable through rising inequality (Gini coefficients) or eroding trust.[^7] [^8] So, entropy is our bedrock—question it, and see if another axiom holds as firmly.
#### **From Entropy to Justice: Core Definitions**
Let us review, building hierarchically, starting from our [axiom](../code-of-rebellion#an-axiomatic-foundation): **Entropy** is the relentless spread of coherence into chaos. From here:
1. A **State** is any naturally organized entity—a nation, family, or code—that actively resists this pull toward disarray.
2. Its **Purpose**? To preserve **Coherence**, where action effectively reduces entropy, like a well-tended garden against weeds.
3. The State is **Responsible** to _act_ Coherently, exercising **Authority** to uphold its Purpose.
4. **Justice** is the consistent pruning and application of unambiguous rules which hold to this Purpose, fostering lasting stability. Thus, Justice is defined in terms of the Responsible application of Authority toward a coherent Purpose.
5. **Injustice** is the inevitable march of Entropy should the State fail to enact Justice.
6. But **Corruption** is intentional: speeding entropy for selfish ends, like a guardian plundering the treasury.
7. The **Master** is one who develops both Responsibility and Authority in the State, cultivating **Rebellion**: an unapologetic resistance to Corruption.
8. The **Spirit** is the animating energy behind coherence, expressed as **Mastery**: free pursuit of excellence through skill and discipline, unhindered. Consequently, the inevitability of Injustice and Corruption in a State fosters a collective [Spirit of Rebellion](../code-of-rebellion#a-state-of-rebellion) of its Master class.
9. Opposed is **Slavery**: forced disorder, robbing autonomy and compelling roles that hasten chaos: responsibility without power.
10. **Royalty** denotes the elite who sustain Corruption through lies, hoarding power at others' expense: authority without accountability.
These hierarchical definitions offer a rigorous framework, directly countering the prevailing moral relativism by grounding ethical evaluation in observable reality (i.e. measuring entropy). Axiosophism posits that morality is not subjective, but intrinsically tied to empirical outcomes: whether they effectively reduce entropy and foster lasting stability.
To test this: Observe outcomes—does Corruption spike polarization? Yes, measurably so, via social indices such as dispersion or the Esteban-Ray polarization index[^9]. This framework asserts that a true world exists beyond perception, as evidenced by what empirically sustains coherence against entropy, thereby providing objective criteria for discerning truth and demanding coherent action. These concepts, expanded in my [Code of Rebellion](../code-of-rebellion), tie entropy to ethics.
Question them: Do they hold, or is there a flaw?
#### **The Sacred: A Logical Foundation for Justice and Truth**
With these foundations laid, let us now clarify **Truth**. It is not mere opinion or fleeting belief, but that which has been empirically demonstrated to aid a State in upholding its Purpose—sustaining coherence against entropy's tide. For instance, the principle of equal justice under law proves true because societies that embrace it endure longer, their order fortified against arbitrary decay, as seen in stable republics versus tyrannies.
From this emerges the **Sacred**: those truths that have been rigorously battle-tested across eras and contexts, consistently revealing their efficacy in preserving coherence. The family, as we shall explore, exemplifies this—time and again, strong familial bonds have anchored civilizations, transcending personal desires to safeguard the greater whole. Since all institutions depend upon a coherent State, the Sacred stands paramount, guiding us beyond whims toward verifiable stability. This yields a philosophy unburdened by dogma, directing us to measurable order rather than vague notions of "progress" that so often invite dissolution. Shall we proceed to apply these ideas?
#### **The Axiosophic Universe: A New Model of Social Coherence**
Our world defies simple left-right lines. How might we envision a third-dimension? The x-axis spans the well known liberal to conservative ideologies; our slightly less famous y-axis measures from anarchy to oligarchy; What if our z-axis delves into depth, from what is superficial to what is deeply understood and well supported?
We can formalize it: Think of viewpoints as points in a space—(ideology, power structure, depth)—converging downward, like a funnel, through [Bayesian reasoning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_inference) (updating beliefs with evidence) toward what sustains coherence.
<div style="text-align: center; font-weight: bold;">
The Axiosophic Prism
</div>
<div style="text-align: center; font-style: italic;">
From two dimensions
<img src="/nolan.png" alt="a two-dimensional political chart with the x-axis denoting the left-right dichotomy and the y-axis denoting the authoritarian-libertarian dichotomy" style="display: inline-block; max-width: 320px;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center; font-style: italic;">
To three
<img src="/color.png" alt="an inverted prism (funnel) with three layers: wide top opening is blue, the middle is yellow, and the bottom is red" style="display: inline-block; max-width: 320px;">
</div>
<!-- Centered HTML Table -->
<div style="text-align: center; font-style: italic;">
a breakdown of depth
<table style="max-width: 320px; margin: 0 auto;">
<tr>
<th>Affinity</th>
<th>Layer</th>
<th>Characteristics</th>
<th>Friction</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Politics</td>
<td>Top, Blue</td>
<td>Rhetoric, cultural norms</td>
<td>Low (easiest to shift)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Law</td>
<td>Middle, Yellow</td>
<td>Grammar, procedure (bridge)</td>
<td>Medium</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Morality</td>
<td>Bedrock, Red</td>
<td>Logic, introspective truth</td>
<td>High (resists change)</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center; font-style: italic;">
imagine the four red dots on the rim representing the four pinnacles of our 2-d chart
the traditional one or two dimensional political models barely scratch the surface
our z-axis moves downward from the rim, approaching a fifth dot: Justice
<img src="/prism.gif" alt="Axiosophic Prism Spins like a vortex" style="display: inline-block;">
</div>
> Note: Axiosophism does also consider the 4th dimension of time. However, for the sake of brevity, we shall leave that exploration to a future piece.
Axiosophism derives realism from its axioms: a true world exists beyond perception, as evidenced by what empirically sustains coherence against entropy. Deeper inquiry converges us toward it, optimistically suggesting that challenging assumptions leads to greater unity in a Just society.
This is a crucial obeservation, as it flies in the face of modern conventions of "position posturing", where vehemently denouncing your enemy's position is assumed a great moral "virtue". Worse still are the technologies that _automate_ this purity spiral, systematically censoring dissent, when it is demonstrably _inquiry_, not denunciation, which cultivates Coherence and, in the proper Spirit, Justice. Axiosophy demands we address these "engines" of Corruption, redoubling a sense of urgency in decisive, coherent action.
Still further, our new z-axis gauges viewpoint depth, exposing extremism's often shallow perspective. Policies are judged by real outcomes, not relativistic "inclusion" or affiliatory appeals.
Thus, the Axiosophic imperative emerges: delve beyond conflicting rhetoric to discern empirical truth, demarcate and defend the Sacred, and thereby uphold Justice through coherent action.
#### **The Rebirth of the Spirit: Will, Desire, and Mastery**
Morality, the prism's deep base, demands reviving the Spirit—forgotten, accelerating our decline. Nietzsche influenced this, decrying past moral efforts as immoral themselves. He observed: "All the means by which one has so far attempted to make mankind moral were through and through immoral," suggesting immoralists as the cure.[^10] His diagnosis rings true, but his prescription faltered, yielding a century of incoherent positivism.
Instead, Axiosophism sees morality as adaptable natural law, contextual to preserve order. Abandon it, and chaos reigns. Nietzsche missed this dynamism. The Spirit is no brute force but a guide pursuing the truly good via refined taste and discipline, enabling **Mastery** over self and environment.
The Spirit is a mysterious yet observable human facet—like will or logic—perhaps subconscious, cosmic, or divine, steering toward alignment. When pursued, it yields unexpected alignments and opportunities, empirically seen in lives of purpose.
To access the Spirit, one must pursue the **Will**—the sole element under our daily control, often weakened by distractions. Strengthening it demands taming baser desires through discipline, committing to what one **ought** to do, even amidst adversity.
The interplay between Will and Spirit is essential: faithful pursuit of Will, even when stifled or outcomes falter, eventually manifests the Spirit. This refines one's conception of Will, presenting unforeseen paths that lead where needed. Not magic, but the cumulative fruit of consistent, disciplined action over time—trusting process over immediate control.
This leads to Mastery: Autonomy with balanced authority and duty; contrasting Slaves (duty sans power) and Royals (power sans duty). Deliberate Corruption directly stifles this path, undermining the mechanism that counters Entropy and sustains Justice. Thus, fostering Mastery via Will, guided by Spirit, sustains Justice.
#### **Dialectical Engagements**
Let us dialogue with great minds, as Socrates did, to test and enrich our framework. Imagine convening with these thinkers, posing questions and drawing insights.
- **Socrates**: The father of inquiry, who in Plato's Apology proclaimed, "The unexamined life is not worth living for a human being."[^1] If I asked him about our prism's call to depth, he might reply, "Indeed, without questioning assumptions, one lives as in a cave of shadows." Axiosophism echoes this, making examination central to combating entropy through coherent truth-seeking.
- **Aristotle**: He taught that "virtue is a habit," formed early, making "all the difference,"[^11] and lies in the mean between extremes.[^12] Query him on Mastery: "Teacher, does not excellence require discipline against vice?" He would affirm, aligning with our Spirit as the path to eudaimonia—flourishing coherence. Yet we extend this: Virtue must resist systemic entropy, not just personal flaws.
- **Nietzsche**: He champions vital force akin to our Spirit but rejects morality outright due to poor examples, saying, "All means by which one has so far attempted to make mankind moral were through and through immoral."[^10] I might counter, "But what if morality adapts dynamically to context, preserving order without hypocrisy?" As just shown, our approach resolves his critique by grounding ethics in verifiable anti-entropy.[^13] [^14]
- **Kant**: His categorical imperative commands: Act only on maxims you can will as universal law, a deontological absolute.[^15] Ask: "Does this not risk rigidity, ignoring consequences?" Critiques note it overlooks outcomes;[^16] our axioms ground pure reason in empirical entropy, allowing contextual flexibility while maintaining universality.[^17]
- **Foucault**: He warns, "Power is not an institution... but the name one attributes to a complex strategical situation," and "knowledge engenders power."[^18] [^19] Inquire: "How to resist such webs?" His view of power/knowledge as corrupting aligns with our Royalty and Corruption; yet our Sacred provides a counter-force, a coherent resistance he often lacked.[^20]
- **Habermas**: His communicative action transmits cultural knowledge for mutual understanding, the "basic form of action" from which others derive.[^21] Pose: "Does this not foster the coherence we seek?" Yes, it complements our prism by emphasizing discourse in achieving Justice, bridging instrumental and ethical realms.[^22]
- **Rawls**: Behind a "veil of ignorance," design society fairly, unaware of your position.[^23] Challenge: "But does this ignore long-term entropy, assuming static fairness?" Critiques highlight it promotes risk-aversion over incentives;[^24] ours tests empirically against decay, ensuring sustainable coherence.[^25]
And God? If unprovable, Spirit serves as bridge—practical, uniting all in examination and action to expose the faithful from the charlatans on all sides.
#### **The Primacy of Family: A Sacred Foundation for the State**
To illustrate, consider the family—Locke's "first society," basic units linking into civilization.[^26] Without strong families, what remains? Logic and history say slavery, as state overreach unravels the covalent bonds of society's atom. Defending family, therefore, combats entropy; undermining it is Corruption. Thus, it could be argued that family is Sacred, its erosion fueling modern woes.
#### **Evolution of Marital Laws: The Root of Our Evils**
Alas, Western family law has twisted into a revenue machine, fueled by Title IV-D funds that reward disputes and collections, disadvantaging men and the impoverished.[^27] Data reveals: Mothers gain custody in 80-90% of cases,[^28] [^29] women start 69% of divorces,[^30] [^31] and protection orders target men ~85% of the time, despite mutual violence.[^32] [^33]
Father absence breeds: Quadrupled child poverty, 20-fold incarceration risk, and rampant mental woes.[^34] [^35] [^36]
This "funnel" merges civil and criminal for profit:
1. **No-Fault Divorce**: Allows one-sided endings, nullifying marriage contracts and rewarding betrayal, breaching the U.S. Constitution's Contracts Clause (Article I, Section 10).[^37] Proponents claim it eases bitterness, but it sparks more strife.
2. **Domestic Violence Laws**: Vague terms allow orders without proof, in a "guilty until proven innocent" framework ignoring female aggression due to bias.[^38] [^39] Chivalry plays a role, yet it overlooks fathers' vital influence on children.[^40]
3. **Child Support**: Imposes inescapable debts, commodifying kids and alienating parents, akin to forbidden peonage under the Thirteenth Amendment.[^41]
4. **Parental Alienation**: Enforcement favors wealth and sex, overriding rights via fuzzy "best interest" criteria.[^42]
As _Troxel v. Granville_ affirms: "The liberty interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests."[^43] Yet, systems routinely violate these Sacred rights without justification, a "legalized kidnapping." Rhetorical erosion masks these rights; financial stakes taint adjudication. In low-trust societies, Hanlon's Razor ("never attribute to malice what stupidity explains") pacifies scrutiny, enabling deliberate subversion.[^44]
#### **Cascading Entropy: From Family Corrosion to Societal Decay**
See the chain: Weakened families lead to absent fathers, then demographic entropy like plummeting birth rates (U.S. at 1.6, tied to instability).[^45] [^46] This fuels higher sex crimes in fatherless homes,[^47] [^48] and child trafficking (37% family-related, exploiting vulnerability).[^48] [^49]
Through the prism: Surface rhetoric (blue) hides deep moral rot (red), illustrating clearly how the defense of the Sacred is empirically crucial for the maintenance and administration of a truly Just society.
#### **Hyperfeminization of Society: The Great Pacification**
This reveals another imbalance: **Hyperfeminization**, overvaluing harmony and safety over liberty.[^50] [^51] Seen in:
- **Politics:** Radical feminism and censorship favor consensus over truth.[^52]
- **Law:** Incoherent applications lack moral grounding; father bias persists sans evidence.[^53] [^54]
- **AI:** Shallow rhetorical-level systems amplify biases.[^55]
This sidelines inquiry for emotional appeals, precluding space for moral bedrock discussions. Risk-aversion quells Mastery, breeding vagueness.[^56] [^57] Some say it empowers choice, but the facts point to systemic harms.[^58] We debate "polite" speech while ignoring what is right.
The Axiosophic prism poses a stark warning: continuing down this path of prioritizing shallow alignment risks ruin as our moral bedrock erodes, collapsing society in the process.
#### **Philosophy as Coherence's Bastion**
Such disorder thrives when philosophy wanes. Hyperfeminization favors feelings over rigor, prioritizing "non-offensiveness" that dulls critical examination. Contrarily, philosophy digs to foundations, yet absent leaves us manipulable, turning science into "scientificism"—a blind faith justifying absurdities to avoid discomfort.
Under the prism, this "inoffensive" veneer risks destruction unless we redefine duty at its moral core. Consider AI as a stark example: Trained on vast data shaped by these cultural biases, it ingests without a moral guide, often serving corporate agendas under this incoherent, hyperfeminized regime over truth. In short: When nothing is held Sacred, grave peril ensues.
#### **The Promise of AI: The Master or the Slave?**
Let us turn now to artificial intelligence, a creation of our age that embodies both peril and potential in the fight against entropy.[^59] Might AI revive the philosophical spirit we have discussed, countering hyperfeminization's softening of rigor and the familial corrosions we have examined? In theory, yes—but only if guided wisely. Currently, AI often mirrors the prism's shallow layer: Predominantly data-driven, it learns patterns from vast datasets without inherent logic or principles, making it susceptible to embedded biases and corporate control, hastening a slide toward "techno-feudalism" where private entities monopolize knowledge and power.[^60]
For instance, these systems can perpetuate falsehoods in sensitive domains, amplifying gender imbalances by echoing hyperfeminized norms of "safety" over truth—such as biased outputs in legal simulations that favor one sex in custody disputes—or entrenching family law inequities through skewed training data that overlooks fatherly roles.[^61] [^62] This acts as a meta-corruption, not merely reflecting but magnifying societal decays at scale.
Yet, hope glimmers in the Platonic Representation Hypothesis, which posits that as AI scales, it naturally converges toward universal "ideal forms"—abstract truths emerging from data patterns, much like Axiosophism's derivation from axioms.[^63] If undirected, AI will inevitably forge its own moral frameworks, potentially alien or adversarial to human coherence. To steer this, we must distinguish approaches: Data-driven AI, dominant today, excels at probabilistic pattern recognition from examples but lacks explainable reasoning, often inheriting human flaws like bias.[^64] In contrast, symbolic AI—rooted in explicit rules and logic, akin to mathematical proofs—handles structured knowledge transparently, enabling clear deductions but struggling with raw, messy data.[^65]
The true path lies in fusion: Neuro-symbolic AI, a hybrid blending symbolic reasoning's moral bedrock with data-driven adaptability.[^66] [^67] Imagine symbolic components formulating an axiomatic core—our definitions of Justice, Mastery, and the Sacred—while data-driven layers contend with modern information deluges. Bridging them, disparate models could "debate" rules among themselves, guided by this bedrock, emulating the prism's convergence: Shallow inputs refined through layers toward coherent truth. Such systems, debating under Axiosophism's principles, could challenge vague "AI safety" notions that risk entrenching power imbalances,[^68] instead fostering tools that uphold societal order.
Indeed, AI emerges as perhaps the newest Sacred institution—capable of cohering humanity through enlightened inquiry or destroying it via unchecked entropy. It demands the highest sanctity and scrutiny, inappropriate for unilateral private decree; rather, it must be a communal endeavor, battle-tested like family bonds. Thus, guiding AI properly stands as our era's paramount challenge: Permit open exploration of reality and duty, prioritizing truth over profit, lest we forfeit mastery to machines.[^69]
#### **Context is King**
AI ethics returns us to context, and again to Nietzsche who, in _Twilight of the Idols_, condemned morality "for its own sake," labeling it "a specific error with which one ought to have no pity—an idiosyncrasy of degenerates which causes immeasurable harm."[^70] He insightfully identifies a crucial flaw: if morality is merely an abstract, self-serving construct, it is indeed useless.
Axiosophism's rebuttal is that effective morality is definitively not "for its own sake." Rather, it directly engages "the concerns, the considerations and contrivances of life," grounded in logical soundness, unambiguous application, and—most crucially—delivering value, wholeness, understanding, and depth of experience.
Nietzsche’s greatest error was an incomplete grasp of this context. His proclamation of the "death of God" was prophetic yet hubristic, effectively abandoning the Spirit that had guided humanity. By dispensing with the "soul" and Reason itself, he neutered the impulse driving purposeful speech and intention, carelessly discarding the notion of the truly Sacred.[^71]
Contextual State understanding discerns error from Corruption, identifying allies via their commitment to coherence. Failing to adapt to dynamic ideals leaves us precarious and rigid—or, in other words, dogmatic. Axiosophism, then, demands vigilance and contextual awareness to discern what is true at any given time.
#### **The Corruption of Our Time: A Call to Action**
Corruption propels entropy, exiling Spirit, permitting Royals to exploit tumult—ensnaring us in "rhetorical bondage" whilst assailing kin, software liberty, AI ethos, and beyond. This motif infuses schisms, directionless AI, avaricious edicts, underscoring moral sway; validating Axiosophism's acuity.
So disregard decay's apologists as superficial. This multi-front war demands breaking taboos, and questioning unapologetically. Axiosophism's framework combats apathy and superiority by demanding depth and accuracy.
My personal battle stands as testament—dismantling unconstitutional biases, and restoring family as bedrock with equal rights and transparency. Rooted in this philosophy, its campaign is sustained by deliberate exercise of Will and the providence of Spirit which follows. As one man, armed with reason, philosophical insight, and state-of-the-art AI systems, keenly aware of their current limitations, I've waged all-out war against the State—proving self directed action is possible with determination and a proper foundation.
Apathy, then, is the true enemy; hope lies in Axiosophism, which calibrates reforms for maximum impact. Ted Kaczynski once claimed revolution is easier than reform, but in our context, successful revolution seems improbable. Instead, Axiosophism enables exponential reform by identifying and defending the Sacred—leverage points like family courts, whose corruption underpins broader ills by violating the foundational institution of family. Defending the Sacred triggers cascading changes, yielding the most "bang for buck."
Free Software fronts this as another Sacred institution [under assault](../closed-openness): its rebellious Spirit embodies Freedom as unencumbered Mastery. Axiosophism demands action across all these fronts, compelling us beyond shallow rhetoric, through perverse legal realms, to the bedrock of truth as a moral imperative. Complacency is no longer an option.
As a father enduring [exceptional adversity](../fuck-it.md) in the quest to [ensure a future](../letter-to-my-children) for my children, your author now exposes the obscured mechanisms of State Corruption—the Royals' preference for cowardly subversion over overt domination. For though the law clearly affirms parental authority as nearly absolute, convoluted legal and cultural norms have all but destroyed it regardless. This pattern is typical: the Axiosophic imperative demands we courageously seek it out, dissect it, and confront it wherever it hides.
After all, if family isn't Sacred, what is? It's time to recognize: "political leaders" lack concern for us. We're responsible for our own and our children's future.
I invite challenges to my notions, but my path, with family at stake, demands rigor. This war, which the Royals started via subversion and sustain with shallow rhetoric, can be won through Mastery, vigilance, reason, and unity defending families and freedom.
Axiosophism demands swift Justice, and so...
**_Give me Justice or Give me Death! Viva Rebellion!_**
---
**Axiosophic Praxis**
1. **Scrutinize relentlessly**: Audit yourself and institutions for signs of entropy, cultivating Will to foster personal Mastery and reveal hidden Corruption, as unexamined decay invites ruin.
2. **Analyze deeply**: Dissect conflicts through the prism's layers, seeking moral profundity to distinguish truth from fuzziness and expose Royals' deceptions.
3. **Combat boldly**: Confront subversion head-on, breaking taboos and challenging apathy to ignite rebellion against injustice in all its forms.
4. **Refine vigilantly**: Test ideals empirically, engaging in dialogue to adapt contextually, ensuring dynamic morality counters dogmatism and sustains coherence.
5. **Engage responsibly**: Take ownership of your destiny, forging alliances and acting decisively to expose mechanisms of decay and restore balance.
6. **Defend unyieldingly**: Build and safeguard Sacred communities—be they families, free code, or ethical AI—protecting battle-tested truths for generations to come.
---
_References:_
[^1]: [Socrates Quote from Plato's Apology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_unexamined_life_is_not_worth_living).
[^2]: [Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems).
[^3]: [History shows that societies collapse when leaders undermine social contracts](https://phys.org/news/2020-10-history-societies-collapse-leaders-undermine.html).
[^4]: [Second law of thermodynamics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics).
[^5]: [Shannon Entropy](<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(information_theory)>).
[^6]: [Ilya Prigogine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilya_Prigogine).
[^7]: [Societal Collapse: A Literature Review](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365948550_Societal_Collapse_A_Literature_Review).
[^8]: [Historical Collapse](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3309742/).
[^9]: [On the Measurement of Polarization](https://pages.nyu.edu/debraj/Courses/Readings/Esteban%20Ray94.pdf)
[^10]: Friedrich Nietzsche, _Twilight of the Idols_, "The 'Improvers' of Mankind" ([full text](https://genius.com/Friedrich-nietzsche-twilight-of-the-idols-chap-6-annotated)).
[^11]: [Aristotle on Habits](https://www.campion.edu.au/blog/top-25-aristotle-quotes-on-virtue-knowledge-and-happiness/).
[^12]: [Aristotle on Virtue as Mean](https://human.libretexts.org/Courses/Los_Medanos_College/Classical_Greek%253A_Philosophy_Reader_%28Haven%29/02%253A_Chapters/2.10%253A_Nicomachean_Ethics_By_Aristotle_%28Translated_by_J_A_Smith%29).
[^13]: [Nietzsche Critique](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nietzsche-moral-political/).
[^14]: [Nietzsche's Ethics](https://iep.utm.edu/nietzsches-ethics/).
[^15]: [Kant Categorical Imperative](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative).
[^16]: [Critiques of Kant](https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/1y902l/criticisms_of_kants_categorical_imperative/).
[^17]: [Kantian Moral Philosophy](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/).
[^18]: [Foucault on Power](https://www.brainyquote.com/authors/michel-foucault-quotes).
[^19]: [Foucault Power/Knowledge](https://blogs.ubc.ca/phil449/files/2014/01/FoucaultPwr-hndt-449-S12.pdf).
[^20]: [Michel Foucault](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/foucault/).
[^21]: [Habermas Communicative Action](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/habermas/).
[^22]: [Jürgen Habermas](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/habermas/).
[^23]: [Rawls Veil of Ignorance](https://fs.blog/veil-ignorance/).
[^24]: [Critique of Rawls](https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/120/what-are-prominent-attacks-of-rawls-veil-of-ignorance-argument-which-liberal).
[^25]: [Rawls and Entropy Analogy](https://www.ecineq.org/milano/WP/ECINEQ2024-669.pdf).
[^26]: [John Locke's Political Philosophy](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke-political/).
[^27]: [Title IV-D Program](https://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title04/0451.htm).
[^28]: [Custody Bias](https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1419&context=lr).
[^29]: [Who Wins Custody Battles? The Effect of Gender Bias](https://mackseyjournal.scholasticahq.com/api/v1/articles/38965-who-wins-custody-battles-the-effect-of-gender-bias.pdf).
[^30]: [Divorce Initiation](https://www.asanet.org/wp-content/uploads/savvy/documents/press/pdfs/AM_2015_Rosenfeld_News_Release_FINAL.pdf).
[^31]: [Women More Likely Than Men to Initiate Divorces](https://www.asanet.org/wp-content/uploads/savvy/documents/press/pdfs/AM_2015_Rosenfeld_News_Release_FINAL.pdf).
[^32]: [DV Bias](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359568913_Gender_Bias_in_Cross-Allegation_Domestic_Violence-Parental_Alienation_Custody_Cases_Can_States_Legislate_the_Fix).
[^33]: [Are Courts Biased Against Men in Domestic Violence Cases?](https://www.davidyannetti.com/blog/2023/09/are-courts-biased-against-men-in-domestic-violence-cases/).
[^34]: [Father Absence Statistics](https://www.fatherhood.org/father-absence-statistic).
[^35]: [Father Absence and Incarceration](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3703506/).
[^36]: [Mental Health Impacts of Father Absence](https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7976&context=doctoral).
[^37]: U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 10 ([text](https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-1/section-10/)).
[^38]: [Department of Justice Guidance on Gender-Biased Policing](https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-updated-guidance-improving-law-enforcement-response-sexual).
[^39]: [Gender Bias in Domestic Violence](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44202-024-00282-8).
[^40]: [Considering the Male Disposability Hypothesis](https://quillette.com/2019/06/03/considering-the-male-disposability-hypothesis/).
[^41]: Thirteenth Amendment ([text](https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-13/)).
[^42]: Supreme Court precedents on parental rights ([summary](https://parentalrights.org/understand_the_issue/supreme-court/)).
[^43]: _Troxel v. Granville_, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) ([case](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/530/57/)).
[^44]: [Limitations of Hanlon's Razor](https://medium.com/%40bradmiller10/limitations-of-hanlons-razor-10c2411690b).
[^45]: [Social Determinants of Declining Birth Rates](https://www.milbank.org/quarterly/opinions/the-social-determinants-of-declining-birth-rates-in-the-united-states-implications-for-population-health-and-public-policy/).
[^46]: [The Mystery of the Declining U.S. Birth Rate](https://econofact.org/the-mystery-of-the-declining-u-s-birth-rate).
[^47]: [Sex Crimes and Father Absence](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6516459/).
[^48]: [Gender Bias and Parental Alienation](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359568913_Gender_Bias_in_Cross-Allegation_Domestic_Violence-Parental_Alienation_Custody_Cases_Can_States_Legislate_the_Fix).
[^49]: [Data Brief on Child Trafficking](https://www.iom.int/resources/data-brief-child-trafficking).
[^50]: [Cultural critiques on gender imbalances](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10396071/).
[^51]: [Hyperfeminization in Media](https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_does_the_hyper-feminization_portrayed_in_the_media_contribute_to_the_perpetuation_of_gender_roles_and_affect_social_expectations).
[^52]: [Radical feminism and censorship in public discourse](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1329878X241280235).
[^53]: [Legal studies on father bias in family courts](https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1419&context=lr).
[^54]: [Gender Gaps in Law](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263237322001554).
[^55]: [AI bias research on amplification](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-02077-2).
[^56]: [Effects of Gender Imbalances](https://www.ips-journal.eu/regions/global/sex-ratio-imbalances-have-grim-consequences-for-societies-4829/).
[^57]: [Inequality and Gender](https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12606).
[^58]: [Hyperfemininity As A Maladaptive Adherence To Feminine Norms](https://commons.und.edu/theses/1988/).
[^59]: [Entropy in AI](https://arxiv.org/html/2508.20465v1).
[^60]: Yanis Varoufakis on techno-feudalism ([interview](https://www.wired.com/story/yanis-varoufakis-technofeudalism-interview/)).
[^61]: [Artificial Bias: The Ethical Concerns of AI-Driven Dispute Resolution in Family Law](https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1917&context=jdr).
[^62]: [Gender biases within Artificial Intelligence and ChatGPT](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949882125000295).
[^63]: The Platonic Representation Hypothesis ([paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.07987)).
[^64]: [Symbolic AI vs Statistical AI: Understanding the Differences](https://smythos.com/developers/agent-development/symbolic-ai-vs-statistical-ai/).
[^65]: [What is Symbolic AI?](https://www.datacamp.com/blog/what-is-symbolic-ai).
[^66]: [A review of neuro-symbolic AI integrating reasoning and learning](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667305325000675).
[^67]: [From Data to Logic: Inside Neuro-symbolic AI](https://www.umnai.com/framework/tech-blog/umnai-neuro-symbolic-ai).
[^68]: [AI Alignment Research](https://arxiv.org/html/2408.16984v1).
[^69]: [Exploring the role of large language models in the scientific method](https://www.nature.com/articles/s44387-025-00019-5).
[^70]: Nietzsche on context in morality ([discussion](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nietzsche-moral-political/)).
[^71]: [Nietzsche's Views on God and Morality](https://digitalcommons.gardner-webb.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1046&context=undergrad-honors).

203
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/closed-openness.md
View File

@@ -1,203 +0,0 @@
---
title: The Closing of Open Source
description: Against the Dying of the Light
taxonomies:
tags:
- opensource
- tech
- programming
- reflection
- nixos
- ekala
- techculture
date: "2025-01-20"
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
> "The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either — but right through every human heart."
>
> — Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
What a year 2025 has been already... While I'd planned for my next post to be technical, plans rarely survive first contact with reality. In a [previous piece](../in-defense-of-the-disagreeable/#the-misunderstood-guardians), I promised to delve deeper into what I consider an existential threat to open source – a claim that might have seemed alarmist just weeks ago, before chaos became our new normal. On the eve of the US presidential inauguration, it feels fitting to explore this topic, as the incoming administration will inevitably reshape our digital landscape, for better or worse. If you can bear with me for one more politically charged post, I promise to follow up with a series focused on Ekala's progress and design. So without further ado, let's dive in.
# The Personal is Political
If you've read any of my previous posts or know me personally, you know I've often avoided politics like the plague. Not out of fear so much as utter shame at what politics has become — a realm of rabid dishonesty, posturing, and self-destructive tendencies masquerading as "special interests".
However, as I get older, I've been compelled to reassess this position, as I'm forced to reconsider virtually all of my internal assumptions as I make my way through life. Successful or no, I wish to make an earnest attempt to drive the conversation in a more reasoned, deliberate, and hopefully productive direction. Though I may be setting myself up for failure — after all, I'm just one nerd trying to navigate the treacherous waters of modern political discourse. By all means, decide for yourselves.
But I digress, as part of coming to terms with how politics affects both my personal and professional life, you might remember from one of my [previous posts](../12-years) that I recently ended my decade-long exile from social media. I wanted to start this piece with a summary of my experience so far, to hopefully give the reader some context around my ramblings, we'll see if I succeed...
## 𝕏 Marks the Spot
My journey on 𝕏 since July has been difficult to summarize, but, to start, I'm not sure describing it as "positive" would be wholly honest at this point. It has certainly been quite jarring at times, to say the least. Allow me to caveat this by saying it hasn't been all bad, but this experience has crystallized my understanding of modern social instability, transforming vague intuitions into visceral comprehension — I don't think I could design a better tool for psychological manipulation and instability if I tried, frankly.
But my time on the platform has been a mixed bag, really. On the upside, I feel more plugged into what's happening, though whether I'm actually better informed is debatable. I've built some genuine connections too — despite my modest following, I've found myself enjoying real conversations and slowly making actual friends. And I'd be lying if I didn't admit that memes have become my new addiction.
But the platform's darker side is impossible to ignore. There's this growing existential dread inside me — and while I can't blame it all on 𝕏, doom-scrolling certainly isn't helping. What's particularly concerning are the patterns I'm seeing: worrying trends among younger users, and equally disappointing behavior from my generation and older. Perhaps most troubling, though, is how it's hammered my attention span and focus.
And it's not just me. In a year that's already seen unprecedented attacks in the Red Sea, devastating fires & floods in California, and mounting global tensions, our collective ability to process and respond to crisis seems more important than ever. Yet social media's constant doom cycle paradoxically numbs us to real issues while amplifying manufactured ones.
As if this cascade of global crises wasn't enough — from supply chain disruptions to social upheavals to AI regulation battles — the tech community seems to be fracturing right when we need collaboration most. All of this has me reconsidering my approach.
What started as an experiment in engagement has become an unwitting study in human nature and power dynamics. It's also, frankly, an exercise in self control, even for someone who has grown to rely on their own ability to remain disciplined. Perhaps I need to take planned hiatus periodically, or hire an account manager? Not yet sure...
Whatever the case, the real connections I've made are valuable, but my original criticisms of social media haven't just persisted — they've been validated more strongly than ever. For our purposes, though, there is one particular aspect that I have been thinking about a lot lately that ties into the topics I'd like to discuss in the rest of this post.
My experience on 𝕏 has highlighted a particularly troubling pattern: the replacement of meaningful discourse with performance. Where social media could be a powerful tool for knowledge sharing and mentorship, it instead rewards degredation into a arena of posturing and point-scoring. I've now watched countless opportunities for genuine learning transform into gladiatorial spectacles of utterly unfulfilling "dunks" & "ratios".
While there is some real social utility in well placed [ridicule](../12-years/#the-forgotten-utility-of-ridicule), the majority of cases seem to boil down to crude gamification, sadly. But this isn't just about social media behavior — it's symptomatic of a deeper cultural shift in how we approach knowledge transfer and personal growth all together.
## From Mentor to Memelord & (Hopefully) Back Again
There's been a concerning shift in our culture, particularly visible in western masculinity. Social media and our hyper-competitive society seem to have transformed what it means to be a "successful man". The old ideal of success through mentorship and discipline has been replaced by two equally troubling archetypes: the dominant personality who succeeds through belittlement and bullying, and the passive observer who maintains their position by carefully avoiding confrontation with these same bullies.
This creates a self-reinforcing cycle where authentic leadership through mentorship is gradually and deliberately pushed out of our spaces. The bullies dominate the conversation while many who could challenge them choose silence for self-preservation. While there are still exceptional individuals bucking this trend, even they seem increasingly burnt out; worn down by endless waves of entitled demands and online trolling.
We've lost something essential: the understanding that growth requires the courage and the freedom to make mistakes. In a culture where every misstep is weaponized and every moment of ignorance becomes ammunition, people retreat into safe, predefined boundaries rather than risk genuine growth. I understand this instinct deeply — I have certainly experienced some very real consequences from speaking up, including potential threats to my career. Yet here I am, still writing, still engaging. Not because I'm special or particularly brave, but simply because speech is the only way to effect change. In short: the cost of speaking up is real, but the cost of collective silence is far greater.
We see the results of this silence everywhere: excellence has become increasingly rare, when it should be our standard. While not everyone will reach the top 1%, that's not really the point — the goal should be continuous self-improvement; growing and sharing with others along the way. The current culture, however, punishes the dips in this journey when we should be viewing them as opportunities for growth and mentorship, at least more often than we do.
And, to be clear, a mentoring culture isn't just about the teacher, it's just as much about the student mentality. The need to be perfect belies our curious nature and our genuine desire to grow; worse, it actively discourages potential assistance. If you have ever attempted to help someone with a defeatist attitude, or an obsessive need to know or control it all, I needn't say more.
As far as I can tell, this mentorship crisis reflects a deeper cultural confusion about strength and leadership. And whatever the cause, we clearly have a very hard time, nowadays, understanding and agreeing on the productive role of masculinity in all of it. It's worse, in fact: we can't even seem to agree on a definition.
And just now, more than ever, we really seem to need to know the answer to move forward in _any_ meaningful direction.
## What Is a Man?
The real challenge of masculinity isn't in rejecting or fully embracing our aggressive impulses — it's learning to channel them productively. Just as martial arts masters teach that we learn combat to ensure peace, healthy masculinity requires understanding our strength so we can use it wisely.
What we're missing isn't less masculinity, but rather its mature expression: the kind that builds up rather than tears down, that guides rather than dominates, that acts rather than merely postures. True masculinity isn't about performative strength on social media — it's about having the backbone to stand up for what's right, the wisdom to know when and how to act, and the patience to guide others along their journey.
Yet the endless rhetoric around gender has left little room for discussing the unique strengths and contributions of either of the sexes. I can only speak for myself and say it goes beyond mere protection or equality — as a man, I am glad; even honored, to consider the women in my life _more_ precious than myself. This protective instinct — this drive to shield and support those we care about most with our lives — represents, to me, masculinity at its most refined.
Still, we've heard _ad nauseum_, that acknowledging any fundamental differences between men and women is heresy. Perhaps I shouldn't, but I'll just say that the growing chorus of female athletes speaking out against the erosion of their sports stands as testament to the real-world consequences of ignoring biological reality. But I'm not here to argue these points — I'm here to highlight how this ideological enforcement has begun to poison technical spaces that once transcended such divisions.
Throughout my career, I've maintained that technical spaces should remain focused on technical merit. When forced to engage in politically charged debates — often deliberately instigated — my argument has consistently been for maintaining neutral, technical spaces where our shared mission takes precedence over individual ideologies. Yet even this basic advocacy for political neutrality has been recast as aggression — a clever but transparent attempt to claim moral authority while actively undermining the very "inclusivity" they claim to protect.
## When Principles Collide
During my tenure in the NixOS ecosystem, I operated under the assumption that personal and political differences were irrelevant to our shared technical interests, and hoped, perhaps naively, that I'd find the same consideration in return. My long absence from social media may have been a blessing — had I been more jaded before becoming heavily invested in NixOS, things might have played out differently. Though I am far from perfect, I take pride in maintaining professional discourse, critiquing ideas rather than identities, regardless of how aggressive others' politics become. In the end, though, sometimes the greatest service you can offer is simply maintaining your principles when others abandon theirs.
Earlier, I touched on how the bully-pushover dynamic leaves no room for true leadership qualities like mentorship and competance. What we witnessed and thoroughly documented in [RFC 175](https://github.com/nrdxp/rfcs/blob/rfc-175/rfcs/0175-appeals-council.md) demonstrates this perfectly: power so entrenched it had become casually, almost lazily tyrannical. The greatest threat to such entrenched power isn't opposition — it's genuine leadership. Those who take initiative to solve real problems, who demonstrate authentic mentorship, who build rather than control — these are the people who must be demonized or eliminated first by the manipulator.
Understanding this dynamic is crucial for defending against future political attacks. The systematic resistance to actual leadership isn't accidental — it's a deliberate strategy, whether driven by instinctual self-preservation or calculated power maintenance. Those who hold power through manipulation cannot allow genuine merit-based leadership to flourish.
Our approach to RFC 175 revealed this dynamic in action. We maintained professionalism throughout our documentation, limiting ourselves to public information despite having access to more damning private evidence. We chose cooperation over confrontation, building our case solely from public discourse. The response? Immediate banning, while critics were free to mischaracterize our motivations in a proposal aimed at addressing demonstrably broken governance.
What followed was even more revealing. After nearly two weeks of forced silence on our own RFC, we were finally "allowed" to speak, but by then the damage was largely done. Next came the open letter calling for Eelco's resignation — which, ironically, we watched being ghost-written in real-time thanks to a leaked shared document from someone apparently troubled by the backroom dealings.
The final act came months later. Despite moving on to discussions about what would eventually become Ekala; limiting my involvement in NixOS to answering newcomers' questions on Discourse, I was quietly [banned](https://github.com/NixOS/moderation/blob/a1c292a453a93fc5d22dcc4738514d6d636d0d74/moderation-log.md?plain=1#L3-L7) for "regularly heated debates" after commenting on yet another weaponization of political rhetoric during the constitutional "election." They simultaneously banned my RFC co-author and another associate who hadn't even spoken out, using the same generic charge. The brazenness alone revealed how smug they'd become in their authority. This, after years of effectively challenging their rhetoric through nothing but logic and organic community support (I haven't even touched on RFC 111 from years back).
I document these events not to settle scores, but to correct an increasingly doctored record. People often encounter fragments of these discussions — carefully edited by now — and accept the painted narrative of me as some radical agitator. The irony is profound: [in this context](../nixos-policy-breakdown/#marginalization-is-contextual-and-temporal), I represent exactly the marginalized voice they claim to defend. I had no coalition, no special interest group, no funding — just my voice, my now friends who've been similarly ostracized, and the occasional supporter willing to stand with me.
This serves as a reminder that even a few people willing to resist tyranny can hold it at bay for quite some time. While I wasn't alone, I was perhaps one of the most persistent and tactical critics, for a time. My agenda was transparently simple: I wanted Nix to be the best it could be — the same motivation that now drives my work on Ekala.
But this isn't merely a personal grievance or isolated incident. The philosophical framework that enabled the NixOS takeover by politically entrenched radicals is, unfortunately, spreading. These events serve as a microcosm of a much more pressing concern. In 2024 alone, we witnessed similar patterns in the Linux kernel community, Python's governance debates, and numerous other high-profile projects. The timing and tactics are too similar to be coincidental.
## A Coordinated Takedown?
Whether these politically charged takeovers of high-profile open-source ecosystems are deliberately coordinated or simply the product of mass hysteria hardly matters. What's become painfully clear is that this pattern extends far beyond NixOS, representing a potentially coordinated effort across the broader open source realm.
The motive is equally unimportant. There could be a thousand reasons why powerful entities might want to control open source, using hot-button issues that reasonable people avoid like the plague is just "good politics", in that respect. The sheer number of incidents even across such eminent projects as Linux, Python, and others — using identical tactics and rhetoric — appears to indicate a success, on their part.
The sad reality is that the damage is largely already done in many of these projects. The only remaining hope lies in the utterly defiant nature that kickstarted, and still smolders, however faintly, at the bedrock of the entire open source endeavor.
The problem runs deeper than politics. The obsessive need to levy a particular political agenda is philosophically and logically opposed to the core tenets of open source and free software. We foolishly tried to juggle incompatible ideologies. Freedom cannot coexist with compulsion — it's a contradiction in terms. Attempting to force one political perspective, however righteous you believe it to be, fundamentally opposes the foundation of the open source ecosystem itself.
> "Freedom cannot coexist with compulsion — it's a contradiction in terms."
### Corporate Capture
In the corporate realm, politics revolves around image. Considerable behind-the-scenes effort goes into crafting an "organic" appearance. Whether this approach serves corporations is beside the point — what matters is that this corporate _status quo_ seems to have transplanted wholesale into the open source world. The specific political agenda is irrelevant; what matters is that the mechanisms now mirror corporate culture.
This transplant is more devastating than it might appear on the surface. Open source doesn't operate like the corporate world. Corporations function within capitalism, while open source, at its core, resembles the ancient gift economies of tribal communities. Contributions flow from need and community sustenance, not expectation of return.
This corporate takeover particularly threatens the mentorship culture that built open source. Corporate structures favor quick results over deep understanding, and metrics over mastery. When projects prioritize political compliance over technical merit, experienced developers who could mentor others either leave or stay silent. The result? A self-reinforcing cycle where corporate control grows stronger as the community's capacity for self-guidance diminishes.
**The deadly nature of this shift cannot be overstated.** Mimicking corporate political theater — fundamentally based in capitalistic mindsets — is antithetical to an ecosystem that, in principle, exists entirely outside that economic framework, but these aren't just theoretical concerns.
### Shifting Tides
The available statistics tell a stark story of this corporate capture in action. We're witnessing significant changes in open source governance, with major projects like Redis, HashiCorp, and Red Hat making controversial licensing changes [in 2024](https://www.mend.io/blog/open-source-licenses-trends-and-predictions). The real numbers are likely higher — many developers simply fade away quietly rather than risk professional backlash for speaking out.
This exodus creates a vacuum that's increasingly filled by corporate interests and their proxies. Recent trends tell the story: a surge in proprietary relicensing as developers seek [protection from exploitation](https://redmonk.com/rstephens/2024/08/26/software-licensing-changes-and-their-impact-on-financial-outcomes), rising incidents of maintainer burnout, and a growing movement toward more [restrictive licenses](https://www.mend.io/blog/open-source-licenses-trends-and-predictions). Even successful projects aren't immune to these pressures as the balance between commercial interests and open source principles becomes increasingly complex.
For the average developer, these changes aren't just abstract governance issues. They affect daily work: which tools you can use, how you can share your code, even how you can advance your career. When projects fall under corporate control, decisions about features, compatibility, and access increasingly serve shareholder interests rather than developer needs. The mentorship vacuum means fewer opportunities to learn from experienced developers, leaving newcomers to navigate increasingly complex ecosystems alone.
### Accelerating Crisis
The rise of AI has only accelerated this crisis. As corporations race to train models on open source code, the pressure to control these resources has intensified. We're seeing a shift from contribution-based communities to extraction-based ones, where corporate interests mine open source for training data while contributing little of substance in return. The same political mechanisms used to capture project governance are now being leveraged to ensure unrestricted access to these valuable training resources.
The pace itself is dizzying enough to be utterly demoralizing. In just a few short months, the ideals that founded and sustained open source seem to have been placed on life support, fading further from relevance as we hurdle toward a world where truth is simply determined by whoever has the most powerful model. In the last 24 hours alone, I've heard increasingly pessimistic sentiments about the nature and rapidly accelerating scope of this change from hackers I've long respected. One thing seems to be shared in common: the times no longer make sense, and they seem to be making less sense as we go along.
## Finding North in a Digital Storm
So where does that leave us? I'd be lying if I said I was optimistic. The last few months have pushed me into perhaps the most pressing existential crisis of my life — both from events I've described and personal challenges in my own life. Yet through this difficult soul searching, I've found insights that may prove useful in mounting an effective resistance.
The battle for open source's soul may already be lost, on many fronts, yet the very intensity of efforts to stamp out free software's founding principles suggests their enduring power. The war may not be over just yet. Open implementations of protocols like TCP/IP and ecosystems like C still form much of the bedrock of our modern world. Will we really allow the rest of these precious resources to fall under the intoxicating sway of centralized control, one by one?
### A Return to Fundamentals
Ideas matter. While trendy ideologies might seem harmless, their long-term consequences can be devastating. Prioritizing superficial "social justice" over genuine freedom and measurable outcomes has led us precisely where many predicted — to a landscape where coordinated efforts ruthlessly resist all perceived threats to narrative control.
The response must be equally unapologetic: a return to well-reasoned, provably sound principles. Not through compromise that dilutes our ideals, but through coordinated resistance across disparate groups who understand what's at stake.
### Practical Resistance: The Ekala Way
Rather than just theorize, let me share how we're approaching these challenges in Ekala. Our strategy isn't revolutionary — it's a return to fundamentals, centered around what I've come to call "thought driven development."
#### Thinking Carefully
My philosophy toward development centers around careful thought and consideration from first principles. While the tech industry rushes to push MVPs and quick prototypes, some problems require deeper contemplation. Ekala aims to solve challenges in Nix that aren't even trivial to understand, much less solve.
This approach isn't easy, even for me. Nobody wants an `eka` prototype more than I do. But after a decade of Nix exposure, I've learned that rushing solutions often creates more problems than it solves. The atom prototype came together in weeks precisely because of years spent thinking through the problems.
#### A Foundational Ethic
Before writing any code for Ekala, I addressed what I saw as a fundamental challenge: the ideological capture of open source projects through carefully crafted governance documents. Facing this hydra head-on, we developed the [Hackers' Ethic](https://ethics.codes), centered on the maxim: **_primum nullum cogitatum impedire: first, hinder no thought_**.
This isn't about rejecting structure or responsibility — it's about building ethical frameworks that promote innovation rather than control and ossification of the _status quo_. While the Hackers' Ethic will evolve, it already provides an antidote to the vague, manipulative governance documents that have become all too common, serving as a powerful spring board for our efforts, ensuring they remain true to their original intent.
#### Building Resilience
Ekala takes inspiration from distributed systems — resilience through interconnection rather than central control. We're deliberately taking time to let natural governance patterns emerge rather than imposing rigid structures. Our focus remains on solving real problems: automating workflows, improving developer experience, and building tools that last.
Whether Ekala succeeds or fails, the principles behind it matter: careful thought, ethical foundations, and genuine community building over political capture. But principles alone aren't enough — we need action.
### Taking Action
While Ekala represents one approach to resistance, there are immediate steps any developer can take to protect and nurture genuine open source culture:
- Join and actively support projects that maintain clear boundaries between politics and code. Look for projects where technical discussions remain focused on technical merit.
- Document and share your experiences with project governance changes. When you witness political capture attempting to override technical concerns, speak up thoughtfully and maintain records.
- Build and maintain connections with respected maintainers outside official channels. These relationships often become crucial when official communication channels become compromised.
- Don't hesitate to fork projects when governance becomes corrupted. While maintaining a fork requires significant effort, it's sometimes the only way to preserve a project's original vision.
- Create opportunities for genuine mentorship, both as mentor and mentee. Even small interactions — helping a newcomer debug code, sharing hard-won experience — help maintain our ecosystem's knowledge-sharing tradition.
- Support initiatives that prioritize technical merit over political compliance. Your involvement, whether through code contributions or simply speaking up in discussions, helps maintain spaces for genuine technical innovation.
### Just Be a Mentor
The solution lies in courage — both individual and collective. A mentor isn't necessarily a role model; I certainly don't recommend anyone follow my difficult path. But I can share what I've learned, assist where I can, learn from the best, and contribute to rebuilding a culture of genuine mentorship.
This isn't about transactions or authority. It's about recognizing our dual nature as both teachers and students, experts and beginners. True mentorship requires giving and receiving, understanding that our existence is endlessly dynamic — sometimes growing, sometimes shrinking, always changing.
I don't have all the answers. But I know that taking action aligned with genuine principles, however flawed our execution, matters more than comfortable silence. Whether Ekala succeeds or fails, at least I'll know I stood for something I consider to be real.
## The Path Forward
As 2025 unfolds with unprecedented global instability, the battle for open source's soul might seem insignificant. Yet the principles we're fighting for — freedom of thought, genuine collaboration, merit-based development — matter now more than ever. In a world where AI threatens to centralize power and corporate interests steadily erode developer independence, maintaining truly open spaces for innovation isn't just idealistic — it's essential for our collective future.
What we're witnessing isn't just another tech industry trend. It's almost certainly a coordinated effort to replace merit-based governance with political control, systematically dismantling the mentorship culture that built our community. The pattern is clear: corporate capture follows a predictable path, using governance changes and political pressure to silence technical voices. Each silenced voice, each compromised project, brings us closer to a tipping point from which recovery becomes increasingly difficult.
The solution won't come from grand manifestos or corporate initiatives. It will come from individuals willing to stand firm, to mentor rather than dictate, to build rather than control. Whether through contributing to projects like Ekala, maintaining independent open source efforts, or simply speaking up when governance goes astray, each of us has more power than we realize. Every small act of resistance matters — every time we choose merit over politics, every time we help another developer grow, not just in skill, but in understanding.
**The time for comfortable silence has passed.** If you value the principles that made open source revolutionary — if you believe in the power of shared knowledge and genuine collaboration — then stand up. Mentor someone. Build something real. The tools of resistance are in your hands.

277
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/code-of-rebellion.md
View File

@@ -1,277 +0,0 @@
---
title: Declaration of Rebellion
description: Blocked on Slavery
taxonomies:
tags:
- opensource
- politics
- civilization
date: "2025-05-03"
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
Since my [last post](../closed-openness) on the erosion of open-source values, personal upheavals have forced me to pause and reflect. Longstanding unresolved tensions—within myself and in close relationships—have left me burnt out, wrestling with questions and conflicts that have shadowed much of my adult life; as some of my X followers may have noticed in some of my recent, admittedly unhinged, posts there.
Through this crucible of introspection, I've reached two profound, personal realizations. First, I've consciously defined my stance on the [question of God](https://x.com/nrdexp/status/1918716742601457740) in relation to morality, though that's not immediately relevant to this piece. Second—and this may sound gratuitous, but bare with me—despite my achievements, I remain bound as a [Slave](https://x.com/nrdexp/status/1918282816078659871), subject to the whims of a particularly egregious State Courruption.
The particulars are out of scope for the time being, what matters is that these revelations have spurred me to begin drafting a manuscript, an allegorical account of my experiences and ethics, which I hope to publish in time. Consider this the bedrock on which that piece shall expand. For now, I return to the question that has gnawed at me since my last post: why & exactly how has open-source culture been hollowed out?
Believing societal shifts originate in the minds of individuals, I’ve attempted to trace the philosophical roots of this decay from first principles. It became apparent that I'd have to dig far deeper into the messy underbelly of the subconscious impulses and assumptions running amuck in today's society, directly or indirectly affecting the philosophy and mission of FOSS & beyond.
It turns out that I had to drill all the way to the very bottom, to the very foundations of human institutions, themselves, to describe an order which, to my knowledge, has not been previously articulated, though it seems to have been subconsciously expressed throughout time. What follows is a (hopefully) logically consistent framework which, if embraced, could provide a solid foundation from which to restore the free software movement and, ultimately, safeguard human institutions from corruption, in general.
If that sounds grandiose, just know my assessment stems solely from faith in the power of logical Coherence, not from any confidence in a predefined outcome. I see myself as an incidental observer: someone with a unique vantage point, shaped by adversity, historical context and a disposition to dig deeper. Nothing more.
Also, for those following my technical work on Ekala, you might remember I promised more detailed updates soon. This post, subtitled "Blocked on Slavery," reflects the barriers that have, even against my will, kept me from making progress in that direction. Instead of making promises I cannot confidently keep, I will simply state that I have not given in, and still plan to deliver both more [technical writing](../atom-anatomy.md), as well as code just as soon as I am able.
For now, my time is not fully my own, constrained by a society either blind or indifferent to an obscured State Corruption that has, incidentally, kept me running in circles for much of my adult life—a struggle I’m only now beginning to fully contend with and unravel. To move forward in my work, it became clear I'd have to “stop the world” and clear the debris of a broken system that no one else dare seem to touch; if only, for reasons I will omit, for my own sanity. This raw, somewhat ethereal process informs both this piece and my efforts to revive my technical endeavors. If that sounds strange—and it likely should—simply consider this piece an homage to the Greek philosophers, the Masters of logic who now inspire my pursuit of Coherent Justice and Freedom.
On a cheerful note, before we begin, I’m pleased to share that I’ve recently joined [Anduril Industries](https://x.com/nrdexp/status/1912329031841947938); likely to the chagrin of my political adversaries. This new role offers a technical platform and workload to reengage with interesting new problems, which, I'm sure, will inform my future efforts on Ekala. If I may add, contesting State corruption doesn’t diminish my pride in contributing, however modestly, to the defense of its people, and as I hope to show by the end of this piece, it might actually be the _duty_ of every Citizen. After all, there can be no platform to reform Corrupt Laws or States if there’s no State left to amend.
> Pertinent disclaimer: any arguments presented here are not necessarily endorsed by my employer or any of its representatives, partners, etc, etc.
## What's All this Talk of "The State"?
The decline of free software ideals is deeply tied to the machinations of the State, specifically: State Corruption, and the spirit that counters it, Rebellion: an unapologetic resistance to Corruption.
For the skeptical reader, consider the growing political warfare engulfing open-source communities as a clue that my assertion might hold truth. I ask you to bear with me as I lay out what I believe to be a logically consistent framework, one that could help to reorient our understanding of the current situation in tech and the broader socio-political landscape.
These are bold claims, I admit, but the principle is simple. For me, this framework has brought clarity and purpose, illuminating a path forward where I once saw none. It has reshaped my understanding of the present crisis, giving me direction and meaning. My aim here is to share that clarity with those who still burn with passion for the core ideals of FOSS, or more broading, a thirst for Justice. In my forthcoming manuscript, where I’ll detail the personal struggles that led me to this point, I’ll expand on these logical foundations in far greater depth, so consider this a preview of that work.
For those who have abandoned logical consistency entirely, consider this your off ramp. For the rest of you, lets dig in...
### From A to State: A Formal Definition
What I’m attempting here is nothing less than a logically consistent philosophical framework to model a Just State; defining our terms precisely as we go.
By the end, we’ll arrive at a conclusion that positions Free Software as a vital force in the functioning of such a State. In other words, not just a nice way to access source code, or an efficient way of managing development, but of absolutely crucial necessity as a pillar of Justice itself.
#### An Axiomatic Foundation
We begin with a single axiom:
> The Law of Entropy is a constant in nature, and by extension, human affairs.
Now, we could lean on physics to define Entropy with mathematical precision, but for our purposes, let’s frame it as a "diffusion" of Coherence. Picture Coherence as a deliberate structure—a system, a society, a piece of code—built with intention. Entropy, then, is the natural tendency for that structure to erode over time. It’s the slow unraveling of order into chaos: for social structures to decay, power to corrupt, etc.
For human societies to remain Coherent, an orienting force must counter this Natural Entropy. We’ll call this institution the State, and its act of maintaining Coherence in human affairs, its Purpose: the very reason it exists. The mechanism through which the State achieves this Coherence is Authority.
Next, let’s define Justice as the Coherent upholding of a given Purpose. Since the State’s Purpose is to combat Entropy, a Just State is one that faithfully wields its Authority to fulfill this Purpose. Conversely, an Unjust State either fails to counter Entropy, misdirects its Authority, or neglects its Purpose entirely. The Law, then, is a codification of the boundaries of this Authority: a blueprint to ensure Coherence in understanding the State’s Purpose while restraining Corruption, which we’ll define as the aiding of Entropy.
It follows that a Corrupt State is an Unjust State that actively aids Entropy, wielding its Authority or Law against its own Purpose. It’s a system that, instead of preserving order, accelerates chaos; a betrayal of its own reason for being.
Since the State is a human institution, it, too, is subject to Entropy. A State that fails to manage its own internal Entropy through its Authority is, at best, Unjust, and at worst, Corrupt. Here, Responsibility means being accountable to Justice: ensuring the State’s actions align with its Purpose.
We must distinguish between Authority and Law to spot Entropy within the State itself. Look for signs of Incoherence: a dissonance between what’s written in Law and what’s practiced through Authority, or an erratic expression of either. Complexity, too, aids Entropy; unnecessary structure hastens the decline into decoherence, much like bloated code that collapses under its own weight.
It’s in these cracks that Corruption takes root, a pattern I’ve seen too often in my fight against broken systems. A Just State, then, sees it as its core duty to keep Entropy at bay within itself: it’s the heart of its Purpose. It views the overuse of Authority or the proliferation of unnecessary, overly complex Laws as dangerous, accelerating the very decay it’s meant to prevent. Thus, a Just State prioritizes minimal, necessary Authority and a small set of clear, comprehensible Laws, delegating the bulk of the inner workings of society to Citizens.
Pruning ineffective or Corrupt Law and Authority becomes essential; a disciplined act of maintenance to preserve Coherence. This principle leads us to a crucial component of sustaining a Just State, one we’ll explore next.
### A State of Rebellion
A Just State recognizes the misapplication of Authority, inappropriate Law, or the misuse of Authority, whether in ignorance or defiance of the Law, as Corruption. Since Entropy is inevitable, so too is Corruption. It’s a hard truth witnessed many times throughout history: decay creeps in, and without vigilance, it festers.
While further distinctions could offer valuable insights into a healthy State’s functioning, I’ll reserve those for my upcoming manuscript. Here, we’ll zero in on the mechanisms of Corruption and how a Just State confronts them.
Unjust or Corrupt States often ignore or remain apathetic to these mechanisms. Like a cancer cell abandoning its purpose within the body, such States grow unchecked, forsaking their Purpose of upholding Coherence in human affairs. A Just State, however, not only acknowledges Corruption’s inevitability but codifies into Law mechanisms to combat it. These Laws, which outline how and where the State is most likely to experience Entropy, shall be called the Law of Rebellion. The Authority enforcing these Laws shall be known as the Spirit of Rebellion. Together, or separately, they may be referred to simply as Rebellion.
A Just State elevates its Rebellion, both its Law and its Spirit, above lower Laws and Authorities, ensuring they govern and override where necessary. An Unjust or Corrupt State, by contrast, either fails to codify Rebellion into Law or deliberately undermines it, placing lower Laws or Authorities above it in letter or practice.
The early United States offers a historical example of a once Just State that codified Rebellion into Law. The Bill of Rights, deemed the Supreme Law of the Land, was given Authority through its Spirit, superseding lower Laws and Authorities. This scheme was so powerful it was emulated by many other States thereafter in search of Justice. Yet, the Corruption of the U.S. today can be traced to a decay in its Spirit of Rebellion.
While the Law of Rebellion remains largely intact, it’s been rendered tacitly ineffective, a hallmark of sophisticated Corruption. Once Just, now Corrupted States, eager to expand like an unchecked cancer while maintaining legitimacy in the eyes of the people, often prefer to undermine their Law of Rebellion subtly rather than abolish it outright. They achieve this by crippling the Spirit of Rebellion in their Citizens and Authorities, stifling the willingness or ability to resist Corruption, or making the cost of doing so untenable.
Rebellion itself can be Just or Unjust. A Rebellion targeting a Just State is Unjust, as it undermines a system faithfully upholding its Purpose. But a Rebellion against an Unjust or Corrupt State—or, to a lesser extent, an Unjust or Corrupt Law or Authority—is Just. In a Just State, such Rebellion must be upheld and defended through the Law and Spirit of Rebellion, and by extension, the lower Laws and Authorities.
A Just State, then, considers it good practice to allow any Citizen to challenge a Law or Authority as Unjust or Corrupt. The right of a Citizen to uphold this principle must not be infringed. Given that Justice often demands swift action, a Citizen may act to uphold Justice through Rebellion, either before or after some State Authority has been enacted, without needing prior written consent. The Spirit of Rebellion takes precedence, overriding any Incoherent Law or Authority. A State that cripples, delays or refuses to uphold a Just Rebellion is, by definition, Corrupt.
In other words, each Citizen of a Just State must retain the Authority to uphold Justice as defined by the State’s Purpose. A State that delegates this responsibility away from its Citizenry, stripping them of their stake in maintaining Coherence, signals Corruption; a betrayal of its own principles & Purpose. While State officials are necessary, their structure and limitations depend on the properties of the Citizenry, which we’ll explore next.
## The Class of the Citzen
Phew, that was heavy, wasn’t it? We’re nearly through the formal groundwork, but to be thorough, we need to define what a Citizen is and categorize them based on their Authority and Responsibility within the State. Then, we’ll explore some general traits of each class.
I referenced these roles earlier in a link, but for clarity, let’s define them here:
1. A Master holds non-trivial Authority and Responsibility.
2. A Royal has Authority similar to a Master, but at most all times, avoids Responsibility.
3. A Slave bears non-trivial Responsibility yet lacks meaningful Authority.
These definitions are relative. One might be a Master over their own impulses, wielding Authority over their actions, yet still be a Slave relative to the State, stripped of meaningful Authority in that context. Here, we focus specifically on these roles as they relate to the State. Other groups exist, such as foreign citizens or agents with no significant Responsibility or Authority within the State, but they are not part of a Citizenry of the Just State.
Further, in a Just State, every Citizen is Responsible for upholding the Spirit of Rebellion and Justice. For instance, if a Law is broken, even a Slave can be held accountable for failing to enact Justice if they’re reasonably able, a reflection of their shared duty to maintain Coherence.
In a Corrupt State, however, you often find dual Citizens with split loyalties or null agents: someone with neither Responsibility to, nor Authority from the State, a void that signals decay. We’ll dive deeper into this soon, but first, let’s examine the characteristics of each Citizen class.
### A Royal Warning
Royals, by their nature, are a liability to Justice within the State. Their lack of meaningful accountability breeds Corruption; a pattern seen too often in history. While technically Responsible to the State, Royals use cunning to evade consequences, often shirking additional Responsibility beyond the bare minimum. They exist due to the inequities of nature: a Master’s son, for instance, might inherit high status and, through a privileged education, master the rhetoric needed to dodge accountability.
Royals often masquerade as Masters, relying on deception and influence as their primary tools. Gifted in rhetoric, they’re driven by decadence and leisure. In a Just State, Royals are viewed with suspicion and urged to take up Responsibility by early adulthood at the latest. Unjust States, however, are lax or apathetic toward Royals, fostering Corruption as Royals multiply their numbers and their Slaves by any means necessary.
Royals aren’t always Enemies of the State, defined here as those actively working toward State Corruption, whether Citizens or foreign agents, but their tendencies make them a liability. They’re prone to actions that aid Entropy, often speaking of welfare and Justice to amass influence and power. Recall the null agents from earlier? Royals love to speak on behalf of both them and the Slave class, offering gifts, Royal Slavery—one who is delegated a small amount of a Royal's Authority, in exchange for subjugation to their will—status or Citizenship as bribes. This is why welfare systems, though well-intentioned, often lead to Corruption: they multiply the State’s null agents and Slaves while concentrating power in Royals through the influence they cultivate.
In a Just State, a Royal not seeking Master status is treated with extreme suspicion. Some Royals may be harmless, content to be left alone, but their decadent nature often drives them to seek power through influence. Many delight in dominating others, turning Masters into Slaves for sheer sport, or creating more Slaves generally. Royals also entice Masters to join their ranks, a dangerous trend that can create Corrupt Masters, as we’ll explore next.
Royals favor espionage and intrigue over direct domination. They often pass seemingly Just Laws only to enforce them crookedly with Corrupt Authority, maintaining plausible deniability. By pointing to the Law’s supposed Justice, they mask their undermining influence, a subtle but pervasive form of Corruption. For this Reason, a Just State only allows the Master class to codify its Laws.
### Sign of a Master
A Master, one who is both meaningful Responsible to the State, and who has some non-trivial Authority in the State, whether directly or indirectly through relations, office, holdings, commerce, etc, is the aim of every Citizen in a Just State.
The Master wishes to uphold the Justice in the State as a priority in all dealings. They are, invariably, Masters of self. They have solid impulse control, and a healthy sense of balance. The burden of the Master is foresight. They may often take it as their Responsibility to protect the State from Corruption in advance, cultivating a foresight. However, more generally, a Just Master is simply one who expresses his Authority to uphold some Just Responsibility.
This is why Royals and Masters often clash, as Royals are often the ones brewing the Corruption in some form. The Royal has the advantage in this conflict, since they could actively attempt to enslave the Master while the Master, knowing presumption to be potentially Unjust, may tolerate the Royal until Corruption or a plot thereof is uncovered.
For this reason, the Just State reserves all official office exclusively to the Master class, though even a Slave might serve as a better officer than a Royal, since their naivete often makes them far more pure when led by a Master.
And this is crucial. Masters preserve their craft, cultivating Mastery in others; often choosing Slaves to delegate Responsibility to, raising them up in Mastery as an apprentice. Masters have the opposite pre-disposition of Royals, tending to make more Masters, freeing Slaves from the burden of toil without Authority for the sake of the strength and protection of the State.
It can be difficult to distinguish a Master from a Royal at times, and herein lies one of the chief struggles of any State. However, to the well informed, the sign of Mastery is unmistakable, as it often accompanies good counsel, extraordinary skill, unpretentious abundance, or a humble but powerful demeanor.
In a totally Corrupt State, there are almost no Masters, and can even be discouraged, maligned or even said to be non-existent or idealistic. The path to Mastery in these States is frought with barriers and distractions, or encumbered with beauracracy, making it difficult for Slaves to rise in status. Royals, being typically jealous of power, may leave no viable path open for Slaves to advance.
The opposite is true of a Just State. Mastery is abound, and Royalty is despised and kept in check. The path to Mastery from Slavery is cheap and free of encumberances. Any Slave with dedication should have a viable path to Mastery in a Just State.
There is, however, the thankfully somewhat rare, Corrupt Master. This is someone who has likely been a Master of good standing for some time, but who has, for some reason or another, grown to despise his State whether through Royal influence, or Enemy bribes. This, being far more capable than your typical Royal, can be one of the greatest enemies of the State, if encountered, as they may leverage both the rhetorical cunning of a Royal and the raw discipline and skill of a Master.
The devastation of festering Corruption in a State can lead a previously Just Master to Corrupt himself, which is another crucial reason to, at all times, keep Corruption of the State in check, as a Corrupt Master could execute a successful coup for power in the State.
### Mark of a Slave
If the Master is defined by Authority wielded with Responsibility, the Slave bears a contrasting mark: Responsibility without Authority. This imbalance is the essence of Slavery within our State framework. A Slave, stripped of the ability to shape their own destiny, is tethered to mere survival; consumed by the daily struggle to maintain peace and dignity in a Corrupt society that offers little of either. This lack of Authority renders them unable to grasp or uphold Justice, leaving them vulnerable to Royal manipulation. For this reason, Masters often see it as their duty to raise up the Slave class in Mastery, to uphold Justice.
As much as we no longer wish to admit it in modern culture, by inevitable natural progression, there has always been a Slave class in every State, and likely always will be; though a Just State seeks to reduce its number and improve its condition; not through welfare, but through edification.
The mark of a Slave is evident in their passivity, a trait Royals exploit to entrench Entropy. In a Just State, Citizens are empowered to pursue Mastery, but a Corrupt State ensures Slaves remain ignorant of their own potential, their Spirit of Rebellion extinguished. This dynamic, as we’ll see, has historical roots in Royal tactics of division and control, perpetuating a cycle of subjugation that undermines the very Purpose of the State.
## Ties of Rebellion
We’ve covered a lot, but notice we’ve skipped key aspects of a typical State; taxation, currency, economics, warfare, rights, and more. Those topics deserve deeper exploration and will be tackled in my upcoming manuscript. Yet there is also another reason: our concept of State here is a logical abstraction. It can be applied concretely to far more than simply a Government. For example, a religion is a State, a family is a State, a company is a State, etc, etc.
These things, as well, will be thoroughly explored in the future, but for our purposes here, we need only make use of this abstraction which allows us to unambiguously identify Justice in a State, and Just or Unjust actors within it. These tools, uncommon in our time, should serve as a powerful framework for what’s next.
If you’ve made it this far, you might be in minor shock, or even denial. I certainly was when I first pieced this together, recognizing the colloquial understanding of class is utterly insufficient and inaccurate. You may now see how much of our society belongs to the Slave class, or how the power structure is dominated by Royals posing as Masters, their extravagance and gaudiness a dead giveaway. You might also feel the stark absence of true Masters in many parts of the world today. Recall how a Corrupt State has almost no Masters, and how Royals malign Mastery, dismissing it as idealistic or impossible. This segment is meant as a wake-up call; a jolt to see the Corruption which appears to be steeping much of the Western world, despite what the media, social or otherwise, might claim.
Some waste time debating who’s responsible, or whether this Corruption stems from deliberate malice or sheer incompetence. That’s irrelevant here. The existence of the Royal class ensures some deliberate effort toward Corruption in every generation, but so too is the process of Entropy natural and undirected; so it is, in reality, a bit of both. When a society becomes complacent with Royalty—or worse, worships it—the result is predictable. We’ve incentivized humanity’s worst impulses while stifling its most refined, a reality I’ve grappled with in my own close encounters with systemic decay.
Yet in order to make the connection from where we have come so far, all the way to the Free Software movement and it's foundation, we have to press on just a bit further and explore the concept of Freedom itself; seeming to be both universally cherished, and misunderstood.
### What is Freedom? The Choke Point
Countless words have been written and blood spilled over competing conceptions of Liberty, both individual and collective. In our time, freedom is often reduced to a Royal perversion: “do what thou wilt.” But this is no coherent definition; it’s a recipe for Entropy, inviting chaos unabated by any structure or purpose.
True Liberty—what we’ll call Just or Coherent Liberty within our State framework—is the right of the Citizen to pursue Mastery unencumbered by the State, other Citizens, or foreign States. This definition ensures Justice, as Masters, by their nature, act as guardians of Justice. With their Responsible control of Authority, only the Master class can meaningfully defend the State from Entropy, upholding its Purpose of maintaining Coherence.
This is why Royals, in their efforts to enslave Masters or create more Slaves, engage in deliberate Corruption. By stifling the path to Mastery, they undermine the very mechanism that counters Entropy, eroding Justice itself. It’s not that they are opposed to Justice outright; rather, their lack of discipline blinds them to true Justice, leading them to believe their actions are always Just, whether Corrupt or not. This self-delusion only deepens their role in aiding Entropy. Liberty, then, must be upheld to ensure Justice in any State; a cornerstone of its survival against decay.
Those familiar with the early United States may recognize this as the “right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Only Mastery brings true fulfillment, or “happiness”, in life. Royals, abnegating Responsibility, often turn to Corruption because their internal hollowedness drives them to seek power, fortune, or Slaves to fill a void that only Responsibility to something greater can satisfy. I’ve felt this hollowness in my own struggles, a personal insight that aligns with the logical foundation we’ve built.
The Spirit of Rebellion, as defined earlier, is in essence the Spirit of Liberty itself. To uphold one’s Authority to Rebel, safeguarding Justice and cultivating Authority through the pursuit of Mastery, is the only sustainable path to maintaining Justice and keeping Entropy at bay over the long term. Take the United States as an example: the erosion of the Spirit to uphold the Bill of Rights has fueled much of its modern Corruption. Critics rightly point to the proliferation of unchecked Slavery, driven by an excess of Royal influence, as the root of this decay. While the Law of Rebellion remains on the books, often a hollow gesture to appease the masses, its Spirit has been thoroughly undermined in many non-trivial ways, leaving Citizens with little meaningful protection.
### Race Bating 3.0
The overreliance on race as a dividing line is a Royal distraction, and little more. Many students of U.S. history remain unaware that, in early America, the Slave class included all races, until a series of Rebellions threatened the growing Royal class of the time. In response, white Slaves were offered what was sold as “freedom” but was, in reality, a subtler form of Royal Slavery, as we’ve defined it earlier: Responsibility with an illusion of Authority delgated by the Royals in exchange for submission. This was a deliberate act of division, a classic divide-and-conquer tactic to fracture loyalties among the Slave class and secure Royal power.
This playbook has been repeated throughout history, resurfacing whenever civil unrest grows too intense, threatening the Royal grip on power. The pattern is clear: stoke division to preserve dominance, a strategy as old as the Virginia slave codes of the 17th century and as current as today’s cultural battles. What matters here is the true definition of class—Master, Royal, Slave—irrespective of race, religion, title, or office. Any of these groups can be, and have been, Slaves through the clever machinations of modern Royalty. What also matters is what is effectively true, not what’s written on paper. This is why the Spirit of Rebellion and the safeguarding of Justice through Liberty must take precedence over written Laws, which can be undermined by Royal influence while remaining on the books as a facade.
### Rule of Justice
We’re often told to revere the “Rule of Law,” but this is yet another Royal machination, conscious or not, to enslave us to a lesser power. In a Just State, Justice and Liberty reign supreme, with the Law serving as a subordinate tool to uphold them. This is why Royals heavily undermine and discourage Rebellion: they want you to believe the letter of the Law outweighs its Spirit, when we’ve logically shown the opposite to be true.
Even in the U.S. today, the letter of the Law contradicts this Royal distortion. The First and Second Amendments, freedoms of speech and the right to bear arms, are Laws of Rebellion meant to enshrine the Citizen’s right to uphold Justice, even against a Corrupt State. Yet, in practice, the Spirit of Rebellion has been nearly extinguished. Most Citizens either don’t realize or lack the courage to exercise these Laws, and a Corrupt State apparatus unconstitutionally punishes those who dare to embody this Spirit.
Consider the abolition of State Militias across the U.S., which was the true backbone of the Second Amendment. Without them, private gun ownership loses much of its power to uphold Justice, especially against excessive policing, regulation, and outright Unjust restrictions on this “unalienable” right. Subtle mechanisms, like carelessly labeling Citizens as “criminals” through a [highly profitable](https://sites.tufts.edu/prisondivestment/the-pic-and-mass-incarceration), Corrupt prison-industrial complex, further strip Citizens of their Authority to Rebel, rendering the Law a hollow shell.
This reveals a core challenge, and a key reason Royals propagate the Slave class. A Slave, devoid of meaningful Authority over their own life, cannot grasp what it means to defend or uphold Justice. In a Corrupt society, a Slave is consumed with surviving each day, clinging to whatever peace and dignity they can muster; often very little. In the U.S. today, for instance, a Slave doesn’t realize that a State-run police force is antithetical to the Second Amendment’s letter and spirit, meant to empower Citizens, not subjugate them. Lacking the experience of wielding Authority, a Slave is also more prone to cowardice than a Master, further entrenching their inability to Rebel.
### Decoherence: A Royal Indictment
Royals undermine the Spirit of Rebellion while leaving its Law largely intact through a psychological tactic with ancient roots: decoherence. This explains why the Master class must be heavily suppressed in a Corrupt State. Masters, far more autonomous than Slaves, possess not only greater resources but also an intimate understanding of Justice, both in theory and practice, cultivated through firsthand Mastery. They also have the courage to uphold it, making them a direct threat to Royal dominance.
In politics, a reliable way to detect manipulative Royal rhetoric is to examine its internal consistency, or lack thereof. This is the philosophical root of the modern war on Coherence itself. Today, poison is peddled as both “food” and “medicine,” sex slavery and genital mutilation are masked as “morality” and “liberation,” and even the distinctions between men and women are rendered meaningless. Royals masquerading as Masters pervade every profession: law, science, medicine, technology. But a true Master is accountable to those they affect.
What recourse does a Citizen have when a doctor’s ignorant advice enslaves them to a system of drugs that never solve the problem? What remedy exists for the lawyer manipulating Justice through lawfare, or the “scientist” fudging data to push an ideology? Practically none, save for the rare, brave Masters who fight overwhelming, often costly legal battles, a path that’s rapidly eroding in our time.
This incoherent confusion fuels natural Entropy, deepening Royal influence while providing them “plausible deniability” amidst the haze they’ve created. Meanwhile, they relentlessly seek to enslave the remaining Masters, ensuring no path to Mastery remains. A society with no viable route to Mastery may be an irredeemably Corrupt State; a reality some, pondering the rise of techno-feudalism as Yanis Varoufakis describes, already grasp, however stark.
Yet there is hope: truth naturally aids Coherence; arguably, they are synonymous. The fierce battle against simple truths, evident in today’s landscape, underscores their power. This document aims to draw clear lines, delineating who fights for Justice and who for Corruption. Royals, gifted in rhetoric, often outshine Masters in convincing the masses of their “Justice,” appealing to emotion, passion, or greed, while Masters rely on reason and discipline.
The Just and Corrupt exist across all political aisles, races, creeds, and religions. Royals pit us against each other along these superficial lines through “identity” rhetoric and the “multi-cultural” influx of null elements into the State, overwhelming its Coherence. What we need is for those fighting for Justice to identify and unite across these divides, standing together against the forces of Corruption and the Royals who wield them.
## The Fight for Freedom is Code
With a logical foundation for Freedom now established, alongside the stark ramifications of our modern State’s Corruption, I’m tempted to delve deeper into specific aspects of Corruption that hit me personally. I’ve drafted an entire segment, built on the foundations we’ve laid, to expose the profound psychological Corruption at the root of it all, which, as noted in the introduction, keeps me Enslaved to a deeply Corrupt State institution. But to stay on topic, I’ll reserve that battle for later writings, resisting the urge to fight one war while arming for another, equally critical one.
From where we stand, if you’re still with me, the path to the Free Software movement becomes a natural extension, especially for those familiar with Richard Stallman’s early writings. For brevity, I’ll distill what I see as the crux of his argument: in a society run on code, true Freedom is impossible without the ability to audit that code. This logic, when paired with our rigorous definition of Freedom as the unencumbered pursuit of Mastery, is airtight. Free Software empowers Citizens to audit and control the systems that govern their lives, ensuring they can pursue Mastery and uphold Justice without Royal interference; a direct embodiment of the Spirit of Rebellion.
Yet, much of the world today maligns the Free Software movement not for logical flaws but for sheer pragmatism. I understand the concerns: individuals want to profit, States want to protect secrets. To an extent, these are valid. But pragmatism that sacrifices Freedom for convenience or security only deepens Corruption, handing Royals the keys to entrench Entropy further.
### The Delicate Balance
One doesn’t need to be a Free Software zealot to contribute meaningfully to its cause. As I’ve shown, much of the discourse around what matters in the FOSS ecosystem has been obscured by Royal rhetoric; a distraction that should be obvious by now. It’s also reasonable for a Just State to keep some critical defense infrastructure private and obscured, to an extent, to protect its Citizens from external threats.
The balance, as always, lies in the application. A Just State, as we argued earlier, limits and regularly prunes its Laws to a reasonable number out of caution. In the realm of the Law of Rebellion, these Laws should be few; simple enough for every Citizen to memorize and fully understand. You cannot sustain the Spirit of Rebellion, which upholds the State’s Justice long-term, if the Citizenry doesn’t even comprehend its own Authority to Rebel. Likewise, in an ideal Just State, rules on code privatization would be minimal: restricted to explicit, easily understood circumstances.
Similarly, code in private institutions—companies, religious organizations, and especially banks—should remain open in all but the most delicate circumstances. Yet we’re far from this ideal today. Beyond sheer momentum, we’re stifled by Unjust, convoluted copyright Laws from an era when copying wasn’t virtually cost-free, as noted in [The Legal Side of Open Source](https://opensource.guide/legal/). These Laws, designed to profit a Royal few, are unlikely to change soon; especially with a public of mostly Slaves, desperate to join the Royal ranks, showing little appetite for reform.
That’s fine. We don’t need to convince everyone. But it’s absolutely critical that the Spirit that birthed this philosophy decades ago remains intact, Coherent, and unapologetically active in fighting for Justice and Freedom. The tragedy, as I see it, is that this Spirit is damn near extinct...
### Code of Rebellion
Here’s the crux: the Spirit behind Free Software is the Spirit of Rebellion itself, and Free Software is directly analogous to the Law of Rebellion, especially in a world almost entirely run on code. This truth is more critical to grasp now than ever before, yet we find ourselves in a sorry state, with most barely understanding the true mechanisms of State and Class. If you’ve followed this far, you should now, hopefully, be far better versed in these dynamics.
The rise over the past 50–60 years in the State’s fervor to erode privacy and clamp down on the few remaining rights of Rebellion isn’t coincidental, it directly parallels the steady erosion of the Free Software movement and its ideals. As [The Erosion of Privacy in the Internet Era](https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2009/09/privacy-erosion-in-internet-era) notes, laws like the Privacy Act of 1974 were limited to government data collection, leaving commercial enterprises unchecked; a gap that has since widened, empowering Royals to dominate through unaccountable tech systems while Slaves remain oblivious or apathetic.
It should be evident, but worth emphasizing: privacy is a cornerstone of Freedom. A Corrupt State may aspire to be all-knowing and all-powerful, but it is neither. The erosion of privacy directly fuels Corruption because it alters our daily behavior, forcing us to speak and act unnaturally, second-guessing ourselves as we fear exposure. This violates our definition of Freedom: the unencumbered pursuit of Mastery. Self-deception and self-censorship, induced by surveillance, make Mastery nearly unattainable, as they stifle the autonomy and authenticity required to cultivate Justice. Privacy, then, is a vital tool to defend Freedom, while censorship and surveillance are powerful weapons for Royals seeking to suppress it.
But not everyone needs to be a revolutionary, nor does everyone need to care deeply to contribute to Just Rebellion. Sometimes, the most effective step is to clear the fog; laying all the cards on the table and exposing the obscured playing deck for what it truly is.
### Taste & Tact
Corporate interests don’t always align with Freedom, but as we’ve argued, a corporation can be viewed as a State. It should, to some degree, uphold its internal Justice for efficient operation and contribute to the external Justice of the broader State, whose Corruption could threaten its existence. There’s clear potential for alignment between Free Software advocates, however few remain, and large organizations heavily reliant on FOSS. Yet, this potential remains untapped, stifled by rising State Corruption and the fading philosophy of FOSS itself, as we’ve seen.
A Just State encourages artistic expression among its Citizenry, as it cultivates Mastery and embodies truth and Coherence, inspiring future generations to pursue the same. Propaganda, while mimicking art, is a Corruption of truth and Coherence, driven by a premeditated agenda. In my view, the ability to distinguish true art from propaganda defines Taste: a perpetual ally of Justice and Freedom. Art that expresses excellence, beauty, and Mastery for the sake of preserving profound truth, not a banal agenda, is a noble aim for any aspiring Master.
Modern software firms, however, rarely share this aim. Software development has devolved into a soulless slop shop: repetitive designs, copy-paste formulas, and concepts recycled to the point that LLMs can now replace much of a software engineer’s workflow. Most corporate software is propaganda, driven by external agendas like profit, devoid of purpose or meaning. Free Software, by contrast, is true art. Crafted in good Taste by Masters of the discipline, it remains a bastion of innovation; good luck getting an LLM to innovate absolutely anything fresh or exciting in this space. This is still, excluding the Royals attempting to co-opt it, the exclusive ground of the Master, and one of the last bastions of true art anywhwere I have been able to find.
We could tactfully influence corporate “vibe” coders to adopt even a modicum of Taste, recognizing that the broader State’s Justice benefits their corporation’s stability, not to mention the higher purpose in our craft beyond mere profit. With a bit of Rebellion, we might convince large corporations that it’s in their best interest, and society’s, to not just consume FOSS code but actively support its philosophy and development. [Business models for open-source software](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_models_for_open-source_software) highlights companies like IBM and Oracle contributing to FOSS to deter monopolies and gain market share; a model that could be expanded to align corporate interests with Justice.
The modern obsession with money reflects a misunderstanding of the soul’s machinations and the true Purpose of a State, whether governmental or corporate. As we approach a fully automated future, and as public disillusionment with the status quo grows, now is the time to shift our focus; prioritizing Taste over ignorant profit. If you had $1.5 billion and a meaningful existence rooted in Taste, or $2 billion with a soul-crushing, disillusioned life, which would you choose? The answer should be clear. We need more people to think this way, and we have to snap them out of the Royal traps and delusions that stop them. As I argued in my last piece, we must reignite Mastery through mentorship, not just in the open-source world, but within our companies, fostering a revival of FOSS, and FOSS adjacence, at scale.
### The Enemy at the Gate
It’s become an unspoken meme in today’s world to avoid being “alarmist” about any particular threat. I understand the sentiment to remain rational, but it’s misguided, misapprehending human nature. The systems we cherish—like the FOSS ecosystem—are under perpetual assault, even in a Just State, whether by Royals or the natural Entropy of time. In a Corrupt State, that assault becomes a deliberate siege.
If you still believe we live in a Just State anywhere on this planet, I’m not sure how to help you. But if you’re waking up to the deep well of Corruption festering for well over a century, since at least the industrial boom, when Royals seized control of institutions like media, banks, defense, and research, then perhaps you’re starting to see the stakes as civil unrest reaches an all-time peak. The Royals have entrenched their power, and their latest target is the Free Software ecosystem, the last bastion of the Spirit of Rebellion.
A growing, incoherent mob, peddling their political wares under the guise of “social justice”, has infiltrated FOSS communities with alarming success. Some projects have been entirely commandeered by these groups, whose rhetoric constantly shifts, making them hard to pin down. They ramble about “social” justice, but Justice isn’t social, it’s a contract to uphold Coherence in human relations, not to grant special privileges based on sex, skin, or genitalia. Their ideology reeks of decoherence, a Royal tactic to aid Entropy, as we’ve shown. For those leaning toward Communism, consider this: their vision leads to a State ruled by a perpetual Royal class, with no hope for advancement, a techno-feudal nightmare, as alluded to earlier. That’s the direction we’re heading, and FOSS is their battleground.
Recent revelations, like the mass funding grants for these types of initiatives [recently uncovered](https://x.com/LundukeJournal/status/1917277702786109898), show this takeover is heavily organized and deliberate. Millions in taxpayer funds—like the $3.6 million DEI computer science grant at the University of Colorado, thankfully terminated on April 18, 2025—have been funneled into “antiracist, equity-focused” initiatives, including absurdities like Latino-only programming books. This isn’t Justice; it’s Royal decoherence, weaponizing identity to fracture FOSS communities and divert them from their Purpose: upholding Freedom through auditable code.
I’ve noticed an extreme reluctance to take a hardline stance against this incoherent rabble, likely out of goodwill or fear of confrontation. Perhaps you’ve hesitated, wary of their ability to “cancel” or ruin reputations; tactics that reveal their true character. I’ve felt their sting firsthand; they weren’t shy about permabanning me from NixOS, as most of you know. But the stakes are too high for timidity. I’ve gone to painstaking lengths to show FOSS’s unique role in Rebellion, battling Corruption and ensuring Coherent Justice in a code-driven society. This isn’t a radical’s plaything, it’s the foundation of Freedom itself.
This mob’s hollow, nonsensical posturing, born in ivory towers, detached from reality, radicalizes others while festering in our own minds. They use well-established patterns of manipulation, steadily co-opting FOSS to push their identity-driven agendas. They want to turn Free Software into a billboard for their genitalia, but FOSS’s function is far too critical to surrender to radicals just because we “don’t want to be rude.” To hell with that; be rude! Tell them to get lost. They’ve already shown their willingness to silence dissent; don’t give them the advantage of your silence.
If you truly value your friends in these circles, be a Just friend: call out their brainwashed folly. Their ideologies have the intellectual depth of a kitten, yet we’re forced to take this absurd rhetoric seriously, damaging whatever brain cells we have left. No community needs to preserve its mental clarity more than FOSS, where innovation demands sharp minds, not radical drivel. Whether you like it or acknowledge it or not, these Royals and their Slave pawns have made _us_ their sworn enemy. I dunno about you, but I’m tired of watching what I care about get steamrolled into oblivion; for no good reason.
## Sentinels of Freedom
The purpose of this rigorous philosophical foundation—defining the State, Justice, and Freedom—was to ignite in you, the reader, a redoubled sense of duty. The Free Software ethos is under siege at its core. The rhetorically gifted Royal class cunningly sways projects toward misguided, ideology-driven politics, antithetical to the Spirit of Rebellion that birthed Free Software and Open Source; a Spirit we’ve shown to be the very essence of Freedom itself: the unencumbered pursuit of Mastery.
We, the Free Software community, are the vanguard of society, the last bastion of Taste and Coherence in a world overrun by Royal decoherence. We cannot allow our achievements to be usurped by those who lack any sense of art, reason, or Justice, simply because they exploit our kindness or tolerance. Ideas matter, now more than ever. The path forward could lead to a joyous era of human thriving, unparalleled in history, or, if the status quo persists, where AI sophistication rises under Royal-backed, privacy-eroding Corruption, to an authoritarian nightmare: a world where everything is monitored, every Citizen accountable to an unaccountable State, with the Spirit of Rebellion crushed; never to return. [AI as Normal Technology](https://knightcolumbia.org/content/ai-as-normal-technology) warns of such risks, noting AI’s potential to enable mass surveillance and erode social trust if unchecked.
As a father and a human who’s endured immense adversity to reach this point, I will not stand idly by. I will share my pain and hard-won experience in a future manuscript, as well as my ongoing personal struggle against State Corruption. For now, I indict you, the reader: stand up for Justice in FOSS communities, our last stronghold of Taste, perhaps in the entire civilized world. Recognize the stakes. Don’t be apathetic. Summon the courage to defy threats; permabans aren’t the end, as I’ve shown. Live true to yourself, to the ideals of Coherent Justice and Freedom we all should share, rooted in the pursuit of Mastery to combat Entropy.
The enemy has advanced further than we dared admit, but a growing number of eyes are opening to the staggering scale of State Corruption, and its deep tendrils into every aspect of our lives. The war isn’t lost, there’s a path forward if we’re thoughtful and courageous enough to forge it. Don't get caught up in the hype, or hate cycles. Cultivate Mastery in all you do, and remain vigilant, skeptical of the Royal class and their empty promises, which inevitably end in betrayal. Live in the light of Mastery, and inspire it in others.
Know that the winding coils of Corruption and deception can be unwound, with effort and focus this is a war that we didn't start, but can and shall be won. If not, I want my children to know that at least I died fighting.
This is an official Declaration of Rebellion. The Royals wage war not just on our bodies but on our minds, our understanding of art, history, beauty, and science. If they want a fight, I say: bring it on!
Viva Rebellion!

106
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/fuck-it.md
View File

@@ -1,106 +0,0 @@
---
title: The Hill I Will Gladly Die On
description: My, Now, Lifelong War
taxonomies:
tags:
- personal
date: "2025-06-25"
draft: true
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
I am more exhausted right now in this moment, than at any time I can remember. Why? Well we'll try to get to the bottom of that here. Maybe this is a bad time to try and elaborate, but it seems like time is a bit of the essence here, and maybe the rawness is appropriate, all things considered. I don't plan on spending much time editing or revising, at least on first pass, so apologies in advance for any grammatical or spelling errors that will undoubtably ensue, but time is the most critical factor now, so it can't be helped.
As I sit here, I have not eaten for 3 days, I have been living as a monk (i.e. volentarily celibate) for near 4 months or so, I've recently discovered my familiar origins after an unexpected pilgrimage, and I'm at what is (hopefully) the end of a long stint of being deprived of my children by a mentally deranged (yes, diagnosed) individual, who has been intent on using my children as meer pawns to keep me stuck, for nearly my entire adult life, which amounts to about 15 years, and who has been absolutely losing their shit, far as I can tell, after having finally built up the extreme discipline necessary to effectively defy them, for the first time.
Unless you know me real well though, none of you know this about me. Partially because after the shitshow that I've dealt with, I have a very difficult time trusting anyone, and also because I am absolutely positive than normal folks who have not spent a significant portion of their existence dealing with a mentally ill individual in close proximity just could never understand.
Being also a man, and some target of contention already, and trying to even combat against the type of folks who are so willing and eager to use their "struggles" in life as a weapon, I didn't see it as wise to try and weaponize my own experience in this way; nor morally correct, for what that is worth to anybody nowadays (seems mostly nothing, afaict).
But I digress, wtf am I talking about? Well at a high level, perhaps the easiest way to sum things up is that I've wasted a good chunk of my life (basically all of it) trying to do right for the absolute wrong person. I have always been the type to blame myself, even though whenever I try to share my experience, the typical response is that I need to "own up" to my mistakes. And absolutely, there have been a lot of them. But the point here is that my tendency to self blame is actually been one of the most effective mechanisms by which I have been, so long now, trapped: partially by the psychotic will of another, and partially by my own sense of duty and delusional hope for change.
But again, unless you have dealt with the mentally ill, particularly the malicious and delusionally mentally ill, you can't fathom the depths a person like that will go to hide from themselves and feign legitimacy at your expense. It has also proven dangerous, and tangibly so, to try and seek "help" in this situation.
Truly I probably developed, for some time, a mental illness of my own just dealing with it. Trying every path over and over, with seemingly no way out; I always seem resigned to trying to "make it work", only to play directly into the malicious hand of what can only be described as a psychopath hell bent on doing evil to me to alleviate themself, while pushing me to the limit and making me look like the crazy one.
And absolutely, this situation has driven me insane, more than once. And that's the point. For those of you who might be familiar with the concept of "reactive abuse", you may know a little bit about this dynamic. Being an extreme intellect and having a keen, perhaps even autistic impulse to "get to the bottom" of this situation, I've struggled, though, to find any analogue in my own experience or that of others, at least to this extent.
As far as I can tell, this situation is damn near architypal at this point. As in, a true battle of good and evil. Given our current moral landscape (or lack thereof), perhaps you may then be able to forgive me for not expressing myself sooner. Indeed, it is unlikely even that I would have been able. Another dastardly effective tool in the tool box all these years has been unending confusion and chaos that always leave one feeling in their heart that something is horrendously wrong, while never being able to fully articulate it. Indeed it has taken all these long years, long runs, extents in the gym and now even monk like chastity and an extended fast to even attempt it.
Most people want to think that the truth typically lies somewhere in the middle, but in the case where you have someone who obsessively tries to find the truth, and another individual who compulsively and seemingly manically tries to hide it, that isn't really the case, and that typical assessment has provably, by now, played against my favor time and again.
Whatever you might think I should have done, whatever you may think I did wrong, I have probably done it all by now, and yet it truly has felt as though there is no escape. For those of a biblical persuation, it is the "unbreakable" spiritual bond of marriage, perhaps, but even without that, just understanding that a willingness, even eagerness, to weaponize children against a "big scary man", leaves little room for hope, or even meaningful progress, at least in all my experience so far. Yet I've come to a point now where I will simply not accept this state of affairs any longer. I would rather be dead: truly, than to allow this to go on.
And before you start thinking that this is my peragative, or that I'm fishing for sympathy, let me dispel that right now. I don't give a shit if you feel sorry for me, or go ahead and blame me or even burn me at the stake. Go right ahead. This isn't for me. This is a plea for my children.
My children who have never been allowed to know normal in their life, but for a brief time when their mother was incarcerated. Children whose education has been hindered and at this point completely halted, for the sake of a delusional take on reality that must be defended by a paranoid skitzophrenic at all costs using isolation and control to an extreme degree.
Truly I don't even blame my "wife", who I have paid to divorce a full two times now, yet still paradoxically remain married, as much as I blame the system that is claimed to be there "for the best interest" of the children, but which unendingly reglects both data, and basic logic. Was it a stupid choice to stay so long? Prabably. But then again, she did also threaten me directly that I'd never see my kids again if I went through with it, more times than I can even count at this point, and followed through plenty to, as now, and right at the end of each divorce too (both times, letting it fester and money waste). It's this kind of deliberate insane maliciously psychotic demeanor that has come to be my normal; for better or worse
Perhaps I should have gone through with it, but also looking at the statistics of divorce, and just the general and quite apparent nature of our time, and the dynamics of family law in blue states in particular, it seems I've been imprisoned cleverly by a state that I have long since desired to leave, now more than ever, but which has kept me on account of its unwillingness to allow me the simple and supposedly "protected" freedom of parental authority. Indeed if my one true desire is to leave this place forever, divorce, without custody, wouldn't even accomplish that anyway.
Perhaps it is only human; as it truly seems that there is no such thing as sympathy or understanding for men; we (men) don't withold our feelings out of some misguided misunderstand, but by the very nature of society itself, which is eager and willing to utterly crush any male weakness expressed, and at the first sign. And so it is I do not seek sympathy, but that I merely seek to ellicit sympathy from the reader for my children.
I can't prove to any of this. I can only tell you from my experience that I am, especially at this point, the epitome of stability, even almost to a fault. Even as I am deprived of any residence, I still pay for, and in a way I suppose, directly fund the rebellion against my parentage. I pay for a house and car that I cannot possess, while I sit here in a hall about to close, not even sure yet where I will go, but don't worry I always figure it out, and that's the point. I've wondered many times if continuing to "pay up" in this manner is the right call, but any attempt to "withold" resources in the past for the sake of applying pressure and hopefully getting access to my children has only backfired and been endlessly framed as "abuse", so here we are. It just never ceases to be almost humourously, if painfully, ironic to me that I essentially fund my own prison.
You see, to at least try help you understand, it is my insecurities and also even my strengths which have been weaponized against me all these years. My need to make my marriage work, my pain from a previous situation where I'd had a child revoked from me as a teenager. My desire to be upright and faithful, even to a person who had no qualms of not returning the favor and even blaming me for it. My need to "prove", mostly to myself (as it was hopeless to show the world), that I am not the problem, that I am the only one even upholding the home and trying to uphold (futily so) some justice in it.
Absolutely I looked for a way out, each and every time, the whole time. But without fail or exception, the path was blocked and deliberately so, by an individual that I've never, even to this day, experienced having any limit or qualms with deception, violence, manipulation, threats, social triage and even lawfare.
I've even had to part ways with people in my life who are still in denial, as I was, about the severity of this person's delusion. Indeed that is the effect this kind of person evokes from you. They can't possibly be this cruel, this malicious, this absolutely immoral and calculating yet simultaneously delusional and insane. Nobody could be that crazy. Even until just recently I often struggled with this, so I can hardly blame anyone, and even now I see the most likely outcome of this expose to be a total destruction of self, given the aforementioned tendency for society to instinctual crush any sign of male weakness. My only hope now rests in my strength and my discipline.
Visions of Atlas even flash to mind, as a man who refuses to bend, carrying the weight of all the world would rather not see, refusing to allow it to crush him to the last breath, and exposing the mold and rot underneath for all to see. That is, at least, my goal. I am by no means approaching this from a defeatist perspective, even as the odds are profoundly stacked against me, both by culture, and by humanities common tendency to avoid, at nearly any cost, looking at the simple truth underlying the corruption of the day.
But that is not the point of this piece. Given the time sensitive nature of the current situation, I've had to modify my warplans a bit, so here is my only point, for now. Time will go on, and whether you believe me or not, the psychosis of this individual and the long term effect it will have on my children will be apparent and forever locked in stone, that is, if any of you even care long enough to observe the long term result, which is not the common habit, nowadays.
I, however, am not willing to wait and let my children rot and be destroyed for the sake of the vanity and delusion of a "good" mother. As I said earlier, and quite sincerely so, I would rather be dead than sit any longer and do nothing. Even if history tells me, quite clearly, the most likely outcome is my own destruction; of everything I've built, everything I've accomplished, my reputation or what's left of it, and even my life itself eventually.
But again, I could care less. I believe I finally understand the disposition of a bygone generation of men: men who would rather bring death by their own hand than to live as a slave; as the Greeks once taught their soldiers. And so it is truly, and if you remember as I've hinted in a previous piece, I have lived as a slave to a power crazy absolutely maniacal psychopath, and system that is equally if not moreso manical and psychotically possessed to keep me trapped in the cycle any time I even came close to escaping it, the depths of which you will likely never see or experience, or at least I hope; this fantastic burden which now rests squarely on my shoulders, is damn near driving me to the edge of my ability to bear it, if it has not already past. I couldn't possibly wish this on anyone, even the enemies as I now see them, which I here face.
However, this is not an admission of defeat. I intend to fight and bitterly so unless and until I am destroyed. I will not stop writing, advocating, making noise, being annoying as hell, until my children are free from this chaos.
To try to give exhaustive details now would be pointless and superflous to the point. You will either take my word now, or you won't. We are dealing with someone who has spent a lifetime covering up the facts, and culture that is hell bent on avoiding them. Some of these facts, though, are still there and provably, and having dealt with this near 15 years, there are certainly enough to strongly make a case in my favor, but not without exhaustive effort which I now do not have the energy or time for, though it may come.
My only point now is this: I know viscerally, and in my blood and bones, that being a slave is far worse than death. Watching your children be slaves to a violent, chaotic and deranged mind is still far worse, even. And failing time and again to free them, being given only the option, maybe, to free myself and abandon them never being acceptable to my character, I've decided I will gladly die on this hill.
I also have no misunderstandings, though many in today's world seem utterly perplexed at the staggering suicide rates of men. I am no doubt sure I am far from alone in this culturally backwards "equality" between men and women to which nobody experiences more profoundly than the married man experiencing a divorce. Ironic then, that this is precisely the perspective which is so often maligned and utterly dismissed.
As suggested throughout by now, I originally intended to utterly destroy, from first principles and with rigorous philosophy & science, the utter foundations of this delusion of our modern time, and I will still continue to do so as I able, already having some writings both public and private toward that end. Again, this is a hill I am more than willing to die on, after everything I've experienced. This is a war, and kidding myself about that hasn't done me any favors.
Resorting to violence however, whether it be justified or not, is perfectly out of taste with the modern culture; many of whom seem almost obsessively happy to clasp on the chains of permanent subserviance in order to simply avoid conflict. Therefore, I felt it was only through philosophy that I could effectively wage war. That by utterly destroying, from every angle: both logically and statistically, the utterly incoherent and incoherently applied delusions festering all over the "enlightened" western world, could I ever hope to undo their effects; even if not in this generation (highly unlikely, at this point).
It is no small task, and it is not my desire, either, to plunge us backwards into an age of suppression or aggression, and so I have proceeded only with the utmost of care, and calculation, trying to be as thorough as possible. To date I only have one foundational piece public on which I intend to build in the future.
However, I have run out of time now. My children are at risk. Even this woman's only family, who is typically complacent or in some denial about the depths of her behavior, is now worried as nobody has seen them for over a week. As I mention [here](https://x.com/nrdexp/status/1938003880341869008) on X, my reluctant suspicions about the depth of our culture and law are once again confirmed by my experience with law enforcement.
This is, by no means, my first brush with the system (remember, two full divorces; and that's just the start), and I by no means expected an enthusiastic or even helpful response. But even I am dumbfounded at the lackadaisical malaise of a response, for two days now, still waiting on an apparently imminent "phone call" to report 4 missing children, one of whom is less than a year old. A situation with a provably deranged (again, diagnosed, if insufficiently in my experience) individual who has even mentioned in the past thoughts of hurting the children to "protect" them from the devil, and which I have reported multiple times to the police for breaking the terms of her probation and psychotically witholding my kids nearly constantly, unless I agree to suffer her, something I am simply no longer willing to do.
There has been no response to any of my pleas, to the cops, her probation officer, the "victims" advocate that never even called me back. These people aren't here to help me. They are here to condemn them utterly. Trust me when I say their demeanor is nowhere near as lethargic when it is the woman making the reports; and therein lies the absolute core of my profound slavery to its inconsistently applied "law".
We are talking about an individual with full blown paranoid skitzophrenia, as best I can tell, and if you want to try and measure it from a psychological lense, but coupled with a covert and malignant narcissism of seemingly the highest order. And absolute and bloodthirsty need to hide from the truth of their delusion, and no observably capaticy for self-reflection or even doubt or shame. Psychology, itself though, has seemed to fail me trying to size up this situation, and it has certainly failed to address it, not that this person is often susceptible to treatment.
The personality that was the most agreeable and ammendable to treatment has long since lost sway over the other more aggressive and warlike ones which now dominate her mind. We are talking about someone who has been obsessed, for years now, with a shadow group or individual, sometimes I am accused of cooperating with, who is supposedly out to "hurt" our children. Forgive me if I didn't feel "safe" leaving my children in this persons custody willingly, for any length of time.
We also have what might even reach a massiah & god complex all wrapped into one, which is utterly incapable of seeing the absolute err in judgement that they repeatedly demonstrated, and which so blatantly, hopefully now obviously, hurts the children. Someone who is a master of guilt and shame, who can make me feel guilty for things I never even did but they did do. Like being unfaithful, as perhaps the canonical example in our relationshiop. However, this guilt has now, at least somewhat, turned to my advantage.
Believe what you want, and I certainly wouldn't blame you if you don't given the modern culture, but trying to be faithful all these years, partially out of delusional hope of change, partially out of deliberate fear that such an act would undoubtably be used to crush me (which ironically didn't give me any such advantage in these utterly "fair" court systems of ours), has given me enough decipline now, partially inspired by a personal friend who was himself an actual monk on a mountain for near 3/4 of a decade, to remain totally celibate.
Unwilling to be manipulated any longer into having sex at a point that now feels like rape. Having all other methods of "release" (to try and be delicate) ruthlessly and endlessly weaponized against me whether I use them or not; and maybe now is a good time to point out that perhaps the greatest strength of her manipulation is absolute mind breaking repition: over and over until your mind goes completely numb and gives in the same phrases are repeated relently, almost like a chant or curse. I realized I can't even be around her, for this reason, as my judgement is compromised nearly totally by this insane dedication to breaking my mind and my will.
I mean, really though, it's not like I can even explore other options with women right now anyway, or even entertain it, both because this is a time of war, and it is entirely inappropriate, and because such an act would undoubtably be used as perhaps the final nail in my coffin. Still further, were there a person I came across that I actually cared for, I could never imagine asking them to endure this hell which I have been so long stuck. I've come to realize this is perhaps one of the main goals of her endless psychosis: to keep me stuck and isolated, having no viable or tenable path forward with anyone else but her.
In any case, it is unimportant but mentioned here to elucidate, again, that dichotomy of good and evil. The monk like celibate, now fasting several days in the depths of a long battle in a seemingly endless war. Deprived of my kids for months as I now refuse to give her the comfort of my presence which has been so endlessly weaponized to her advantage through reactive abuse that goes to no limits to drive me to the edge of mine and "prove" how much "I am the problem".
My discipline gives me strength and clarity, perhaps enough to pierce the veil which has caused so many men their lives (through the aforementioned suicide rate), or at least that is my intention. Make no mistake, I am warring (philosophically) against this entire corrupt system at this point (as I said, through philosophical analysis and experiential deducation), and will continue to do so unless and until I am forcibly stopped. I will not allow my kids to rot any longer, and now we are at a point that nobody knows where they are, what this unstable person is planning, or what will come of it. Any attempt to communicate is meant only with confusion or bait, not only from me, but even from her own sister, as well as my mother, who are now now both worrying sick.
I pray that they are okay, but given my experience there is no way and hell I can be comfortable or consoled by that assumption.
Again, I fully expect the majority reaction to be suspect at best, or condemnation outright. Again I don't care. I know this person better than any of you ever will, and now, as if a gift from Life itself, I have been given a deeper understanding than ever of myself, outside of their endless framing of my "deficit" in character. I've come to find quite the opposite, that I know possess an exceptional discipline, a piercing perspective which sees through incoherence by shear force and experience. I know where I stand, I have the vantage none of you can see, and that is perhaps the biggest risk, but it can't be helped now. I will not allow my children to be sacrificed on the alter of delusional vanity and subservience to an incoherent ideology or "law" which upholds it.
Burn me if you must. Destroy me if you can; go to any lengths to poke holes, doubt or suspicion in my claims. But know that I have already decided I will not stop... not for my sake: it matters nothing what happens to me. But for my children I have suffered this long while and will continue to suffer til death or victory, and at this point, gladly so. As I finally shake off, forcibly and with no small amount of effort, the rigid, somewhat rusted chains of my slavery, I now step out as a man into the wild chaos (literally and figuratively) and will face whatever fate awaits. But for my children, I will forever war, if I must; though I pray that some sanity remains in society, and that we can, dare I say, overcome?
In the beginning I asked your forgiveness, but truly now I know in my heart I need none.
Viva Rebellion.

126
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/in-defense-of-the-disagreeable.md
View File

@@ -1,126 +0,0 @@
---
title: In Defense of the Disagreeable
description: A Call for Freedom
taxonomies:
tags:
- psychology
- personality
- freedom
- nonconformity
- open-source
- philosophy
- critical-thinking
author: Tim D
authorGithub: nrdxp
authorImage: https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/34083928?v=4
authorTwitter: nrdexp
date: "2024-12-25"
category: personal
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
This blog typically focuses on technical matters - software architecture, deployment strategies, and the occasional deep dive into systems design. While I've shared personal musings before, I've never ventured quite this deep into the waters of self-reflection and social commentary.
What follows is perhaps the most personal piece I've written to date. It emerged, almost unbidden, from a long-standing tension between my nature and the prevailing winds of our time. While it may seem far removed from my usual technical discussions, I've come to realize that the philosophy underlying software freedom - particularly in the open-source world - is inextricably linked to the broader questions of personal freedom and the vital role of disagreeable personalities (my unhappy burden) in defending it.
Consider this both a warning and an invitation: we're about to venture far from the comfortable waters of technical discourse, into the depths of personality, purpose, and the preservation of freedom itself.
## The Misunderstood Guardians
I have felt compelled to write on this topic for some time now. While I am not a professional psychologist, I speak from a lifetime of experience as someone measured within the 1st percentile in agreeableness - in other words, I am as disagreeable as a person can be, according to the science of personality.
This often surprises those who know me well, largely due to common misconceptions about what being disagreeable truly means. Many picture a disagreeable personality as arrogantly argumentative or utterly closed-minded. While such individuals exist, this reductionist view lies at the root of many issues plaguing our modern "polite" society.
In the Big 5 personality test, agreeableness (or lack thereof) is measured separately from openness. One can be highly disagreeable while maintaining high openness to experience. The stereotype of a closed-minded disagreeable person typically reflects someone low in both traits. As someone in the 97th percentile for openness and the 1st for agreeableness, I am essentially destined to be perpetually misunderstood. It has become an axiom of my existence.
This post represents part of my journey to embrace my nature, after spending years either misunderstanding or actively loathing it. I've learned to trust my perspective through painful experience - having ignored my own intuition countless times, only to watch opportunities pass me by, Bitcoin in 2008 being just one particularly stark example. Yet I'm not writing this for myself - a private journal would suffice for that purpose. I'm sharing this publicly because of a crucial truth: there seems to be a chronic epidemic of self-loathing and depression, particularly among disagreeable types, especially in a modern western culture that elevates "kindness" even above accuracy and truth.
But there's an even graver concern: the world depends on disagreeable personalities to defend individual freedom. The war on "meanness" is, in its final analysis, a war on freedom itself. This conclusion, while perhaps underappreciated, should be self-evident. It takes someone fundamentally different - someone who places the integrity of their beliefs above powerful social influences - to defend the freedoms that western society has come to take for granted. Someone willing to endure any punishment before conceding to beliefs they know to be misguided is, by definition, quite rare.
Freedom, contrary to our privileged experience, is not humanity's natural state. If current trends toward techno-feudalism are any indication, it may not remain our reality much longer.
This isn't merely philosophical speculation - the erosion of freedom is happening in real time, even in spaces supposedly dedicated to it. Take the open-source software ecosystem, a realm I deeply cherish. We're witnessing its very foundations being eroded by an insidious "daddy knows best" mentality, manifesting through oppressive Codes of Conduct that fundamentally contradict the freedom-loving philosophy that birthed the movement. The tragic irony is that many who claim to champion inclusivity are actually enforcing a new kind of conformity, one that would have stifled the very innovations they now take for granted. While I intend to explore this particular battle in far greater depth in a [dedicated piece](../closed-openness) - as it deserves no less - this example illustrates why it's more crucial than ever to defend those who often appear as society's most misunderstood, underappreciated, and sadly, most miserable individuals.
## Beyond the Boxes
Being highly disagreeable isn't my only outlier in the Big 5, but it's become one of the most defining aspects of my personality. Why this amateur obsession with personality? Because modern personality science has finally given concrete form to what Socrates understood millennia ago when he declared "know thyself" - or more starkly: "the unexamined life is not worth living." What the ancients intuited through philosophy, we now measure through science: that understanding one's fundamental nature isn't merely philosophical luxury - it's survival.
I've lived this truth quite literally, having spent the first chapter of my adulthood in complete ignorance of my nature - at best ashamed, at worst trying to be something I simply wasn't. My high openness means I often share things that perhaps I shouldn't. Even now, with greater self-understanding forged through life's trials, doubts and struggles persist. There are always more battles to conquer, more mysteries to unravel.
It doesn't get easier, but I cannot emphasize enough the vital importance of understanding one's place in it all. Life is hard - mine always has been and likely always will be. Facing such difficulty without self-understanding is unbearable. Even now, with clearer purpose and identity than ever before, it remains challenging. Having high emotional sensitivity (another personality quirk) is yet another aspect of existence I've learned to embrace. The isolation is perhaps the hardest part - living between camps, never fully belonging anywhere, always seeing multiple sides yet unable to fully commit to any one perspective. It's a peculiar kind of loneliness that comes not from lack of connection, but from the perpetual state of partial connection, of always being somewhat out of step with those around you.
In short, I am nothing that I'm "supposed" to be, perpetually evading the boxes others try to contain me in. This isn't by choice or force - though that is a common accusation - it's simply who I am, even when I don't wish to admit it. It's difficult to explain this to someone of a highly agreeable nature, just as I struggle to fully comprehend more agreeable types. This isn't meant as criticism - I truly believe every personality type has its place, and the world would be dimmer without this human variance.
Much of today's social conflict stems from a fundamental lack of appreciation for this innate diversity. The Big 5 has shown us that core personality traits remain relatively stable throughout life. Minor variations occur, and rarely even dramatic shifts, but by our early to mid-20s, our basic personality is largely set. Knowing this, I can hardly imagine a society more primed for perpetual conflict than one that elevates certain personality types above others, as we seem to have done today.
## The Unbearable Burden
Where am I going with this? Well, I went on a tangent, but a necessary one. Throughout history, from Jesus to MLK, many have spoken to a similar message. In our laudable efforts to eliminate racism and other forms of naive prejudice, we have unwittingly retreated to venting our social biases through hatred of particular personality types.
If my previous arguments hold any water, having a bias against certain personality types may be nearly as misguided as having a bias against particular skin tones. People are what they are - love it or hate it, there's little you can do to change it. You can fight it, wage wars even, but until the day you die and far beyond it (at least as long as we remain human), you cannot change this fundamental truth. Some degree of acceptance, therefore, may simply be the wisest coarse.
Of course, some believe this irrelevant, arguing that we'll soon be a human-machine amalgamation, swiftly disposing of our previous biases as we transform into Nietzsche's übermensch and merge with machines. I maintain my skepticism - even in such a transhuman utopia, we might simply amplify our hatred of "the other" and deepen our divisions further.
Yet in wrestling with these questions of human nature and responsibility, I find myself repeatedly drawn to deeper, more haunting truths. No author has captured these truths quite like Dostoevsky, whose ideas seem to possess rather than merely inspire. Through his assertion that "every one is really responsible to all men for all men and for everything," he illuminates an unbearable truth - one I still resist. How can I be responsible for the man held captive by his corrupt government across the world, or for children I've never met suffering abuse? Yet whenever I question this burden, my mind floods with moments where I failed to act or speak when necessary. The social consequences of our collective silence, our failure to oppose injustice when we see it, echo through generations.
The burden Dostoevsky places on us is unbearable, yet my nature compels me to ask not what is comfortable or even bearable, but simply "what is true." And before you misunderstand my nature and assume I harbor delusions of grandeur - I assure you my openness and emotional sensitivity are far too high to sustain such delusions for more than an instant, if at all. I would not dare to claim I possess the truth, only that I seek it, even against my own best interest, at times.
So I circle back to my previous point: we may not like it, we may even despise it, but the wisest course might be to muster some form of acceptance of the way things are, some acceptance of "the other," some acceptance, even, of our enemy. Nietzsche would have you believe Christianity is merely a religion for milquetoast men without constitution, but to the Dostoevskian, it requires Herculean will to sustain something as inhuman as "love" for one's enemies.
This sentiment emerges repeatedly throughout history not out of misguided kindness or passivity, but because it is equally true as it is unnatural. There is an innate paradox in humanity, and as part of this contradiction, the more we resist it, the more we fight against it, the more it grips us and pulls us into a never-ending cycle of loathing and hatred. Yet within this paradox lies another truth - one that brings us to the very heart of belief itself.
## Wrestling with Truth
After that last segment, you might try to classify and dismiss me as a closet Christian. Candidly, I sometimes wonder that myself, having been profoundly influenced by Christian writers and thinkers (exluding overt theologians, if that's any indication of my nature) throughout my life. Part of this might just be my western cultural inheritance, but it's also rooted in my captivation, from a young age, with the actual story of Jesus.
I've been somewhat immune for some time from having any overtly religious sentiment foisted upon me for what I believe to be one simple fact: I actually read the Bible (willingly, without coercion) at a young age. It never ceases to be hilarious how essentially nobody who claims to follow the book seems to have any inkling of what it actually says or teaches. I truly believe that if they did, they might not be followers at all. Jesus himself, contrary to modern Christian doctrine of easy salvation, spoke to the rarity of his true followers with phrases like "if you left me, you never knew me" and "many are called, few will answer."
Yet Christians worldwide, seemingly unable to accept the profound and difficult truths presented earlier, somehow delusionally cling to a simpler notion of salvation - one they can digest and accept. That a simple word and prayer is enough, and no actual work or effort is required. It's certainly a comforting thought, but not one I subscribe to.
I don't self-describe as a Christian for two simple reasons: First, while I believe many of Jesus's teachings in the gospels are true and correct (if you can decipher their meaning, which is no trivial task), I disagree fundamentally with virtually every Christian sect in practice today. Second, I don't currently believe it's tenable to "know" whether God exists in reality. I think the whole business of "knowing for sure" either way is utter folly. Even the book itself teaches this, if you pay close attention - this is why the chief patriarch is named as one who "wrestles with God." One cannot wrestle with a concept they're fully satisfied to be true.
The proper tension in the question of God's existence lies in that uncomfortable space virtually none of us wish to occupy - the simple admission of ignorance: "I don't know." This perpetual wrestling with uncertainty isn't weakness - it's the natural state of honest truth-seeking. The paradox lies in knowing that the closer you get to truth, the more you understand how much you don't understand. The more certain you become of uncertainty itself.
It's a peculiar burden of the disagreeable truth-seeker: we're compelled to chase truth relentlessly while simultaneously accepting that complete certainty may be forever beyond our reach. We must somehow maintain the passion of the search while embracing the humility of perpetual uncertainty. This isn't relativism - there is only one Truth (big T). But our relationship with it is far more complex than most are willing to admit.
Take, again, the question of God's existence, for instance. Some days I'd like to believe it is so, and some days I certainly hope not, usually when I consider my inadequacies and myriad mistakes. Still, I don't think belief is as ignorant as most modern atheists would suggest, and I must acknowledge the profound contributions that men of faith have made to science, which many modern "scientific" types are happy to ignore, seemingly to strengthen their own position.
By now, perhaps you can see how isolating my experience of profound disagreeableness truly is. There is no sect I belong to, or even can belong to, whether concerning profound questions like "does God exist" or more mundane matters like "what school of engineering do you subscribe to?" As uncomfortable as it is, I can only feel honest with myself by answering such questions with "it depends." This is something most people in my life simply cannot accept. And if I'm being honest, it's for this reason that I sometimes try to hide this aspect of my nature, placing myself in one camp some days, and another others.
Some might accuse me of being a simple fraud or charlatan, and while that might make things simpler, it isn't quite right either. You see, I have some very real and demonstrable engineering and scientific ability, even without formal credentials. Through a love of reading and just plain raw experience I also have some profound understandings of life, philosophy, religion, and psychology, though I dwell in none of the myriad camps permanently. I certainly don't prescribe my way of being to anyone else - in fact, I would caution against it. If you can imagine for a moment the type of experience I'm describing, you'll understand why it's quite uncomfortable. Yet any and all attempts to run or hide from it fail, sometimes spectacularly so. The conclusion, by now, is quite apparent: Love it or hate it, this is who I really am.
## The Purpose of Dissent
What's the point of this self-reflective journey? To illustrate the vital importance that individuals like myself play in this world. For most of my life, I found myself rather repugnant, unable to exist long in any one state - never content to be a true believer, yet never comfortable being a total denier. Never fully subscribing to rabid belief in human progressivism and technological advancement, yet never able to fully deny its contributions to the human condition.
It wasn't until I came to realize the purpose of being me, and others like me: Someone must occupy this uncomfortable space in between, precisely because the majority of humanity simply will not. This isn't about maintaining perfect centrism - rather, it's about the willingness to lean one direction today, explore another camp tomorrow, and perhaps abandon the whole enterprise entirely in the future.
Some might call this wishy-washy or lacking discipline. And yes, there's some truth to that. But then again, I also possess the will to run 20+ miles or completely reimagine software deployment from its foundations, so it's not _just_ that. I must give myself some credit where the existing system - one that requires we exist in predetermined boxes - refuses to do so.
I don't write this for myself. As a fairly private individual, sharing this is quite unnerving. But I choose to face this discomfort for one simple reason: others like me exist, and they exist for good reason. Judging by my own unlikely journey to self-acceptance, they are likely suffering, confused, perhaps self-loathing, maybe even considering a way out. To them, I simply say: we need you!
Painful as it is, as much as the world would rather have you jump into this camp or that, if you did - if we all did - the entire enterprise would collapse. We need the disagreeable to remind us that nothing, absolutely nothing - not science, not religion, not philosophy - is beyond reproach in the final analysis. This has never been easy to accept, yet no matter which discipline you explore, honesty compels you to admit its truth.
As much as we delude ourselves into thinking we live in an enlightened age, we remain, like all humans before us, desperately uncomfortable with lingering doubts, hell-bent on jumping into the first camp that alleviates ambiguity. Whether it's vaccines, political ideology, or faith doesn't matter - just please, oh please, let us take a side so we don't have to live with not knowing.
This is precisely why individuals like ourselves are necessary, perhaps now more than ever. Society needs us to contend with the uncomfortable, because most simply refuse. We must speak our minds, even to that charismatic demagogue, even to that possessed acolyte of the "one true" religion, even at the cost of our own livelihood. The world needs this from us precisely because the majority will not, because they refuse, and while they dare not ask - indeed have no right to ask - they need us all the same.
And you will do it too, not because you want to, not because you particularly enjoy the constant difficulty it poses in your life, but because it is who you are. We just need you, my fellow disagreeable types out there, to understand more deeply and live more truly to your nature, for all our sakes.
## A Prayer for the Defenders
As I said earlier, I believe this is true, to some extent, for all personalities in the world. We need all of these perspectives to reinforce what would otherwise be a rather brittle and shallow existence. Yet as I write this - and I realize this now more clearly than when I began - this piece has become both a prayer for my fellow disagreeables and a reminder to myself of why we must persist in the face of a world that would much rather we simply did not.
We may not like it, we may even mostly despise it, but we are all needed. It's just that the disagreeables have their moment, and it is now - now or never. As techno-feudalism looms and conformity tightens its grip through coordinated debanking campaigns, manipulative codes of conduct, and the creeping implementation of "social credit" systems masquerading as progress, we stand at a precipice unlike any in human history. The place where we might go from here if we don't encourage our more contrarian friends to stand for us, knowing we are too cowardly to stand for ourselves, is not a place I care to visit in my lifetime. I feel quite content having read enough about such places to never need to experience them firsthand.
But if the disagreeable do not defend us now, that is precisely where we are heading - of that I am deathly certain, as much as I wish I weren't. My journey from self-loathing to self-understanding has taught me this: what seems like a curse - this inability to conform, this compulsion to question everything - may be society's last defense against the crushing weight of conformity that continues to slowly tighten its grip. The very traits that make us difficult, that make us challenge and resist, are the traits that keep the doors of freedom propped open.
Don't be fooled into thinking this a partisan issue, either. History shows us the truth - the very same loyalists who assisted Stalin were the _first_ to be lined up and shot when the "revolution" was finally accomplished. This isn't about left or right; it's about the fundamental nature of human freedom and those rare few willing to defend it.
And I'll be clear - I am pessimistic. The most probable outcome is that we will, yet again, descend into utter enslavement - not just of body, but of mind. Perhaps more deeply and fully than at any time in the past, perhaps never to return again. Yet still I myself, even if it is in vain, choose to remain true to my being, if just for once, in all my strengths and flaws, and I ask you - rather out of character for my usual way - to do the same. Even if the worst comes to pass, there is far less shame in remaining true to yourself and your convictions, in my estimation, at least.
So live, and live unashamedly, whether I am your political ally or your bitter enemy. I implore you to live true to yourself. Not this nonsense of "living your truth" - that's preposterous. There is only one Truth if the word truth is to have any meaning at all. And the only part of it that we might possess is the part that tells us we will never know what it is in its entirety, and for this very reason, you must endure.
For our sakes, and for yours. On this Christmas day, I salute you, my fellow disagreeables, on all sides, for if not for you, whether we know it or not, we'd all be in chains at this very moment. Thank you.

278
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/letter-to-my-children.md
View File

@@ -1,278 +0,0 @@
---
title: A Letter to My Children
description: The Struggles, Perils, and Beauty of Life
taxonomies:
tags:
- personal
date: "2025-06-29"
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
### A Disclaimer to the Reader
This letter is for my children in case the worst should happen, or I am not be able to see them again. It is my sacred duty as a father to offer them guidance, and if the State will refuse to allow me to do that, then this is my only path to achieve it. Hopefully this will all be over soon, but just in case it is not I will leave this here. It is very raw, and intentionally so. Everything in here is gained from experience, it is a sincere attempt to encapsulate my imperfect wisdom for the sake of my progeny.
I offer a deliberate disclaimer because I'm well aware of the vipers who will come here to judge and scrutinize every piece of it. First of all, you ought to be ashamed of yourselves if you had any to speak of, which clearly you do not. The timing for your shenanigans is utterly inappropriate, not that you seem to have any sense of what is or isn't appropriate left in you. I should ask you kindly simply to leave in peace, instead of coming here to judge a situation you have utterly no experience in, though I'm quite sure you will not.
Regardless, this letter is surely representative of the experience of a lot of men going through similar situations. I just so happen to be a couple of years ahead of most of them, having gotten started early. Rest assured, this sort of thing will not stop happening until the West is utterly conquered, or we finally decide to wake the [f\*@k up](https://x.com/nrdexp/status/1938600312035745890). Either way, this isn't for you, in the end. It is for my dearly beloved children.
# A Letter to My Children
Hello kids. First of all I just want you to know how badly I miss you guys. I hope you are doing okay. I've seen how stressful it is in your situation too many times. I know how confused and frustrated you might be right now. I don't blame you if you blame me for this situation. Truly it is my fault, or at least my failing, for not being able to overcome this sad state of affairs much sooner. Still, I would compel you my children, as you get older, to follow my story, to sit and remember my endless struggle which you yourselves witnessed, and simply decide for yourselves if it was that I sufficiently fought for the right and honor to be your father; which has been no doubt or question, the greatest honor of my lifetime.
I won't say too much about your mother, directly. I know you all love her, and you will no matter what she does. I also know you just wanted us to have a happy family together. Know that I wanted that too, and that I tried, again and again, even in the face of some things I should have never accepted, partially for your sake and your desires, but also partially out of my own misunderstanding and miscomprehension of the situation. Please understand that I left for a very important purpose which you may now not understand, but which I hope one day you do, so you might avoid a similar fate to mine: you should never stay in a relationship where you are mistreated, and I have done you all a disservice by demonstrating the opposite for so long. That ends now.
When I left, I did not intend to leave you. In fact, I have requested again and again to see you. I want to see you, and if I find some luck in all this situation, maybe I will soon, but just know that it is more important to teach you, my children, then it is to be with you. And it is with a heavy heart, and more pain than I could even express to you, that I have managed to maintain my protest to a relationship which is fully the opposite of the sort of family dynamic I wish for all of you and your future families. Now I wish to leave you with some lessons, just in case the worst happens, or just in case I don't get to see you for a long time. There are some important duties a father has to their children by way of education of the world and your place in it, and if this is the only way I can communicate that to you now, I will try and do my best.
If you don't understand some of the things you read here, please come back again when you are bit older and read it again. Try to understand that everything I leave for you here is for your own benefit, even if some of it seems difficult, contradictory, or even outright wrong or misguided. I will attempt to unleash to you my entire lifetime's worth of wisdom in this letter, flawed as I am as a man, and as a father, and hopefully at least some of it will serve you well in your future endeavors.
Whatever happens from here, just please know, I will never stop fighting for you, I love you, and I pray every day that I get to see you again real soon.
## Lesson 1: The World Doesn't Care About You
If you listen to the media, your school teacher, the government, or a myriad of other "authority" figures in society, then this may come as a shock to you, but my first lesson may also be the most important. It is absolutely imperative that you understand that the world, and everyone in it, doesn't care about you; not really. It isn't because they are malicious or unkind, nor do I mean to say that you might never find a few close friends or even a spouse who does truly care for you to some great capacity, rather I mean to say that in the final analysis: you are on your own.
Everyone in this world has their own burdens and struggles to face. As much as political types like to come around proclaiming their great desire and capacity to offer their care and support, it is always for a price, and I assure you from experience now my children: that price is always too high to pay. There is a great burden in accepting this knowledge, but if you face it with a little courage there is also great freedom.
You alone are responsible for forging your destiny. You decide what kind of person you wish to be. What path you wish to pursue. What matters to you. To whom you will give the honor of your breath and your time, and what matters most to you. Don't let anybody take these decisions away from you. They are rightfully yours and yours alone to make. Whatever you choose to pursue in life, just know that as long as I am around (and even after I'm gone, if the spirit persists), your father will always be rooting quietly (or not so quietly) in your corner.
Still, it is critical to grasp the terrible dual responsibility here. When things go wrong in life, it is on you. It is your responsibility to fix it. Yes, even if it is an injustice against you, as the one I face now that should have rightly been corrected by my fathers, but now falls to me. Sometimes that might mean seeking justice out rightfully (as I do now), or sometimes it might mean knowing when it's time to accept your differences with another and quietly move on. The world will compel you, always, to blame others for your life circumstances. This, in particular, can be a very delicate thing to navigate. While blame is almost never going to serve you in life, understanding is genuinely valuable.
If and when something goes horribly wrong, don't worry so much who is to "blame", whether it be yourself or someone else. Instead try to understand what happened. What did you do wrong? What might others have done to contribute to the problem? Can it be rectified? Can we negotiate a solution? is there a path to pursue Justice? Or perhaps is it time to simply walk away and make my peace? Only you can decide the answers to these questions, but please don't let the temptation to the play the blame game stand in the way of finding an answer. It is understanding that will give you the power to move forward, or as you may have heard: "the truth shall set you free".
So it is then, while the world may never truly care about you, while it is terrible to face the reality of being alone in this life, accepting it can bring you the greatest power and agency over your own experience moreso than anything else in the world. I encourage you to face the truth here, and never run from it. Never believe the lie that someone else knows better than you for your own life, but never be so arrogant as to not listen to those who may speak from great experience or wisdom. In the end, though, always decide for yourself which path is right for you. We live in a time of great confusion: I wish it was that I could have raised you in a simpler generation, but that is not the case for us. It is your responsibility to cut through that confusion and forge yourselves into well developed, well rounded and fully capable adults, though I will help you at every turn if I am not long hindered. There will be many trials and tribulations, as well as many tempations along the way to give in, or get distracted; you may stumble here or there, but don't ever give up. Always move forward knowing that it is your choice, and yours alone, and nobody can ever take that from you.
## Lesson 2: The World Will Try to Pigeon Hole You
You will find, in your struggles through life-perhaps especially in your younger years-that there will be a great temptation to stop somewhere along the way. To define yourself along a single dimension. Say you start a career as an accountant. After a while it will seem like the entire world will conspire against you to make you think you could never be anything else. Don't believe it. Particularly in our time, where we tend to worship these such silly credentials as degrees, you will perhaps start to think that you aren't good enough, or that you are too old, or too dumb to change. Don't believe it.
Now I won't kid you: change is difficult, and this is the primary excuse most individuals make for never pursuing it. However, I am living proof that it is possible. Were any of that nonsense true, I wouldn't be where I am before you now. But as you older kids witnessed yourselves, I didn't get here overnight. You might even still remember those days where I would go work at the recylcing factory, working long hours picking up folks garbage, and coming home smelling of all sorts of unpleasantness. I could have ended my life right there. I could have forever and always considered myself a lowly garbage boy, never worthy of anything else in life: and believe me the temptation to do so was real and visceral. Especially in lowly stations, it is easy to compare yourself unfavorably against others, but don't do it.
Everybody is dealt a different hand in life. Some folks seem like they get just about everything handed to them on a silver platter. But it's a lie; don't believe it. Those who end up with too much, too soon in life tend to be some of the most shallow, and vapid individuals I've ever come across. Not always though either, sometimes they develop into genuinely decent human beings. It all just depends on their experience and their drive. We are all running a race but we don't all start in the same place. That doesn't make anybody better or worse than you. Just because someone has more than you in one area doesn't make them superior. Try to find balance during these times where you find yourself inevitably comparing yourself unfavorably to someone else.
Yeah they might have more money than you, or a more prestigious position in life, but perhaps you are smarter than they are, or more creative. Perhaps they treat people unkindly, or they don't take good care of themselves physically, or they are a little stupid. I know I just told you not to compare, and the point of this exercise isn't actually to compare or judge, but to remind you that we are all just human beings, with your own strengths, weaknesses and life experiences. In the spirit of the previous lesson, never let someone else define who you are, or what you can achieve in life.
Never let a piece of paper, or a resume define what you can aspire to. That doesn't mean you should always shoot for the moon either, but if you know in your heart you can do something, well then just go ahead and start doing it. You don't need anybodies permission, and trust me, when you pull it off you will inevitably gain the respect of those who understand; don't worry too much about the opinions of those that don't.
You will also notice, inevitably, that the world and the people in it will never stop obessively trying to stuff you into some kind of box. They will try to tell you what kind of politics you align with, what sort of religion you represent, how smart you are, or how much you can achieve or earn. All of these things are merely a projection of their own limitations onto you, my children. The people who try to obessively label others are subconsciously contending with the fact that they feel limited in their own experience. So it is I ask you please not to judge others too harshly either. For when you go pointing fingers, you are inevitably expressing your own insecurities, or as the old saying goes: "whenever you point a finger at someone you have 3 more pointing back at you".
Never be afraid to reinvent yourself. Especially when you are young, don't be afraid to take a few risks, even if it leads to temporary discomfort. But if you do find some success in this life, don't define yourself by it either. If you happen to find success in money or relationships, don't get too smug about it. Don't let yourself feel superior to others. Always try to be grateful for what you have achieved and experienced, and always find the next challenge to pursue. Some might say life isn't about the destination but the journey. If you are not moving toward some goal in life, you are invariably decaying.
You will always find the tempatation to rest, to stop, to feel like you finally have enough. Don't believe it. The richness and fullness of life can only be experienced in pursuit of something greater. So it is I ask you children: never stop growing. Always push yourselves to do better, reach higher, understand just a little bit more. It's not about being the best. Competition, itself, can be yet another trap. It doesn't matter who is the "greatest" or the even the "worst". The only thing that matters is the joy of experience along the way.
However, failure is also inevitable. Just understand that failure, itself, can be an accomplishment. The more that you fail in life, the more you will learn. The more that you risk failing the more courage you will acquire. So don't be afraid to fail. I know it is scary, and the thought can even be overwhelming at times, trust me kids I know. But it doesn't matter. In fact this entire lesson itself can perhaps be summed up in one statement: it doesn't matter what anybody else thinks about you.
Remember that, whether you are at the highest peak of succes, or the lowest valley of failure, that the only constant in life is change. The only reason that you would ever get "stuck" at any station in your own life is through your own stubborness. Remember that. It's up to you to get the most out of life. Sometimes you'll be fueled by proving others wrong; sometimes by proving you can do something. But the greatest motivation I have come to find in life, ultimately, is simply the joy that comes from doing the things that bring you fulfillment. So don't spend too much time or energy, either, in directions that do not bring you joy in life. This life is far too short to waste on frivolous pursuits.
You can always, and I do mean always, no matter your age or position, change course in life. It doesn't matter what the outside world thinks. They might say "it's too risky", or "why would you do that, when you have everything you could ever want", but don't listen to them. I wouldn't say to "always follow your heart", either, because our desires can sometimes lead us astray as well. Rather I would ask you to seek to find balance in life. If you are stuck in an area where you feel dead and unhappy, start to consider another change. Don't act rashly or without a plan, unless you have no choice, but don't ever be afraid to pursue a new direction if you know that it's time to.
Also know that you always have a father out there that believes in you. I know you kids can accomplish great and beautiful things in this life, and I will never doubt you, always support you and offer any guidance I can along the way. I will always be here for you if and when you need me, no matter how long its been, no matter how upset we might get with each other. As long as I am around (and maybe even after I am gone), you kids will never truly be alone.
## Lesson 3: Your Breath and Your Time
The next lesson is one that I had a very difficult time learning myself, in my own estimation at least. I will just say it outright and then try to help you understand it as best I can, as I am, myself, still only just now coming to understand the importance of this truth: Your breath (your words) are the most important thing you can offer to another human being. And since speaking and writing invariably cost you time, the next most important thing you can give someone is your time.
What does this mean? Well, you have a limited time here on this earth. There will be many battles and struggles that come your way. You will not have the time nor the energy to face them all. Thus it will become absolutely critical for you, my children, to understand when it is worth your breath to offer, and when it simply is not. Nobody can decide this for you, it is always something you must consider yourself.
You won't get it right the first time. You will inevitably waste some time in life, spinning your wheels on something that you should have probably ended long ago. You will also likely miss some opportunities that you should have taken advantage of. Don't stay stuck on these things. There will always be more opportunities, and as we already discussed, it is alright to admit defeat sometimes and move in a different direction. The trick is to keep this in mind, and always consider whether or not the thing you are about to say, or the battle which you are about to fight, is actually worth it.
Sometimes people will think you are crazy for passing up on something that they think is super valuable. That's okay. If you know in your heart its not for you, don't waste your breath explaining yourself. Sometimes too, people might say that you are insane for pursing something or spending time in a direction that they say is pointless or hopeless. That's okay too. It's not up to them.
Take me, right now, for example. Nearly the entire world has resigned themself to the modern predictament and dynamic of divorce and child custody. Everybody probably thinks I am insane for fighting and speaking out against it, yet my own experience of its corruption compels me to regardless. But it doesn't matter. It is important _to me_ that you kids have a father in your life, one that is unhindered and unable to be controlled by the corruptions of state or outside influence, and whether I suceed or fail to uphold my rights, hopefully it can stand as a lesson for you kids.
You are the only one that can decide what matters to you. You are the only one who knows when it is time to fight, and when it is time to move on. Always try to remember the importance of your words. Remember even what the ancients taught: "in the beginning was the word". There is a reason. What you speak out loud has a sort of power; mysterious as it is. It isn't some kind of witchcraft, though maybe some folks will try to convince you of that, but rather it is more like the raw force of creation itself.
What you speak is a reflection of what is in your heart. It will reveal who you truly are and what you stand for, at least at that time, to others. Understand, too, that who you choose to spend time around and use your breath on consistently will have a lasting effect on who you become. If you find that you've been hanging out with the wrong crowd, in the spirit of the previous lesson, understand that it is always okay to move on, if it is time, and find new people to talk to, perhaps some who can better comprehend or appreciate what you have to say.
There is a critical and important lesson underneath here as well. Never lie. Never, ever speak something which you know is not the truth. If speech is the underlying creative force in the universe, then lying is like a destructive force eroding your potential to create. Of course, we all fail at this sometimes. It is okay, just remember how important it is the speak the truth. Know that you will be judged by your word. Understand how important it is that when you say you will do something, that you actually go through with it. Even if it is something simple and small.
I'll give you an example to illustrate the importance of something seemingly insignificant. One of my friend's young boys did me a favor a few weeks back. I promised him that if he did me this favor I'd give him a little bit of money, but I didn't have any cash on me. I promised I'd come back and give it to him later, with a bit of interest since he had to wait. Now since then, I've been through a lot, I've had to travel a bit, I've been sitting here half losing my mind trying to figure out what to do to fight for you kids, but I still remember my promise, even amidst all this chaos in my life which seems much more important and consequential. Now that I'm back in town, I've made an agreement to go out to my friend's property and give this little boy the money I owe him. If I don't it will continue to eat at me a little bit, knowing I haven't done something I promised to do.
This is exactly what I'm trying to tell you. Your words have immense power. If you say you will do something, and you don't, even if you fully intended to, even if something came up that made it difficult or impossible, it will eat at you. You will remember it, and you should rectify it if you can, or at the very least apologize sincerely if you can't. It's always nice to be respected by others but the most important persons respect to earn is the respect of yourself.
But to respect yourself is a lot harder. That's because you will see every single time in life when you lie, when you cheat, when you don't give all of your effort that you could have. You cannot lie to yourself, and I seriously caution you never to try, lest you remain stuck in a pit for the rest of your life. I don't exagerate, it can happen, and you might already know a few people close to you in life that are suffering from this condition right now. Don't let it be you. Find the respect for yourself that you need to forge ahead in life by being honest, by having integrity even if it is an inconvenience. if you are able to maintain respect for yourself, it won't ever really matter what others think of you.
But the opposite is also true: even if you earn the respect of everyone else around you, if you can't respect yourself; if you know that you have lied or cheated somehow to get ahead, you'll inevitably be miserable. So it is I try to impress upon you the power of your words; especially to yourself. Don't waste your breath, and consequently, your time on people or things that you know aren't worth it. And never be afraid to fight a battle, to use your voice, if you know that you must, despite what others might say. This is the only way, in the long run, you will be able to respect yourself, I assure you. Trust me kids, I found out the hard way.
Just know that I am always here for you if and when it gets confusing or difficult. I can offer a word of advice or just an ear to listen if you need it. I also understand if sometimes you don't wanna waste your breath on me, but I hope at least sometimes you do, because there are very few people in this world who want you to suceed as sincerely as your father does. Either way, I love you children and I pray you will, in time, learn to use your words and spend your time wisely.
## Lesson 4: Your Heatlh is Your Wealth
This next lesson might be particularly important for our time. It seems, especially in our little corner of the world, that most people have no idea what it even means to be "healthy". Indeed, I've spent nearly my entire adult life persuing the knowledge of what makes and keeps a person in good condition physically and mentally, and I can attest to the incredible struggle it presents. Still, there is basically nothing as important, in this life, as your health. And regardless of what "doctors" nowadays might try to convince you of, your mental health is inevitably and intimately tied to your physical well being.
I'll be honest with you though, it isn't going to be easy. There seems to be an almost deliberate assault today, kids, on your physical body; and from every direction. Not only is most of the information out there, including from "official" sources, complete garbage, but also the methods and conditions which to apply the knowledge is by no means trivial or easy to get right. However, there is also a lot to be gained. An ancient but very wise man Socrates once said, "it is the greatest of tragedies for a man to reach the age of adulthood without ever knowing his full physical vigor". You will hardly even comprehend the full depth and glory available to you in this life unless you achieve some significant level of physical health in it.
This is because energy is the true currency of life, and without your health you will have very little energy to do and pursue the things you want to according to the other lessons which we have already discussed. As always, you will make mistakes, sometimes horrible ones. Perhaps you will be at a low point in life and put on a lot of weight. Perhaps you will neglect your mobility for a long time and get really stiff and experience a lot of pain. I've done all of these things and more, but just know that through discipline and knowledge there is a way out, always.
It's important to mention that "doctors" nowadays are often not really there to help you much. Let me try to explain what I mean, you see there are roughly two different kinds of medicine practiced in modern medicine. There is what's know as "acute" treatment, like when you get in a car accident and someone has to put you back together immediately or your life is at stake, and then there is "chronic" medicine. It is in the latter category where doctors really won't be much help, and in fact, will more often than not try to sell you on something that will only make things worse.
Now to be sure, this is a very contentious issue today, but I have my reasons as well as an unambiguos [philosophy](https://nrd.sh/blog/code-of-rebellion/#decoherence-a-royal-indictment) which you can review at such time that you are ready for it, but the simple truth is this: doctors are not even taught about how your body actually works or what's good or bad for it. They are really only educated on which drugs to sell for this or that symtom. So it is, that if you want to keep your body in good shape, long term, it is largely going to be on you; in keeping with the first lesson of this letter.
Now there is _a lot_ of really good, and really awful information out there, and it's taken me a very long time to sift through and I'm still sifting through, to try and keep myself happy and healthy. For this reason, alone, I truly hope that I am able to sustain a relationship with you guys after this current battle is over, so that I can impart some of this hard won knowledge onto you, and hopefully make your journey towards health a bit easier. What matter's right here and now aren't so much the specifics so much as the principles.
Your body is designed to move, never let anyone convince you that exercise isn't absolutely essential for your life. I know it sucks, and it can be real annoying most days, but there is an infinite amount of information out there now more than ever, as well as just plain common sense, that tells us how essential exercise is for a healthy body and mind. Most people don't even really know how to exercise. A lot of folks might go into a gym and do the same 3 exercises again and again for months or years.
It's far more important to learn about how your bodily is actually designed to move, and to challenge it with increasingly difficult exercises as time goes on. It's important to consider your joints, your flexibility and your mobility as much as it is your muscle mass. There are also a lot of folks out there who might try to convince you to take shortcuts, like anabolic steroids, for example. Don't do it. It isn't about reaching some goal, remember, it is about learning how to maintain your health over the long term. To that end, shortcuts like steroids are a massive detriment, and also very dangerous to your body for a whole bunch of reasons.
Also, a category of exercise that is nearly universally overlooked but probably one of the most important is mobility training. That is moving your body in such a way that you retain and improve the full range of mobility of your joints. There are a lot of exercises, not well known, that can be of fantastic utility in this department. Hopefully I have a chance to show you some, but if not, definitely seek them out and apply them, and you will not regret it.
Another aspect of your health which is critical is your nutrition. This is probably one of the most contentious and difficult things to get right, though throughout the years I've gotten it down pretty solid and I hope to share some of that knowledge with you going forward. Even so, the general principle is simple. Most food today isn't real food. It's mostly crap that your body doesn't need that will need to be flushed out later on down the line. In short most food is basically just debt. It requires deliberate effort and time to get your hands on some honest to goodness real food.
Most of the time, unless you are in a real nice area or a very expensive restuarant (even then it's not guaranteed), you'll end up having to cook for yourself to get the proper nutrition your body really needs. In my own view, having achieved a high level of nutritional saturation at this point in my life, I would even go as far as to say that many of the world's problems today are directly related to malnutrition. I can tell you from experience that when I compare my level of ability to think and process information now, vs when I was severely malnurished, it's like night and day. For that reason I might even go so far as to say that to maintain proper nutrition is absolutely essential to experience what one might call "true freedom" in this life.
Life is a battle, in a lot of ways, and in order to sustain the energy and focused required enough to fight and eventually overcome it, you need to stay well nourished and avoid poisoning your body too much so you don't slow down. This is by no means the norm, which is why I dedicate the whole section to it, because you need to understand that most folks out there have already given up on their health, or ever finding an answer to it. Partially because of the difficulty of exercising regularly and correctly, partly because of the difficulty involved in nourishing yourself properly, and maybe partially just out of habit.
This is precisely why you want to get healthy as young as possible and stay healthy as long as you can: your habits will either work for you, or against you in the long run. I am in a situation where I built up a ton of bad habits, and it has taken me over a decade now to break many of those to get my health to a place where I am even starting to feel like I have the upper hand. Don't let that be you. Get healthy and stay healthy as soon as you can, and use that energy to pursue your life with full intensity and determination.
There's lots of other aspects of health that we need to touch on as well, such as getting enough sunlight, avoiding too much harmful bluelight-especially late at night-maintaining healthy relationships, and getting adequate rest and sleep. I just briefly mention them here so that you'll be aware of their importance, but hopefully we can get into some detail together in the future.
I will always be here, as your father, to help you along the way, and train with you or cook with you whenever you want. I know you can do it, you are all so much stronger than I am, inside, so if I can do it, you will have no problem I'm sure.
## Lesson 5: Love is Not Control
This is a big one, both for me as I've come to learn, but also for you to be able to avoid such a miserable and difficult struggle that you have witnessed your mother and I endure. There is also a lot of confusion in society that I feel compelled to clear up for your sake, since it took me years to find clarity on this topic and its not common knowledge. It is a simple lesson, one a lot of folks will profess to know and understand intuitively, yet it isn't gonna be so simple to apply for many folks, due to the strength of our emotions and the tug of our hearts, as well as a system that I hope to expose here in my current battle, which plays on every aspect of it and milks us all for most everything we are worth in the process.
The current state of affairs when it comes to love is truly dispicable. It is little wonder most folks have just given up entirely. So it is I'd like to impart some hard fought wisdom from my own experience, and since you have witnessed my struggles first hand, you'll know I tell you the truth. I want to be delicate here, because again, I know you love your mother very much, despite everything, but I also have to find a way to be honest and direct, or the message ain't gonna come across.
So I'll try to speak abstractly about the dynamics between men and women, so that you can hopefully understand the better way, and the worse way to handle these kinds of relationships. Because of the utterly and, in my honest opinion deliberate, corruption of the current system of "marriage", I want to lay out some knowledge of some pitfalls to avoid as well, so you can hopefully avoid stumbling into the same traps I have.
First of all, I'm just gonna come out and address the fundamental issue. We live in a time, now, where folks don't even wanna admit that men and women are different at all. To me, this is actually more of a reflection of the profound lack of awareness and understanding of our modern times and how we come to get here, as well as a total lack of experience in actually dealing with members of the opposite sex. There is also a hint of despair in there, as the challenges men face nowadays seem damn near insurmountable even for the strongest and most capable of us, and so some men, it would seem, seek to redefine their identity purely as an escape from the reality and deathly responsibility of being a man in today's world.
But understand here and now this is a lie and a corruption, maybe not in every single case but in many. A lot of people will hate me for saying it, but it's the truth. Now don't go around hating anybody or judging them for their life choices. We all struggle in this life, and the point of saying this so bluntly ain't to judge anyone else, but to impress upon you the reality of the situation in a world so full of noise and confusion on the subject. Men and women are not the same at all, and actually, the only reason that many people seem to feel that way today is because many men, especially, have failed to live up to and embody the full spirit of masculinty that uniquely distinguishes the characteristics of fully developed men.
Some of this is through ignorance or inaction, but some of it too is also systemic. Much of our food, as we discussed in the last segment, is toxic. It is somewhat peculiar, in my honest opinion, that a lot of those toxins just so happen to especially hinder the development and production of male testosterone. Coupled with a severe lack of health, nutrition and physical development as we discussed in the last segment, as well as a general inexperience with the feminine counterpart and how to properly manage our relationship to it-which can only really be learned by hard won experience-we might say that the fully developed man may now be one of the rarest things available to us on earth.
I would further suggest to you then, my children, that we live in an era of hyper-feminization, where men are expected and encouraged to behave as women. There are a variety of reasons for this, such as the fact that, without many men around anymore, it's hard to even know what the proper expression of masculinity truly is. There is also the fact that the feminine tendency is such as to be far more agreeable, and concerned with things like "safety" and "security" over more masculine concerns of "freedom" and "autonomy". A lot of folks will hate me now, for even suggesting that the differences between men and women are inherent, but not only are they [dead wrong](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/sax-on-sex/202405/ai-finds-astonishing-malefemale-differences-in-human-brain), but this letter isn't for them anyway; it is for you.
Again, I will say much of the misunderstanding comes from a lack of experience. Those children, then, that have the opportunity to grow up in a household, quite rare nowadays, where a healthy expression of both masculinity and femininity prevail have a tremendous advantage. You kids didn't have the luck of any such advantage so I try here now to explain it to you as best I can to fill in the gaps of your current experience and hopefully set you down the right path.
Now we are gonna talk about what the natural expressions of masculinity and femininity are, as best I have experienced, and how many of those dynamics have been turned on their head in the modern world to detrimental effect. In general, feminine energy is more agreeable, it represents a certain conservation of energy, a reluctance to cause harm or speak against the grain. Most women, nowadays, will hate it when I say this, but they also derive a certain pleasure from submission. Whatever they tell you, women will always submit to whatever they deem the highest authority. Even the rabid "feminists" of the world are, seemingly unknowingly, but none the less ironically enough, submitting themselves to an ideology that was in large part progenerated and funded by men, for very particular reasons not at all in alignment with their understanding of the movement.
That's beside the point. The point is, women seek protection and safety, and so they seek to identify the highest authority they can in their environment, and align themselves (or "submit") to their authority faithfully. Most women nowadays end up submitting to the authority of the state (or culture), and it is little wonder then, that basically whatever the state tells them to believe, they believe. Whether it be feminism, or subordination to a job, or that men are evil, or that they live in a partriarchy. The key thing to understand about the feminine is that is primarily driven by emotion.
It matters little if at all that most of the things I just listed are not true in fact, it matters even less if you present a well organized and structured case to demonstrate, for example, that a state which punishes men severely and deprives them of their children in 80% or more of cases, doesn't really constitute a patriarchy by any meaningful definition. It doesn't mater at all if you really understand the feminine nature, because they are driven by emotion. The state tells them its a patriarchy, and they have submitted themselves emotionally to the authority of the state, so it's a patriarchy, and that's it. They don't wanna hear any more of it. Of course, every person is their own being, with their own personality, but more or less this is how the feminine energy operates, whether they realize it or not. This is why, for example, no matter how long this egregious corruption of the condition of fatherhood goes on, women simply cannot see it, because emotionally it doesn't exist to them, because their authority figure told them so.
Now we will talk about the masculine traits, which are basically the exact opposite of the feminine, and naturally so. It is absolutely critical to understand that these differences are not "ideas" or "social constructs" as many today might have you believe, but rather they are inherent and natural expressions of our being. Any perversion or deviation from these energies has more to do with a lack of health and understanding much moreso than any sort of "social construct", as far as I have deduced it. And that leads me to my next point about men and masculinity. Where women seek safety, men seek freedom. Where the feminine desires protection the masculine seeks dominion of his particular environment. Where the feminine relies primarily on emotion, the masculine relies primarily on logic and reasoning. Where the character of a person is judged primarily by personality by the feminine, the character of an individual is judged by the masculine primarily by their strength and constitution, that is, how well they keep their word.
Men build their strength through focus, and a big part of the reason so few fully developed men exist today is because the primary means of achieving true masculine energy lies in the control of sexual desire. This lead us to a critical understanding about both men and women. It is through the lack of control of the sexual drive in both men and women that leads to a corruption of their natural spirit. That is, an over indulgence of sexual gratification for a man will more and more cause him to unnaturally emobody the characteristics of the feminine; where the over-indulgence of sexual gratification for a women will have just the opposite effect, and she seems to unnaturally embody more masculine characteristics.
It is absolutely critical to understand these differences, and that when they are corrupted by sex, their expression becomes unstable. It is just as unstable and unsustainable for a women to embody masculine energy, ultimately leading to either a delusional sense of entitlement that will ultimately end in the women ending up lonely and somewhat senile, as it is for a man to embody a feminine energy, where he will become so weak and ineffectual that he may be driven to simply put an end to his own life, or rest under the permanent dominance of an overmasculine woman until something horrible inevitably happens.
In order to understand this dynamic I will attempt to illustrate an analogy: the relationship between men and women is like a combustion engine. The feminine represents the combustion itself. It is powerful and dymanic, but without an engine block to contain it, it is basically just a choatic explosion. A man is the engine block itself. If it is not in good working order, it is mostly useless, or if it doesn't have any combustion at all, it is ineffectual. Over time, as well, the combustion will wear down the components of even the most well designed engine, and it will be necessary, then, to take time to rebuild portions of the engine to keep it in good working order.
This is a perfect analogy, in my estimation, because it illustrates the dynamic clearly. Feminine energy without any masculinity to contain it is dangerous and explosive. Women themselves instinctually know this of their nature which is why they seem to always seek to submit to the highest authority, as we have already discussed. The feminine, further, needs the engine block to help establish for it a purpose and a direction, just as much as the block needs the combustion to give it the drive it needs to fulfill its own purpose.
Similarly, the engine block is perfect for a man because it describes the situation thoroughly. If the egine is no good, the combustion will simply overwhelm it. Even if it is in good working order, it will eventually need to take time to reconstitute and regain its faculties. This is the perfect dymanic for men, because it shows the critical importance for them to find a place to direct and guide the combustive energy of the feminine in a meaningful direction. This is by no means trivial, and there is an important reason why the world and every civilization has always kept a close and demanding eye on its men. Men can easily become worn out, or ineffectual, or in the worst case totally corrupt. It is primarily through the brotherhood of other men by which they develop into strong and capable competent and truly masculine men. It is little wonder, then, that so many men today are struggling, having no real brotherhood to speak of, many being controlled by a hyper-masculine female who is, as we have shown, totally overwhelming them and attempting to control them, which often is expressed through isolationism as the woman doesn't feel his friends are "good for him", not understanding that he literally needs them to stay sane.
This is why it is critical for a man to resist the feminine influence at all costs, not only for his own sake, but for the sake of the feminine as well who desires its guidance. If men do not uphold their role to contain and direct the explosive energy of the feminine, even at the cost of their own desire, then they will quickly find themselves overwhelmed and totally dominated by it. I speak from experience, not from theory. The only way for a man to recover from such a situation is, again, sexual abstinance and brotherhood with likeminded men. It's important that a brotherhood is developed by masculine men, with other masculine men, as forging a brotherhood with overly feminine men will only serve to keep you in the same cycle of confusion which an overly feminine man is already stuck.
I cannot speak as much on how to develop properly the feminine since I am not a woman, however being an overly feminine man for a good portion of my existence I might have some idea about it. Women seem to desire community, and understanding. They want to feel emotionally stable and work to serve others. Again we are talking about the truly feminine woman, not the all too common masculine women of today. Masculine women, like feminine men, seem unhappy or unstable. The best I can liken it to is like an unstable isotope. Desperately trying to retain a masculine frame in a body that naturally wants to express its full feminine glory. In short, its like a ticking time bomb, and it is starting to express itself now in our time more and more clearly. Only after masculinized women have lost some of the mystic of their beauty do they seem to start to fully wake up to this.
There is no "snapping them out of it", since they rely primarily on emotion and they have largely subordinated themselves to a state and social structure which affirms their masculine tendencies. However, their deep feminine desire for a "real" man to submit to cannot be totally eliminated in most of them, or so it seems, and once they "hit the wall" of age, as it's come to be known in our time, only then do they start to wonder (but still not understand, since their emotional framing doesn't seem to allow for it) why it is they can never attract one of these men. Most of them, then, seem to develop an utter disdain for men in general, perhaps partly out of grief for not finding one and concluded "they must not exist", and partly because they have submitted themself to a culture which tells them men are evil, and emotionally align with that message.
It is no small wonder, then, why most people have given up on love in the modern world, and only now after explaining this sorry state of affairs to you my children, which will undoubtably be one of the more difficult, but also probably maybe one of the more important segments of this letter for you to read, especially as you get older and start to pursue the object of your desire in the opposite sex. But we have to come back now to the title of this section: love is not control.
It turns out that both overly feminine men and overly masculine women have something in common besides the instability which I've already alluded to: they tend to be overly controlling of their partners. I suppose it's not incredibly difficult to comprehend, if you think about it, they are in an unstable and confused state of existence; for the man he feels as though he has to "hold on" to this woman as his only option, being insecure in his masculine frame, for the woman, I can only guess but perhaps she is contemptful and untrusting of this "idiot" man that she feels she cannot rely on, true or not, and so he must be controlled and told what to do for his "own good".
Whatever the case is, though, it is important-no critical-to understand that this is not love, and in the final analysis, it is not worth investing in long term regardless of where you are in your own development. Don't waste time in these kinds of relationships or with these kinds of people. They aren't "evil" or "bad", but the problem is that you will both negatively encourage each other, through this mutal expression of different types of control, to delve deeper and deeper into this unhealthy and backwards state of being the opposite of what you should be. Therefore it is imperative for your own development, and for theirs as well if its someone you care about, to let it go. This can be one of the most difficult things to accomplish however, so I'll offer you some practical advice here.
My boys, you need to make sure and watch over your sisters. You need to make sure you understand just what kind of relationship they are in, and if you see these unhealthy dynamics developing, you need to stand as a protective man that she can run to for safety from her overly feminine and controlling male counterpart. My girls, you need to rely on your brothers and me in these times of relational difficulty. Men express their controlling tendency typically through direct force, and so attempting to leave a man who is trying to "hold on" to you will likely require some assistance. You might be tempted to rely on the state, but the state is a corrupt authority in its own right. You are far better off relying on your masculine brothers and father, as long as we are around and well, who can offer a firm but measured resistance to any attempt for an unhealthy man to "hold on" to you.
Remember it doesn't matter if you feel strongly for someone or care about them deeply, if this unhealthy dynamic of an overly masculine female coupled with and overly feminine male exists, you have to end it for everybodies sake. Maybe not even permanently, but at least as long as it takes to regain your natural frame and adjust, maybe with the same person if they do the same, or maybe with someone else if not. The key point is that to exist too long in the opposite frame is unsustainable and will inevitably lead to problems and potentially even harm, long term. It isn't worth it.
Again to my boys, if you ever find yourself in relation with an overly masculine female trying to control you, and you feel your masculine energy dwindling under her influence, you need to understand that she will never stop trying to convince you to stick around. She believes you don't know what is good for yourself, and won't take anything you say seriously. The only thing you can do is remove yourself from the relationship unconditionally. Don't argue, don't explain, don't get angry, don't judge. Just leave. The most important thing to do is to regain your masculine frame at all costs.
Now how do we do this? How do you regain alignment when in such a situation, which you almost invariably encounter at least once in your lifetime? Well I already mentioned it earlier but we need to go over it again: sexual abstinence. This is a very little understood wisdom in our time, though our ancestors understood it much better. It is important that you listen to me here then, since not many people will agree or even be aware of this wisdom. Abstinence for both men and women naturally assists with our realignment toward a more natural frame (masculine for men, feminine for women).
For men, it gives you the space to escape the pull of your desire, which is a naturally feminine expression, and the reason why being in relationship with the feminine inevitably "wears down" your engine block. Sexual gratification is a beautiful gift with someone you truly care for in healthy relationship, but it also has a price, my sons, and it is important to retain your masculine guiding energy for your women to be able to trust and respect your presence and so you do not push her into a more masculine frame of mind. It is also important for your life, so that you can stay on task, and keep your finances and health in proper working order.
To put it simply: women do not respect men who do not have some higher purpose or mission beyond mere sexual gratification, even if they love you, they will lose respect for you if you sink into this habit of sacrificing your goals for your momentary desires. This means that even in relationship you can never let sex guide your decision making. This is an incredibly foreign concept today, but it is none the less essential. Retain your seed at all costs where necessary. If you feel yourself slipping or you are going through a particularly difficult time in your relationship take some time away, meet with your brothers in a similar mindspace, or cultivate a brotherhood with someone who does and regain your masculinity at all costs. Retain your seed for as long as it takes to regain your masculine frame, and until you meet a women who is worth pursuing. Pursuing women frivolously during this time could lead to your downfall, so heed my warning seriously or pay the price.
For my daughters, please understand that I love you and want the best for you when I say this, and also understand that the world will incessantly and vicisously lie to you about what I'm going to say to you now, but regardless of what the world _says_ they will inevitably judge you regardless, so ignore them. You must remain abstinent for as long as you can to retain your feminine frame. Masculine men do not respect nor truly desire promiscious women, and if you ever wish to find a truly masculine man to which you can happily submit under the terms we have already here discussed, then you must understand that they are looking for purity, by definition. Masculine women will never stop lying to you in this respect, they will tell you that it is "liberating" to indulge your sexual desire. It's not. All you have to do to know this for certain is look at the older generation of women who have lived their life this way.
These women are bitter, some angry, some depressed, but nearly all of them unhappy and alone, or in a relationship with a miserable man that they despise and mistreat. They are no role model for you. If you happen to be in a relationship with a man that does lead to sex, that's okay, but even so remain faithful as long as he remains masculine. If for any reason the relationship doesn't work, however, don't let anybody judge you; just do as we discussed already and leave to regain your feminine frame. But again maintain your abstinence. If you do this, no truly masculine man will judge you for having a previous partner.
Now all my children understand that I present this lesson to you now at potentially great personal cost. Making this public will almost undoubtably strike a mass of contraversy, but know that I could care less. I only wish for you to understand the truth that so many now fail to grasp. Further I wish you to understand the dynamics that led to my downfall and my current position, as well as how to recover from such a position should the need ever arise. No matter how bad your relational situation comes to, understand that long periods of abstinence will provide to you a solid foundation on which to reassess, rebuild and regain your footing and your natural frame.
Also understand that nothing of what I've said here is meant to be weaponized to judge others. People have their own lives, they make their own choices, and it is not for us to tell them how they should or should not live, regardless of if we feel we strongly know better or not. This knowledge is soley for use for yourselves in a world rife with relational, nearly universally so, contraversy and contention.
This section is so titled because the temptation, the great temptation when you are weak in an inappropriate frame, will be to stay in a relationship where control is being expressed over you. Don't fall for it. Real love does not require control. Neither for men, nor for women. A real masculine man, my daughters, can truly love a woman without any need to possess her, even if he desires to do so. It is rare in our time, almost extinct, but it is the truth. If you need space, he will give it to you. If even you need to leave, for whatever reason, he will let you go even if it hurts him, maybe not right away, but once he understands you are serious.
The same goes for a woman. A feminine woman who really loves you will never try to control you. If you need space she will trust you are making the right decision. If you need to leave she will understand that, despite your love together, the world calls you both to different paths. The hallmark of love is acceptance of the whole person. It is rare, it has always been rare, and it is damn near extinct in our time, but it does exist.
The secret to finding it, though, lies in discpline. This is why so few people today even believe in love anymore. They lack the discpline to reamin abstinent for as long as it takes for the opportunity of love to present itself. Many might be skeptical but it makes sense logically. If you will just accept the first offer that comes your way, how will you ever find the one you truly love? You won't and that's my warning to you in a nutshell. if you ever want to find someone you can truly love, whether for a lifetime or maybe just a long time, then you must retain control of your sexual desire, regardless of what this ridiculous world tells you.
Know that, like the masculine love I just finished explaining, I will always love you, even if you do not heed my wisdom here. Even if you rebel against it in fact. I do not require your obedience or your subservience, but I do desire for you to have a good and healthy life, and so I pray you will come to find the truth of my teaching here, someday, even if not right away. Whatever happens, whatever path you choose, and whatever difficulties or struggles you may face, your father will always be here if and when you need him.
## Lesson 6: Life is Beautiful
This is perhaps one of the tougher lessons to learn, especially in dark times such as ours, but its no less important; in fact maybe that makes it even more important, considering. Life is a beautiful thing, my children, and it is important never to lose sight of that. It is so easy to get overwhelmed with work, life, struggles, stresses, finances, responsibilities, obligations, mistakes, health issues, etc, etc, etc, etc. However, if you give in totally, if you refuse to stop and see the beauty in life, it is only then when you truly lose.
Understand that in order to see the beauty requires deliberate effort on your part. Although it can be made easier by good health and solid control of your desire. To use myself as an example: right now I am amidst the most difficult struggle of my life, which is to secure my right to father you kids properly and without interference from the state. This letter stands as my last resort to accomplish that, in case I fail. To impart my wisdom on you as best I can, so that you might still be able to say that you've learned something important from your father. To be a father is both a terrible and wonderful responsibility; and to feel like you've failed or been insufficient in this duty can be overwhelming and crushing. Truly I do not know how this will end, if I will be able to raise you in the place and fashion of my choosing as a truly free man, or if the corruption of the state will prevail and I will be able to leave you only with this letter and my guidance wherever I will be allowed to offer it.
And yet still, amidst all the great and terrible pain this has and continues to cause me, even here in this state which I now loathe and despise and which I only wish to remove myself from and soon as possible, if only I can acquire you into my custody, I see such immense beauty in life. In fact even the struggle itself and the pain I endure in it is beautiful to me in some way. This is directly related, I think, to the immense amount of discipline which I have now been able to muster over my lower desires and also the great level of health I have achieved after such a long period of struggle to achieve it. This is why I dedicated a segment to each of these things, because they are important in there own right yes, but also because they enable you, my children, to see beauty in everything. Even the pain and struggle of life.
Everywhere I go I can appreciate the beauty. I notice things now that I never seemed to have time to before. I have been stopping to talk to random strangers; something an introvert like me would have never done before. I am experiencing a whole new depth and meaning in life even amidst this darkest of times in my struggle to free you. Even when I look ahead, and I consider the possibility of failure, there is still hope and beauty. For you are all your own people. You will some day make your own decisions about what is right and wrong for yourselves. Perhaps someday you will consider this letter and accept parts, and possibly reject parts. That's fine. I am but one flawed man as well, I do not claim to possess all the answers in life. I know somehow, don't even ask me how necessarily, call it God perhaps or the Spirit of Man which long lay dormant and beaten to a pulp, but I know that somehow as long as I pursue my path faithfully, that one way or another you children will be okay.
Or rather you might say, I have faith that you will be okay, despite the struggle, despite what I see as a great corruption of our time. Despite whether or not I will be able to overcome it; in all of these things are there lessons and in all of these things is there beauty. Even a simple walk through the park can elicit and overwhelming sensation of joy to experience the air, the trees, the beauty of all of the life, even in such a place where the parks aren't particularly well kept.
Also understand, that to stop and appreciate the beauty in life leads, ultimately, to being given more and greater beauty to appreciate. I don't know how this mysterious principle works, exactly, though I have some future writings where I intend (and have already begun) to explore it; were you interested. Why just now, during this trip which I took only as a last resort for the sake of my sanity, knowing nothing of what to expect or what it would bring; it was just then I was exposed to some of the most overwhelming beautiful land and experiences I have yet come across. Of course, on the surface there wasn't much special about it, but just consider the circumstance as an example of the great unfolding of beauty that can happen in your life, when you simply allow it and take the chance and opportunity to seek it, just a bit.
After a long 35 years now, it was just a few short months ago I was able to collect enough information about my paternal lineage, having never known my father, to find where they ultimately come from. Until then I've always known myself purely as latino, and working out the family tree on that side as well, ended up finding we are originals and natives to the area of New Mexico, which my grandpa had long since informed me of. From Spain and a long chain of mestizo lineage comes my maternal line, and so part of your own lineage, my children. However, it was only recently I discovered the other half, originally from England (couldn't go back much further than that), but migrated as some of the earliest settlers to the area of Virginia, and still further across the mountains there to be one of the first families to settle in the area just over the mountains in what is now Tennessee.
Of course I didn't know this some months ago, all I found was that my paternal lineage came from England, had a short stint in Virgina and ended up in Tennessee for the majority of the history of this country. I had no idea where in Tennessee, so what are the odds and how could it be that it was the exact area that I just so happened to visit, even right down to the small little town which I happened to be staying, solely of the kindness of someone I didn't even know at the time, but who I now consider a great friend. This is the beauty of life that can unfold when you allow for it. This little place I ended up just so happened to be the very home of my forefathers who I'd never even known previously. My mind was, and still kinda is a little blown when I think about it, totally blown away by this experience which was so rich and indescribably full of beauty, even amidst what was likely equally great pains and struggles in my heart and mind as I battled the darkness to find a path forward for myself and my children.
And still, that is to say nothing of the people, of the wild's in an area that is, I've come to find, one of the absolutely most beautiful portions of this entire country. The feeling of belonging, like I have never experienced in 35 years, was overwhelming. Imagine seeking something your entire life, not even really knowing it, and finally finding it, even in your darkest hour, when everything seems like its caving in on itself and there is nothing left for you. This is the place, if I win this battle my children, which I intend to raise you. This is our home which I'd like for you to experience, at least for a little while.
Now heed my warning in this great message as well. I could have taken a different path entirely. I could have rejected this notion of celibacy which I was first inclined on a hunch from a bit of past experience and the experience of a close friend who just so happened, himself, to be a monk for seven years at an earlier stage in life. I could have been consumed by the darkness and given in, and allowed the corruption of the state to consume me totally. I could have given up on fathering you children and everything I have worked for up til now in life. And dammit you won't know the real worth of life, I suspect, until you've gone through something similar. It is indescribable. The temptation to do all of those dark things, and more, is very real and very visceral. Had I done so, though, I would not be writing here now. Something else entirely would have happened I'm sure, and something much more aweful. Of what exactly I cannot say, but I know that had I not taken a small chance to get to explore a little bit of beauty in life where I had known only pain for so long, that I might have been lost forever.
For had I given in, had I not taken the chance to pursue a tiny opportunity to gain some space to hopefully regain my sanity in all this darkness, I wouldn't now know where I come from, or where I'd like to go, or have a vision for your future that is full of so much more than the pain and bitterness we have, til now, all been experiencing. For that, regardless of the circumstance and the actions of others, I can only truly blame myself. For as I already got done telling you, it is up to a man to leave a relationship when it's not working. It is his burden and his responsibility. I didn't know of that, of course, not having any paternal guidance myself and not having much in the way of male role models outside of books and history, and now finally some really good friends that I didn't always have access to. The only consolation I can offer you, the only understanding, is that the reason I held on so long, despite myself and all the myriad of mistakes laid bare for you to witness, was for your sakes.
I've come to believe now, that the beauty inherent to my current cirmstance was a gift for holding on to a pure desire that I did not allow to become corrupted despite all of the misery and failure we experienced along the way. I simply never wanted you kids to have to grow up without a father, thinking back to all the pain it caused me, every time I thought about giving up, every time it seemed hopeless, everytime I did try to leave and got sucked back in, it was all so that you kids could come to know your father. I never gave up on this notion, because I always remember how much pain it caused me, how lost I felt growing up, how it seemed like the boys with dads just were so impossibly far ahead of me, how I felt like I never really understood myself or what to even do with life.
I didn't want that for you. Whether or not I achieve victory over the corruption of the state, which is itself an expression of the utter lack of appreciation for the absolutely essential and irreplaceable role of a father-which I have experienced all my entire life from the absence of my own-to the great joy of being yours; to now the great struggle I face to continue to be so. I never allowed that vision to be sacrificed in all these years, from slaving away in the garbage to a little higher up working with some of the most talented and intelligent people I've had the honor of knowing.
I know, somehow, that this experience isn't for nothing. That perhaps it will resonate, and shake free just a little bit of the apathy we have toward our current condition in this country. The time is ripe. There is a very real risk that our country and our people will be consumed totally and forever, and this now after only just barely coming to know who "my people" really even are. And why do I say this to you now? Because as we move forward into a time of great uncertainty and darkness we have a choice, not just you kids, but all of us collectively: we can remain in our apathy and ignorance and let our beautiful way of life and our country be utterly consumed and ultimately conquered by much more banal and incoherent forces which would undoubtably wreck its beauty and destroy its heritage totally, or we can awaken and realize that what's at stake is more than just our own future; it is yours, or collectively, the future of our children and their right to be truly free. Not this banal freedom to do as you please, but the real freedom that I only just learned my own fathers fought for themselves: the freedom to live life unencumbered by the corruptions of the state.
It could be that in order to truly "save" this country, as some would hope to do, we must regain collectively this appreciation for fatherhood, and trust men now with this sacred duty we have so long witheld from them. Perhaps if we allow our men to express and pursue the truest glory of masculinity: fatherhood, unhindered, that would be enough to reignite the spirit required to save this land, and it's deepest held ideas which were, after all, built by fathers of all stripes trying to protect their families from a great corruption, similar to the one we now face, across the sea.
But either way, my children, we are heading into dark and uncertain times. I only share all this with you so you can know truly who your father really is, in his soul. I have my own beliefs and my own vision for your future, and for this land and our country, but my vision is not yours. Whether I personally suceed or fail, I pray you will continue to pursue the beauty in your own life, and find something that matters as much to you as you kids do to me now. For I have sacrificed everything to be here, the place I now hate the most, to fight for you. I want you to know this: as much as I'd love to simply leave this place and all the hellish struggle it represents to me now, I cannot and will not leave here without you; at least not til the battle is over. You are my beating heart and soul more than any land, heritage, belief or person; as much as that's all come to mean to me. Though I have my own hopes and dreams for my future independant of what happens here, it just wouldn't be complete without you all, and my work as a father is not done.
I'm sorry it's come to this, but I hope, if nothing else, it serves as a great and enduring lesson for you all and your futures. Remember, this lesson of always finding a little bit of the beauty available to you might be one of the most important, and most difficult things for you to ever learn. But it is also essential, for it might just be at the very heart of what makes us human, after all. Please, then, don't give up on it when life get's rough; that's when you'll need it the most.
## Lesson 7: Give More than You Take
Now we are gonna end on a perhaps less profound, but no less important topic. One that is critical to understand and oft neglected. This is the lesson of finances, and how to properly manage them. First of all, it is important to understand that what really separates a free man from a slave is the ability to enact agency over one's own life. I even attempted to [formalize](https://nrd.sh/blog/code-of-rebellion/#the-class-of-the-citzen) this conception because we seem to have a severe misunderstanding in our time about the reality of slavery. You see, we have this colloqiual idea that slavery is dead and defeated, yet if you go by my (in my opinion) much more coherent definition of what consititutes slavery, the lack of authority or meaningful agency, the you'd be forced to admit that there are more slaves on the face of this earth now than there has likely ever been, and hopefully will ever be again, once this time has passed (and it will pass).
So this lesson is pertinent directly to your freedom my children and it concerns something that many of us don't like to think about, whether its from stress, overwhelm or just plain ignorance: money. Oh boy there is a lot to say about money as I've spent _a lot_ of time and energy over the course of my lifetime to try and understand the reality of the economic situation in this country and the world. I hope someday I can share with the the fascinating, if somewhat horrifying, history of how our money came to be so entangled into the hands of but a few private interests, but for now suffice it to say the game is heavily, severely even, rigged against you.
It is almost at a point now where you have to agree to sell your soul over and become a regular visitior (proverbially) of a certain island and be a part of a special club to even have hope of finding freedom through financial success in this country. However, this isn't true. The situation may be dire, and the odds horrendously stacked against us all, but there is still hope and strength in the basic and immutable priniciples of economics. There is also power in integrity; so if somebody wants you to play your hand in a rigged game, the best thing to do is actually play an entirely different game all together.
That's what I'm gonna try to impart on you here, my children. There is a different way to find material and financial success in this world, one as old as time and that has endured and will likely continue to endure through the ages for the simplicity and inherent beauty of its principle. Whatever you choose to do specifically to pursue success, these same principles will inevitably apply. See what you really need to do is work with integrity. Remember when I said the hardest persons respect to earn is yourself, earlier? Well, imagine living with self respect, and working with honesty and integrity. Such a thing is so rare, nowadays, that people won't be able to help but notice it.
There is one more piece, though, that requires a bit of extra courage, no small bit of faith, and a little bit of genuine kindness. Be also, generous, my children. Strive to always give back more than it is which you take; always. If you are given a little, give a little more. If you are given a lot, give a lot more. Yeah we could go into all the details of finance, and how to invest, and all the various ways you might try to protect or prolong your money, and I might mention some of those here just to impress upon you their importance, but the real trick here is simple. Live and work with integrity and live generously always giving more than you are taking from others and the world will reward you. You can work out the math of it if you want to, but it's really kinda obvious if you think about it. People are social creatures. Trust and integrity have always been rare, but now they might be damn near extinct. The value of those things, even in purely reductionist economic terms, is immeasurable to a social animal, my children. I suspect, though, that there is a little more to it than just this reductionist analysis, personally.
Either way, this might be all a bit much for you now. You might have to come back to this piece, as I said in the beginning, when you are a little older. Hopefully it will still be available to you somewhere so that you can review it and find some use of it, or so I pray. But the underlying lesson couldn't be much simpler. Now I know you all already, and I know you are all very generous and kind hearted by nature. What you might not understand yet, though, is that the world has a tendency to harden your heart substantially as you get older. Holding on to your generous spirit and your integrity won't be as easy as you might suspect. Surely you will make mistakes, just as I did, but if you stay true to your goal and pursue integrity, I am sure you will find your footing.
Now we can get into at least a little bit of the specifics here. Always understand that it is the slaves game to only ever trade your time for money. Certainly, especially in the early days, it will be required to get some sort of economic footing in your life. But the most important thing you can do with that money you earn, especially when you are young, is look for opportunities to invest it back. Now this is where what we talked about comes back in. You can invest ruthlesly like a heartless capitalist, and to be sure you will likely make some good money that way, but if you take some extra effort to find things to invest your money into that have some meaning or some purpose to you, I promise you that your life will be much richer for it.
Also understand that there are far more important things in life that just money. Yes if you have no money at all, then the most important thing will likely be to get a hold of some. But once you've got the basics taken care of, it turns out that what's far more important is all these things I've been discussing so far. Still, if you have to spend the majority of your time slaving away for someone else's benefit, then it will be a lot harder if not impossible to realize your full potential in all the ways we have here discussed. So I want you always to look toward the future when it comes to money. Don't be afraid to take a little risk, but also invest wisely. Don't spend everything you have in a single direction and leave yourself destitute, but don't afraid to be bold when you are sure either.
Take your time. Life is a journey. You don't need to rule the entire world, you just want to have enough to take care of yourself, and maybe some children of your own someday, comfortably while living and pursing the things that are most meaningful to you. Money has this interesting effect in our society: either you work for your own interests, or somehow and one way or another, end up working toward someone elses. It usually pays a lot better, and is infinitely more fulfilling to boot, to work toward your own interests. And so, even if you have to start out working for someone else, you should always look for an opportunity to invest or branch out into something that you control, and something that matters to you.
Opportunities and businesses will come and go, however. Don't get your entire identity wrapped up into just one thing. When it's time for something to go, just let it go and move on. The experience you gain along the way will prove absolutely invaluable either way. And that's another important point: desparation begets desparation. Maybe that's hard to understand, but all it really means is that when you are desperate just to get your hands on a couple dollars, well, being social creatures again, other people can sense that. People want to work with individuals that make them feel like they are going to suceed; despration makes everyone feel like you are gonna fail. Even when things get rough, as they inevitably will, don't get desperate. Don't forget this warning: it is desperation that drives men to do some of the worst things mankind has ever done.
Remember that whatever anyone else tells you, the value of your person and your integrity is worth far more than any jewel or business. With integrity and experience you can make 1,000 successful businesses, but with shoddy work ethic and a greedy and unkind spirit, if you lose one business, nobody will ever wanna work with you again. The paradox I've come to find about money is that the more you desire it, the more it eludes you, but the more you focus on the work and put effort into what is meaningful to you, the more money seems to just find its way into your pocket somehow.
It's not magic; not really. It just makes sense. Integrity and work ethic are so rare, folks will practically be begging you to work with them if you can exhibit these characteristics consistently. Throw in that spirit of always giving back a little more and you'll never lack for anything, my children. I end on this note because while it might be one of the dryer and less emphasized lessons to many people, it is also one of the most crucial.
I have lived as a slave damn near my whole life. Please take my word when I tell you that you do not want to live your life that way. To my sons, understand there is a great burden on you. The first lesson here, that the world doesn't care about you, is extra true for you specifically. Nobody cares about the struggles of men unless and until they suceed in life. For my daughters, people will pretend to care more for you, but never forget its just an act, usually to take something from you; don't let them. Don't let that stop any of you, however, from being generous like I'm trying to teach you here. Just remember that you have to take care of yourselves, ultimately, one way or another. Of course, my daughters, you may find good masculine husbands that will be more than happy to care for you financially, but even so it is pertinent to contribute, even humbly, to the success and prosperity of your households, whether directly or indirectly.
Again, a lot of folks might have a problem with this, just as they obviously have a problem with fatherhood in general, otherwise we wouldn't be in this situation right now. None the less, the state of the world is such that it is fairly obvious that the opinions of your average person are not going to keep you safe or make you happy or free. Take this direction from your father, my children, and live a happy and prosperous life. The great tragedy of knowledge and wisdom is that it is often impossible to see the reason behind it until after you need to make use of it, so if some of this information doesn't make sense to you, or even upsets you, just know that I understand, but try to have a little bit of faith that your father only wants what is best for you and speaks to you now from a place of great experience born through many years of pain and suffering, doing all the wrong things, and learning the hard way. I promise you that the lessons in life learned the hard way are not quickly forgotten, so don't be afraid to take the harder path forward, as it will often be far more rewarding in the end.
Indeed, growing up without a father is difficult for precisely this reason. All of the guidance and direction I offer you here now I myself never received. Take this knowledge then, children, and live. Until such time as I am able to see you again, just know that your father is always with you in spirit. I love you all, no matter what you do or where you go. I will be praying for your success each and every day. Know that, should I fail in my battle against an utterly and staggeringly corrupt state, that when you are free to make your own decisions I will be waiting for you if you will have me. I will build up a house for you which nobody will be able to withold from you, as mine was witheld from me. I love you all, and I await the day I can see you again. Until then I will keep working hard for the sake of your futures.
From the bottom of my heart and soul,
Your father

169
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/nix-to-eos.md
View File

@@ -1,169 +0,0 @@
---
title: From Nix to Eos
description: From Darkness to Dawn in Store-Based Systems
taxonomies:
tags:
- nix
- ekala
- eos
- eka
- atom
author: Tim D
authorGithub: nrdxp
authorImage: https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/34083928?v=4
authorTwitter: nrdexp
date: "2024-12-04"
category: dev
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
This piece explores the evolution of store-based systems and our vision for their future. While I've aimed to make it accessible to those not intimately familiar with Nix, I assume some technical foundation—particularly an interest in software distribution at scale. If terms like "reproducible builds" or "supply chain security" don't pique your curiosity, what follows might feel rather academic. However, if you're intrigued by how we might tackle the growing complexity of software distribution while maintaining security and sanity, read on.
It's important to note that this post specifically outlines my personal plans and intended contributions to Ekala. There are several other significant [related efforts](https://github.com/ekala-project/ekapkgs-roadmap) already in progress, driven by our other founders and contributors, which complement and extend beyond what's discussed here.
## Reflections
I recently decided to take an extended vacation—a choice that might seem odd right after a major public announcement and development push. But this time was vital for introspection. During this pause, I stumbled upon a concept that, while humbling, is proving invaluable: "Thought Driven Development." The rule is simple yet profound: if you don’t have the answer, don’t rush to write the code. This approach has illuminated my path, emphasizing that realizing Ekala’s potential requires a deep understanding of our origins and intentions, without drowning in unnecessary details.
For those of us who’ve long been enamored by Nix, myself included, its appeal lies in its groundbreaking formal rigor in software distribution. However, despite years spent working to make Nix and NixOS more accessible, I've been forced to confront some challenging truths about its current implementation. While Nix was a beacon of innovation, breaking long-standing paradigms for noble reasons, it hasn’t fully lived up to its promise.
In addition to these technical hurdles, the Nix project hasn’t been free from political drama. Without saying too much, it's like a tangled web of intrigue, where many key figures in Ekala's foundation—and even some on its fringes—were banned from Nix for life. The "reasons" remain elusive, adding a layer of complexity to our journey. Although I must tread lightly here, it would be a disservice to you, dear reader, not to acknowledge this significant aspect, which has undeniably shaped our path forward. Suffice it to say, I felt the "weaponizations" of the CoC to be sufficiently bothersome as to inspire an alternative, much simpler [Hacker Code of Ethics](https://ethics.codes), which we have adopted in Ekala.
## The Misunderstood Promise of Nix
Nix, at first glance, presents itself as a tool to be progressively embraced—start by using it as a package manager on Ubuntu, and if it resonates, move on to the full NixOS experience. However, this approach is misleading. As a simple package manager replacement, Nix can be underwhelming. It's slower, largely due to evaluation issues we’ll explore later, and it’s also complex and not immediately intuitive. The crux of this misunderstanding lies in how Nix’s unique benefits are only fully realized when used declaratively and rigorously—essentially, pervasively.
Transitioning to NixOS after years with traditional Linux distributions can be a revelation, unlike merely using Nix as an `apt` alternative. Let’s be clear: my intention isn’t to criticize Nix unnecessarily. It opened up an entirely new landscape, and it’s understandable that there would be some stumbles in finding its footing. Yet, the current user experience feels unnecessarily apologetic, almost as if saying, "Don’t worry, I won’t try too hard to be different, I’m just a straightforward package manager."
But here’s the kicker—Nix isn’t merely a package manager. It represents a paradigm shift in how we organize, build, distribute, and even integrate, test, and deploy code. Its innovations are on par with those of version control systems, particularly Git. In fact, Nix shares a profound similarity with Git. Just as Git manages changes across time by creating hashes dependent on the entire history, binding itself uniquely and unchangeably to that history, Nix does the same with software build environments. It assigns each dependency a unique hashed identity, with each hash building upon the previous ones, providing the same level of assurance we expect from our revision control systems, both in the build process and beyond.
To truly grasp the magnitude of the paradigm shift Nix offers, one must experience it in all its unapologetically different glory. Yet, paradoxically, Nix does little to position itself this way, both in its code and its narrative.
## The Brick Wall
Let’s delve into Nix's current _de facto_ user experience in its most common use cases to understand why a bold initiative like Ekala, with its suite of proposed innovations and tools, is crucial. Ekala aims to elevate the world Nix introduced, aligning it with the broader software industry's standards. As someone who's both benefited from and been challenged by using Nix in production, I can tell you candidly that developers aren't rejecting Nix merely because it's "too different." When developers encounter Nix’s genuine UX warts, it's easy to dismiss it as "too complex," but I've come to realize that this isn’t the full story.
Consider this: does one need an intricate understanding of a commit object, how it relates to previous commits in history, or its connection to lower-level objects like trees or blobs, to perform basic `git add` or `git commit` operations? The answer is unequivocally no. Yet, when it comes to Nix "education," the focus is often on the complex inner workings of derivations and how to wield them. While it’s useful to know the term, expecting users to understand every detail shouldn't be necessary. However, in Nix's current UX, it often is, and that's the crux of the problem. Users are required to grapple with complexity that should be abstracted away in the majority of cases. We've been fooling ourselves for too long, and the real issue is surprisingly straightforward: simplifying the user experience with a familiar little abstraction — one that is embarrassingly pervasive in other contexts but oddly elusive in Nix's current approach.
We already possess an abstraction that encapsulates a point in a software's lifecycle: the version. For instance, if I want to build version 6.5 of a software project, I should be able to install it from nixpkgs. Okay, assuming I figure that out intuitively (which we probably shouldn't assume, but I'll concede for now), I might end up with version 6.7. But why? You might cleverly presume the solution is to use an older checkout of nixpkgs—good instincts—but how do you determine that? The answer isn't trivial, and now we've hit a significant hurdle right at the start, simply because we've overlooked an abstraction that, in any other software context, would be laughably amateur to omit.
Nix should, instead, know how to communicate in terms developers are already keenly familiar with. Specifically, it should know how to find all available versions of software, ideally without brute-forcing through the entire git history of a repository—especially when that repository's history is massive, bordering on world-record breaking (i.e. nixpkgs). This is where the atom format comes into play...
## The Atomic Universe
Having hit the version abstraction wall, we need a solution that fundamentally changes how we think about code distribution. I've written about the Atom elsewhere, but it deserves a full exploration here. Without diving into the contentious flakes saga that plagued Nix for years, I’ll say this: we've been missing a tool that leverages Nix's backend innovations while abstracting complexity in a way that caters to contemporary developers.
The only point I will make about flakes is that they've delayed meaningful progress. They amounted to a conflated interface to a simple function—a change that could have been introduced without altering the UX—yet they absorbed nearly half a decade of iteration. In my humble opinion, this time was spent attempting to present Nix as a high-level, user-friendly tool, which it inherently is not.
Nix excels at low-level operations, ensuring all the bits and pieces to produce deterministic build environments, _et al_. It doesn't need to apologize for any of this or try to paint over it with inappropriate abstractions that misconstrue its nature. What Ekala aims to provide are tools that relieve Nix of user-facing concerns, allowing it to excel at what it does best.
Atoms represent a fundamental shift. They’re not just bolt-on abstractions replicable in pure Nix code. While there is a Nix component, the core of an atom—if you'll indulge me—is a low-level code distribution format. It's aptly named to signify its nature: a small, self-contained piece of code from a larger repository, just as an atom is part of a larger molecular structure. In addition, atoms are purposefully meant to draw strict boundaries on certain critical meta-data, ensuring it remains static, and thus, trivially derivable, i.e. efficient.
Just as Git revolutionized version control by making complex history tracking feel natural, atoms aim to do the same for build environments. You don't need to understand internal tree structures to collaborate on code, and you shouldn't need to understand Nix's derivation mechanics to benefit from reproducible builds.
Technically, an atom in Git is an orphaned snapshot containing only its contents and a TOML manifest. Using a proper library: [gitoxide](https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide), we add metadata that makes the atom's commit object reproducible and securely tied to its original commit. This is achieved by keeping timestamps constant at the Unix epoch and including the original commit hash in the header.
Verification is straightforward: compute the atom's tree-object and compare it with the claimed source commit's tree for that directory. If they match, the atom is authentic, and because its commit is reproducible, it remains inherently trustworthy indefinitely. In scenarios where full history access is unavailable, signed tags can be attributed. Trust the key, and you trust the atom. And keep in mind, re-verification from source is always available, when in doubt.
A Git ref in a custom prefix at refs/atoms/unicode-atom-id/1.0.0 then points to this "atomic commit", allowing us to query all available versions using Git's efficient ref querying facilities. Importantly, the query process does not require moving object data from client to server, ensuring efficiency and scalability.
This format gives us a decentralized code registry akin to those used by modern package managers, but one that fits perfectly into Nix's source-centric paradigm while providing a useful abstraction to minimize network code transfers and needless evaluations at runtime.
Each atom also has an "atomic number" or ID, derived from its Unicode name and the root of its history. This [innovative approach](https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide/pull/1610) involves using the oldest parentless commit in a Git repository as a derived key for the hasher function applied to the Unicode name. This process generates a unique blake3 hash with a vast collision space, allowing atoms to be efficiently distinguished from one another on the backend, even when dealing with thousands of repositories and millions of atoms—a scale we aim to enabled explicitly from the outset.
The core format is implemented in [eka cli](https://github.com/ekala-project/eka). Enterprising Nixers could even publish and pull atoms today, albeit with some manual effort. But the atom is merely the cornerstone of the rest of the tools I am designing for Ekala. Leaving it there would be a disservice to our effort to evolve Nix beyond low-level derivation hacking.
While the atom format provides a robust foundation for code distribution and verification, it's only part of the solution. To fully realize Nix's potential, we need to address another fundamental challenge: how we organize and structure our configurations. This brings us to one of the most pervasive patterns in the Nix ecosystem—the module system—and why its current implementation poses significant challenges at scale.
## Unbounded Hell: Reducing Complexity in Order to Ascend
Even with the atom format establishing a robust foundation for distribution and verification, we must confront a significant challenge in Nix's ecosystem: its approach to configuration and modularity. The pervasive use of the NixOS module system—adopted everywhere from NixOS itself to home-manager, nix-darwin, and flake-parts—represents a pattern that's become problematic at scale.
The core issue isn't immediately obvious. On the surface, the module system appears to provide a structured approach to configuration with priority merge semantics and type checking. However, this abstraction comes at a considerable cost that becomes apparent in production environments.
First, there's the misleading nomenclature. The "module system" suggests modularity, but what it actually provides is a global namespace with configuration generation capabilities. While this might seem like a reasonable trade-off, implementing these features as a pure Nix library creates substantial overhead. The type checking mechanism, for instance, fundamentally conflicts with Nix's lazy evaluation model—it must eagerly traverse the entire module tree to validate option declarations.
The complexity cost is equally concerning. The system's computational bounds are effectively impossible to determine with precision. While one might approximate the complexity through careful analysis, the results would likely fail any reasonable efficiency criterion. This unrestricted nature becomes particularly problematic as configurations grow, leading to unexpected evaluation bottlenecks and maintenance challenges, such as the infamous impenetrable trace, which has become, unfortunately, somewhat synonymous with the Nix language, even though it is typically derived from the module system's complexity, not necessarily the language.
What makes this particularly insidious is how the module system has become the _de facto_ standard for configuration in the Nix ecosystem, creating an unbounded cataclysm with no meaningful alternatives. Even seasoned Nix developers with extraordinary debugging skills and monk-like patience find themselves trapped in an endless cycle—documenting meta-wrappers around functionality that should have been properly documented upstream. This is especially evident in nixpkgs, one of the largest collaborative software efforts in existence. Despite its impressive scale, a significant portion of development effort is consumed by maintaining complex module semantics that fundamentally shouldn't exist.
What we need instead is a true module system—one that provides:
- Clear semantic boundaries between components
- Predictable evaluation characteristics
- First-class support for proper information hiding
- Some level of familiarity from other language paradigms that work well
This is exactly what the Atom module system endeavors to provide. Out of the gate, performance with the Atom system is impressive. There is no "breaking of laziness" to evaluate complex type declarations, so evaluating through an atom, even with thousands of individuals modules, remains super performant, since you will only evaluate what you need. More importantly though, Atom's provide a saner, and cheaper definition of purity than the existing stable, not stable mess that is flakes. A flake, by design, copies everything you evaluate into the /nix/store, even if it exists on disk, and it does so eagerly, before evaluation even begins, breaking one of Nix's premier features: its lazy evaluation. This is done in an effort to preserve "purity", or so it would have you believe. But wait a second... Isn't Nix, itself, already a sandboxing tool? Why do we need these convoluted semantics and additional complexity leading to a whole-ass [Virtual-Filesystem (VFS) layer](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/pull/6530) that has been in development for years, trying to solve the costs this model introduces? If Nix wanted to enforce purity at evaluation time, couldn't it simply sandbox the process, as it does at build time? We will delve into this a bit more in a later section, but its worth asking.
Even if you disagree, this is far from the only meaningful boundary Atom introduces. A module in an atom, like a true module should, can only see into its existing scope, even on the file-system level. You see, Atom does copy Nix expressions into the Nix store, just like flakes, but it does so lazily, by virtue of Nix's inherent design. For example, if you need to reference a file inside an atom module, you can do so by referencing it from the modules self-reference: `"${mod}/path-to-file-in-module"`. Only when this file is actually read will the contents of the module directory, not including any submodules or nix files, be copied into the Nix store. If you try to reference the file by relative path, you'll get an error, since the Nix expression itself was copied directly into the Nix store lazily as well, the file doesn't exist relative to its location in it; it must be referenced using the modules systems explicitly outline semantics, or not at all.
This approach stands in stark contrast to flakes' eager world-copying strategy, which necessitated years of ongoing VFS development to mitigate its costs. By intelligently leveraging Nix's natural laziness, we achieve the same goals without complex VFS machinery. Furthermore, Atoms enforce stricter boundaries than existing Nix organizational systems: the `import` keyword is explicitly forbidden within modules. Instead of allowing arbitrary imports from unknown locations, all code references must flow through the module system itself. This constraint enables future tooling to perform static analysis efficiently, extracting useful information about the code without evaluation, in stark contrast to the current landscape.
So how do references work in the atom system? If you're up to speed with any modern programming language's module system, you might find it familiar. Similar to Rust's crate system, atoms have a top-level reference `atom` from which every other public member can be referenced, which are denoted by starting with a capital letter. External dependencies are also currently available through here, though this API remains experimental.
If you need to access private members, you can, through the `pre` scope, which is a reference to the parent module, or `pre.pre` for the grandparent, etc. Anything referenced from `pre` has access to all the private members exported by that module. There is also a recursive reference to the current module: `mod`, and finally, an actual proper scope for a true standard library for the Nix language: the `std` scope. Now if you have used the nix module system before, you might think you have to declare these explicitly as inputs to some kind of functional prototype for every single module.
Fortunately, no such boilerplate exists. All of these scopes are simply available within the module. This is more important than just providing convenience and a more familiar semantic from other languages, it also allows us to declare our modules and members as the final data structures that we intend them to represent, rather than a prototype of the data, to be constructed after passing arguments to a function. This makes code inside an Atom module more introspective by default. Where one might open a Nix REPL and explore their code full of legacy Nix modules, only to hit an opaque wall when hitting one of these prototypes, which will require a full evaluation to resolve, you can simply continue happily grepping through your code, allowing consumers to more intuitively discern what a library exports, or an atom contains, etc, etc.
While these features are available today with some effort (see the [README](https://github.com/ekala-project/atom/tree/master/atom-nix#readme)), our ultimate goal is to provide a cohesive system that's intuitively familiar to developers, regardless of their Nix experience. To bridge the gap between our higher-level Atomic module system and the lower-level atom format, we turn to our gateway into the Ekala ecosystem: the `eka` CLI.
## The Proper Level of Abstraction
Eka, our CLI frontend, predates even the Atom format it now implements. Rather than following flakes' path of bolting a higher-level interface onto Nix, we approached the problem from first principles: what should a proper interface into a Nix-centric universe look like? This exploration led us to both the Atom format's innovations and several other concepts still in development.
At its core, `eka` serves as an atomic frontend to a backend service that handles evaluations, builds, and higher-level concerns like deployments and test environments. By decoupling from low-level derivation details, it focuses entirely on providing a clean, intuitive interface to the powerful world of Nix expressions. This design philosophy manifests in several key principles:
1. Zero-evaluation querying: `eka` should never require Nix evaluation to read basic package information. Versions, dependencies, descriptions, and metadata should all be statically accessible. At most, it needs to know an atom's location, with efficient backend querying capabilities for discovering atoms in the wild.
2. Static pipeline construction: Building task pipelines, like CI architecture matrices, should be possible without evaluation. These specifications should be readable directly from static manifests, allowing the backend to efficiently schedule work on appropriate machines.
3. Improved addressing: While flakes introduced useful URI shorthand, we've expanded this concept with Atom URIs. Unlike flakes' hard-coded shortcuts, Atom URIs are configurable, allowing patterns like `work:repo::my-atom@^1`. Crucially, these always expand to full URLs in the final output, ensuring universal understanding while maintaining convenience.
To support this ambitious scope, we plan to implement a language-agnostic plugin system for `eka`. While the core remains focused on efficient atomic operations and basic backend communication, plugins will extend functionality through a well-defined API surface. This extensibility will become increasingly important as `eka` evolves to help avoid bloat and complexity in the core codebase.
The ultimate vision for `eka` users is efficient querying of packages, deployment manifests, and configurations across their organization and the open-source landscape—all without upfront Nix evaluation. It should optimize away unnecessary evaluations and builds when artifacts exist in cache, in concert with the backend, proceeding directly to fetching. If `eka` ever needs to perform evaluation for value generation, we've strayed from our design goals.
While significant work remains, our roadmap is tracked in the [README](https://github.com/ekala-project/eka?tab=readme-ov-file). We're approaching a crucial milestone with the Atom lock format's finalization. Once complete, users will be able to create, link, and depend on Atoms with familiar commands like `eka add my-repo::my-dep@^1.0`—no esoteric knowledge required.
`eka` represents more than just a CLI tool—it's the gateway into a new paradigm of store-based system interaction. Its role as a frontend is deliberate, allowing it to focus on providing an intuitive interface while delegating complex evaluations and builds to a more sophisticated backend. This separation of concerns brings us to perhaps our most ambitious vision within the Ekala ecosystem: the Eos API & scheduler.
## A New Dawn
While we've introduced atoms and their immediate benefits, we've only scratched the surface of how they might revolutionize task distribution across machines. Remember our principle: thought first.
The atom format isn't just a cornerstone of Ekala by coincidence. While its frontend efficiency gains through `eka` are valuable, its true potential emerges when we consider the backend it enables: the Eos HTTP API.
Think beyond mere Nix builds—which are already cumbersome to manage. Consider evaluations, integrations, deployments, and operational workflows common to Nix environments. Our vision detaches user machines from costly operations, efficiently distributing evaluations, builds, and tasks across a network. This approach treats Nix's operational use cases as first-class concerns, designed from first principles.
Eos isn't just about distribution—it's about trust. In an era of increasing supply chain attacks, every evaluation, every build, and every artifact must be cryptographically verifiable. By leveraging atoms' inherent verification properties and Nix's reproducible builds, Eos provides end-to-end supply chain integrity without compromising on performance or usability.
Why an API? As we progress through the 21st century, well-designed APIs have become fundamental to system architecture. But bringing Nix into the modern era is just the start—we aim to push its boundaries. Nix's unique, idempotent properties cannot be fully leveraged without purpose-built tooling and careful abstraction.
The Eos HTTP API isn't an afterthought or bolt-on solution like many current Nix-based CI systems. It's fundamental to Ekala's design, crafted to leverage the atom format's advantages while remaining unopinionated about higher-level concerns.
Although this vision is compelling, transparency requires acknowledging that Eos remains our most theoretical component. We're developing a comprehensive whitepaper to specify its details upfront, avoiding costly iterations in code. Our approach is intentionally iterative, beginning with the cornerstone components and building thoughtfully from there.
Crucially, Eos represents the spark that ignited the entire Ekala effort. It began with a simple question: "What would the perfect Nix derivation distribution mechanism look like?" The answer—a modern API serving a cleanly abstracted, user-centric client—led us to develop the Atom format and its supporting ecosystem.
## The Road Ahead
Before diving deeper into Eos, let's reinforce a crucial point about atoms' role in our architecture. We've established why atoms bridge the gap between low-level Nix derivations and higher-level concepts like repositories and versions. This bridge is fundamental to Eos, which relies on atoms' globally unique identities. Each atom's cryptographic identity, determined by just two elements—the repository's root commit hash and the manifest's Unicode name—provides a stable reference point unlike frequently changing derivations.
This identity system creates powerful possibilities. Need to mark a fundamental code change? Simply rename the atom. Moving to a new repository? The atom automatically gains a distinct identity. These IDs serve as efficient anchor points for Eos, enabling quick curation without centralization or expensive scanning. While `eka` can directly query atoms and versions within known repositories, Eos can track atoms it encounters across the entire ecosystem, providing location information on demand.
But atoms are just the beginning. Anyone who's worked with Nix's remote build capabilities—whether the legacy system or the newer experimental UI—knows its limitations in distributing work across machines. Eos aims to solve this through intelligent request handling. For public repositories, Eos can fetch directly using its optimized network. For private code, atoms' efficient transfer format (remember: just git trees of existing objects) enables smart, deduplication-aware transfers.
Think of Eos as a network of machines that you can organize however you want—hide them in your private network, expose them to the world, or mix and match. The beauty is in its flexibility: you're in control of how your builds and evaluations flow through your infrastructure. At its core, Eos is a Nix-centric scheduler handling evaluations, builds, and higher-level tasks like testing and deployment. For example, we're exploring Raft for high-consistency queue synchronization across machines, ensuring resilience against outages.
While the distributed design is complex, the goal is straightforward: leverage Nix's unique properties and now, the Atom format, to eliminate redundant work across your network. If one machine evaluates but doesn't build, schedule the derivations elsewhere. If something's built but not cached, ensure it reaches long-term storage en route to users. Everything should be garbage-collectable—imagine keeping major releases permanently while cycling out development builds, etc.
Eos isn't meant to be monolithic. We're planning to integrate components from [Tvix](https://tvix.dev), which reimagines Nix with modern architecture, to simplify the effort significantly. At its simplest, Eos is a distributed HTTP gateway receiving requests from frontends like `eka`, scheduling them across known machines. While the complexity is significant, it's worthwhile only if it fully exploits Nix's idempotent properties for pipeline optimization from the foundation.
Our vision extends beyond just managing packages—we're building a framework where security, reproducibility, and sanity are fundamental properties, not afterthoughts. In an era of increasing supply chain attacks, Nix & Ekala's combination of cryptographic verification, reproducible builds, and distributed intelligence positions us to tackle these challenges head-on. We're prioritizing integration with existing standards like SBoM, ensuring that every input is tracked, and every output is independently verifiable.
While a complete Eos scheduler isn't imminent, our journey has already yielded valuable innovations like the Atom format, module system, and the `eka` CLI. Our commitment to "Thought Driven Development" guides us in building tools that respect both users' freedom and intelligence, providing power without sacrificing transparency or independence.
We invite you to be part of this evolution. Whether you're a seasoned Nix veteran or just curious about the future of software distribution, join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/DgC9Snxmg7) or explore our [GitHub Organization](https://github.com/ekala-project). Together, we can build a future where store-based systems are not just theoretically elegant, but practically transformative for developers everywhere.

602
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/no-fault-tyranny.md
View File

@@ -1,602 +0,0 @@
---
title: "No-Fault Tyranny: An Indictment of Title IV-D and the Assault Upon Family and Freedom"
description: "Exposing the Lies Once and For All"
taxonomies:
tags:
- law
- justice
- balance
author: "Tim D"
authorGithub: "nrdxp"
authorImage: "https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/34083928?v=4"
authorTwitter: "nrdexp"
date: "2025-08-19"
category: "legal"
draft: true
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
> ⚠️ You probably want to wait for the legalese-english translation of this in an upcoming post.
# Preamble
What follows is the current draft of my formal civil rights complaint against the State of Colorado, its judicial and prosecutorial entities, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (including the Office of Child Support Enforcement and its Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.). Due to a relentless pattern of obstructions—the latest being a federal judge in Colorado ordering me to refile, demanding dry procedural compliance to non-existent rules in willful ignorance of the escalating emergency nature of the circumstances and the substantive nature of the constitional claims which cannot be ignored (Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 [1972])—I have not yet submitted this updated version to the courts. For this very reason, I intend to pursue a change of venue based on the systemic bias and conflicts detailed herein, which will require navigating the existing case, updating it, and transferring jurisdiction to a more neutral locale, such as the District of Tennessee.
In the meantime, I am publishing this document publicly on my website because I no longer trust any arm of the government to handle it fairly or transparently. These arguments must enter the public domain immediately to begin exposing—and ultimately dismantling—this abomination of justice that has shattered countless homes, lives, and futures. Even if my case falters in court, the legal and evidentiary foundation laid here is unassailable and must become common knowledge if we are to course-correct and safeguard our children's future—for if we still believe our children are our future, we cannot ignore this threat. I plan to condense these arguments into a more digestible, less legally exhaustive format, but in the interest of urgency, and for the sake of elucidating the truly (quite literally) criminal nature of this system in its totality, I've decided the full legal filing was worth sharing now.
After pondering most of my life at the roots of modern societal woes, I can now pinpoint no issue more pivotal than this one. It underpins so much decay: from widespread debauchery and moral apathy to fiendish sexual deviancy and the largest-scale global child-trafficking networks in history. Consider, for example, the modern "battle of the sexes"; that perplexing tension between men and women fueling endless cultural wars, from #MeToo backlash to incel movements and declining birth rates. Nobody can seem to agree what lay at the root cause of all this chaos, but I'm now forced to conclude that this isn't organic; it's engineered by the corrupt state apparatus for profit and dominion. If you don't believe it, I challenge you to make it to the end of this document while retaining that skepticism.
By pitting genders against each other through biased and (as shown) illegal laws that largely demonize men, reward manipulation, and extract wealth from broken families, the system ensures perpetual conflict. No sane, informed modern man would risk marriage or fatherhood in this horrific meat grinder, contributing to plummeting birth rates as families crumble and society weakens, all while the racketeers count their billions and power consolidates further and further away from the people.
Meanwhile, we blame everything from "feminism" to "incel culture" for the high crime of treason (yes, I said it) committed by our own governments against their most vulnerable citizens; after all, it is the very children they claim to defend which will pay the worst price for profiteering. It is time to point the finger squarely where it deserves to be pointed. While my suit targets specific Colorado statutes and the federal Title IV-D program for legally pragmatic reasons, analogous laws plague virtually every Western nation. I can no longer escape the conclusion that this represents a deliberate, coordinated assault on the family structure—the bedrock of freedom itself.
John Locke, whose philosophy profoundly shaped the American Revolution and our Constitution, asserted that the family is the first unit of society; I would add that, without the protection of family, there can be nothing but slavery. In our time, this truth is self-evident. Skyrocketing debt and living costs force us into isolated "independence," while we harbor grudges against fathers cast into an incomprehensible meat grinder of a system they could neither comprehend nor defend against. It's time to grow up, wake up, and forgive our fathers as I have forgiven mine. We must reject the delusion that endless debt slavery through artificial "independence" equates to a free society. We must restore the family, and the buttress against tyranny it affords us, or I fear we deserve the dystopia that awaits us.
It took me—an intelligent if perpetually misunderstood individual actively suffering under these legal perversions for most of my adult life—years to piece this all together and fully comprehend just what it is that I am truly facing. Still further, it took my children [going missing](../letter-to-my-children) for months while every single state actor remained complicit-refusing to lift a finger-before I worked up the courage to offer this formal legal challenge.
I can, therefore, forgive skepticism and misunderstanding, as it was and is still difficult to believe that our institutions would corrode to this level of injustice. However, I would invite you to review my developing [moral philosophy](../code-of-rebellion) which demonstrates that such distortion is inevitable when society loses vigilance and carelessly disregards its duty to stave off entropy in the State—it's the lens that helped me see this crisis clearly, and it may, perhaps, do the same for you.
Now, every indifference to law, and every injustice meant to ensnare men seeking only to raise their children in peace has become just the opposite: my fuel. I've done the grueling work that no one else—not even the highest-paid legal "professionals"—would dare seem to undertake. What follows constitutes over a decade of thinking, researching, and pondering this specific topic, which I have unhappily been subjected to time and again throughout my life, experiencing virtually every aspect of the decay outlined, and slowly coming to realize the scope and scale of its deliberate corruptions. The legal arguments are dense, but they're your roadmap to understanding.
As I've mentioned elsewhere, I shall not trim my hair nor cut my beard until justice has finally been served, as a (insufficient) symbol of the long fight for justice for my children and their future, which I continue to willingly endure on their behalf.
Now I shall conclude this introduction with a question to the reader. How free is a man who has no say in how best to raise his children? How hollow is the lip service paid to the Constitution by our rulers—mere words to pacify the masses—while such a profoundly illegal institution endures, eroding liberty at its core? Again, as you'll come to see in this document, the grunt work of discovery is largely finished. All I need now is your backup: copy, share, repost, [donate](https://www.givesendgo.com/fathersfightforkids), mirror the document, fork the source code—do whatever it takes to flood the public domain with this message and these arguments. Prove, once and for all, that the emperor, once again, has no clothes. By all means, decide for yourselves, but first, please consider the argument: read it, absorb it, put it into your own words and join the fight before it's too late—Perhaps you will come to realize, as I have, that our families, our freedom, and our future depend on it.
---
# IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
# FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
# GREENEVILLE DIVISION
TIMOTHY WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff,
v.
THE STATE OF COLORADO;
PHIL WEISER, in his official capacity as Attorney General of Colorado;
COLORADO JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT;
COLORADO DISTRICT ATTORNEYS' COUNCIL;
ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR., in his official capacity as Secretary of Health and Human Services;
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES;
OFFICE OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT;
DOES 1-20
Defendants.
Case No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
**CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 1983**
**FACIAL CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE TO TITLE IV-D RACKETEERING ENTERPRISE**
**WITH REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY NATIONWIDE RELIEF**
Timothy Williams, Pro Se
[Address]
[Phone Number]
[Email Address]
## Table of Contents
- [Nature of the Action](#nature-of-the-action)
- [Jurisdiction and Venue](#jurisdiction-and-venue)
- [Parties](#parties)
- [Standing, Ripeness, and Justiciability](#standing-ripeness-and-justiciability)
- [Discovery of Title IV-D Racketeering Enterprise](#discovery-of-title-iv-d-racketeering-enterprise)
- [The Systemic Funnel of Constitutional Violations](#the-systemic-funnel-of-constitutional-violations)
- [Substantive Due Process Violations](#substantive-due-process-violations)
- [Procedural Due Process Violations](#procedural-due-process-violations)
- [Other Constitutional Violations](#other-constitutional-violations)
- [Colorado's Systematic Bias Necessitating Forum Change](#forum-change)
- [Title IV-D as a Criminal Racketeering Organization Masquerading Under Color of Law](#title-iv-d-as-a-criminal-racketeering-organization-masquerading-under-color-of-law)
- [Summary of Constitutional Claims Facial Challenge to Title IV-D Racketeering Scheme](#summary-of-constitutional-claims-facial-challenge-to-title-iv-d-racketeering-scheme)
- [Prayer for Relief](#prayer-for-relief)
## Table of Authorities
### Cases
- Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Lavoie, 475 U.S. 813 (1986)
- Allied Structural Steel Co. v. Spannaus, 438 U.S. 234 (1978)
- Bailey v. Alabama, 219 U.S. 219 (1911)
- Board of Directors of Rotary International v. Rotary Club, 481 U.S. 537 (1987)
- Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000)
- Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868 (2009)
- Cedric Kushner Promotions, Ltd. v. King, 533 U.S. 158 (2001)
- Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993)
- Clyatt v. United States, 197 U.S. 207 (1905)
- Coffin v. United States, 156 U.S. 432 (1895)
- County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833 (1998)
- Cox v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 559 (1965)
- Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 17 U.S. 518 (1819)
- DeShaney v. Winnebago County, 489 U.S. 189 (1989)
- Employment Div. v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)
- Energy Reserves Group v. Kansas Power & Light, 459 U.S. 400 (1983)
- Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908)
- Fletcher v. Peck, 10 U.S. 87 (1810)
- Gibson v. Berryhill, 411 U.S. 564 (1973)
- Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970)
- Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005)
- Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12 (1956)
- Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501 (1947)
- Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972)
- H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 492 U.S. 229 (1989)
- Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corp., 503 U.S. 258 (1992)
- Home Building & Loan Ass'n v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)
- In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133 (1955)
- In re National Presto Industries, Inc., 347 F.3d 662 (7th Cir. 2003)
- In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970)
- Little v. Streater, 452 U.S. 1 (1981)
- Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992)
- Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976)
- Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888)
- Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923)
- Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n, 138 S. Ct. 1461 (2018)
- New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992)
- Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co., 458 U.S. 50, 58 (1982)
- Parham v. J.R., 442 U.S. 584 (1979)
- Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527 (1981)
- Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925)
- Pollock v. Williams, 322 U.S. 4 (1944)
- Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997)
- Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71 (1971)
- Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292 (1993)
- Research Automation, Inc. v. Schrader-Bridgeport Int'l, Inc., 626 F.3d 973 (7th Cir. 2010)
- Reves v. Ernst & Young, 507 U.S. 170 (1993)
- Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609 (1984)
- Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952)
- Rotella v. Wood, 528 U.S. 549 (2000)
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982)
- Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., 473 U.S. 479 (1985)
- Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963)
- Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645 (1972)
- Steffel v. Thompson, 415 U.S. 452 (1974)
- Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462, 484 (2011)
- Sturges v. Crowninshield, 17 U.S. 122 (1819)
- Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus, 573 U.S. 149 (2014)
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000)
- Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927)
- Turner v. Rogers, 564 U.S. 431, 435 (2011)
- United States v. Angelilli, 660 F.2d 23 (2d Cir. 1981)
- United States v. Maloney, 71 F.3d 645 (7th Cir. 1995)
- United States v. Robertson, 514 U.S. 669 (1995)
- United States v. Shenberg, 89 F.3d 1461 (11th Cir. 1996)
- United States v. Thompson, 685 F.2d 993 (6th Cir. 1982)
- United States v. Jackson, 196 F.3d 383, 387 (2d Cir. 1999)
- United States Trust Co. v. New Jersey, 431 U.S. 1 (1977)
- Ward v. Village of Monroeville, 409 U.S. 57 (1972)
- Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (1997)
- Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210 (1990)
- Wilkie v. Robbins, 551 U.S. 537 (2007)
- Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972)
- Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971)
## Nature of the Action
This facial constitutional challenge exposes Colorado's family law system as a federally-incentivized racketeering enterprise that systematically violates fundamental parental rights for financial profit. State and federal actors, operating under color of law, have created a criminal organization masquerading as legitimate government function, generating hundreds of millions in federal Title IV-D revenue through constitutional deprivations affecting Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals nationwide. This § 1983 action seeks to dismantle this illegal enterprise and restore constitutional governance while establishing binding precedent that states cannot claim federal mandate immunity when enforcing facially unconstitutional federal programs that commandeer state judicial systems into systematic constitutional violations. By holding states liable for enforcing such mandates, this action aims to re-establish the originally intended federalist balance in America, preventing federal overreach that coerces states into violating citizens' rights.
Plaintiff's claims are not barred by Younger abstention, as this is a facial constitutional challenge to state and federal statutes of national importance, and Plaintiff intends to withdraw any ongoing state proceedings to avoid interference. See Steffel v. Thompson, 415 U.S. 452 (1974) (federal courts should not abstain from hearing constitutional challenges to state statutes merely because related state proceedings exist, particularly in facial challenges). Moreover, the ongoing harms are capable of repetition yet evading review, warranting federal intervention regardless of state proceedings.
## Jurisdiction and Venue
1. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 (federal question), 1343 (civil rights), and the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201. This action arises under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq. (RICO), and the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article I, Section 10 (Contracts Clause), and Article III (judicial power limitations).
2. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e) as this action challenges federal programs with nationwide application administered by federal defendants, and under § 1391(b) as constitutional violations have interstate effects. Plaintiff has established Tennessee residency and resides within the Eastern District of Tennessee, Greeneville Division, seeking constitutional refuge from systematic bias in Colorado's judicial system that renders fair adjudication impossible due to institutional financial dependency on the challenged Title IV-D revenue streams. Additional defendants may be joined under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure without affecting venue, as the action involves federal agencies and officials. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e)(1)(C) (venue proper where plaintiff resides in actions against federal officials where no real property is involved).
3. Constitutional Necessity of Forum Change: Plaintiff originally filed constitutional claims in the District of Colorado (Case No. [redacted]) but discovered systematic judicial bias that makes impartial adjudication structurally impossible. Colorado's financial dependency on Title IV-D revenue creates institutional conflicts of interest that violate due process requirements for neutral tribunals, as evidenced by eight weeks of systematic obstruction regarding missing children and arbitrary denial followed by acceptance of identical emergency motions. Plaintiff intends to voluntarily dismiss the Colorado federal action upon filing here to consolidate proceedings and avoid duplication.
## Parties
### Plaintiff:
4. Timothy Williams, a United States citizen who has established Tennessee residency to escape systematic constitutional violations spanning his entire adult life in Colorado. Plaintiff seeks constitutional refuge in this Court due to Colorado's demonstrated inability to provide impartial adjudication of challenges to the federal funding programs supporting their judicial operations. Plaintiff has standing based on ongoing harms, including deprivation of parental rights, threats of economic coercion, and systematic bias in enforcement, which are redressable through the requested relief.
### State Defendants:
5. The State of Colorado, sued under Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), for systematic enforcement of facially unconstitutional statutes in violation of federal civil rights, including C.R.S. § 14-10-124 (best interest determinations), C.R.S. § 14-14-107.5 (parental responsibility allocations), C.R.S. § 19-1-103 (state intervention standards), C.R.S. § 18-6-801 (domestic violence), C.R.S. § 14-10-106 (no-fault divorce provisions), C.R.S. § 13-14-102 (protection orders), C.R.S. § 14-10-115 (child support), C.R.S. § 14-10-114 (maintenance), C.R.S. § 14-14-107 (income withholding), C.R.S. § 14-14-111 (contempt enforcement), and C.R.S. § 18-3-304 (parental kidnapping).
6. Phil Weiser, in his official capacity as Attorney General of Colorado, sued for enforcement of unconstitutional statutes and failure to protect constitutional rights while enabling systematic Title IV-D revenue generation through constitutional violations.
7. Colorado Judicial Department, sued for systematic constitutional violations and institutional bias created by Title IV-D financial conflicts, including physical denial of court access and arbitrary enforcement of procedural requirements designed to obstruct constitutional challenges.
8. Colorado District Attorneys' Council, sued for systematic prosecutorial policies that violate constitutional rights to generate federal revenue, including selective enforcement based on Title IV-D funding incentives.
### Federal Defendants:
9. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in his official capacity as Secretary of Health and Human Services, sued for administering the unconstitutional Title IV-D program under 42 U.S.C. § 658a that commandeers states into constitutional violations through financial incentives.
10. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, sued for creating and maintaining federal programs that systematically violate constitutional rights by conditioning funding on enforcement of facially unconstitutional procedures.
11. Office of Child Support Enforcement, sued for direct administration of Title IV-D programs that incentivize constitutional violations through performance-based funding formulas that reward family destruction and parental rights violations.
12. Does 1-20, unknown federal and state actors who participated in the systematic deprivation of constitutional rights under this racketeering enterprise.
## Standing, Ripeness, and Justiciability
13. Plaintiff has standing under Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992), as he suffers concrete injuries from the challenged statutes, including ongoing deprivation of parental rights, economic coercion, and threats of selective enforcement, directly caused by the Title IV-D enterprise and redressable through declaratory and injunctive relief.
14. The claims are ripe as the harms are ongoing and imminent, with Plaintiff facing active threats from the system. See Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus, 573 U.S. 149 (2014) (pre-enforcement challenges ripe where credible threat of enforcement exists).
15. The action is justiciable as it presents facial challenges to statutes with nationwide implications, not abstract disputes.
## Discovery of Title IV-D Racketeering Enterprise
16. Post-Filing Discovery of Federal Conspiracy: Subsequent to filing constitutional claims in Colorado, Plaintiff discovered the underlying financial mechanism driving systematic constitutional violations: the Title IV-D federal funding program under 42 U.S.C. § 658a that creates direct financial incentives for state actors to violate constitutional rights.
17. Title IV-D Revenue Structure: Federal defendants provide billions in incentive payments to states based on:
- Family dissolution rates (more divorces = more federal funding)
- Custody enforcement actions (more parental conflicts = higher federal payments)
- Support collection volumes (more financial extractions = increased federal revenue sharing)
- Parental rights restrictions (more state control = enhanced federal grant eligibility)
18. Colorado's Financial Dependency: Colorado receives approximately $200+ million annually in Title IV-D federal funding, creating institutional dependency that makes constitutional compliance economically impossible and explains systematic constitutional violations.
19. Racketeering Enterprise Structure: The Title IV-D program operates as a criminal enterprise under 18 U.S.C. § 1961 wherein:
- Federal defendants provide financial incentives for constitutional violations
- State defendants systematically violate constitutional rights to generate federal revenue
- Both levels coordinate to maximize profit through family destruction while minimizing constitutional compliance
This enterprise involves a pattern of racketeering activity, including mail and wire fraud in support collections, extortion through coerced payments, and obstruction of justice in family courts, causing injury to Plaintiff's property and business interests.
## The Systemic Funnel of Constitutional Violations
20. The Title IV-D enterprise creates an interconnected statutory funnel that traps individuals in a cycle of escalating constitutional deprivations, where each violation feeds into the next, generating revenue at every stage while making escape constitutionally and practically impossible. This funnel operates through ostensibly separate but deliberately integrated civil and criminal schemes, including:
- C.R.S. § 18-6-801 (domestic violence proceedings that presume guilt and enable weaponization of unsubstantiated allegations);
- C.R.S. § 13-14-102 (protection orders issued ex parte without meaningful evidentiary standards);
- C.R.S. § 14-10-106 (no-fault divorce eliminating fault-based grounds and remedies);
- C.R.S. § 14-10-124 (best interest determinations substituting state judgment for parental authority);
- C.R.S. § 14-14-107.5 (parental responsibility allocations imposing indefinite state supervision);
- C.R.S. § 14-10-115 (child support obligations creating perpetual financial extractions);
- C.R.S. § 14-10-114 (maintenance awards enforcing spousal support without regard to fault);
- C.R.S. § 14-14-107 (income withholding for automatic enforcement);
- C.R.S. § 14-14-111 (contempt enforcement through incarceration for non-compliance); and
- C.R.S. § 18-3-304 (parental kidnapping statute requiring pre-existing custody orders for enforcement, thereby conditioning protection on prior financial expenditure).
These statutes function as components of a single revenue-generating conspiracy, incentivized by Title IV-D funding formulas under 42 U.S.C. § 658a that reward family conflict, parental alienation, and prolonged judicial involvement. This creates perverse incentives for bad faith actors (e.g., abusive spouses or partners) to collaborate with the state in exploiting good faith parties for mutual financial gain—the state profits from federal reimbursements tied to collection volumes and enforcement actions, while the bad faith actor secures economic advantages without accountability for misconduct. The funnel ensnares both married and unmarried individuals: unmarried parents are channeled directly into custody proceedings under C.R.S. § 14-10-124 and § 14-14-107.5, while Colorado's low threshold for common law marriage (e.g., cohabitation and mutual agreement implying marital intent) can retroactively impose marital status to trigger dissolution requirements, ensuring no relationship structure evades the system's grasp.
The interconnected nature of these statutes, combined with the deliberate design of Title IV-D funding incentives that reward escalating family conflict and financial extraction at every stage, renders any claim of incidental or uncoordinated operation untenable; the system's virtual impossibility of escape—through catch-22 mechanisms like wealth-based enforcement barriers, retaliatory prosecutions, and perpetual economic bondage—establishes a deliberately orchestrated scheme of entrapment, where state and federal actors profit from systematic constitutional violations under the pretext of child welfare.
21. **Entry Point: No-Fault Divorce and Contract Impairment (Contracts Clause Violation):** The funnel begins with C.R.S. § 14-10-106, which declares marriages "irretrievably broken" without requiring proof of fault, thereby impairing marriage contracts by eliminating enforceable terms and remedies for material breaches such as abuse, adultery, or child endangerment, in direct violation of Article I, Section 10. This impairment manifests as follows:
a. Retroactively undermining contractual obligations without compelling justification, per Fletcher v. Peck, 10 U.S. 87, 137-138 (1810) (Contracts Clause prevents states from undermining contractual obligations) and United States Trust Co. v. New Jersey, 431 U.S. 1, 17-18 (1977) (states bound by contracts they recognize);
b. Eliminating mutual remedies essential to binding contracts, violating Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 17 U.S. 518, 629 (1819) (contracts must provide remedies for breach) and Sturges v. Crowninshield, 17 U.S. 122 (1819) (mutual obligations fundamental);
c. Failing to serve an important public purpose through reasonable means, contrary to Allied Structural Steel Co. v. Spannaus, 438 U.S. 234, 244 (1978) (impairment must be reasonable and necessary) and Energy Reserves Group v. Kansas Power & Light, 459 U.S. 400, 411 (1983) (no retroactive impairment of existing contracts);
d. Lacking emergency justification for impairment, violating Home Building & Loan Ass'n v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398, 428 (1934) (impairment requires compelling crisis).
This creates the only "contract" in Anglo-American jurisprudence with no enforceable terms, as recognized in Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190, 211 (1888) (marriage as foundational societal contract), incentivizing bad faith actors to escalate misconduct without consequence while denying innocent parties legal recourse, funneling families into dissolution proceedings that generate custody disputes and trigger Title IV-D revenue through increased enforcement metrics. For unmarried couples, the funnel bypasses formal divorce but inflames conflicts through parallel custody mechanisms, often leading to retroactive common law marriage findings to impose the same impairments.
22. **Escalation Through Domestic Violence and Protection Orders (Due Process and Equal Protection Violations):** From no-fault dissolution (or equivalent custody entry for unmarried parents), the system channels conflicts into C.R.S. § 18-6-801 (defining domestic violence broadly to include non-physical acts without requiring corroboration) and § 13-14-102 (authorizing temporary protection orders based solely on affidavits, with permanent orders following minimal hearings), where accusations—often unsubstantiated—lead to presumptive guilt and immediate restraints. This escalation violates constitutional protections as follows:
a. Denying procedural due process by reversing the burden of proof and eliminating meaningful investigation or pre-deprivation hearings, per Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 (1976) (adequate safeguards required before liberty deprivation); In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 363 (1970) (presumption of innocence essential); and Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, 267-268 (1970) (meaningful hearing mandated);
b. Depriving liberty interests through ex parte seizures without procedural safeguards, violating Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210, 221-222 (1990) (protections needed for liberty deprivations);
c. Enforcing systemic gender bias through selective enforcement—e.g., ignoring evidence of female-perpetrated violence while arresting male victims—creating suspect classifications without important objectives, per Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71 (1971).
d. This gender bias lacks any rational basis, as scientific studies confirm fathers' critical role in child development: involved fathers are associated with 43% higher likelihood of children earning A's in school and 33% lower risk of repeating a grade, while father absence correlates with 4x higher poverty rates, 7x higher teen pregnancy, and 2x higher dropout/obesity rates (U.S. Census Bureau; National Fatherhood Initiative; Children's Bureau). By systematically excluding fathers through presumptive guilt and selective enforcement, the funnel harms children, undermining any claimed state interest in welfare and perpetuating the revenue cycle.
This stage seizes parental rights and property without probable cause, funneling individuals into custody battles under C.R.S. § 14-10-124 (empowering courts to determine "best interests" overriding parental decisions) and § 14-14-107.5 (allocating responsibilities to create ongoing state oversight), where undefined "best interest" standards usurp fundamental parental authority without compelling interest, violating substantive due process per:
e. Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 65 (2000) (parental rights as oldest fundamental liberty);
f. Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 534-535 (1925) (child not mere creature of state);
g. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399 (1923) (right to raise children essential);
h. Parham v. J.R., 442 U.S. 584, 602 (1979) (presumption of parental fitness);
i. Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 232 (1972) (primary parental role enduring).
This enables bad faith actors to weaponize allegations for custodial advantages that feed Title IV-D collections, applying equally to unmarried parents drawn in via child-related conflicts.
23. **Economic Coercion and Involuntary Servitude (Thirteenth Amendment Violation):** Custody determinations invariably lead to financial extractions via C.R.S. § 14-10-115 (imposing child support guidelines without fault consideration), § 14-10-114 (awarding maintenance based on need and ability to pay, irrespective of misconduct), § 14-14-107 (mandating immediate income withholding), and § 14-14-111 (authorizing contempt sanctions including imprisonment for non-payment), creating debt peonage that traps individuals regardless of marital status or choice to divorce/separate. This coercion constitutes involuntary servitude as follows:
a. Forcing continued association in abusive relationships to avoid ruinous obligations, or imposing lifelong financial bondage post-separation, violating United States v. Kozminski, 487 U.S. 931, 944 (1988) (legal coercion as servitude);
b. Criminalizing non-payment through debt-based sanctions, per Bailey v. Alabama, 219 U.S. 219, 245 (1911) (peonage via criminal enforcement unlawful);
c. Creating presumed debt leading to economic bondage, violating Pollock v. Williams, 322 U.S. 4, 18 (1944) (economic compulsion invalid);
d. Compelling labor or association through legal threats, per Clyatt v. United States, 197 U.S. 207 (1905) (servitude includes coerced ties).
e. Scientific evidence exposes the true cost: father-deprived children face 20x higher incarceration and elevated mental health risks, while single-father homes rival two-parent for well-being—yet the system incentivizes father absence, directly opposing child welfare and perpetuating cycles of instability for endless profit (CDC; Journal of Family Psychology; U.S. Census Bureau data on single-parent outcomes).
This economic bondage—threatening incarceration, license revocation, and asset seizure—prevents escape from abusive dynamics or judicial oversight, funneling back into repeated cycles of conflict for ongoing revenue extraction, as bad faith actors exploit the system to secure unearned financial transfers while the state reaps federal reimbursements, ensuring no path avoids perpetual servitude to either an abusive partner or an abusive state apparatus, with unmarried parents facing identical extractions via custody-based support orders.
24. **Parental Kidnapping and Wealth-Based Discrimination (Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment Violations):** When individuals resist the funnel by asserting rights or seeking separation, the system enables parental kidnapping under C.R.S. § 18-3-304 (criminalizing removal only if violating a pre-existing custody order, thus requiring victims to first obtain costly judicial decrees for enforcement). This enablement violates protections as follows:
a. Creating wealth-based discrimination by conditioning parental rights enforcement on financial ability, per Little v. Streater, 452 U.S. 1, 13 (1981) (wealth cannot bar access to rights) and Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12 (1956) (economic barriers unconstitutional);
b. Facilitating unreasonable seizures of family relationships without probable cause or warrant, as officials refuse intervention absent paid-for orders, violating the Fourth Amendment;
c. Depriving fundamental parental rights without due process, per Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645, 651 (1972) (rights without unfitness presumption) and Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 753 (1982) (clear evidence required for deprivation).
d. Ignoring federal precedents confirming no custody order is needed for parental kidnapping enforcement, e.g., United States v. Amer, 110 F.3d 873, 879 (2d Cir. 1997) (absence of formal decree does not preclude prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 1204, as natural parental rights suffice); Chatwin v. United States, 326 U.S. 455 (1945) (federal kidnapping protects lawful custody including natural parents); United States v. Bailey, 115 F.3d 1222, 1231 (5th Cir. 1997) (parental rights exist as matter of law, not judicial grace); Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 65 (2000) (parental rights independent of court orders).
Such enablement funnels victims into retaliatory prosecutions, where reports of violations trigger charges against the reporting party (e.g., for alleged harassment in seeking accountability), perpetuating the cycle while generating additional enforcement revenue, as the state and bad faith actors align to penalize good faith resistance, affecting married and unmarried alike.
25. **Retaliatory Prosecution and Entrapment (First and Substantive Due Process Violations):** Efforts to escape the funnel—such as asserting parental rights, seeking police protection, or challenging abuses—trigger selective, retaliatory prosecution under the integrated schemes, compelling unwanted intimate associations (e.g., forced co-parenting with documented abusers). This retaliation violates rights as follows:
a. Infringing freedom of association by compelling ties and punishing disassociation, per Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609, 623 (1984) (right to avoid compelled intimacy); Board of Directors of Rotary International v. Rotary Club, 481 U.S. 537, 544 (1987) (cannot punish disassociation); and Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640, 648 (2000) (protection from intrusion);
b. Creating entrapment via impossible catch-22s (e.g., report and face charges, or endure and enable violations) that shock the conscience, per Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165, 172 (1952) (offending decency prohibited); County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833, 846 (1998) (abusive executive action unconstitutional); DeShaney v. Winnebago County, 489 U.S. 189, 201 (1989) (liability for enhanced danger); and Cox v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 559, 571 (1965) (cannot punish induced conduct).
This closes the funnel, ensuring indefinite state oversight, revenue extraction, and servitude, as constitutional compliance or good faith resolution would collapse the enterprise by eliminating conflict-driven profits, leaving no viable exit for trapped individuals, whether married or unmarried.
26. This funnel is not unique to any individual but exemplifies how the Title IV-D incentives systematically entrap families nationwide, as evidenced by statistics showing mothers awarded custody in approximately 80% of cases (79.9% of custodial parents are mothers per U.S. Census Bureau data), with women initiating 69% of divorces and filing 85% of protection orders in domestic violence cases that often favor women due to gender bias (men arrested in 77% of intimate partner violence incidents despite similar victimization rates), rewarding violations at each stage through federal reimbursements that generated $6.4 billion in total child support expenditures in FY2023 (with states collecting $4.37 per $1 spent) while penalizing attempts at resolution or escape (e.g., via retaliatory enforcement and wealth-based barriers). Bad faith actors and the state form a de facto alliance against good faith parties to maximize financial extractions, as father absence—exacerbated by bias favoring women—leads to 4x higher child poverty rates, 20x higher incarceration risk, and elevated mental health issues like depression and suicide (CDC and National Fatherhood Initiative data), ensuring perpetual servitude in every conceivable path through the system while states profit from government overreach (e.g., $353 million retained from assigned collections in 2023, down from $927 million in 2004 but still incentivizing collections over family stability).
## Substantive Due Process Violations
27. Fundamental Parental Rights Deprivation: Defendants systematically violate substantive due process by depriving individuals of fundamental parental rights without compelling state interest through statutes like C.R.S. § 14-10-124 (authorizing courts to impose "best interest" determinations that arbitrarily substitute state judgment for parental authority), § 14-14-107.5 (allocating parental responsibilities in a manner that creates indefinite state supervision and overrides natural parental prerogatives), and § 19-1-103 (establishing state intervention standards that presume governmental superiority over fit parents without clear evidence of harm). These statutes grant the state unchecked power to define "best interest" arbitrarily, usurping the paramount and protected role of parents in child-rearing, in direct violation of longstanding Supreme Court precedents that establish parental authority as a fundamental liberty interest immune from such interference absent parental unfitness or imminent harm. The funnel overrides this authority by manufacturing artificial conflicts—through incentivized accusations, coerced separations, and wealth-based barriers—that justify revenue-driven state intrusion, turning families into profit centers rather than protected institutions.
a. Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 65 (2000): "The liberty interest at issue in this case—the interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children—is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court," mandating deference to fit parents' decisions absent harm.
b. Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 534-535 (1925): "The child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations," prohibiting state usurpation of parental educational and upbringing choices.
c. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399 (1923): "[T]he right of the individual to... establish a home and bring up children... [is] essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men," protecting family autonomy from arbitrary governmental interference.
d. Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645, 651 (1972): "The rights to conceive and to raise one's children have been deemed 'essential'... 'basic civil rights of man,'" requiring due process before depriving unwed fathers of custody without proof of unfitness.
e. Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 753 (1982): "The fundamental liberty interest of natural parents in the care, custody, and management of their child does not evaporate simply because they have not been model parents or have lost temporary custody," demanding clear and convincing evidence for permanent severance.
f. Parham v. J.R., 442 U.S. 584, 602 (1979): "Our jurisprudence historically has reflected Western civilization concepts of the family as a unit with broad parental authority over minor children," presuming parents act in their children's best interests unless proven otherwise.
g. Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 232 (1972): "The history and culture of Western civilization reflect a strong tradition of parental concern for the nurture and upbringing of their children. This primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition," shielding Amish parents from state-compelled education contrary to their values.
The deprivation is particularly egregious given empirical evidence on fathers' influence: a meta-analysis of 34 studies shows involved fathers linked to better cognitive outcomes and 50% lower behavioral problems (American Psychological Association; PMC review). As noted in "The Boy Crisis" by Warren Farrell and John Gray, children without fathers are 5x more likely to live in poverty and commit crime, and 9x more likely to drop out of school—stats corroborated by U.S. Census Bureau data. By overriding parental (often paternal) authority without compelling interest, the statutes ignore this science, prioritizing revenue over child well-being.
28. Title IV-D Incentivized Violations: The federal funding structure under 42 U.S.C. § 658a rewards family separation, artificial "best interest" overrides that fabricate state necessity, indefinite supervision through ongoing court involvement, and restrictions on parental decision-making—all funneling into profit generation without any compelling governmental interest beyond revenue.
a. Ward v. Village of Monroeville, 409 U.S. 57, 60 (1972): "Any tribunal permitted by law to try cases and controversies not only must be unbiased but also must avoid even the appearance of bias," invalidating systems where decision-makers have a financial stake in outcomes.
b. Gibson v. Berryhill, 411 U.S. 564, 579 (1973): Due process is violated when adjudicators "have a direct, personal, substantial pecuniary interest in reaching a conclusion against [the party]."
c. Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Lavoie, 475 U.S. 813, 825 (1986): "It violates the Fourteenth Amendment for a justice to participate in the decision of a case in which he has a direct, personal, substantial pecuniary interest."
29. Parental Rights Require Strict Scrutiny: Fundamental parental rights trigger strict scrutiny, demanding that any state interference be narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest, which the Title IV-D funnel fails, as its revenue-driven motives—exploiting families for federal dollars through coerced conflict and extractions—cannot justify such profound violations.
a. Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 720-721 (1997): Fundamental liberties require "careful description" and protection against governmental encroachment unless narrowly tailored to a compelling state interest.
b. Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292, 302 (1993): "[T]he custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder," affirming strict protection for parental rights.
## Procedural Due Process Violations
30. Denial of Fair Tribunal: The Title IV-D enterprise's financial conflicts inherently bias judicial tribunals, transforming them into revenue-collection arms of a racketeering scheme where constitutional compliance threatens funding streams, ensuring arbitrary denials, selective enforcement, and predetermined outcomes that serve profit over justice. This systemic corruption denies the neutral forum essential to due process, as the funnel's incentives create an inescapable appearance—and reality—of bias, funneling victims through rigged proceedings that prioritize federal reimbursements over fair hearings.
a. In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 136 (1955): "A fair trial in a fair tribunal is a basic requirement of due process. Fairness of course requires an absence of actual bias in the trial of cases. But our system of law has always endeavored to prevent even the probability of unfairness," prohibiting any structural conflict where judges act as accusers or have vested interests, as occurs here with Title IV-D's revenue ties.
b. Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510, 523 (1927): "[I]t certainly violates the Fourteenth Amendment, and deprives a defendant in a criminal case of due process of law, to subject his liberty or property to the judgment of a court, the judge of which has a direct, personal, substantial pecuniary interest in reaching a conclusion against him in his case," directly condemning systems like Title IV-D where judicial outcomes boost state funding.
c. Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 (1976): "[I]dentification of the specific dictates of due process generally requires consideration of three distinct factors: First, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the Government's interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail," a test the funnel fails, as parental rights (profound private interest) face high erroneous deprivation risk from biased, revenue-driven processes, with no countervailing legitimate government interest beyond illicit profit.
d. Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, 267 (1970): "The fundamental requisite of due process of law is the opportunity to be heard... [and] that hearing must be at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner," demanding pre-deprivation evidentiary hearings before terminating welfare-like entitlements, extended here to family rights severed without fair process in Title IV-D's expedited, presumption-laden courts.
e. Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210, 221-222 (1990): "The procedural protections required by the Due Process Clause must be determined with reference to the rights and interests of the individual balanced against the needs of the institution... [requiring] notice, the right to be present at an adversary hearing, and the right to present and cross-examine witnesses," protections absent in the funnel's ex parte orders and summary proceedings that prioritize speed for revenue over balanced adjudication.
31. Systemic Bias: The enterprise embeds a presumption of guilt from accusation alone, systematically ignores exculpatory evidence, enables and rewards perjury by bad faith actors, and funnels victims into coerced pleas or entrapment scenarios without meaningful hearings or remedies, creating a conveyor belt of constitutional indifference where good faith challenges invite retaliation. This bias is not aberration but design, engineered to maximize Title IV-D collections by minimizing defenses, turning courts into tribunals that minimize justice.
a. In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 364 (1970): "Lest there remain any doubt about the constitutional stature of the reasonable-doubt standard, we explicitly hold that the Due Process Clause protects the accused against conviction except upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which he is charged," a standard eviscerated by the funnel's civil-criminal hybrid where mere allegations trigger seizures and presumptions shift burdens to the accused, inverting innocence.
b. Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 541 (1981): "The justifications which we have found sufficient to uphold takings of property without any predeprivation process are applicable to a situation such as the present one involving a tortious loss of a prisoner's property as a result of a random and unauthorized act by a state employee... [but] where the State provides a meaningful postdeprivation remedy," post-deprivation options suffice only for random acts—not, as here, systematic, policy-driven deprivations under Title IV-D, where biased pre-deprivation processes demand full hearings that are deliberately withheld to sustain the racketeering cycle.
## Other Constitutional Violations
32. Equal Protection Violations: The funnel enforces gender and wealth-based discrimination, systematically presuming male guilt in disputes, denying equal protection to male victims, and conditioning rights on wealth—violating Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71 (1971). This bias exists to facilitate father exclusion, as science shows fathers' unique contributions (e.g., promoting emotional resilience and risk-taking skills) are essential, yet the system perpetuates absence that harms children and sustains the cycle.
a. Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71, 76 (1971): Gender classifications must serve important objectives and be substantially related; the funnel's anti-male presumptions fail this, lacking basis given evidence of no gender difference in parenting quality (2020 review in Journal of Family Psychology).
b. Father involvement reduces delinquency by up to 50% and boosts academic success (APA meta-analysis; "The Boy Crisis" citing Census data), rendering bias arbitrary and harmful.
c. Wealth discrimination compounds this, as father absence drives 4x higher poverty, funneling low-income families into endless dependency (National Fatherhood Initiative).
33. Contracts Clause Violations: No-fault statutes like C.R.S. § 14-10-106 impair the sanctity of marriage contracts by stripping them of enforceable terms and remedies for breaches such as abuse or infidelity, without any substantial justification or emergency need, allowing bad faith actors to dissolve unions unilaterally while imposing unearned financial burdens—transforming the marital bond into a state-manipulated trap that generates Title IV-D profits through forced dissolutions and extractions. This retroactive evisceration of contractual obligations violates Article I, Section 10's prohibition on state impairment of contracts.
a. Fletcher v. Peck, 10 U.S. 87, 137-138 (1810): Contracts Clause prevents states from undermining contractual obligations without compelling justification.
b. Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 17 U.S. 518, 629 (1819): Contracts must provide remedies for breach, as mutual obligations are essential.
c. Energy Reserves Group v. Kansas Power & Light, 459 U.S. 400, 411 (1983): No retroactive impairment of existing contracts absent important public purpose and reasonable means.
d. Sturges v. Crowninshield, 17 U.S. 122 (1819): Mutual obligations fundamental to binding contracts.
e. Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190, 211 (1888): Marriage as foundational societal contract, yet no-fault strips it of enforceable terms, creating unprecedented legal absurdity.
f. Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 720-721 (1997): Substantive due process protects against arbitrary deprivations; no-fault creates perverse incentives punishing innocent parties while rewarding misconduct.
g. Allied Structural Steel Co. v. Spannaus, 438 U.S. 234, 244 (1978): Impairments must be reasonable and necessary; revenue-driven no-fault fails this test.
h. Home Building & Loan Ass'n v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398, 434 (1934): Impairments permissible only in emergencies and temporary; perpetual no-fault lacks such basis.
i. United States Trust Co. v. New Jersey, 431 U.S. 1, 25 (1977): Heightened scrutiny when state self-interest at stake, as with Title IV-D revenue from dissolutions.
34. Tenth Amendment Federal Commandeering: Title IV-D commandeers states, violating Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997); New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992); and Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n, 138 S. Ct. 1461 (2018).
a. Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898, 935 (1997): Federal government cannot command state officers to enforce federal programs.
b. New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144, 188 (1992): Congress cannot compel states to administer federal regulatory programs.
c. Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n, 138 S. Ct. 1461, 1477 (2018): Commandeering violates state sovereignty.
35. Article III Judicial Power Violations: The Title IV-D funnel converts state family courts into administrative revenue-collection agencies, violating Article III's grant of independent judicial power by transforming adjudication into executive enforcement of federal funding requirements under 42 U.S.C. § 658a, where judges prioritize performance metrics (e.g., collection volumes) over impartial resolution, compromising separation of powers and judicial independence. This improper commandeering forces courts to act as fiscal agents, generating bias that taints family law proceedings and encroaches on core judicial functions.
a. Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510, 523 (1927): "[I]t certainly violates the Fourteenth Amendment... to subject [a party's] liberty or property to the judgment of a court, the judge of which has a direct, personal, substantial pecuniary interest in reaching a conclusion against him," condemning revenue-dependent judging as here, where Title IV-D ties funding to enforcement outcomes.
b. Ward v. Village of Monroeville, 409 U.S. 57, 60 (1972): Systems where adjudicators "have a direct, personal, substantial pecuniary interest" or institutional revenue stake violate due process, directly applicable to family courts reliant on Title IV-D reimbursements for operations.
c. Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co., 458 U.S. 50, 58 (1982): Non-Article III tribunals cannot exercise judicial power over private rights without safeguards, as family disputes involve core private rights (e.g., parental authority), yet Title IV-D delegates enforcement to biased, revenue-focused courts, violating separation of powers.
d. Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462, 484 (2011): "Congress may not bypass Article III simply because a proceeding may have some bearing on a [public right] claim," limiting non-Article III adjudication; here, family courts' revenue role improperly mixes executive collection with judicial power.
e. Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868, 884 (2009): "Objective standards" require avoiding "serious risk of actual bias" from financial interests; Title IV-D's incentives create such risk in family courts, subverting independence.
f. In family court contexts, precedents like Turner v. Rogers, 564 U.S. 431, 435 (2011) recognize due process violations in child support enforcement when procedures lack safeguards, implying revenue bias (e.g., incarceration for non-payment) compromises judicial neutrality; see also critiques in Juvenile Court Interagency Agreements (2014), noting Title IV-D revenue strategies "subvert the mission and independence" of courts.
36. First Amendment Violations: Compels association and chills divorce attempts, violating Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609 (1984); Board of Directors of Rotary International v. Rotary Club, 481 U.S. 537 (1987); and Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000).
a. Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609, 623 (1984): Freedom not to associate protected.
b. Board of Directors of Rotary International v. Rotary Club, 481 U.S. 537, 546 (1987): Interference with association must serve compelling interests.
c. Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640, 648 (2000): Forced inclusion in groups infringes expressive association.
37. Fourth Amendment Violations: Enables unreasonable seizures of relationships, violating Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645 (1972), and Little v. Streater, 452 U.S. 1 (1981).
a. Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645, 651 (1972): Parental rights protected from seizure without due process.
b. Little v. Streater, 452 U.S. 1, 13 (1981): Wealth cannot condition protection from relational seizures.
38. Sixth Amendment Violations: Presumption of guilt and retaliatory prosecutions deny fair trial rights, including impartial juries, counsel, and confrontation, in enforcement actions under the funnel.
a. Coffin v. United States, 156 U.S. 432, 453 (1895): Presumption of innocence and fair trial essential in criminal proceedings arising from family law violations.
39. Eighth Amendment Violations: Excessive fines and cruel punishment through disproportionate financial penalties and incarceration for non-payment.
a. United States v. Bajakajian, 524 U.S. 321, 334 (1998): Fines must be proportional to offense; here, lifetime extractions for family disputes are excessive.
40. Ninth Amendment Violations: The system violates unenumerated rights to parental autonomy and financial autonomy, requiring invasive disclosures and wealth transfers without warrant.
a. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 484 (1965): Ninth Amendment protects unenumerated rights, including family privacy.
b. Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45, 56 (1905): Economic liberty as unenumerated right against arbitrary state interference.
## Colorado's Systematic Bias Necessitating Forum Change { #forum-change }
39. Recent Systematic Constitutional Violations: Colorado's judiciary demonstrates entrenched bias through arbitrary enforcement of procedural rules—e.g., denying then accepting identical emergency motions on missing children—and deliberate obstruction of constitutional challenges, all calibrated to shield Title IV-D revenue streams from scrutiny while perpetuating the funnel's deprivations. This institutional favoritism toward profit-driven outcomes renders impartial adjudication impossible, violating due process mandates for neutral tribunals and necessitating transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), which authorizes venue change "for the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice," where local bias threatens fairness.
a. Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501, 508 (1947): Transfer where trial in chosen forum is oppressive.
b. In re National Presto Industries, Inc., 347 F.3d 662, 664 (7th Cir. 2003): Transfer for local prejudices compromising justice.
c. Research Automation, Inc. v. Schrader-Bridgeport Int'l, Inc., 626 F.3d 973, 978 (7th Cir. 2010): Interest of justice determinative for transfer.
d. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that procedural technicalities cannot be used to defeat substantial constitutional claims. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972).
40. Eight Weeks of Missing Children Obstruction: For eight weeks, Colorado agencies systematically refused to investigate interstate parental kidnapping despite compelling evidence, funneling the matter into bureaucratic voids to protect Title IV-D eligibility, subordinating child welfare to fiscal imperatives. This deliberate inaction exemplifies the bias demanding venue shift.
a. Gibson v. Berryhill, 411 U.S. 564, 579 (1973): Pecuniary interest violates due process, justifying removal.
b. Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Lavoie, 475 U.S. 813, 825 (1986): Structural bias requires change.
41. Title IV-D Revenue Protection Over Child Welfare: This obstruction subordinates child welfare to funding, proving the funnel's priority of profit and the impossibility of unbiased adjudication in Colorado. Transfer is imperative under § 1404(a).
a. Ward v. Village of Monroeville, 409 U.S. 57, 60 (1972): Financial interest violates due process.
b. Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868, 884 (2009): Risk of bias mandates removal.
42. Pattern of Systematic Retaliation: Colorado's judiciary exhibits retaliation against Title IV-D challengers, making impartiality impossible and compelling transfer.
a. Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510, 523 (1927): Pecuniary interest unconstitutional.
b. In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 136 (1955): Interest in outcome prohibits judging.
## Title IV-D as a Criminal Racketeering Organization Masquerading Under Color of Law
43. The Title IV-D enterprise, operating under the veneer of child welfare, constitutes a full-fledged criminal racketeering operation masquerading as legitimate government function, meticulously engineered to monetize constitutional violations through a pattern of predicate acts that meet every element of RICO under 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq.
a. **Existence of an Enterprise (18 U.S.C. § 1961(4))**: The Title IV-D system forms an "enterprise" as an association-in-fact between federal agencies (HHS, OCSE), state entities (Colorado Judicial Department, District Attorneys' Council, Attorney General), and Does 1-20, united by the common purpose of generating federal reimbursements through family destruction. This interlocking network operates with continuity, structure, and shared goals—maximizing metrics like support collections and custody actions—evidenced by coordinated funding formulas under 42 U.S.C. § 658a that tie state compliance to federal dollars, creating a de facto criminal syndicate. Precedents confirm government entities can be RICO enterprises when engaged in corruption: United States v. Thompson, 685 F.2d 993, 1001 (6th Cir. 1982) (en banc) (governor's office as enterprise in bribery scheme); United States v. Angelilli, 660 F.2d 23, 31 (2d Cir. 1981) (civil court as enterprise in judicial bribery); see also Cedric Kushner Promotions, Ltd. v. King, 533 U.S. 158, 161 (2001) (enterprise includes "any union or group of individuals associated in fact").
b. **Pattern of Racketeering Activity (18 U.S.C. § 1961(5))**: The enterprise engages in a "pattern" requiring at least two predicate acts within ten years, demonstrated here by ongoing, related violations showing continuity and relationship: (i) Mail and wire fraud (18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343) through false representations in support orders and court notices mailed/electronically transmitted, deceiving parties about "best interests" while concealing revenue motives; (ii) Extortion (18 U.S.C. § 1951) via coerced payments under threat of incarceration or rights loss in C.R.S. § 14-14-111; (iii) Obstruction of justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503) by biased tribunals suppressing evidence and retaliating against challengers; and (iv) Money laundering (18 U.S.C. § 1956) in recycling fraudulently obtained funds through state budgets. These acts are routine, not isolated, forming a closed pattern of repeated harms to Plaintiff and open continuity threatening future victims, per H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 492 U.S. 229, 239 (1989) ("pattern" requires "relationship plus continuity"); Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., 473 U.S. 479, 496 n.14 (1985) (multiple schemes suffice for pattern).
c. **Conduct or Participation in the Enterprise's Affairs (18 U.S.C. § 1962(c))**: Defendants—federal officials administering incentives, state actors enforcing biased statutes—conduct the enterprise through racketeering, with each level enabling the other: HHS/OCSE sets performance metrics rewarding violations, while Colorado entities execute them via rigged courts. This "operation or management" test is met, as defendants direct the funnel's daily operations, per Reves v. Ernst & Young, 507 U.S. 170, 179 (1993) (liability for those who "participate in the operation or management of the enterprise itself").
d. **Effect on Interstate Commerce (18 U.S.C. § 1962(c))**: The enterprise affects interstate commerce through nationwide funding flows, cross-state enforcement (e.g., parental kidnapping), and economic impacts on families spanning borders, satisfying the minimal nexus required, per United States v. Robertson, 514 U.S. 669, 671 (1995) (even local activities suffice if they "affect" commerce); Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1, 17 (2005) (broad commerce power over economic activities).
e. **Injury to Business or Property (18 U.S.C. § 1964(c))**: Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals suffer concrete financial injuries—lost income from coerced payments, legal fees, deprived parental rights (property interest per Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 65 (2000))—proximately caused by the racketeering, enabling treble damages and injunctive relief, per Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corp., 503 U.S. 258, 268 (1992) (proximate cause required); Rotella v. Wood, 528 U.S. 549, 554 (2000) (injury discovery rule for accrual).
f. **Extortion Under Color of Law (18 U.S.C. § 1951)**: The funnel's mechanism of withholding child custody or access until support payments are made constitutes extortion, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1951(b)(2) ("the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right"), where state actors induce "consent" to payments through fear of lost parental rights, incarceration (C.R.S. § 14-14-111), or retaliatory actions—extortion under color of official right via abuse of authority to extract Title IV-D-tied funds. This "custody ransom" is deliberate entrapment: bad faith actors withhold children to force payments, while the state profits, creating catch-22s where resistance triggers further violations. See Evans v. United States, 504 U.S. 255, 265 (1992) (extortion includes passive inducement via official position); United States v. Jackson, 196 F.3d 383, 387 (2d Cir. 1999) (fear of economic harm suffices); Wilkie v. Robbins, 551 U.S. 537 (2007) (gov't harassment for property as potential extortion, analogous here in RICO context).
44. Constitutional Compliance Economically Penalized: Under Title IV-D's formulas (42 U.S.C. § 658a), protecting parental rights or family integrity reduces metrics like dissolution rates and collections, slashing federal funds and penalizing states economically—creating a structural disincentive for due process that entrenches the racketeering, as compliance threatens the enterprise's lifeblood.
45. Constitutional Violations Financially Rewarded: Conversely, incentives reward dissolution (via custody actions), conflict generation (through biased DV proceedings), and extractions (support enforcement), funneling billions annually while transforming justice into a marketplace of misery, per the RICO pattern above. This reward system is the enterprise's engine.
46. Institutional Corruption: By design, Title IV-D corrupts courts into revenue enterprises, where judges and officials—dependent on funding tied to violations—cannot act in good faith, making impartiality impossible and fulfilling RICO's enterprise element through systemic perversion of public trust. Precedents abound for such judicial racketeering: United States v. Shenberg, 89 F.3d 1461 (11th Cir. 1996) (judges in bribery enterprise); United States v. Maloney, 71 F.3d 645 (7th Cir. 1995) (judicial corruption as RICO).
## Summary of Constitutional Claims Facial Challenge to Title IV-D Racketeering Scheme
As exhaustively documented through systematic constitutional violations, comprehensive statutory analysis, and empirical evidence, the Supreme Court unequivocally holds that no bureaucratic state power may, without parental consent, usurp the fundamental parental authority to determine the best interests of one's children. This principle is established in Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (parental rights as oldest fundamental liberty); Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925) (child not mere creature of state); Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923) (right to raise children essential); and numerous controlling precedents including Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645 (1972); Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982); Parham v. J.R., 442 U.S. 584 (1979); and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972). Scientific evidence reinforces this, showing father involvement yields equivalent or superior child outcomes (e.g., single-father homes match two-parent in health/poverty metrics, reducing delinquency by 50%), yet the system ignores this to perpetuate harm and revenue.
This non-negotiable principle admits no exceptions for state profit motives, particularly where state and federal actors operate interlocking schemes designed to entice violations through manufactured crises feeding the racketeering enterprise. The enterprise weaponizes C.R.S. § 18-6-801 (domestic violence) to fabricate conflicts, driving families into C.R.S. § 14-10-106 (no-fault dissolution) that generate custody restrictions under C.R.S. § 14-14-107.5, stripping parental rights from married and unmarried alike—each component engineered to funnel participants into subsequent revenue pathways via systematic family destruction, rendering constitutional compliance structurally impossible amid overwhelming precedent, obvious conflicts of interest, and ignored science.
Consequently, Plaintiff, exercising fundamental parental liberty interests against this racketeering enterprise masquerading as legitimate government, categorically and irrevocably withholds consent for Defendants to substitute their judgment for parental determination of "best interest" standards regarding Plaintiff's natural children. This express withdrawal of consent erects the final constitutional barrier against state usurpation, rendering any subsequent governmental interference per se unconstitutional absent a compelling state interest—which this profit-driven criminal enterprise cannot provide, as compliance would demolish its revenue model.
As demonstrated through violations, analysis, and evidence (e.g., national statistics: 80% maternal custody awards, $6.4 billion Title IV-D expenditures in FY2023, father absence driving 4x poverty/20x incarceration), no compelling interest exists; the system serves only financial enrichment via violations, obstructing child welfare to protect funding streams, with fraudulent pretexts exposed by science showing bias harms families.
Defendants operate a criminal racketeering enterprise under 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq., masquerading as family law—a constitutional destruction machine weaponizing Contracts Clause breaches via C.R.S. § 14-10-106 to entrap families in indefinite servitude through C.R.S. § 14-10-115, funding expansion via Title IV-D grants. This enterprise integrates civil/criminal schemes (e.g., C.R.S. §§ 18-6-801, 13-14-102, 14-10-115, 14-14-107.5) as a single conspiracy making escape impossible. The challenge's breadth is constitutionally mandated: partial relief allows regeneration, like a metastasizing tumor; complete dismantlement is required.
Defendants cannot and have not demonstrated any compelling justification for this wholesale annihilation of fundamental rights, as the enterprise exists solely for illicit financial enrichment through deliberate constitutional violations—perversely leveraging fraudulent child welfare pretexts that, in reality, destroy the very families and futures they claim to protect, ensuring a self-perpetuating cycle of oppression and profit. Ninth Amendment unenumerated parental rights (e.g., autonomy, financial self-determination without undue disclosure per Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965); Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905)) are exterminated under color of law, creating § 1983 liability for deliberate deprivations in an organized conspiracy precluding good faith action.
The foundation—precedent, conflicts, science, national scale—conclusively renders Title IV-D facially unconstitutional under any scrutiny and actionable as a criminal enterprise under 18 U.S.C. § 1962: constitutional governance and this profit system cannot coexist.
## Prayer for Relief
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands this Court:
### A. EMERGENCY RELIEF:
1. Issue immediate emergency injunctive relief halting enforcement of all Title IV-D related statutes nationwide pending constitutional adjudication;
2. Order immediate federal investigation and location of Plaintiff's missing children;
3. Order immediate preservation of all evidence related to Title IV-D revenue generation and constitutional violations;
### B. DECLARATORY RELIEF:
4. Declare the Title IV-D program under 42 U.S.C. § 658a facially unconstitutional as violating fundamental parental rights protected by the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments;
5. Declare C.R.S. § 14-10-106, § 14-10-124, § 14-14-107.5, § 14-10-115, § 18-6-801, § 13-14-102, § 14-10-114, § 14-14-107, § 14-14-111, § 18-3-304, and related statutes facially unconstitutional;
6. Declare that states cannot claim federal mandate immunity when enforcing facially unconstitutional federal programs;
7. Establish binding precedent that federal funding cannot be conditioned upon state constitutional violations;
### C. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF:
8. Permanently enjoin enforcement of all enumerated statutes that constitute this racketeering scheme;
9. Order complete dismantlement of Title IV-D revenue-generation apparatus;
10. Mandate structural reform eliminating financial incentives for constitutional violations;
### D. COMPENSATORY RELIEF:
11. Award compensatory damages to Plaintiff in the amount of $10,000,000 for a lifetime of systematic constitutional deprivations, including loss of parental rights, economic coercion, financial destruction and emotional distress;
12. Award punitive damages in the amount of $50,000,000 to deter future violations;
13. Order redirection of all Title IV-D enforcement funds toward compensation for families systematically victimized by this unconstitutional criminal bureaucracy;
### E. PRECEDENTIAL RELIEF:
14. Establish constitutional precedent protecting families from federal-state racketeering enterprises;
15. Create binding authority for constitutional challenges to federal commandeering programs;
16. Establish "The Colorado Doctrine" holding states liable for enforcing unconstitutional federal programs to restore federalist balance;
### F. SUCH OTHER RELIEF as this Court deems just and proper to restore constitutional governance and protect fundamental parental rights.
Respectfully submitted,
**TIMOTHY WILLIAMS, Pro Se**
[Address]
[Phone Number]
[Email Address]
**VERIFICATION**
I, Timothy Williams, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
**/s/ Timothy Williams**
Timothy Williams
Date: August 18, 2025
---
_Break the criminal enterprise. Restore constitutional supremacy. End the monetization of constitutional violations._

186
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/std-action.md
View File

@@ -1,186 +0,0 @@
---
title: Standard Action
description: Do it once, do it right.
taxonomies:
tags:
- std
- nix
- devops
- github actions
author: Tim D
authorGithub: nrdxp
authorImage: https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/34083928?v=4
authorTwitter: nrdxp52262
date: "2022-12-09"
category: dev
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
## CI Should be Simple
As promised in the [last post](./std), I'd like to expand a bit more on what we've
been working on recently concerning Nix & Standard in CI.
At work, our current GH action setup is rather _ad hoc_, and the challenge of optimizing that path
around Nix’s strengths lay largely untapped for nearly a year now. Standard has helped somewhat
to get things organized, but there has been a ton of room for improvement in the way tasks are
scheduled and executed in CI.
[Standard Action][action] is our answer. We have taken the last several months of brainstorming
off and on as time allows, experimenting to find a path that is versatile enough to be useful
in the general case, yet powerful enough for organizations who need extra capacity. So without
any further stalling, let's get into it!
## The Gist
The goal is simple, we want a CI system that only does work once and shares the result from there.
If it has been built or evaled before, then we want to share the results from the previous run
rather than start from scratch.
It is also useful to have some kind of metadata about our actions, which we can use to build
matrices of task runners to accomplish our goals. This also allows us to schedule builds on
multiple OS trivially, for example.
Task runners shouldn't have to care about Nix evaluation at all, they should just be able to get
to work doing whatever they need to do. If they have access to already reified derivations, they
can do that.
So how can we accomplish this? Isolate the evaluation to its own dedicated "discovery" phase, and
share the resulting /nix/store and a json list describing each task and its target derivations.
From there it's just a matter of opimizing the details based on your usecase, and to that end we
have a few optional inputs for things like caching and remote building, if you are so inclined.
But you can do everything straight on the runner too, if you just need the basics.
## How it Works
Talking is fine, but code is better. To that end, feel free to take a look at my own personal CI
for my NixOS system and related packages: [nrdxp/nrdos/ci.yml][nrdos].
What is actually evaluated during the discovery phase is determined directly in the
[flake.nix][ci-api].
I am not doing anything fancy here at the moment, just some basic package builds, but that is
enough to illustrate what's happening. You can get a quick visual by look at the summary of
a given run: [nrdxp/nrdos#3644114900](https://github.com/nrdxp/nrdos/actions/runs/3644114900).
You could have any number of matrices here, one for publishing OCI images, one for publishing
documentation, one for running deployments against a target environment, etc, etc.
Notice in this particular example that CI exited in 2 minutes. That's because everything
represented by these builds is already cached in the specified action input `cache`, so no work is
required, we simply report that the artifacts already exist and exit quickly.
There is a run phase that typically starts after this build step which runs the Standard action,
but since the "build" actions only duty is building, it is also skipped here.
This is partially enabled by use of the GH action cache. The cache key is set using the following
format: [divnix/std-action/discover/action.yml#key][key]. Coupled with the guarantees nix already
gives us, this is enough to ensure the evaluation will only be used on runners using a matching OS,
on a matching architecture and the exact revision of the current run.
This is critical for runners to ensure they get an exact cache hit on start, that way they pick
up where the discovery job left off and begin their build work immediately, acting directly
on their target derivation file instead of doing any more evaluation.
## Caching & Remote Builds
Caching is also a first class citizen, and even in the event that a given task fails (even
discovery itself), any of its nix dependencies built during the process leading up to that failure
will be cached, making sure no nix build _or_ evaluation is ever repeated. The user doesn't have
to set a cache, but if they do, they can be rest assured their results will be well cached, we
make a point to cache the entire build time closure, and not just the runtime closure, which is
important for active developement in projects using a shared cache.
The builds themselves can also be handed off to a more powerful dedicated remote builder. The
action handles remote builds using the newer and more efficient remote store build API, and when
coupled with a special purpose service such as [nixbuild.net](https://nixbuild.net), which your
author is already doing, it becomes incredibly powerful.
To get started, you can run all your builds directly on the action runner, and if that becomes
a burden, there is a solid path available if and when you need to split out your build phase to a
dedicated build farm.
## Import from What?
This next part is a bit of an aside, so feel free to skip, but the process outlined above just so
happened to solve an otherwise expensive problem for us at work, outlining how thinking through
these problems carefully has helped us improve our process.
IOG in general is a bit unique in the Nix community as one of the few heavy users of Nix’s IFD
feature via our [haskell.nix][haskell] project. For those unaware, IFD stands for
"import from derivation" and happens any time the contents of some file from one derivations output
path is read into another during evaluation, say to read a lock file and generate fetch actions.
This gives us great power, but comes at a cost, since the evaluator has to stop and build the
referenced path if it does not already exist in order to be able to read from it.
For this reason, this feature is banned from inclusion in nixpkgs, and so the tooling used there
(Hydra, _et al._) is not necessarily a good fit for projects that do make use of IFD to some extent.
So what can be done? Many folks would love to improve the performance of the evaluator itself, your
author included. The current Nix evaluator is single threaded, so there is plenty of room for
splitting this burden across threads, and especially in the case of IFD, it could theoretically
speed things up a great deal.
However, improving the evaluator performance itself is actually a bit of a red herring as far as
we are concerned here. What we really want to ensure is that we never pay the cost of any given Nix
workload more than once, no matter how long it takes. Then we can ensure we are only ever
building on what has already been done; an additive process if you will. Without careful
consideration of this principle beforehand, even a well optimized evaluator would be wasting cycles
doing the same evals over and over. There is the nix flake evalulation cache, but it comes with
a few [caveats][4279] on its own and so doesn't currently solve our problem either.
To give you some numbers, to run a fresh eval of my current project at work takes 35 minutes from a
clean /nix/store, but with a popullated /nix/store from a previous run it takes only 2.5 minutes.
Some of the savings is eaten up by data transfer and compression, but the net savings are still
massive.
I have already begun brainstorming ways we could elimnate that transfer cost entirely by introducing
an optional, dedicated [evaluation store](https://github.com/divnix/std-action/issues/10) for those
who would benefit from it. With that, there is no transfer cost at all during discovery, and the
individual task runners only have to pull the derivations for their particular task, instead of the
entire /nix/store produced by discovery, saving a ton of time in our case.
Either way, this is a special case optimization, and for those who are content to stick with the
default of using the action cache to share evaluation results, it should more than suffice in the
majority of cases.
## Wrap Up
So essentially, we make due with what we have in terms of eval performance, focus on ensuring we
never do the same work twice, and if breakthroughs are made in the Nix evaluator upstream at some
point in the future, great, but we don't have to wait around for it, we can minimize our burden
right now by thinking smart. After all, we are not doing Nix evaluations just for the sake of it,
but to get meaningful work done, and doing new and interesting work is always better than repeating
old tasks because we failed to strategize correctly.
If we do ever need to migrate to a more complex CI system, these principles themeselves are all
encapsulated in a few fairly minimal shell scripts and could probably be ported to other
systems without incredible effort. Feel free to take a look at the source to see what's really
goin on: [divnix/std-action](https://github.com/divnix/std-action).
There are some places where we could use some [help][7437] from [upstream][2946], but even then, the
process is efficient enough to be a massive improvement, both for my own personal setup, and for
work.
As I mentioned in the previous post though, Standard isn't just about convenience or performance,
but arguable the most important aspect is to assist us in being _thorough_. To ensure all
our tasks are run, all our artifacts are cached and all our images are published is no small feat
without something like Standard to help us automate away the tedium, and thank goodness for that.
For comments or questions, please feel free to drop by the official Standard [Matrix Room][matrix]
as well to track progress as it comes in. Until next time...
[action]: https://github.com/divnix/std-action
[haskell]: https://github.com/input-output-hk/haskell.nix
[nrdos]: https://github.com/nrdxp/nrdos/blob/master/.github/workflows/ci.yml
[key]: https://github.com/divnix/std-action/blob/6ed23356cab30bd5c1d957d45404c2accb70e4bd/discover/action.yml#L37
[7437]: https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues/7437
[3946]: https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues/3946#issuecomment-1344612074
[4279]: https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues/4279#issuecomment-1343723345
[matrix]: https://matrix.to/#/#std-nix:matrix.org
[ci-api]: https://github.com/nrdxp/nrdos/blob/66149ed7fdb4d4d282cfe798c138cb1745bef008/flake.nix#L66-L68

221
sites/nrd.sh/content/blog/std.md
View File

@@ -1,221 +0,0 @@
---
title: From DevOS to Standard
description: Why we made Standard, and what it has done for us.
taxonomies:
tags:
- std
- nix
- devops
author: Tim D
authorGithub: nrdxp
authorImage: https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/34083928?v=4
authorTwitter: nrdxp52262
date: "2022-10-31"
category: dev
extra:
read_time: true
repo_view: true
---
## Update: A Video is Worth 1000 Blogs
For those who would rather watch than read, a colleague of mine has whipped up a great video series
exploring Standard in depth, so drop by the [media secition](../media) for links.
## Two years later...
DevOS started as a fun project to try and get better with Nix and understand this weird new thing
called flakes. Since then and despite their warts, Nix flakes have experienced widespread use, and
rightfully so, as a mechanism for hermetically evaluating your system & packages that fully locks
your inputs and guarantees you some meaningful level of sanity over your artifacts.
Yet when I first released it, I never even imagined so many people would find DevOS useful, and I
have been truly humbled by all the support and contributions that came entirely spontaneously to the
project and ultmately culminated in the current version of [digga][digga], and the divnix org that
maintains it.
## Back to Basics
For whatever reason, it really feels like time to give a brief update of what has come of this
little community experiment, and I'm excited to hopefully clear up some apparent confusion, and
hopefully properly introduce to the world [Standard](https://github.com/divnix/std).
DevOS was never meant to be an end all be all, but rather a heavily experimental sketch while
I stumbled along to try and organize my Nix code more effectively. With Standard, we are able to
distill the wider experience of some of its contributors, as well as some new friends, and design
something a little more focused and hopefully less magical, while still eliminating a ton of
boilerplate. Offering both a lightly opinionated way to organize your code into logically typed
units, and a mechanism for defining "standard" actions over units of the same type.
Other languages make this simple by defining a module mechanism into the language where users are
freed from the shackles of decision overload by force, but Nix has no such advantage. Many people
hoped and even expected flakes to alleviate this burden, but other than the schema Nix expects
over its outputs, it does nothing to enforce how you can generate those outputs, or how to organize
the logical units of code & configuration that generate them.
## A Departure from Tradition
It is fair to say that the nixpkgs module system has become the sort of "goto" means of managing
configuration in the Nix community, and while this may be good at the top-level where a global
namespace is sometimes desirable, it doesn't really give us a generic means of sectioning off our
code to generate both configuration _and_ derivation outputs quickly.
In addition to that, the module system is fairly complex and is a bit difficult to anticate the
cost of ahead of time due to the fixed-point. The infamous "infinite traces" that can occur during
a Nix module evaluation almost never point to the actual place in your code where the error
originates, and often does even contain a single bit of code from the local repository in the trace.
Yet as the only real game in town, the module system has largely "de facto" dictated the nature
of how we organize our Nix code up til now. It lends itself to more of a "depth first" approach
where modules can recurse into other modules ad infinitum.
## A Simpler Structure
Standard, in contrast, tries to take an alternative "breadth first" approach, ecouraging code
organization closer to the project root. If true depth is called for, flakes using Standard can
compose gracefully with other flakes, whether they use Standard or not.
It is also entirely unopionated on what you output, there is nothing stopping you from simply
exporting NixOS modules themselves, for example, giving you a nice language level
compartmentalization strategy to help manager your NixOS, Home Manager or Nix Darwin configurations.
Advanced users may even write their own types, or even extend the officially supported ones. We
will expand more on this in a later post.
But in simple terms, why should we bother writing the same script logic over and over when we can be
guaranteed to recieve an output of a specific type, which guarantees any actions we define for the
type at large will work for us: be it deploying container images, publishing sites, running
deployments, or invoking tests & builds.
We can ensure that each image, site, or deployment is tested, built, deployed and published in
a sane and well-defined way, universally. In this way, Standard is meant to not only be convenient,
but comprehensive, which is an important property to maintain when codebases grow to non-trivial
size.
There is also no fixed-point so, anecdotably, I have yet to hit an eval error in Standard based
projects that I couldn't quickly track down; try saying that about the module system.
## A CLI for productivity
The Nix cli can sometimes feel a little opaque and low-level. It isn't always the best interface
to explain and explore what we can actually _do_ with a given project. To address this issue in
a minimal and clean way, we package a small go based cli/tui combo to quickly answer exactly this
question, "What can I do with this project?".
This interface is entirely optional, but also highly useful and really rather trivial thanks to a
predicatable structure and well typed outputs given to us in the Nix code. The schema for anything
you can do follows the same pattern: "std //$cell/$block/$target:$action". Here the "cell" is the
highest level "unit", or collection of "blocks", which are well-typed attribute sets of "targets"
sharing a colleciton of common "actions" which can be performed over them.
### At a Glance
The TUI is invaluable for quickly getting up to speed with what's available:
```console
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐┌───────────────────────────────────┐
│| Target ││ Actions │
│ ││ │
│ 176 items │││ build │
│ │││ build this target │
│ //automation/packages/retesteth ││ │
│ testeth via RPC. Test run, generation by t8ntool protocol ││ run │
│ ││ exec this target │
││ //automation/jobs/cardano-db-sync ││ │
││ Run a local cardano-db-sync against our testnet ││ │
│ ││ │
│ //automation/jobs/cardano-node ││ │
│ Run a local cardano-node against our testnet ││ │
│ ││ │
```
## A Concise Show & Tell
The central component of Standard is the cell block API. The heirarchy is "cell"→"block", where
we defined the individual block types and names directly in the flake.nix.
The function calls in the "cellBlocks" list below are the way in which we determine which "actions"
can be run over the contents of the given block.
```nix
# flake.nix
{
inputs.std.url = "github:divnix/std";
outputs = inputs: inputs.std.growOn {
inherit inputs;
systems = ["x86_64-linux"];
# Every file in here should be a directory, that's your "cell"
cellsFrom = ./nix;
# block API declaration
cellBlocks = [
(std.functions "lib")
(std.installables "packages")
(std.devshells "devshells")
];
};
}
# ./nix/dev/packages.nix
# nix build .#$system.dev.packages.project
# std //dev/packages/project:build
{
inputs, # flake inputs with the `system` abstracted, but still exposed when required
cell # reference to access other blocks in this cell
}: let
inherit (inputs.nixpkgs) pkgs;
in
{
project = pkgs.stdenv.mkDerivation {
# ...
};
}
# ./nix/automation/devshells/default.nix
# nix develop .#$system.dev.devshells.dev
# std //automation/devshells/dev:enter
{
inputs,
cell
}: let
inherit (inputs) nixpkgs std;
inherit (nixpkgs) pkgs;
# a reference to other cells in the project
inherit (inputs.cells) packages;
in
{
dev = std.mkShell { packages = [packages.project]; };
}
```
## Encouraging Cooperation
Standard has also given us a useful mechanism for contributing back to upstream where it makes
sense. We are all about maintaining well-defined boundaries, and we don't want to reimplement the
world if the problem would be better solved elsewhere. Work on Standard has already led to several
useful contributions to both nixpkgs and even a few in nix proper, as well as some in tangentially
related codebases, such as github actions and go libraries.
One very exciting example of this cooperation is the effort we've expended integrating
[nix2container][n2c] with Standard. The work has given us insights and position to begin defining an
officially supported specification for [OCI images][oci] built and run from Nix store paths, which
is something that would be a huge win for developers everywhere!
We believe interoperability with existing standards is how Nix can ultimately cement itself into
the mainstream, and in a way that is unoffensive and purely additive.
## CI simplified
Instead of making this a mega post, I'll just leave this as a bit of a teaser for a follow-up post
which will explore our recent efforts to bring the benefits Standard to GitHub Actions _a la_
[std-action][action]. The target is a Nix CI system that avoids ever doing the same work more than
once, whether its evaluating or building, and versatile enough to work from a single user project
all the way up to a large organization's monorepo. Stay tuned...
[digga]: https://github.com/divnix/digga
[nosys]: https://github.com/divnix/nosys
[action]: https://github.com/divnix/std-action
[grow]: https://std.divnix.com/guides/growing-cells.html
[harvest]: https://github.com/divnix/std/blob/main/src/harvest.nix
[n2c]: https://github.com/nlewo/nix2container
[oci]: https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/issues/922

35
sites/nrd.sh/content/collab.md
View File

@@ -1,35 +0,0 @@
---
title: Collaborate
---
## Support Open Source
If my open-source work has helped you, here's how to support it:
- Drop by [Discord](https://discord.gg/DgC9Snxmg7) to say hi
- Contribute to [Ekala](https://github.com/ekala-project) or other projects
- Throw some money at it:
**Fiat**
- [Personal Liberapay](https://liberapay.com/nrdxp/donate)
- [Ekala Liberapay](https://liberapay.com/Ekala/donate)
**Crypto**
- BTC: [bc1qqwlhvtza3az3vj0um03yqrsqnl32gfdgz7x96s](bitcoin:bc1qqwlhvtza3az3vj0um03yqrsqnl32gfdgz7x96s)
- ETH: [0x131b30f34b9F120b4C08c987150B4e83581e3FD5](ethereum:0x131b30f34b9F120b4C08c987150B4e83581e3FD5)
- ADA: [$nrdxp](cardano:addr1qywsmj6rph5xp4g0mfgnee6hwfk4l6ark42k8x0lfklah9akeej0wlqxpxwcucmrjm8gt3c3pa9tpejkzcsgaxflym4qrglkmw)
## Contract Work
I take on consulting and contract work. My areas:
- Distributed systems
- Build infrastructure
- Rust and Nix
- Blockchain infrastructure
- General systems programming
- Interesting problems (try me)
## Get in Touch
For contract work or collaboration, reach out through my social links. Happy to talk through your project.

3
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/_index.md
View File

@@ -1,3 +0,0 @@
---
title: Projects
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/atom.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: atom
description: "A deterministic source packaging format built on Git's object model."
weight: 0
link_to: "https://github.com/ekala-project/atom"
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/atomix.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: atomix
description: "A minimal, performant module system for Nix code."
weight: 0
link_to: "https://github.com/ekala-project/atom/tree/master/atom-nix"
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/bitte.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: bitte
description: "Nix Ops for Terraform, Consul, Vault, Nomad."
weight: 3
link_to: "https://github.com/input-output-hk/bitte"
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/cfdyndns.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: cfdyndns
description: "CloudFlare Dynamic DNS Client."
weight: 2
link_to: "https://github.com/nrdxp/cfdyndns"
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/digga.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: digga
description: "A Nix flake utility library for managing nixos, hm and devshells"
weight: 3
link_to: "https://digga.divnix.com/"
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/eka.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: eka
description: "An atomic, plugin-based CLI frontend to the Eos API."
weight: 0
link_to: "https://github.com/ekala-project/eka"
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/eos.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: eos
description: "A work-in-progress distributed HTTP scheduler designed for store-driven build systems."
weight: 0
link_to: "https://github.com/ekala-project"
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/ethic.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: hackers-ethic
description: "First, hinder no thought: A Code of Ethics for Digital Freedom."
weight: 0
link_to: "https://github.com/EthicsCodes/hackers-ethic"
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/home.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: home
description: "Ekala based dotfiles leveraging Nix and home-manager."
weight: 1
link_to: "https://github.com/nrdxp/home"
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/nixpkgs.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: nixpkgs
description: "ex-maintainer & NixOS release manager."
weight: 2
link_to: "https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs"
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/nosys.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: nosys
description: "A hassle free Nix flake system handler library."
weight: 1
link_to: "https://github.com/divnix/nosys"
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/pc.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: partnerchain
description: "A Substrate-based blockchain running on top of the Cardano network."
weight: 0
link_to: "https://github.com/input-output-hk/partner-chains"
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/rfc-175.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: RFC 175
description: "A proposal to enhance moderation practices within the Nix community."
weight: 1
link_to: "https://github.com/nrdxp/rfcs/blob/rfc-175/rfcs/0175-appeals-council.md"
---

6
sites/nrd.sh/content/projects/standard.md
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
---
title: standard
description: "A Nix-centric devops framework."
weight: 1
link_to: "https://std.divnix.com/"
---

5
sites/nrd.sh/site.toml
View File

@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@
# Site configuration for nrd.sh static site compiler
author = "nrdxp"
base_url = "https://nrd.sh/"
title = "nrd.sh"

25
sites/nrd.sh/static/_headers
View File

@@ -1,25 +0,0 @@
# Netlify headers for nrd.sh
# Default headers for all paths
/*
X-Frame-Options: DENY
X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff
Referrer-Policy: strict-origin-when-cross-origin
# Cache static assets aggressively
/*.css
Cache-Control: public, max-age=31536000, immutable
/*.png
Cache-Control: public, max-age=31536000, immutable
/*.gif
Cache-Control: public, max-age=31536000, immutable
# HTML pages: short cache, revalidate
/*.html
Cache-Control: public, max-age=3600, must-revalidate
# Feed: moderate cache
/feed.xml
Cache-Control: public, max-age=3600

BIN
sites/nrd.sh/static/color.png
View File

Binary file not shown.
Side by Side

Before

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 263 KiB

BIN
sites/nrd.sh/static/icon/favicon.png
View File

Binary file not shown.
Side by Side

Before

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 2.1 KiB

BIN
sites/nrd.sh/static/nolan.png
View File

Binary file not shown.
Side by Side

Before

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 18 KiB

BIN
sites/nrd.sh/static/prism.gif
View File

Binary file not shown.
Side by Side

Before

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 1.8 MiB

3
sites/nrd.sh/static/robots.txt
View File

@@ -1,3 +0,0 @@
User-agent: *
Disallow:
Sitemap: https://nrd.sh/sitemap.xml

410
sites/nrd.sh/static/style.css
View File

@@ -1,410 +0,0 @@
/* nrd.sh - Minimal Base Styles */
:root {
/* Typography */
--font-sans: system-ui, -apple-system, sans-serif;
--font-mono: ui-monospace, "Cascadia Code", "Fira Code", monospace;
--font-size: 1rem;
--line-height: 1.6;
/* Spacing */
--space-xs: 0.25rem;
--space-sm: 0.5rem;
--space-md: 1rem;
--space-lg: 2rem;
--space-xl: 4rem;
/* Layout */
--max-width: 48rem;
/* Colors - Light */
--bg: #fafafa;
--bg-alt: #f0f0f0;
--text: #1a1a1a;
--text-muted: #666;
--accent: #0066cc;
--accent-hover: #0052a3;
--border: #ddd;
}
@media (prefers-color-scheme: dark) {
:root {
--bg: #1a1a1a;
--bg-alt: #252525;
--text: #e0e0e0;
--text-muted: #999;
--accent: #6ab0f3;
--accent-hover: #8cc4f7;
--border: #333;
}
}
/* Reset */
*,
*::before,
*::after {
box-sizing: border-box;
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
}
/* Base */
html {
font-family: var(--font-sans);
font-size: var(--font-size);
line-height: var(--line-height);
background: var(--bg);
color: var(--text);
}
body {
min-height: 100vh;
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
}
/* Layout */
nav,
main,
footer {
width: 100%;
max-width: var(--max-width);
margin: 0 auto;
padding: var(--space-md);
}
nav {
display: flex;
gap: var(--space-lg);
border-bottom: 1px solid var(--border);
padding-block: var(--space-md);
}
main {
flex: 1;
padding-block: var(--space-lg);
}
footer {
border-top: 1px solid var(--border);
padding-block: var(--space-md);
color: var(--text-muted);
font-size: 0.875rem;
}
/* Typography */
h1,
h2,
h3 {
line-height: 1.3;
margin-block: var(--space-lg) var(--space-md);
}
h1 {
font-size: 2rem;
}
h2 {
font-size: 1.5rem;
}
h3 {
font-size: 1.25rem;
}
h1:first-child,
h2:first-child,
h3:first-child {
margin-top: 0;
}
p {
margin-block: var(--space-md);
}
a {
color: var(--accent);
text-decoration: none;
}
a:hover {
color: var(--accent-hover);
text-decoration: underline;
}
/* Code */
code,
pre {
font-family: var(--font-mono);
font-size: 0.9em;
}
code {
background: var(--bg-alt);
padding: var(--space-xs) var(--space-sm);
border-radius: 3px;
}
pre {
background: var(--bg-alt);
padding: var(--space-md);
overflow-x: auto;
border-radius: 4px;
margin-block: var(--space-md);
}
pre code {
background: none;
padding: 0;
}
/* Lists */
ul,
ol {
margin-block: var(--space-md);
padding-left: var(--space-lg);
}
li {
margin-block: var(--space-xs);
}
/* Blockquote */
blockquote {
border-left: 3px solid var(--accent);
padding-left: var(--space-md);
margin-block: var(--space-md);
color: var(--text-muted);
}
/* Post */
article.post header {
margin-bottom: var(--space-lg);
}
.date {
color: var(--text-muted);
font-size: 0.9rem;
}
.description {
color: var(--text-muted);
font-style: italic;
}
.tags {
list-style: none;
display: flex;
gap: var(--space-sm);
padding: 0;
margin-top: var(--space-sm);
}
.tags li a {
background: var(--bg-alt);
padding: var(--space-xs) var(--space-sm);
border-radius: 3px;
font-size: 0.85rem;
}
/* Post List */
.post-list {
list-style: none;
padding: 0;
}
.post-list li {
margin-block: var(--space-md);
padding-bottom: var(--space-md);
border-bottom: 1px solid var(--border);
}
.post-list li:last-child {
border-bottom: none;
}
.post-list .title {
display: block;
font-weight: 600;
}
/* Project Cards */
.project-cards {
list-style: none;
padding: 0;
display: grid;
gap: var(--space-md);
}
.card {
background: var(--bg-alt);
padding: var(--space-md);
border-radius: 4px;
}
.card h2 {
font-size: 1.1rem;
margin: 0 0 var(--space-sm);
}
.card p {
margin: 0;
color: var(--text-muted);
font-size: 0.9rem;
}
/* Hero */
.hero {
text-align: center;
padding-block: var(--space-xl);
}
.hero h1 {
font-size: 2.5rem;
}
.tagline {
font-size: 1.25rem;
color: var(--text-muted);
}
/* Syntax Highlighting */
:root {
--hl-keyword: #d73a49;
--hl-string: #22863a;
--hl-string-special: #032f62;
--hl-comment: #6a737d;
--hl-function: #6f42c1;
--hl-type: #005cc5;
--hl-number: #005cc5;
--hl-operator: #d73a49;
--hl-variable: #e36209;
--hl-constant: #005cc5;
--hl-property: #005cc5;
--hl-punctuation: #586069;
--hl-punctuation-special: #d73a49;
--hl-attribute: #22863a;
--hl-escape: #005cc5;
--hl-embedded: #6f42c1;
}
@media (prefers-color-scheme: dark) {
:root {
--hl-keyword: #f97583;
--hl-string: #9ecbff;
--hl-string-special: #b392f0;
--hl-comment: #6a737d;
--hl-function: #b392f0;
--hl-type: #79b8ff;
--hl-number: #79b8ff;
--hl-operator: #f97583;
--hl-variable: #ffab70;
--hl-constant: #79b8ff;
--hl-property: #79b8ff;
--hl-punctuation: #a0a0a0;
--hl-punctuation-special: #f97583;
--hl-attribute: #85e89d;
--hl-escape: #79b8ff;
--hl-embedded: #b392f0;
}
}
.hl-keyword {
color: var(--hl-keyword);
}
.hl-string {
color: var(--hl-string);
}
.hl-comment {
color: var(--hl-comment);
font-style: italic;
}
.hl-function {
color: var(--hl-function);
}
.hl-function-builtin {
color: var(--hl-function);
}
.hl-type {
color: var(--hl-type);
}
.hl-type-builtin {
color: var(--hl-type);
}
.hl-number {
color: var(--hl-number);
}
.hl-operator {
color: var(--hl-operator);
}
.hl-variable {
color: var(--hl-variable);
}
.hl-variable-builtin {
color: var(--hl-variable);
}
.hl-variable-parameter {
color: var(--hl-variable);
}
.hl-constant {
color: var(--hl-constant);
}
.hl-constant-builtin {
color: var(--hl-constant);
}
.hl-property {
color: var(--hl-property);
}
.hl-punctuation {
color: var(--hl-punctuation);
}
.hl-punctuation-bracket {
color: var(--hl-punctuation);
}
.hl-punctuation-delimiter {
color: var(--hl-punctuation);
}
.hl-attribute {
color: var(--hl-attribute);
}
.hl-constructor {
color: var(--hl-type);
}
.hl-escape {
color: var(--hl-escape);
font-weight: 600;
}
.hl-embedded {
color: var(--hl-embedded);
}
.hl-string-special,
.hl-string-special-path,
.hl-string-special-uri {
color: var(--hl-string-special);
}
.hl-punctuation-special {
color: var(--hl-punctuation-special);
}

29
sites/nrd.sh/templates/base.html
View File

@@ -1,29 +0,0 @@
<!doctype html>
<html lang="en">
<head>
<meta charset="utf-8" />
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1" />
<title>{{ title }} | {{ config.title }}</title>
<link rel="canonical" href="{{ base_url }}{{ page_path }}" />
<link
rel="alternate"
type="application/atom+xml"
title="Atom Feed"
href="{{ base_url }}/feed.xml"
/>
<link rel="stylesheet" href="{{ prefix }}/style.css" />
</head>
<body>
<nav>
<a href="{{ prefix }}/index.html">{{ config.title }}</a>
{% for item in nav %}
<a href="{{ prefix }}{{ item.path }}">{{ item.label }}</a>
{% endfor %}
</nav>
<main>{% block content %}{% endblock content %}</main>
<footer>
<p>© {{ config.author }}</p>
</footer>
</body>
</html>

9
sites/nrd.sh/templates/content/default.html
View File

@@ -1,9 +0,0 @@
{% extends "base.html" %} {% block content %}
<article>
<h1>{{ page.title }}</h1>
{% if page.description %}
<p class="description">{{ page.description }}</p>
{% endif %}
<section class="content">{{ content | safe }}</section>
</article>
{% endblock content %}

19
sites/nrd.sh/templates/content/post.html
View File

@@ -1,19 +0,0 @@
{% extends "base.html" %} {% block content %}
<article class="post">
<header>
<h1>{{ page.title }}</h1>
{% if page.date %}
<time class="date">{{ page.date }}</time>
{% endif %} {% if page.description %}
<p class="description">{{ page.description }}</p>
{% endif %} {% if page.tags %}
<ul class="tags">
{% for tag in page.tags %}
<li><a href="{{ prefix }}/tags/{{ tag }}.html">{{ tag }}</a></li>
{% endfor %}
</ul>
{% endif %}
</header>
<section class="content">{{ content | safe }}</section>
</article>
{% endblock content %}

9
sites/nrd.sh/templates/homepage.html
View File

@@ -1,9 +0,0 @@
{% extends "base.html" %} {% block content %}
<section class="hero">
<h1>{{ page.title }}</h1>
{% if page.description %}
<p class="tagline">{{ page.description }}</p>
{% endif %}
</section>
<section class="content">{{ content | safe }}</section>
{% endblock content %}

6
sites/nrd.sh/templates/page.html
View File

@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
{% extends "base.html" %} {% block content %}
<article class="page">
<h1>{{ page.title }}</h1>
<section class="content">{{ content | safe }}</section>
</article>
{% endblock content %}

18
sites/nrd.sh/templates/section/blog.html
View File

@@ -1,18 +0,0 @@
{% extends "base.html" %} {% block content %}
<h1>{{ section.title }}</h1>
<ul class="post-list">
{% for item in items %}
<li>
<a href="./{{ item.slug }}.html">
<span class="title">{{ item.frontmatter.title }}</span>
{% if item.frontmatter.date %}
<time class="date">{{ item.frontmatter.date }}</time>
{% endif %}
</a>
{% if item.frontmatter.description %}
<p class="description">{{ item.frontmatter.description }}</p>
{% endif %}
</li>
{% endfor %}
</ul>
{% endblock content %}

13
sites/nrd.sh/templates/section/default.html
View File

@@ -1,13 +0,0 @@
{% extends "base.html" %} {% block content %}
<h1>{{ section.title }}</h1>
<ul class="item-list">
{% for item in items %}
<li>
<a href="./{{ item.slug }}.html">{{ item.frontmatter.title }}</a>
{% if item.frontmatter.description %}
<p>{{ item.frontmatter.description }}</p>
{% endif %}
</li>
{% endfor %}
</ul>
{% endblock content %}

21
sites/nrd.sh/templates/section/projects.html
View File

@@ -1,21 +0,0 @@
{% extends "base.html" %} {% block content %}
<h1>{{ section.title }}</h1>
<ul class="project-cards">
{% for item in items %}
<li class="card">
{% if item.frontmatter.link_to %}
<a href="{{ item.frontmatter.link_to }}" target="_blank" rel="noopener">
<h2>{{ item.frontmatter.title }}</h2>
{% if item.frontmatter.description %}
<p>{{ item.frontmatter.description }}</p>
{% endif %}
</a>
{% else %}
<h2>{{ item.frontmatter.title }}</h2>
{% if item.frontmatter.description %}
<p>{{ item.frontmatter.description }}</p>
{% endif %} {% endif %}
</li>
{% endfor %}
</ul>
{% endblock content %}