Hello,
More of my philosophy about Economic integration and about research & development (R&D) investment and more of my thoughts..
I am a white arab, and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..
Economic integration, or regional integration, is an agreement among nations to reduce or eliminate trade barriers and agree on fiscal policies. The European Union, for example, represents a complete economic integration. Strict nationalists may oppose
economic integration due to concerns over a loss of sovereignty, so i say that we have not just to look at economic integration , but we have to also look at how much you spend in research & development (R&D), so i think that African leaders committed to
investing 1% of GDP in Research and development. With Africa continent's estimated GDP currently at US$2.7 trillion, investment in science and technology is meant to be at US$27 billion, but i think that Africa is very much behind even China in research &
development (R&D) investment, since China spend US$514.798 billion in research & development (R&D), and USA spend US$612.714 billion in research & development (R&D), and European Union spend around US$413 billion in research & development (R&D) and
India spend US$158.691 billion in research & development (R&D), but i think that the problematic of Africa is that it is "much" less economically integrated than European Union, so then we have also to look at the economic integration of Arab countries
and south american countries and such, since the economic integration is so important.
More of my philosophy about HP and about the Tandem team and more of my thoughts..
I invite you to read the following interesting article so that
to notice how HP was smart by also acquiring Tandem Computers, Inc.
with there "NonStop" systems and by learning from the Tandem team
that has also Extended HP NonStop to x86 Server Platform, you can read about it in my below writing and you can read about Tandem Computers here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tandem_Computers , so notice that Tandem Computers, Inc. was the dominant
manufacturer of fault-tolerant computer systems for ATM networks, banks, stock exchanges, telephone switching centers, and other similar commercial transaction processing applications requiring maximum uptime and zero data loss:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/tandem-returns-to-its-hp-roots/
More of my philosophy about HP "NonStop" to x86 Server Platform fault-tolerant computer systems and more..
Now HP to Extend HP NonStop to x86 Server Platform
HP announced in 2013 plans to extend its mission-critical HP NonStop technology to x86 server architecture, providing the 24/7 availability required in an always-on, globally connected world, and increasing customer choice.
Read the following to notice it:
https://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-news/press-release.html?id=1519347#.YHSXT-hKiM8
And today HP provides HP NonStop to x86 Server Platform, and here is
an example, read here:
https://www.hpe.com/ca/en/pdfViewer.html?docId=4aa5-7443&parentPage=/ca/en/products/servers/mission-critical-servers/integrity-nonstop-systems&resourceTitle=HPE+NonStop+X+NS7+%E2%80%93+Redefining+continuous+availability+and+scalability+for+x86+data+sheet
So i think programming the HP NonStop for x86 is now compatible with x86 programming.
And i invite you to read my thoughts about technology here:
https://groups.google.com/g/soc.culture.usa/c/N_UxX3OECX4
More of my philosophy about stack allocation and more of my thoughts..
I think i am highly smart since I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored "above" 115 IQ, so i have just looked at the x64 assembler
of the C/C++ _alloca function that allocates size bytes of space from the Stack and it uses x64 assembler instructions to move RSP register and i think that it also aligns the address and it ensures that it doesn't go beyond the stack limit etc., and i
have quickly understood the x64 assembler of it, and i invite you to look at it here:
64-bit _alloca. How to use from FPC and Delphi?
https://www.atelierweb.com/64-bit-_alloca-how-to-use-from-delphi/
But i think i am smart and i say that the benefit of using a stack comes mostly from "reusability" of the stack, i mean it is done this way
since you have for example from a thread to execute other functions or procedures and to exit from those functions of procedures and this exiting from those functions or procedures makes the memory of stack available again for "reusability", and it is
why i think that using a dynamic allocated array as a stack is also useful since it also offers those benefits of reusability of the stack and i think that dynamic allocation of the array will not be expensive, so it is why i think i will implement _
alloca function using a dynamic allocated array and i think it will also be good for my sophisticated coroutines library.
More of my philosophy about the simulation hypothesis and more of my thoughts..
I think i am highly smart since I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored "above" 115 IQ, i invite you to look at the following
video that talks about the simulation hypothesis:
Michio Kaku - Is the Universe A Digital Simulation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eb7uZXZHVk8
So i think i am highly smart, and i think that saying that the Universe is a Digital Simulation is much less probable, since i say that look for example at how looks this thing that we call humanity, so we can not
say that the simulation of this super intelligent beings has started from a very long ago, like for example more than a billion of years, since this way of doing creates too much suffering that is much less probable since the super intelligent beings are
so advanced and so smart, but i think it is much more short, so then we notice that the super intelligent beings that have started the simulation can not start the simulation in a so primitive environment of our today of what we call humanity, so then i
can say that saying that the Universe is a Digital Simulation is much less probable and the fact the reality exists is much more probable.
More of my philosophy about education and specialization and more of my thoughts..
I think i am highly smart since I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored "above" 115 IQ, so as you notice that i have not scored
115 IQ , but "above" 115 IQ, and now i will give you an IQ test by
inviting you to look at the following video, since i have just looked
at it:
Why FREE college HURTS the poor - VisualEconomik EN
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZvxnk1boAE
So i am discovering smart patterns with my fluid intelligence in
the above video, and it is that the person that is talking in the above video is not seeing with his fluid intelligence, as i am seeing it with my fluid intelligence, that the school is not specialized for the low IQs that are around 25%, i mean that
the schools and the courses of the schools are tuned for the average IQ and to a certain level for the high IQ, and not for the low IQs that are around 25%, so then to solve the problem we have to also "specialize" the school for the low IQs, and it
means to have schools for low IQs that learn the low IQs with ease, and it is also valid for the free schools, and it is the way i have just spoken about IQ and specialization by saying the following:
More of my philosophy about IQ tests and more of my thoughts..
I think i am highly smart, and I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, but i have just passed more and more IQ tests, and i have just noticed that the manner in wich we test with IQ tests is not correct, since in an IQ test
you can be more specialized and above average in one subtest of intelligence than in another subtest of intelligence inside an IQ test, since IQ tests test for many kind of intelligences such as the spatial and speed and calculations and logical
intelligence etc., so i think that you can be really above average in logical intelligence, as i am really above average in logical intelligence, but at the same time you can be below average in calculations and/or spatial.., so since an IQ test doesn't
test for this kind of specializations of intelligence, so i think it is not good, since testing for this kind specializations in intelligence is really important so that to be efficient by knowing the strong advantages of this or that person in every
types of intelligences. And about the importance of specialization, read carefully my following thought about it:
More of my philosophy about specialization and about efficiency and productivity..
The previous CEO Larry Culp of General Electric and the architect of a strategy that represented a new turning point in the world corporate strategies, Larry Culp's strategy was to divide the company according to its activities. Something like we are
better of alone, seperately and
focused on each one's own activity, than together in a large
conglomerate. And it is a move from integration to specialization.
You see it is thought that a company always gains economies of scale
as it grows, but this is not necessarily the case, since as the company
gains in size - especially if it engages in many activities - it
also generates its own bureaucracy, with all that entails in term
of cost and efficiency. And not only that, it is also often the case
that by bringing together very different activities, strategic focus is lost and decision-making is diluted, so that in the end no one ends up
taking responsability, it doesn't always happen, but this reasons are
basically what is driving this increasing specialization. So i invite to look at the following video so that to understand more about it:
The decline of industrial icon of the US - VisualPolitik EN
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hqwYxFCY-k
And here is my previous thoughts about specialization and productivity so that to understand much more:
More about the Japanese Ikigai and about productivity and more of my thoughts..
Read the following interesting article about Japanese Ikigai:
The More People With Purpose, the Better the World Will Be
https://singularityhub.com/2018/06/15/the-more-people-with-purpose-the-better-the-world-will-be/
I think i am highly smart, so i say that the Japanese Ikigai is like a Japanese philosophy that is like the right combination or "balance" of passion, vocation, and mission, and Ikigai and MTP, as concepts, urge us to align our passions with a mission to
better the world, but i think that Japanese Ikiai is a also smart since it gets the "passion" from the "mission", since the mission is also the engine, so you have to align the passion with the mission of the country or the global world so that to be
efficient, and Japanese Ikigai is also smart since so that to higher productivity and be efficient, you have to "specialize" in doing a job, but so that to higher more productivity and be more efficient you can also specialize in what you do "better",
and it is what is doing Japanese Ikigai, since i think that in Japanese Ikigai, being the passion permits to make you specialized in a job in what you do better, and here is what i have just smartly said about productivity:
I think i am highly smart, and i have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, and i will now talk about another important idea of Adam Smith the father of economic Liberalism, and it is about "specialization" in an economic system,
since i say that in an economic system we have to be specialized in doing a job so that to be efficient and productive, but not only that, but we have to specialize in doing a job in what we do better so that to be even more efficient and productive, and
we have to minimize at best the idle time or the wasting of time doing a job, since i can also say that this average idle time or wasting time of the workers working in parallel can be converted to a contention like in parallel programming, so you have
to minimize it at best, and you have to minimize at best the coherency like in parallel programming so that to scale much better, and of course all this can create an economy of scale, and also i invite you to read my following smart and interesting
thoughts about scalability of productivity:
I will talk about following thoughts from the following PhD computer scientist:
https://lemire.me/blog/about-me/
Read more carefully here his thoughts about productivity:
https://lemire.me/blog/2012/10/15/you-cannot-scale-creativity/
And i think he is making a mistake in his above webpage about productivity:
Since we have that Productivity = Output/Input
But better human training and/or better tools and/or better human smartness and/or better human capacity can make the Parallel productivity part much bigger that the Serial productivity part, so it can scale much more (it is like Gustafson's Law).
And it looks like the following:
About parallelism and about Gustafson’s Law..
Gustafson’s Law:
• If you increase the amount of work done by each parallel
task then the serial component will not dominate
• Increase the problem size to maintain scaling
• Can do this by adding extra complexity or increasing the overall
problem size
Scaling is important, as the more a code scales the larger a machine it
can take advantage of:
• can consider weak and strong scaling
• in practice, overheads limit the scalability of real parallel programs
• Amdahl’s law models these in terms of serial and parallel fractions
• larger problems generally scale better: Gustafson’s law
Load balance is also a crucial factor.
More of my philosophy about the essence of science and technology and more of my thoughts..
I think i am highly smart since I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, so i will ask the following philosophical question of:
What is the essence of science and what is the essence technology ?
I think that when you are smart and you use your fluid intelligence and use with it mathematics and such great precision and you invent with it a smart thing, it can be called hard science, but if you are genetically smart and you use your fluid
intelligence without such hard science, and only with soft science or not, and you invent a smart thing, it can be called technology, so the difference is that hard science uses mathematics and its great precision of mathematics and such great precision.
So i think that it is not only science that is important , but technology is also important, and for example in technology you can for example construct smartly an exception handling for real-time operating systems that uses Longjump() and SetJmp() that
you construct in x86 assembler and you use Linklists and the Thread-local storage , so that to avoid to dynamically allocate from the heap, and so that to understand more how i have constructed a Longjump() and SetJmp() in x64 assembler, so invite you to
read my following smart thoughts about preemptive and non-preemptive timesharing:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/JuC4jar661w
More of my philosophy about science and technology and more of my thoughts..
I think i am highly smart since I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, so you have just seen me talking about
how to be successful in business of software development, here is what
i have just said:
"And what i mean, it is that in the early period of software development, there was many things that you can invent or develop or create, but i think today it is different , since many softwares have been invented and created, and not only that, but
notice how many softwares are of high quality, and you have even to compete against open source etc., so i say that the competition is much stronger than the past."
So i think that you have to understand me more, what i am also saying
is i think that the important breakthroughs comes from science , not
from technology, and it is what makes technology much more interesting,
since i think that technology is based on science, it is why i think
that artificial intelligence and quantum computers and the following two inventions that will make logic gates thousands of times faster or a million times faster than those in existing computers are "among"
the "last" breakthroughs in science, read about them in my following thoughts of my philosophy about technology:
And i invite you to read my thoughts about technology here:
https://groups.google.com/g/soc.culture.usa/c/N_UxX3OECX4
And here is more about the constraints on science and technology so that to understand:
Is Science Going To End?
Read more here:
https://philosophynow.org/issues/68/Is_Science_Going_To_End
And read also the following
The Industrial Era Ended, and So Will the Digital Era
Read more here:
https://hbr.org/2018/07/the-industrial-era-ended-and-so-will-the-digital-era
More of my philosophy about the how to be successful in business of software development and more of my thoughts..
I think i am highly smart since I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, and as i have just said is the following:
"The Xerox Thieves: Steve Jobs & Bill Gates
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQocN_c2uLI&t
I think i am discovering patterns with my fluid intelligence in the
above video, and i think that Bill Gates was successful with his Microsoft since it was the early period of software development,
and as i say in french: "Je pense que c'etait aussi une conjoncture"
, and it means in english: "I think that it was also a conjuncture", but
the most important factor of success in this conjuncture is the:
it was the early period of software development, but today it is
different."
And what i mean, it is that in the early period of software development, there was many things that you can invent or develop or create, but i think today it is different , since many softwares have been invented and created, and not only that, but
notice how many softwares are of high quality, and you have even to compete against open source etc., so i say that the competition is much stronger than the past, so reread my previous thoughts:
More of my philosophy about what are the successful technologies
and about the business model and more of my thoughts..
I think i am highly smart since I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, so i have just looked at the following video
of Bill Gates, and i invite you to look at it:
The Xerox Thieves: Steve Jobs & Bill Gates
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQocN_c2uLI&t
I think i am discovering patterns with my fluid intelligence in the
above video, and i think that Bill Gates was successful with his Microsoft since it was the early period of software development,
and as i say in french: "Je pense que c'etait aussi une conjoncture"
, and it means in english: "I think that it was also a conjuncture", but
the most important factor of success in this conjuncture is the:
it was the early period of software development, but today it is
different, since you have to know where you have to invest in software development so that to be rich and successful, so i think that
for example if you invest in security like internet security and such, i think it is a really a good investment, also you have to invest in
software development that has a high return of investment,
and that means that the software has also to be expected to grow big
, and i think that so that to be successful in software development, the software that you develop has to also be of high quality, since there is a strong competition with open source etc. also notice that this requirement of being of high quality is
much more difficult to realize(it means to happen), so it is why i think that we have to think about other ways of doing in software development, such as for example to come with a new smart business plan that solves this problem, so i think that the
smart business plan is so important in business.
More of my philosophy about the German model and about quality and more of my thoughts..
I think i am highly smart since I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, so i will ask the following philosophical question of:
Why is Germany so successful in spite of least working hours?
So i think one of the most important factors are:
Of course the first factor is that Germany has good schools and vocational training - for everyone. This makes the average worker much more productive in terms of value add per hour.
And the second "really" important factor is the following:
It’s in the culture of Germany to focus on quality and being effective (all the way back to Martin Luther and his protestant work ethic)... Higher quality in every step of the chain leads to a massive reduction in defects and rework. This increases
everyone’s productivity. But notice that i am also speaking in my below thoughts about the other ways to increase productivity by being specialization etc., and the way of the German model to focus on quality and being effective by also focusing on
quality in every step of the chain that leads to a massive reduction in defects and rework, is also done by the following methodologies of quality control and Six Sigma etc., so read my following thoughts about them:
More of my philosophy about quality control and more of my thoughts..
I have just looked and understood quickly the following paper about SPC(Statistical process control):
https://owic.oregonstate.edu/sites/default/files/pubs/EM8733.pdf
I think i am highly smart, but i think that the above paper doesn't speak about the fact that you can apply the central limit theorem as following:
The central limit theorem states that the sampling distribution of the mean of any independent, random variable will be normal or nearly normal, if the sample size is large enough.
Also the above paper doesn't speak about the following very important things:
And I have quickly understood quality control with SPC(Statistical process control) and i have just discovered a smart pattern with my fluid intelligence and it is that with SPC(Statistical process control) we can debug the process, like in software
programming, by looking at its variability, so if the variability doesn't follow a normal distribution, so it means that there are defects in the process, and we say that there is special causes that causes those defects, and if the variability follows a
normal distribution, we say that the process is stable and it has only common causes, and it means that we can control it much more easily by looking at the control charts that permit to debug and control the variability by for example changing the
machines or robots and looking at the control charts and measuring again with the control charts
More of my philosophy about the Post Graduate Program on lean Six Sigma and more..
More of my philosophy about Six Sigma and more..
I think i am smart, and now i will talk more about Six Sigma
since i have just talked about SPC(Statistical quality control), so
you have to know that Six Sigma needs to fulfill the following steps:
1- Define the project goals and customer (external and internal)
deliverables.
2- Control future performance so improved process doesn't degrade.
3- Measure the process so that to determine current performance and
quantify the problem.
4- Analyze and determine the root cause(s) of the defects.
5- Improve the process by eliminating the defects.
And you have to know that those steps are also important steps toward attaining ISO 9000 certification, and notice that you can use SPC(Statistical process control) and the control charts on step [4] and step [5] above.
Other than that i have just read the following interesting important paper about SPC(Statistical process control) that explains all the process of SPC(Statistical process control), so i invite you to read it
carefully:
https://owic.oregonstate.edu/sites/default/files/pubs/EM8733.pdf
So as you notice in the above paper that the central limit theorem
in mathematics is so important, but notice carefully that the necessary and important condition so that the central limit theorem works is that you have to use independent and random variables, and notice in the above paper that you have to do two things
and it's that you have to reduce or eliminate the defects and you have to control the "variability" of the defects, and this is why the paper is talking about how to construct a control chart. Other than that the central limit theorem is not only related
to SPC(Statistical process control), but it is also related to PERT and my PERT++ software project below, and notice that in my software project below that is called PERT++, i have provided you with two ways of how to estimate the critical path, first,
by the way of CPM(Critical Path Method) that shows all the arcs of the estimate of the critical path, and the second way is by the way of the central limit theorem by using the inverse normal distribution function, and you have to provide my software
project that is called PERT++ with three types of estimates that are the following:
Optimistic time - generally the shortest time in which the activity
can be completed. It is common practice to specify optimistic times
to be three standard deviations from the mean so that there is
approximately a 1% chance that the activity will be completed within
the optimistic time.
Most likely time - the completion time having the highest
probability. Note that this time is different from the expected time.
Pessimistic time - the longest time that an activity might require. Three standard deviations from the mean is commonly used for the pessimistic time.
And you can download my PERT++ from reading my following below thoughts:
More of my philosophy about the central limit theorem and about my PERT++ and more..
The central limit theorem states that the sampling distribution of the mean of any independent, random variable will be normal or nearly normal, if the sample size is large enough.
How large is "large enough"?
In practice, some statisticians say that a sample size of 30 is large enough when the population distribution is roughly bell-shaped. Others recommend a sample size of at least 40. But if the original population is distinctly not normal (e.g., is badly
skewed, has multiple peaks, and/or has outliers), researchers like the sample size to be even larger. So i invite you to read my following thoughts about my software
project that is called PERT++, and notice that the PERT networks are referred to by some researchers as "probabilistic activity networks" (PAN) because the duration of some or all of the arcs are independent random variables with known probability
distribution functions, and have finite ranges. So PERT uses the central limit theorem (CLT) to find the expected project duration.
And as you are noticing this Central Limit Theorem is also so important
for quality control, read the following to notice it(I also understood Statistical Process Control (SPC)):
An Introduction to Statistical Process Control (SPC)
https://www.engineering.com/AdvancedManufacturing/ArticleID/19494/An-Introduction-to-Statistical-Process-Control-SPC.aspx
Also PERT networks are referred to by some researchers as "probabilistic activity networks" (PAN) because the duration of some or all of the arcs are independent random variables with known probability distribution functions, and have finite ranges. So
PERT uses the central limit theorem (CLT) to find the expected project duration.
So, i have designed and implemented my PERT++ that that is important for quality, please read about it and download it from my website here:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/pert-an-enhanced-edition-of-the-program-or-project-evaluation-and-review-technique-that-includes-statistical-pert-in-delphi-and-freepascal
---
So I have provided you in my PERT++ with the following functions:
function NormalDistA (const Mean, StdDev, AVal, BVal: Extended): Single;
function NormalDistP (const Mean, StdDev, AVal: Extended): Single;
function InvNormalDist(const Mean, StdDev, PVal: Extended; const Less: Boolean): Extended;
For NormalDistA() or NormalDistP(), you pass the best estimate of completion time to Mean, and you pass the critical path standard deviation to StdDev, and you will get the probability of the value Aval or the probability between the values of Aval and
Bval.
For InvNormalDist(), you pass the best estimate of completion time to Mean, and you pass the critical path standard deviation to StdDev, and you will get the length of the critical path of the probability PVal, and when Less is TRUE, you will obtain a
cumulative distribution.
So as you are noticing from my above thoughts that since PERT networks are referred to by some researchers as "probabilistic activity networks" (PAN) becaus