[continued from previous message]

not knowing how to handle or manage the problem with the dictatorship of
the Algerian government, since i think that causes of the problem that
causes dictatorship in Algeria is also the problem of the divide between Islamists and berbers or berberists and arabists that pushes the
government in Algeria at remaining a distatorship government, so it is
this divide of Islamists and berbers or berberists and arabists that is
causing the problem in Algeria, so when France or Morocco talks about
there problem with Algeria, they are not talking correctly since they
are talking about the "consequences" of the causes of the problem as is
doing it the journalist above, but i think that the problem that is the
main cause of dictatorship in Algeria is the problem of the divide such
as between berberists and islamists and arabists, so this is the main
problem that is causing the problem in Algeria, since the arabist
government of Algeria wants to be arabism since it doesn't want to be
the kind of division that is brought by berbers and berberists or
islamists, so it wants to be part of the much greater and much united
and powerful Arab world, and the arabists or arabs in Algeria are 75% of
the population and the berbers and berberists are 25% of the population
in Algeria.

More of my philosophy about division of Labor and about quality and
about productivity and about specialization and more..

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


I have talked about division of Labor and about specialization, but
notice that when you become much older and you are not too specialized
and you accumulate much more deeper and much more general experience and knowledge and you become an architect or Chief Technology Officer or
such, it is also excellent, you can for example notice it by reading the following about Intel that is hiring and rehiring those types of
architects and veterans so that to be successful:

Shlomit Weiss returns to Intel as Head of Chip Development

Read more here:

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.developpez.com%2Factu%2F316610%2FShlomit-Weiss-revient-chez-Intel-au-poste-de-responsable-du-developpement-des-puces-un-nom-de-plus-dans-la-liste-des-veterans-qu-Intel-
continue-de-reembaucher%2F

And about division of Labor and productivity, read my following thoughts:

So i will ask a philosophical question:

How to manage efficiently complexity ?

I think you can manage complexity by the “divide and rule” approach
to management, which also leads to hierarchical division of large organisations, or wich also leads to the Division of "labour", you can
read more about the Division of labour here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_of_labour

Also you can manage complexity by using constraints, such as laws, road
rules and commercial standards, all of which limit the potential for
harmful interactions to occur, also you can manage complexity by using
higher layers of abstraction such as in computer programming, and we can
also follow the efficient rule of: "Do less and do it better" that can
also use higher level layers of abstraction to enhance productivity and quality, this rule is good for productivity and quality, and about productivity: I have also just posted about the following thoughts from
the following PhD computer scientist:

https://lemire.me/blog/about-me/

Read more here his thoughts about productivity:

https://lemire.me/blog/2012/10/15/you-cannot-scale-creativity/

And i think he is making a mistake:

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.


So read my following thoughts about the Threadpool to notice that my
Threadpool that scales very well does Load balance well:


---


About the Threadpool..


I have just read the following:


Concurrency - Throttling Concurrency in the CLR 4.0 ThreadPool


https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/archive/msdn-magazine/2010/september/concurrency-throttling-concurrency-in-the-clr-4-0-threadpool


But i think that both the methodologies from Microsoft of the Hill
Climbing and of the Control Theory using band pass filter or match
filter and discrete Fourier transform have a weakness, there weakness is
that they are "localized" optimization that maximize the throughput ,
so they are not fair, so i don't think i will implement them, so then
you can use my following invention of an efficient Threadpool engine
with priorities that scales very well (and you can use a second
Threadpool for IO etc.):


https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/an-efficient-threadpool-engine-with-priorities-that-scales-very-well


And here is my other Threadpool engine with priorities:


https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/threadpool