Hello...
More of my philosophy about future of humanity and Climate Warming and
more..
I am a white arab from Morocco, and i think i am smart since i have also invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..
Without Further Intervention 3 Degrees is Worst Case 2100 Climate Warming
Assessment of current policies by two researchers published in the
journal Nature suggests that the world is on course for around 3 °C of warming above pre-industrial levels. The world is already at 1 °C of
warming above pre-industrial levels.
The 2.5 degree celsius scenario by 2100 is the likely scenario where all
cars and trucks go electric by 2060 and where solar and wind and battery
power get to 50% more more of power generation.
Read more here:
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2021/10/without-further-intervention-3-degrees-is-worst-case-warming.html
More of my philosophy of do we have to be optimistic or pessimistic..
I invite you to look at the following pessimistic video:
Is The US Becoming A Dystopia?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmXQ3nQBE4U
I think that the the above video is too pessimistic, but i am
optimistic since i think that we have to be much more optimistic,
read my following thoughts to understand why:
More of my philosophy of why i am more positive about our world..
I am more positive about our world since and i am explaining why
by posting my following writing and thoughts, you can read them
in the following web links:
More of my philosophy about capitalism and innovation:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/cf3Wa4z8Xmc
And read my thoughts here:
More of my philosophy about the future of humanity:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/0X024jfzNvM
And read my thoughts here:
More of my philosophy about artificial intelligence and neuroevolution
and common sense and more:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/awfCypJ9iRE
Also read my following thoughts and writing about our Era of
democratization of technology and democratization of information and democratization of finance so that to be more positive:
More about "democratization" of finance..
This "democratization" of finance is also for Research and Development
(R&D))..
And look at the following "democratization" of finance so that to
understand:
The 4 tools making capital more abundant than it’s ever been
Read more here:
https://singularityhub.com/2018/07/19/the-4-tools-making-capital-more-abundant-than-its-ever-been/
About democratization of digital technology and technology and Research
and Development (R&D) investment
This is also why i said the following:
Look at the following interesting video:
Can South Korea lead global innovation in Fourth Industrial Era?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUw8gCShEcI
But i think that this minister of education, science and technology
of south Korea looks somewhat archaic since he is not taking correctly
into account the democratization of digital technology and Technology
that permits you to economically grow very rapidly and much cheaply than
using "expensive" Research and Development (R&D) investment, so i think
that he is not correctly adapting to the realities, because the economic realities have very much changed, since also our era of globalization
has been characterized by the democratization of technology,
democratization of finance, and democratization of information.
Here is more proof of what i am saying:
2. Question: What do you mean by “Democratizing Innovation”?
Eric von Hippel:
The tools for designing high-quality innovations are getting so cheap
and so ubiquitous that individuals can innovate for themselves at a
steadily higher quality and at a steadily decreasing cost. These
sophisticated modern tools are computer-based, and require relatively
little training and practice. As a result, even hobbyist users find they
can use them to design new products and services.
Read more here:
Democratizing Innovation: The Shift of Innovation to Users
https://www.ideaconnection.com/interviews/00010-Democratizing-Innovation-The-Shift-of-Innovation.html
And read my following thoughts to understand more:
More of my philosophy about the well balanced brain between divergent
and convergent thinking..
I think that i have not an extremely masculine brain, but i have
a masculine brain that is well balanced between convergent and divergent thinking, read below so that to understand:
Here is more about my genetical type:
I have come to Canada when i was 20 years old, and i am living
in Canada Quebec for 33 years and now i am 53 years old , but i am
genetically like an athletic guy and i feel that i am still young
because i am more athletic and i am 6 Feet tall, and i am beautiful
from the inside since i am a gentleman type of person and it is also
genetical in me, and you can take a look at my photo that i have just
put here in my website(I am 53 years old):
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/jackson-network-problem
But i have to explain a very important thing:
You have to distinguish between, in one side, the intellectual gifted
brain with the high prenatal testosterone that is an agressive and
violent brain that doesn't know how to think correctly and that doesn't
behave correctly, and, in the other side, my kind of brain, since my
genetical type is also that I have a masculine brain that is well
balanced between convergent and divergent thinking, so it is good for
good thinking, and my brain is not an extremely masculine brain that is
violent or agressive, and i have passed a certified IQ test and i have
scored high and well above 115 in it, so i invite you to look carefully
at the following interesting video that explains the two types of
intellectual gifted brains:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmbEaBfzKFk
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
More of my philosophy about the smart IQ tests and the 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
I have just talked about the way to success, and read the following
about the best big brains from around the world in USA so that to
understand more about the way of success:
Let's look for example at USA, so read the following from Jonathan Wai
that is a Ph.D., it says:
"Heiner Rindermann and James Thompson uncovered that the “smart
fraction” of a country is quite influential in impacting the performance
of that country, for example, its GDP."
And it also says the following:
"“According to recent population estimates, there are about eight
Chinese and Indians for every American in the top 1 percent in brains.”
But consider that the U.S. benefits from the smart fractions of every
other country in the world because it continues to serve as a magnet for brainpower, something that is not even factored into these rankings.
What these rankings clearly show is America is likely still in the lead
in terms of brainpower. And this is despite the fact federal funding for educating our smart fraction is currently zero. Everyone seems worried Americans are falling behind, but this is because everyone is focusing
on average and below average people. Maybe it’s time we started taking a closer look at the smartest people of our own country."
Read more here:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/finding-the-next-einstein/201312/whats-the-smartest-country-in-the-world
So as you are noticing it's immigrants(and there are about eight Chinese
and Indians for every American in the top 1 percent in brains) that are
making USA a rich country.
And read also the following to understand more:
Why Silicon Valley Wouldn’t Work Without Immigrants
There are many theories for why immigrants find so much success in tech.
Many American-born tech workers point out that there is no shortage of American-born employees to fill the roles at many tech companies.
Researchers have found that more than enough students graduate from
American colleges to fill available tech jobs. Critics of the industry’s friendliness toward immigrants say it comes down to money — that
technology companies take advantage of visa programs, like the H-1B
system, to get foreign workers at lower prices than they would pay American-born ones.
But if that criticism rings true in some parts of the tech industry, it
misses the picture among Silicon Valley’s top companies. One common misperception of Silicon Valley is that it operates like a factory; in
that view, tech companies can hire just about anyone from anywhere in
the world to fill a particular role.
But today’s most ambitious tech companies are not like factories.
They’re more like athletic teams. They’re looking for the LeBrons and Bradys — the best people in the world to come up with some brand-new, never-before-seen widget, to completely reimagine what widgets should do
in the first place.
“It’s not about adding tens or hundreds of thousands of people into manufacturing plants,” said Aaron Levie, the co-founder and chief
executive of the cloud-storage company Box. “It’s about the couple ideas that are going to be invented that are going to change everything.”
Why do tech honchos believe that immigrants are better at coming up with
those inventions? It’s partly a numbers thing. As the tech venture
capitalist Paul Graham has pointed out, the United States has only 5
percent of the world’s population; it stands to reason that most of the world’s best new ideas will be thought up by people who weren’t born here.
If you look at some of the most consequential ideas in tech, you find an unusual number that were developed by immigrants. For instance, Google’s entire advertising business — that is, the basis for the vast majority
of its revenues and profits, the engine that allows it to hire thousands
of people in the United States — was created by three immigrants: Salar Kamangar and Omid Kordestani, who came to the United States from Iran,
and Eric Veach, from Canada.
But it’s not just a numbers thing. Another reason immigrants do so well
in tech is that people from outside bring new perspectives that lead to
new ideas.
Read more here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/technology/personaltech/why-silicon-valley-wouldnt-work-without-immigrants.html
More of my philosophy about the financial market and more..
I think that the stock market crashes can be due to economic or natural disasters, speculation, or investor panic, but i also think that
it is the "control" over the factors of speculation and investment panic
that is the most important that permits to prevent a stock market crash,
so first we have to know that an investor is concerned with the
fundamental value of his investment, whereas a speculator is only
concerned with market price movement, and here is my thoughts about how
to avoid stock market crash:
More philosophy about the future of financial stability and cyber risk..
I have just read rapidly the following very interesting article,
i invite you to read it carefully:
The future of financial stability and cyber risk
https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-future-of-financial-stability-and-cyber-risk/
I think that we have to be positive about the future of financial
stability and cyber risk, since notice that the financial stability
depends on three things:
1- Leverage
2- Maturity and Risk Transformation
3- Procyclicality of the price of risk
Read the above article to notice it, but i think that for the first two,
i mean Leverage and Maturity and Risk Transformation, the financial institutions have not to put all the eggs in the same basket, so
they need to diversify the risk correctly by diversifying portfolios
etc., and for the third that is the Procyclicality of the price of risk,
i think that it is less risky since it depends on the "asset" prices
that are diversified to a certain level, and for the cyber risk i am
positive since i think we are getting much more sophisticated in cyber security. So i remain positive.
And my above thoughts are related to how i will invest more for my
retirement etc. as follows, read my following thoughts so that to
understand my way of doing about it:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/h4FblBWnNHk
More of my philosophy about my new proverb and more..
I think i am smart and i think i am a wise type of person,
and as you have just noticed i have just invented quickly
a new proverb and here it is and read my explanation below:
---
Here is my new proverb:
"When you walk towards a goal in life it's like you walk down a forest
path towards a goal, but when you walk this forest path you can look at
flowers and pretty trees and be happier or you can also learn more and
have more experience which is useful while walking in the forest, then
life is like this, you can go through it towards goals, but going
through it you can also have pleasures that make you happier and you can
learn more and have more experience and that is useful to you, and i
think this conception of life makes you more positive."
And here is the translation in french of my new proverb:
"Quand tu marches vers un objectif dans la vie, c'est comme tu marches
dans un chemin de forêt vers un objectif, mais quand tu marches dans ce
chemin de forêt tu peux regarder des fleurs et de jolis arbres et être
plus joyeux ou tu peux aussi en apprendre plus et avoir plus
d'expérience qui est utile en marchant dans la forêt, alors la vie
ressemble à cela,