Hello,


More of my philosophy about the philosopher Heraclitus and about reliability and about how Phosphorus is not a problem and about the rare metals and about the critical elements and about my philosophy and about technology and about Fusion energy and
about CISC and RISC instructions and more of my thoughts..

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


So i think i am a new philosopher, so i think i have just posted about
a philosopher called Heraclitus , and i invite you to look carefully at his ideas of philosophy in the following video:

Heraclitus: Union of opposites, change & logos

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzpXFyYOLIU


So the above philosopher that is called Heraclitus talks about the union
of the opposites by for example saying that the road can go up and down, so what he means is that there is a destination of the road or the goal,
but notice how the road can go up and down so that to attain the destination or the goal, so he is saying that we have to accept the fact that the road can go up and down so that to attain the destination or the goal, so it is i think the "basis" ideas
of the philosophy of Heraclitus, but i think the weakness of this philosophy is that you have to notice how the philosophy of Heraclitus says that you have to accept it, but i think it is naive to say to people to accept it, so it is the weakness, so my
new ideas of my philosophy
say that we have to think about the reliability of the structure , i mean the philosophy of Heraclitus has not just to say to accept it , but you have to be able to "convince" by using ideas to accept the fact that you have to accept that the road can go up and down so that to attain the destination or the goal, so notice that it
is about reliability, so it is what is doing my new ideas of my philosophy and the new model of my philosophy, so i invite you to read my new ideas of my philosophy in the following web link:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/fpvk_69yEK0


So i think that phosphorus is not really a problem, since read the following carefully so that you notice it:

Pedro Sanchez, director of the Agriculture and Food Security Center at the Earth Institute, does not believe there is a phosphorus shortage. “In my long 50-year career, “ he said, “once every decade, people say we are going to run out of phosphorus.
Each time this is disproven. All the most reliable estimates show that we have enough phosphate rock resources to last between 300 and 400 more years.”

Read more here:

https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2013/04/01/phosphorus-essential-to-life-are-we-running-out/


"Rare Metals and Metalloids (RMs) are physically and chemically dissimilar to rare earth elements. However the RMs are diverse and share few overarching similarities. The critical rare metals (RMs) and metalloids discussed in this section are niobium,
tantalum, cobalt, indium, zirconium, gallium, and lithium. Most of these elements are mined in substantial quantities that meet world demand. However, the few countries that possess economically viable sources of critical elements are also experiencing
booms in technological industry, exploitation of workers, and political instability. This endangers the world supply of RMs over the next 100 years unless changes are made to mining and the consumption of these elements. This overview will serve to
outline basic background information behind this element group."

Read more here:

https://web.mit.edu/12.000/www/m2016/finalwebsite/elements/ree.html


"The rare earth elements (REEs) are comprised of the lanthanide elements plus scandium and yttrium, which have similar physical properties and are often found in the same ores and deposits. Specifically, REEs include the light REEs (LREEs) such as
lanthanum, cerium, praseodymium, neodymium, samarium, europium, and the heavy REEs (HREEs) gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, holmium, erbium, thulium, ytterbium, lutetium, scandium and yttrium.

While most of these elements are not actually rare in terms of general amount of these elements in the earth's crust, they are rarely found in sufficient abundance in a single location for their mining to be economically viable. REEs have many important
applications in modern technology for which there is no equal substitute, but an increasing demand for these elements is straining supply."

Read more here:

https://web.mit.edu/12.000/www/m2016/finalwebsite/elements/ree.html


"Today, the world produces 150% more food on only 13% more land compared with 1960, thanks to many innovations in food production made over the years. We produce enough food to feed 1.5x the global population. That's enough to feed 10 billion yet we are
at just over 7 billion currently. There is enough for everyone."

Read more here:

https://news.thin-ink.net/p/we-produce-enough-food-to-feed-15#:~:text=Today%2C%20the%20world%20produces%20150,There%20is%20enough%20for%20everyone.

And read here on the following journal of substainable agriculture so that to notice it:

We Already Grow Enough Food for 10 Billion People

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10440046.2012.695331


And the world population is expected to reach 10.4 billion in 2100 and to stabilize at 10 billion around year 2070.

Read more here:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12281418/


So i don't think food for the growing population is a problem , and notice
that in year 2080 or 2100 we will be so powerful because of the exponential progress of our humanity, so we are going to solve many many of our problems, and i invite you to look at the following interesting video about it:

Exponential Progress: Can We Expect Mind-Blowing Changes In The Near Future

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfM5HXpfnJQ


And i also invite you to read my interesting new thoughts in the following web link about the new and future technologies:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/lfnlD52jDzI

And you can read my thoughts in the following web link about cancer and about new interesting medical treatments and drugs:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/3HwdSeO3esc

And read more of my following thoughts about cancer and about health and about new interesting medical treatments and drugs etc.:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/k6_-3RpoSOA

And i invite you to read all my thoughts of my philosophy and my views on different subjects in the following web link:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/fpvk_69yEK0


"Fusion is having a moment, Physicists have proven it’s possible. Now it’s up to engineers to harness fusion energy to generate electricity. Fusion power is now a solvable engineering challenge rather than an eternally elusive scientific puzzle. That
challenge can’t be met soon enough. And with billions of dollars of government funding and private investment and research from giant international projects fueling these companies, there’s real hope that within the next few years, we might start to
see the technology stack necessary to help wean the world off of fossil fuels, and at a pace that could turn the rising tides of climate change."

Read more here:

https://spectrum.ieee.org/fusion-is-having-a-moment


An evolved swine flu virus might attack us again, new study reveals

"The data from the study hints that if we manage to control the transmission of the virus in people who regularly interact with swine (like farmers), we can minimize the circulation of pdm09 in pigs and thus prevent it from evolving further."

Read more here:

https://interestingengineering.com/health/an-evolved-swine-flu-virus-might-attack-us-again-new-study-reveals

So we can generally consider CISC (Complex Instruction Set Computer) instructions of x86 architecture to be higher-level programming instructions compared to RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computer) instructions due to their complexity.

CISC instructions are designed to perform more complex operations in a single instruction. This complexity allows higher-level programming languages and compilers to generate fewer instructions to accomplish certain tasks. CISC architectures often have a
broader range of instructions, some of which might even directly correspond to operations in high-level programming languages.

In contrast, RISC instructions are designed to be simpler and more streamlined, typically performing basic operations that can be executed in a single clock cycle. It might require more instructions to accomplish the same high-level task that a CISC
instruction could handle in a single operation.

More of my philosophy about Arm Vs. X86 ..

I invite you to read carefully the following interesting article so
that to understand more:

Overhyped Apple Silicon: Arm Vs. X86 Is Irrelevant

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4447703-overhyped-apple-silicon-arm-vs-x86-is-irrelevant


More of my philosophy about code compression of RISC-V and ARM and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart, and i have just read the following paper
that says that RISC-V Compressed programs are 25% smaller than RISC-V programs, fetch 25% fewer instruction bits than RISC-V programs, and incur fewer instruction cache misses. Its code size is competitive with other compressed RISCs. RVC is expected to
improve the performance and energy per operation of RISC-V.

Read more here to notice it:

https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~krste/papers/waterman-ms.pdf


So i think RVC has the same compression as ARM Thumb-2, so i think
that i was correct in my previous thoughts , read them below,
so i think we have now to look if the x86 or x64 are still more cache friendly even with Thumb-2 compression or RVC.

More of my philosophy of who will be the winner, x86 or x64 or ARM and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart, and i think that since x86 or x64 has complex instructions and ARM has simple instructions, so i think that x86 or x64 is more cache friendly, but ARM has wanted to solve the problem by compressing the code by using Thumb-2
that compresses the code, so i think Thumb-2 compresses the size of the code by around 25%, so i think
we have to look if the x86 or x64 are still more cache friendly even with Thumb-2 compression, and i think that x86 or x64 will still optimize more the power or energy efficiency, so i think that there remains that since x86 or x64 has other big
advantages, like the advantage that i am talking about below, so i think the x86 or x64 will be still successful big players in the future, so i think it will be the "tendency". So i think that x86 and x64 will be good for a long time to make money in
business, and they will be good for business for USA that make the AMD or Intel CPUs.


More of my philosophy about x86 or x64 and ARM architectures and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart, and i think that x86 or x64 architectures
has another big advantage over ARM architecture, and it is the following:


"The Bright Parts of x86

Backward Compatibility

Compatibility is a two-edged sword. One reason that ARM does better in low-power contexts is that its simpler decoder doesn't have to be compatible with large accumulations of legacy cruft. The downside is that ARM operating systems need to be modified
for every new chip version.

In contrast, the latest 64-bit chips from AMD and Intel are still able to boot PC DOS, the 16-bit operating system that came with the original IBM PC. Other hardware in the system might not be supported, but the CPUs have retained backward compatibility
with every version since 1978.

Many of the bad things about x86 are due to this backward compatibility, but it's worth remembering the benefit that we've had as a result: New PCs have always been able to run old software."

Read more here on the following web link so that to notice it:

https://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1676714&seqNum=6


So i think that you can not compare x86 or x64 to ARM, since it is
not just a power efficiency comparison, like some are doing it by comparing
the Apple M1 Pro ARM CPU to x86 or x64 CPUs, it is why i think that x86 or x64 architectures will be here for a long time, so i think that they will be good for a long time to make money in business, and they are a good business for USA that make the AMD
or Intel CPUs.

More of my philosophy about weak memory model and ARM and more of my thoughts..


I think ARM hardware memory model is not good, since it is a
weak memory model, so ARM has to provide us with a TSO memory
model that is compatible with x86 TSO memory model, and read what Kent Dickey is saying about it in my following writing:


ProValid, LLC was formed in 2003 to provide hardware design and verification consulting services.

Kent Dickey, founder and President, has had 20 years experience in hardware design and verification. Kent worked at Hewlett-Packard and Intel Corporation, leading teams in ASIC chip design and pre-silicon and post-silicon hardware verification. He
architected bus interface chips for high-end servers at both companies. Kent has received more than 10 patents for innovative work in both design and verification.

Read more here about him:

https://www.provalid.com/about/about.html


And read the following thoughts of Kent Dickey about the weak memory model such as of ARM:

"First, the academic literature on ordering models is terrible. My eyes
glaze over and it's just so boring.

I'm going to guess "niev" means naive. I find that surprising since x86
is basically TSO. TSO is a good idea. I think weakly ordered CPUs are a
bad idea.

TSO is just a handy name for the Sparc and x86 effective ordering for
writeback cacheable memory: loads are ordered, and stores are buffered and will complete in order but drain separately from the main CPU pipeline. TSO can allow loads to hit stores in the buffer and see the new value, this doesn't really matter for
general ordering purposes.

TSO lets you write basic producer/consumer code with no barriers. In fact, about the only type of code that doesn't just work with no barriers on TSO is Lamport's Bakery Algorithm since it relies on "if I write a location and read it back and it's still
there, other CPUs must see that value as well", which isn't true for TSO.

Lock free programming "just works" with TSO or stronger ordering guarantees, and it's extremely difficult to automate putting in barriers for complex algorithms for weakly ordered systems. So code for weakly ordered systems tend to either toss in lots of
barriers, or use explicit locks (with barriers). And extremely weakly ordered systems are very hard to reason about, and especially hard to program since many implementations are not as weakly ordered as the specification says they could be, so just
running your code and having it work is insufficient. Alpha was terrible in this regard, and I'm glad it's silliness died with it.

HP PA-RISC was documented as weakly ordered, but all implementations
guaranteed full system sequential consistency (and it was tested in and enforced, but not including things like cache flushing, which did need barriers). No one wanted to risk breaking software from the original in-order fully sequential machines that might have relied on it. It wasn't really a performance issue, especially once OoO was added.

Weakly ordered CPUs are a bad idea in much the same way in-order VLIW is a bad idea. Certain niche applications might work out fine, but not for a general purpose CPU. It's better to throw some hardware at making TSO perform well, and keep the software
simple and easy to get right.

Kent"


Read the rest on the following web link:

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.arch/c/fSIpGiBhUj0



Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

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