Hello,


More of my philosophy about the smart IQ tests and the scalable algorithms and algorithms..

I am a white arab, and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..

Bonita Montero a software engineer has just written to me the following
about my new invention below:

Multiple reader, exlusive writer locks are *never*
starvation-free. Readers can hold the lock infinitely
and writers as well,

And i have just answered the following:

But i think she is not right, since this holding
the lock infinitely is not counted, since you have
just to use it correctly and avoid this case, so I
think she is making a mistake and she is not
understanding what is that a Multiple-Readers-Exclusive-Writer
Lock is starvation-free, so what i mean by starvation-free
is that in my invention of my algorithm the readers don't
starve the writers and the writers don't starve the readers,
and the writers don't starve and readers don't starve, it
is what we call starvation-free, and i think my invention is
scalable and starvation-free and fair.

And Branimir Maksimovic answered me the following:

If used correctly you don't need any lock :P
Locks are for synchronization, which is not
good thing :P

Please read here:

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/NOJrZoQ3-qk


But I think my answer is correct and i think i am really smart, and here is my explanation:

Since my answer is like a smart IQ test, and it is that my answer is
first that you to know how the: "you have just to use it correctly" is logically in "relation" with the "avoid this case" in my sentence,
so if what i mean in my answer is that the: "you have just to use it correctly" of my sentence is not the cause of the: "avoid this case"
of my sentence, so you are failing the smart IQ test of my answer,
since you are just thinking the case where: "you have just to use it correctly" is the cause of the "avoid this case", and the second case
is if we say: "you have to use it correctly", it also mean that you have to use it in the right environment, so if it is not, so it doesn't just mean don't use it, but it also mean change the environment that is causing the Multiple-Readers-Exclusive-
Writer Lock to wait indefinitely. So you are again failing the smart IQ test.

More of my philosophy about the effects of a commercial society based on the pursuit of self-interest..

I think that we have to understand the work of the philosopher and economist Adam Smith about economic Liberalism, i think the defect of his theory or work is that he is for example saying the following:

"Human egoism is the engine of the properity and happiness of nations"

But i think i am a philosopher that is not in accordance with
the philosopher and economist Adam Smith, since you have to understand
that Adam Smith says about his economic Liberalism that self-interest is most of the time regulated by competition to not lead to corruption, fraud, price-gouging, and cheating, and self-interest and competition is the engine of the properity and
happiness of nations described the opposing, but complementary forces of self-interest and competition as the invisible hand, it means that while producers and consumers are not acting with the intent of serving the needs of others or society, they do,
since when you work, your goal is to earn money, but in the process you provide a valuable good or service that benefits others and society, so it is the basis of the following saying of Adam Smith: "Human egoism is the engine of the properity and
happiness of nations", but i think
that the most important defect of economic Liberalism of Adam Smith is the following: How to bring the positive or the much more positive spirit since the way of egoism and competition of economic Liberalism of Adam Smith brings a negative spirit that
causes disorder and violence ? Also i think that a much more positive or positive spirit is better for economy, this is why my new model that i call coopetition that is a well balance between cooperation and competition is better, this is why i am
sharing a number of my inventions of scalable algorithms and algorithms and softwares with the public or people so that to bring the positive or the much more positive spirit(and you can find all of them here in my website: https://sites.google.com/site/
scalable68/), and i think that this positive spirit or much more positive spirit is good for economy, but you have to play it "smartly", and i give you a proverb of mine that shows how it is important:

"We can ask of from where comes the attachment of Love between
a mother and her son ? so i think i am smart and i will say
that it comes from the fact that it is like a reward, that the son
is loving or is being the son and the mother is giving a good reward like giving him more security or giving him food to eat, so as you are noticing that this rule can be applied to consumerism, since
you can use the same rule with your consumers in a smart
way, for example by giving the impression to your consumers that
you take care of there security by learning them with easy or the like, and then the consumers will love you much more and will be attracted by you."

I think i am smart, and notice how i am talking about
how we have not to have a narrow view of what is smartness, and notice how i am talking about the distributed smartness as rules etc. so i think i can logically infer from my below thoughts the other way of
solving the greatly complex systems that is not by like "planning" the whole system from a centralized government, but by emergence of a higher level intelligence from distributing like the rules or.. into the small parts of the system that will solve
the greatly complex system, it looks like the evolutionary design and planning, and it looks like the way of the higher level smartness from an Ant colony, since in an Ant colony there is no central government, but there is a distributed intelligence
that needs a kind of diversity of genetics of the members of the colony and it needs like a distributed rules that the members have to follow that will make emerge a higher level of intelligence. And of course it looks like evolutionary algorithms in
artificial intelligence, since the advantage of evolutionary algorithms in artificial intelligence is that they don't plan in advance but they search by like following some distributed rules, and of course they need some "randomness" so that to not get
stuck in a local optimum, this is why i am talking below about how to make our civilization that is a complex system much more resilient by learning how to learn to humans with like a set
of rules like in an Ant colony by saying the following and notice
that the learning how to learn can be an efficient abstraction that helps a lot:

More of my philosophy about how i am more happy and more..

I think that i am much more happy since i am understanding that being happy is like a lifestyle that is based on some efficient rules that permit the emergence of happiness, and i will talk about it more in my new philosophy, so i think that we even need
some important rules so that to be a much more resilient civilization, since i think that there is the way of learning people how to become an engineer, but this way of doing is lacking very much, and there is also the way of learning people how to learn
that also permits to efficiently take advantage of this sophisticated tool that we call internet, so i think that this way of learning how to learn to people does make our civilization much more resilient, since the way of "specialization" of our today
civilization is also a "weakness" that has to be solved much more efficiently by the way of learning people how to learn on internet etc. and here is my
new proverb that talks about it:

"I think what is happening in the West and other parts of the world,
it is that individuals are becoming too stupid, since it is the way of specialization that is required, since the individuals are specialized in there jobs so that to enhance much more the efficiency and productivity as a society or as group, but this
specialization is a weakness that is making individuals too stupid, but we can become smart working as a group or as a society using the tools of internet etc."

And here is my thoughts about artificial intelligence and evolutionary algorithms in artificial intelligence:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/P9OTDTiCZ44

More of my philosophy of why i have just invented a better Reader-Writer Lock that is scalable and starvation-free and fair and reentrant (recursive)..

Here is why i have just invented a better Reader-Writer Lock that
is scalable, starvation-free and fair and reentrant (recursive),
and look at my invention below:

Notice that the following PhD researcher says the following:

"Until today, there is no known efficient reader-writer lock with starvation-freedom guarantees"

Read more here:

http://concurrencyfreaks.blogspot.com/2019/04/onefile-and-tail-latency.html

And read the following paper:

Scalable Read-mostly Synchronization Using Passive Reader-Writer Locks

https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc14/atc14-paper-liu.pdf

You will notice that it has a first weakness that it is for TSO hardware memory model and the second weakness is that the writers latency is very expensive when there is few readers, and it can livelock because of the writer preference, and it can have
starvation.

And here is the other best scalable reader-writer lock invention of Facebook:

SharedMutex is a reader-writer lock. It is small, very fast, scalable
on multi-core

Read here:

https://github.com/facebook/folly/blob/master/folly/SharedMutex.h

But you will notice that the weakness of this scalable reader-writer lock is that the priority can only be configured as the following:

SharedMutexReadPriority gives priority to readers,
SharedMutexWritePriority gives priority to writers.

So the weakness of this scalable reader-writer lock is that
you can have starvation with it and you can have a livelock.

Bonita Montero a software engineer has just written to me the following
about my new invention below:

Multiple reader, exlusive writer locks are *never* starvation-free.
Readers can hold the lock infinitely and writers as well,

But i think she is not right, since this holding the lock infinitely is not counted, since you have just to use it correctly and avoid this case, so I think she is making a mistake and she is not understanding what is that a Multiple-Readers-Exclusive-
Writer Lock is starvation-free, so what i mean by starvation-free is that in my invention of my algorithm the readers don't starve the writers and the writers don't starve the readers, and the writers don't starve and readers don't starve, it is what we
call starvation-free, and i think my invention is scalable and starvation-free and fair.

And as you have just noticed i am also making public a number of my scalable algorithms and algorithms and softwares as also open source softwares and since i have just said in my new philosophy the following about my new model that is called coopetition
that is a well balancing between cooperation and competition, since i think that economic Liberalism or capitalism needs both competition and cooperation, since we even need economic actors that share ideas across nations and industries(and this needs
globalization) that make us much more creative, and i invite you to read the following important article so that to notice it:

EU study on the impact of open source published

https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/open-source-observatory-osor/news/report-open-source-driver-eus-digital-innovation

And read my following thoughts about Adam Smith and more so that to notice it:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/ftf3lx5Rzxo

And read also here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/YSaGSfcYmtc

Here is my new invention of a fast, and scalable and starvation-free and fair and lightweight Multiple-Readers-Exclusive-Writer Lock called LW_RWLockX, and now i have included two units that are called MREWEx and LighweightMREWEx that include
TMultiReadExclusiveWriteSynchronizer and TLightweightMREW classes that are scalable and starvation-free and fair since they are using my Scalable LW_RWLockX that is starvation-free and fair, also BeginRead() and BeginWrite() of LightweightMREWEx and
MREWEx are reentrant (recursive), so in other words, if a thread already called BeginWrite(), it can call BeginWrite() again and it will succeed and it will not deadlock, and the same applies to BeginRead(), please take a look at them inside the source
code of my units.

You can download it from my website here:

https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/new-variants-of-scalable-rwlocks

Here is also my way of how i am becoming rich:

First i want to say that i have passed four IQ tests and some of them
are certified and i have scored high, so i am highly smart, second,
my methodology is also that i am reading many PhD papers of researchers and i am seeking the weaknesses of them, and i have found many weaknesses on those PhD papers and from those weaknesses i have invented many software scalable algorithms and
algorithms and i have invented some powerful software tools for parallelism etc., so i give you an example of one of my invention that is: A Scalable reference counting with efficient support for weak references, so that you understand that i am truthful,
here it is:

https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-reference-counting-with-efficient-support-for-weak-references

But the truth is that i have invented many scalable algorithms such
as this one, and i have made public some of them. And here is another example of how i am inventive and creative in operational research too, i have just read the following book (and of other books like it) of a PhD researcher about operational research
and capacity planning, here they are:

Performance by Design: Computer Capacity Planning by Example

https://www.amazon.ca/Performance-Design-Computer-Capacity-Planning/dp/0130906735

So i have just found that there methodologies of those PhD researchers for the E-Business service don't work, because they are doing calculations for a given arrival rate that is statistically and empirically measured from the behavior of customers, but
i think that it is not correct, so i am being inventive and i have come with my new methodology that fixes the arrival rate from the data by using an hyperexponential service distribution(and it is mathematical) since it is also good for Denial-of-
Service (DoS) attacks and i will write a powerful book about it that will teach my new methodology and i will also explain the mathematics behind it and i will sell it, and my new methodology will work for cloud computing and for computer servers.

You can read more about my education and my way of doing here:

And here is more proof of the fact that i have invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms:

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/V9Go8fbF10k


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)