Hello,




More of my philosophy about smartness and about discovering patterns 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..


I think i am really smart, i think that inventing sophisticated theorems
in mathematics is also discovering smart patterns with your fluid
intelligence, it is why i am inventing my thoughts by also discovering
patterns with my fluid intelligence , but notice that discovering
patterns in mathematics is like a low level way of doing like in microeconomics, but discovering patterns can be in a high level way like
in macroeconomics, and here is an example of how i am doing it quickly,
read my following thoughts about Nikola Tesla and about Garry Tan that i
have invented quickly so that to notice how i am discovering smart
patterns with my fluid intelligence in a high level way:

More of my philosophy of how i am smart and about what is smartness..

I think i am smart, and i think that smartness is not doing
mathematics, i think being highly smart is discovering smart patterns
and composing smartly other patterns with those patterns etc. so i will
give you my examples of how i am genetically highly smart, so read
carefully my following thoughts and notice how i have quickly
read a saying of Nikola Tesla and how i have rapidly discovered
smart patterns with my fluid intelligence in a form of my
showing that Nikola Tesla is not correct thinking and by discovering
other patterns with my fluid intelligence in a form of my invention of
my new proverb below etc. so read carefully my following thoughts and
you will notice that being highly smart is also quickly discovering
smart patterns in the way i am doing it below(and notice below the other
smart patterns that i am discovering with my fluid intelligence when i
am rapidly showing that Garry Tan is not correct thinking):

More of my philosophy about Nikola Tesla and my proverbs and more..

I have just looked at the following video of the sayings of Nikola
Tesla, and you can read about him here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla, and you can look at the
video here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnQ-o6R2wac

And i think Nikola Tesla doesn't look like me, Since of course i am also
an inventor of many software scalable algorithms and algorithms, but i
don't think Nikola Tesla was a wise type of person like me(and i think
it is also genetical in me), since for example he is saying the
following saying in the above video:

"Be alone, that is the secret of invention;
be alone, that is when ideas are born"

So i think that the above saying from Nikola Tesla is not smart at all,
since creativity needs convergent and divergent thinking, and divergent thinking needs to "collect" information and data from other people so
that to be efficient, and i also think that creativity is the mother of invention, so this is why Nikola Tesla is not smart by saying the above
saying, and here is more of my smart thoughts about it so that you
understand my kind of personality:

More of my philosophy about divergent and convergent thinking and more..

I invite you to look at the following video:

5 Life-changing books YOU MUST READ in 2022

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGZd2dn8IJ4

I think i am smart, and notice that he is talking about the book called
"The one thing", and he is saying that we have to be focused on doing
one thing at a time because it is good for productivity, and he is
saying that doing many things at the same time is not good for
productivity, but i think i am smart and i say he is not smart and he is
not correct to say so, because we can do many things at the same time
and be like divergent thinking before doing one thing at a time and be
like convergent thinking, and this kind of efficient "balance" like
between convergent and divergent thinking makes the efficient thinking,
and here is my new proverb about my methodology:

"Human vitality comes from intellectual openness and intellectual
openness also comes from divergent thinking and you have to well balance divergent thinking with convergent thinking so that to converge towards
the global optimum of efficiency and not get stuck on a local optimum of efficiency, and this kind of well balancing makes the good creativity."

And i will explain more my proverb so that you understand it:

I think that divergent thinking is thought process or method used to
generate creative ideas by exploring many possible solutions, but notice
that we even need openness in a form of economic actors that share ideas
across nations and industries (and this needs globalization) that make
us much more creative and that's good for economy, since you can easily
notice that globalization also brings a kind of optimality to divergent thinking, and also you have to know how to balance divergent thinking
with convergent thinking, since if divergent thinking is much greater
than convergent thinking it can become costly in terms of time, and if
the convergent thinking is much greater than divergent thinking you can
get stuck on local optimum of efficiency and not converge to a global
optimum of efficiency.

And here is my thoughts about artificial intelligence and evolutionary algorithms in artificial intelligence so that you understand more:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/joLVchvaCf0

More of my philosophy about an IQ test for the highly smart and more..

I think i am really smart and here is a smart IQ test for the highly smart:

So notice what is saying in the following video the known Garry Tan that
is an asian from USA about the how to become rich and notice that he
attended Stanford University from 1999 to 2003, and graduated with a
bachelor's degree in Computer Systems Engineering:

So I invite you to look at his following video that speaks
about how to become rich:

STOP Chasing Money -- Chase WEALTH. | How To get RICH | Garry Tan's Office

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Hdu4DlnLIk&t

The person that is speaking on the above video is called Garry Tan,
and here he is:

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

And I think i am smart and i invite you to look at the following
"defect" or "bug" of the above video, look here at what he is saying:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Hdu4DlnLIk&t=425s

So notice that he is saying that so that to become rich you have to be
the following:

"So what is most useful, is actually acquiring skills that nobody else
has, especially in combination that are rare. If you can rebound the
ball and nobody does it quite the way you can, you can be a Hall of Fame basketball player. And that applies to all the things in your career and
in life."

But it is like an IQ test for the highly smart, since i am quickly
discovering a pattern with my fluid intelligence and it is that he is
trying to abstract the way of becoming rich by also saying:

"If you can rebound the ball and nobody does it quite the way you can,
you can be a Hall of Fame basketball player. And that applies to all the
things in your career and in life."

But the pattern that i am quickly discovering with my fluid intelligence
is that even if you can rebound the ball and nobody does it quite the
way you can, the becoming rich is also not only dependent on the supply
but also on the "demand", so if the demand doesn't want to give you
enough money so that to become rich , you will still not become rich,
so if you are smart you will also notice that it is also about
usefulness, since the demand can find the giving enough money to make
you rich not useful for his pocket, so Garry Tan in the above saying of
the video is not so smart, since he is not taking into account the
factor that we call usefulness to consumers. So the person on the above
video has forgot the very basis of what is it of something has to be
useful for the consumers or customers, so read my following smart "redefinition" of Utilitarianism so that to understand:

More of my philosophy about why the definition of Utilitarianism is like
an IQ test..

Notice that i think i am smart, since when i just looked rapidly at the definition below of Utilitarianism, i have rapidly discovered a pattern
with my fluid intelligence and it is that even if the definition
of Utilitarianism is: That Utilitarianism prescribes actions that
maximise happiness and well-being for all affected individuals,
i can easily see a pattern with my fluid intelligence since i am
smart, since the pattern is that Utilitarianism maximises happiness and well-being by well balancing taking into account not
only the present but also the future, i mean that responability
is inherent to the definition since the well balancing forces us
to be responsability in the present or today so that to maximize
correctly happiness and well being tomorrow or in the future.

I think i am really smart, and what i am trying to explain is that
you have first to know that a language is also an abstraction of the
reality, since even a concept is an abstraction of the reality and also
a language is full of concepts, and not only that but a very important
thing in the process of thinking is that you have to know how to
make a difference between what we call in french: "La pensée duale" et
"La pensée multimodale", and it means in english: that there is a
thinking that is like a boolean logical of thinking and there is a more efficient thinking that comes with precision in form of nuances etc.
and it is the weakness of the above abstraction of the known Garry Tan,
since his abstraction of how to become rich doesn't come with the right precision and the right nuances, since notice that the becoming rich
depends not only on the supply but also on the demand and the demand can
be influenced by other factors such as Covid-19 or the like that prevent
from making rich an individual or individuals in the supply, so
it is why i say that the known Garry Tan above is not so smart.

I can give you another IQ test that i have rapidly invented and
here it is:

So i will give my example of pattern recognition with my fluid
intelligence that permits to understand, here it is:

So if you want to go fast from my country Morocco to another country
called USA , how will you do it ? or what will you do ?

It is like my IQ test..

So if you answer that you need for example to use a fast airplane to go
fast from Morocco to USA, your answer is a stupid answer, so you need
the smart answer, so i will answer that the fast airplane too has to be "reliable" and your "health" has too to permit it and the "weather" has
too to permit it, so now you are clearly noticing that you need to take
into account many "factors" so that to go fast from Morocco to USA, so
you are clearly noticing that being smart needs also a good plan.

More precision of my philosophy about Utilitarianism..

I invite you to read the following definition of what is Utilitarianism:

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

So as you are noticing, it says that Utilitarianism prescribes actions
that maximise happiness and well-being for all affected individuals,
but i think that Utilitarianism is not idiotic since it maximises
happiness and well-being by well balancing taking into account not
only the present but also the future.






More of my philosophy about the Gödel's First incompleteness theorem and
more of my thoughts..

I have searched more on internet the most precise and correct Gödel's
First incompleteness theorem, and here it is:

"Any consistent formal system F within which a certain amount of
elementary arithmetic can be carried out is incomplete; i.e., there are statements of the language of F which can neither be proved nor
disproved in F"

And in mathematics, a statement is a declarative sentence that is either
true or false but not both. A statement is sometimes called a
proposition. The key is that there must be no ambiguity. To be a
statement, a sentence "must" be true or false, and it cannot be both.

So that means that we know that the statement is true or false but
it can not be proven true or false, so we then logically infer that
we can not prove the consistency of the system , so the statement can be
that it is like an axiom in mathematics that is true but that we can not
prove by such logical inference or deduction, so then the system
remains really useful even if it's incomplete by Gödel's incompleteness theorems, so i think that Gödel's incompleteness theorems are not so problematic.

More of my philosophy about what is smartness and more of my thoughts..

I think i am really smart, and you are noticing it more and more,
but i have to explain something really important:

So when i ask you to define smartly what is smartness, you will
say that smartness is the genetical side of smartness and it is
also the skill from the cultural side, but i think that it is
too much abstraction, since when you are smart you will notice
that the pattern that you have to find with your fluid intelligence
can be a pattern that you can not completely see or you can not see
since you have not been able to be at the right place and at the right
time, so it can become a constraint that prevent you from finding the
pattern with your fluid intelligence, so then even if you are really
smart, your smartness that is genetical and cultural is not sufficient,
so then smartness can come from other sides such as a hidden pattern
that you can obtain by being lucky such as by being at the
right place and at the right time. So for example take
a look at me, i am not only genetically smart, since i have
also passed some certified IQ tests on internet and i have
scored above 115 IQ in them, but i am also culturally smart and i am
also this lucky guy that has discovered other smart patterns
by being at the right place and at the right time.

More of my philosophy about money and about happiness and more of my
thoughts..

I think i am really smart and here is my just new proverb:

"Passion is not a good engine since it is much less powerful,
so if for example you have passion for sex, then can you make sex
a passion that guides you ? no, so then it is not a general or
much more general way of doing, so i think that individual
happiness comes from the satisfaction of self-improvement,
and does money = happiness? I think that big money doesn't
add much individual happiness to having individually enough money
( look at the following video from a techlead so that to notice it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1kQmeIsCVs ), but big money
can add much to societal happiness, and big money builds empires."

In my above smart new proverb , i am saying that individual happiness
comes from satisfaction of self-improvement, and I invite you to read
my following thoughts of my philosophy that talks about it and
about how you become self-confidence and how you become this
positive energy and positive energy of hope:

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

And here is my other new proverb that talks about how individual
happiness comes from satisfaction of self-improvement:

"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, tu peux la traverser vers des objectifs, mais en la traversant tu peux avoir aussi des plaisirs qui te rendent plus heureux
et tu peux apprendre plus et avoir plus d'experience et cela t'est
utile, et je pense que cette conception de la vie te rend plus positif."

So you have to understand that my proverb above is like
trying to well balance between, in one side, our strong human desire for success and the fear or the disliking of failure to attain the goal,
and, in the other side, i am showing in my new proverb the good sides or advantages or the pros of walking our lives towards the goal or goals
even if failure or failures happen(s), and i think this conception of
life of my proverb permits to be more positive, also you have to align
the usefulness of the utility with the global mission of the country or
global world"


More of my philosophy of what is it that i am really smart and more of
my thoughts..

I think i am really smart, but what is it that i am really smart ?
is it that i am arrogant by saying it ? not at all ! since my saying of
"i am really smart" can "appear" to a stupid person that i mean that i
am very smart, but it is not ! since the being really smart in my saying
means also that it can be that i am of 115 IQ, so that means that
i am not arrogant by saying that i am really smart, so you have to
understand my following proverb about it that i have invented quickly so
that to understand, here it is:

"There is an important difference between the appearance of a reality
and the truth of a reality, this is why in science you have not to be
confident with the appearances, since in science you have to understand
the truth, so, to be able to understand the truth you have to know how
to be patience before understanding the truth and not to rush in like a
fool by lack of wisdom "

And here are my new proverbs that i have just invented quickly:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/LjeVQZFhK3E

And here are some other proverbs that i have just invented quickly:

Here is one of my interesting just new proverbs:

"Human vitality comes from intellectual openness and intellectual
openness also comes from divergent thinking and you have to well balance divergent thinking with convergent thinking so that to converge towards
the global optimum of efficiency and not get stuck on a local optimum of efficiency, and this kind of well balancing makes the good creativity."

And i will explain more my proverb so that you understand it:

I think that divergent thinking is thought process or method used to
generate creative ideas by exploring many possible solutions, but notice
that we even need openness in a form of economic actors that share ideas
across nations and industries (and this needs globalization) that make
us much more creative and that's good for economy, since you can easily
notice that globalization also brings a kind of optimality to divergent thinking, and also you have to know how to balance divergent thinking
with convergent thinking, since if divergent thinking is much greater
than convergent thinking it can become costly in terms of time, and if
the convergent thinking is much greater than divergent thinking you can
get stuck on local optimum of efficiency and not converge to a global
optimum of efficiency.

Here is the other one of my proverbs that i have just invented quickly:

"Resourcefulness is one of the most important things, and it is a skill,
and the good news is: this skill can be learned and mastered, and resourcefulness is attained only when we combine the resourceful mindset
and skills, so we have to filter out some of the most useful resources
that help us, and resourcefulness is also to know who/what to look for
and what to ask, and when ressourcefulness is attained this becomes an
engine that permits you to have hope and to be energetic and to be
positive in doing what you are doing, since resourcefulness also permits
to easy the jobs for you."

And here is the other one of my proverbs that i have just invented quickly:

"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, tu peux la traverser vers des objectifs, mais en la traversant tu peux avoir aussi des plaisirs qui te rendent plus heureux
et tu peux apprendre plus et avoir plus d'experience et cela t'est
utile, et je pense que cette conception de la vie te rend plus positif."

So you have to understand that my proverb above is like
trying to well balance between, in one side, our strong human desire for success and the fear or the disliking of failure to attain the goal,
and, in the other side, i am showing in my new proverb the good sides or advantages or the pros of walking our lives towards the goal or goals
even if failure or failures happen(s), and i think this conception of
life of my proverb permits to be more positive, also you have to align
the usefulness of the utility with the global mission of the country or
global world"

More of my philosophy about how i am smart in computing and more of my thoughts..

I think i am really smart since i can also rapidly think like
an architect, since i think that i am smart by like finding the
the best path, like the best path of what is the big weaknesses of
reverse engineering that permit us to fight much more efficiently
reverse engineering, also i am finding the best path that finds
the big defect of the Go programming language(read about it in my below thoughts), so then you are also understanding this smart way of mine, so
for example i will now "rapidly" find the big weaknesses of the new
Intel toolkit called OneAPI and i will do it in a more smart way, so
i will start by making you notice that the big weakness of
message passing of MPI is that it is too low level, since the
very important thing that lacks MPI is also that it lacks higher level datastructures that permit us to use them in a transparent way
across processes and across computer machines, other than
that, the other big weakness of message passing of MPI is that it is not
a programming language that provides a unified shared memory with
sophisticated data types objects across processes and across computer
machines, and it is the big defect of the new Intel toolkit that we call OneAPI, since notice how it is so low level by providing with just the following memory objects in the unified shared memory across processes
and across computer machines, here it is and notice it carefully:

https://oneapi-src.github.io/DPCPP_Reference/model/memory-objects.html


So then the big weakness of the new Intel toolkit called OneAPI
is that it is still too low level as message passing of MPI is too low
level.

More of my philosophy about copyrights and about patents and about
reverse engineering and more..

I am really smart, and i will talk more about reverse engineering, so i
think that the creative ways to break disassemblers or debuggers or by
using source code Obfuscation are not so efficient against reverse
engineering, so i will give you my smart way of doing it, first as i
have just told you, that you have to protect your value-added of your
code that you want to sell by for example using more difficult or
difficult algorithms in a smart way that are more difficult or difficult
to understand with assembler code from machine code, and after that you
have to use copyright in a smart way, for example i will use like the
following service from a company in Canada that provides a copyright
filled and certified by a public notary that is valid for 172 countries,
you can read about it here:

http://en.scopyright.ca/

But you have to be smart, since the "patent" that protects an algorithm
is not valid in so many countries such as India etc., so the best way is
to use a copyright as i am doing it, so that this kind of copyright
allows you to fill a lawsuit against binary code that is stolen from you
by asking the one that has stolen from you to show his source code in
a legal lawsuit.

Read my previous thoughts:

I think i am really smart, and i think that the problem with reverse engineering of binary software programs or dynamic or shared libraries
is that even if you use artificial intelligence or sophisticated tools
of reverse engineering, the main hard problem for reverse engineering is
how to understand the "meaning" of the algorithm, since if the
algorithms is difficult , it can be so difficult to understand it with assembler code, this is the main big weakness of reverse engineering,
but of course with reverse engineering you can obtain the assembler from
the machine code, so you can then crack the binary code since it is
much less difficult than understanding a difficult algorithm , and after
that you can give the binary code that is cracked, but with this kind of
way of doing you have to be aware that the cracked binary code can
contain a virus, this is why a "trusthworthy" relationship between a
software developer or developers and the customers is so important. And
it is my way of doing that is creating a trusthworthy relationship
with my customers and with you here in those newsgroups forums and such.

And read my following previous thoughts:

More of my philosophy about reverse engineering..

Simply pulling a piece of software through a decompiler does not
directly yield easily readable code for several reasons.

First of all, names of variables and functions are not kept through the compilation process, so the decompiler will assign generic names. It is
much harder to read code that looks like "f8s6ex2(i37zc, sk1eo)" than it
is to read "CalculatePrice(articleId, amount)".

Secondly, a compiler has a variety of optimization tricks that it will
use during compilation to make the code more efficient. A decompiler
will return this "optimized" code, which will look a lot less readable
than the original.

Just compiling the Delphi mode of freepascal source code with
optimizations (-O2 and up) and stripping all debug and profile
information, and apply smartlinking, will make it almost
un-decompilable. Not only FPC, but also Delphi.

The level of software reverse complexity is different according to
different program languages. generally speaking, compiled language
reverse engineering is more difficult than interpreted language. in
compiled languages, I think that C++ or the Delphi mode of Freepascal
reverse engineering is the most difficult job. why? because it is very
hard to transform assembly language into high level language(C++) or to
Delphi mode of freepascal as i am also explaining above.

So in reverse engineering there is almost no way to re-create the Delphi
mode of freepascal or Delphi source code from the binary.

More of my philosophy about programming languages and about lock-based
systems and more of my thoughts..

I think we have to be optimistic about lock-based systems, since race conditions detection can be done in polynomial-time, and it is not
NP-hard, and you can notice it by reading the following paper:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.08857.pdf

Or by reading the following paper:

https://books.google.ca/books?id=f5BXl6nRgAkC&pg=PA421&lpg=PA421&dq=race+condition+detection+and+polynomial+complexity&source=bl&ots=IvxkORGkQ9&sig=ACfU3U2x0fDnNLHP1Cjk5bD_fdJkmjZQsQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjKoNvg0MP0AhWioXIEHRQsDJc4ChDoAXoECAwQAw#v=
onepage&q=race%20condition%20detection%20and%20polynomial%20complexity&f=false

So i think we can continu to program in lock-based systems, and about composability of lock-based systems, read my below previous thoughts
about it:

More of my philosophy about composability and more..

I have just read quickly the following article about composability,
so i invite you to read it carefully:

https://bartoszmilewski.com/2014/06/09/the-functional-revolution-in-c/

I am not in accordance with the above article, and i think that the
above scientist is programming in Haskell functional language and it is
for him the way to composability, since he says that the way of
functional programming like Haskell functional programming is the
the way that allows composability in presence of concurrency, but for
him lock-based systems don't allow it, but i don't agree with him, and
i will give you the logical proof of it, and here it is, read what is
saying an article from ACM that was written by both Bryan M. Cantrill
and Jeff Bonwick from Sun Microsystems:

You can read about Bryan M. Cantrill here:

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

And you can read about Jeff Bonwick here:

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

And here is what says the article about composability in the presence of concurrency of lock-based systems:

"Design your systems to be composable. Among the more galling claims of
the detractors of lock-based systems is the notion that they are somehow uncomposable:

“Locks and condition variables do not support modular programming,”
reads one typically brazen claim, “building large programs by gluing
together smaller programs[:] locks make this impossible.”9 The claim, of course, is incorrect. For evidence one need only point at the
composition of lock-based systems such as databases and operating
systems into larger systems that remain entirely unaware of lower-level locking.

There are two ways to make lock-based systems completely composable, and
each has its own place. First (and most obviously), one can make locking entirely internal to the subsystem. For example, in concurrent operating systems, control never returns to user level with in-kernel locks held;
the locks used to implement the system itself are entirely behind the
system call interface that constitutes the interface to the system. More generally, this model can work whenever a crisp interface exists between software components: as long as control flow is never returned to the
caller with locks held, the subsystem will remain composable.

Second (and perhaps counterintuitively), one can achieve concurrency and composability by having no locks whatsoever. In this case, there must be
no global subsystem state—subsystem state must be captured in
per-instance state, and it must be up to consumers of the subsystem to
assure that they do not access their instance in parallel. By leaving
locking up to the client of the subsystem, the subsystem itself can be
used concurrently by different subsystems and in different contexts. A
concrete example of this is the AVL tree implementation used extensively
in the Solaris kernel. As with any balanced binary tree, the
implementation is sufficiently complex to merit componentization, but by
not having any global state, the implementation may be used concurrently
by disjoint subsystems—the only constraint is that manipulation of a
single AVL tree instance must be serialized."

Read more here:

https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1454462

More of my philosophy about ThreadSanitizer and about Go programming
language and more of my thoughts..


I think i am really smart, and here is the second weakness of Go

[continued in next message]

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

Hello,




More of my philosophy about smartness and about discovering patterns 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..


I think i am highly smart, i think that inventing sophisticated theorems in mathematics is also discovering smart patterns with your fluid intelligence, it is why i am inventing my thoughts by also discovering patterns with my fluid intelligence , but
notice that discovering patterns in mathematics is like a low level way of doing like in microeconomics, but discovering patterns can be in a high level way like in macroeconomics, and here is an example of how i am doing it quickly, read my following
thoughts about Nikola Tesla and about Garry Tan that i have invented quickly so that to notice how i am discovering smart patterns with my fluid intelligence in a high level way:

More of my philosophy of how i am smart and about what is smartness..

I think i am smart, and i think that smartness is not doing
mathematics, i think being highly smart is discovering smart patterns and composing smartly other patterns with those patterns etc. so i will
give you my examples of how i am genetically highly smart, so read
carefully my following thoughts and notice how i have quickly
read a saying of Nikola Tesla and how i have rapidly discovered
smart patterns with my fluid intelligence in a form of my
showing that Nikola Tesla is not correct thinking and by discovering
other patterns with my fluid intelligence in a form of my invention of my new proverb below etc. so read carefully my following thoughts and you will notice that being highly smart is also quickly discovering smart patterns in the way i am doing it below(
and notice below the other smart patterns that i am discovering with my fluid intelligence when i am rapidly showing that Garry Tan is not correct thinking):

More of my philosophy about Nikola Tesla and my proverbs and more..

I have just looked at the following video of the sayings of Nikola Tesla, and you can read about him here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla, and you can look at the video here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnQ-o6R2wac

And i think Nikola Tesla doesn't look like me, Since of course i am also an inventor of many software scalable algorithms and algorithms, but i don't think Nikola Tesla was a wise type of person like me(and i think it is also genetical in me), since for
example he is saying the following saying in the above video:

"Be alone, that is the secret of invention;
be alone, that is when ideas are born"

So i think that the above saying from Nikola Tesla is not smart at all, since creativity needs convergent and divergent thinking, and divergent thinking needs to "collect" information and data from other people so that to be efficient, and i also think
that creativity is the mother of invention, so this is why Nikola Tesla is not smart by saying the above saying, and here is more of my smart thoughts about it so that you understand my kind of personality:

More of my philosophy about divergent and convergent thinking and more..

I invite you to look at the following video:

5 Life-changing books YOU MUST READ in 2022

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGZd2dn8IJ4

I think i am smart, and notice that he is talking about the book called "The one thing", and he is saying that we have to be focused on doing one thing at a time because it is good for productivity, and he is saying that doing many things at the same
time is not good for productivity, but i think i am smart and i say he is not smart and he is not correct to say so, because we can do many things at the same time and be like divergent thinking before doing one thing at a time and be like convergent
thinking, and this kind of efficient "balance" like between convergent and divergent thinking makes the efficient thinking, and here is my new proverb about my methodology:

"Human vitality comes from intellectual openness and intellectual
openness also comes from divergent thinking and you have to well balance divergent thinking with convergent thinking so that to converge towards
the global optimum of efficiency and not get stuck on a local optimum of efficiency, and this kind of well balancing makes the good creativity."

And i will explain more my proverb so that you understand it:

I think that divergent thinking is thought process or method used to
generate creative ideas by exploring many possible solutions, but notice
that we even need openness in a form of economic actors that share ideas
across nations and industries (and this needs globalization) that make
us much more creative and that's good for economy, since you can easily
notice that globalization also brings a kind of optimality to divergent thinking, and also you have to know how to balance divergent thinking
with convergent thinking, since if divergent thinking is much greater
than convergent thinking it can become costly in terms of time, and if
the convergent thinking is much greater than divergent thinking you can
get stuck on local optimum of efficiency and not converge to a global
optimum of efficiency.

And here is my thoughts about artificial intelligence and evolutionary algorithms in artificial intelligence so that you understand more:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/joLVchvaCf0

More of my philosophy about an IQ test for the highly smart and more..

I think i am really smart and here is a smart IQ test for the highly smart:

So notice what is saying in the following video the known Garry Tan that is an asian from USA about the how to become rich and notice that he attended Stanford University from 1999 to 2003, and graduated with a bachelor's degree in Computer Systems
Engineering:

So I invite you to look at his following video that speaks
about how to become rich:

STOP Chasing Money -- Chase WEALTH. | How To get RICH | Garry Tan's Office

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Hdu4DlnLIk&t

The person that is speaking on the above video is called Garry Tan,
and here he is:

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

And I think i am smart and i invite you to look at the following
"defect" or "bug" of the above video, look here at what he is saying:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Hdu4DlnLIk&t=425s

So notice that he is saying that so that to become rich you have to be the following:

"So what is most useful, is actually acquiring skills that nobody else
has, especially in combination that are rare. If you can rebound the
ball and nobody does it quite the way you can, you can be a Hall of Fame basketball player. And that applies to all the things in your career and
in life."

But it is like an IQ test for the highly smart, since i am quickly discovering a pattern with my fluid intelligence and it is that he is trying to abstract the way of becoming rich by also saying:

"If you can rebound the ball and nobody does it quite the way you can, you can be a Hall of Fame basketball player. And that applies to all the things in your career and in life."

But the pattern that i am quickly discovering with my fluid intelligence is that even if you can rebound the ball and nobody does it quite the way you can, the becoming rich is also not only dependent on the supply but also on the "demand", so if the
demand doesn't want to give you enough money so that to become rich , you will still not become rich,
so if you are smart you will also notice that it is also about usefulness, since the demand can find the giving enough money to make
you rich not useful for his pocket, so Garry Tan in the above saying of the video is not so smart, since he is not taking into account the factor that we call usefulness to consumers. So the person on the above video has forgot the very basis of what is
it of something has to be useful for the consumers or customers, so read my following smart "redefinition" of Utilitarianism so that to understand:

More of my philosophy about why the definition of Utilitarianism is like
an IQ test..

Notice that i think i am smart, since when i just looked rapidly at the definition below of Utilitarianism, i have rapidly discovered a pattern
with my fluid intelligence and it is that even if the definition
of Utilitarianism is: That Utilitarianism prescribes actions that
maximise happiness and well-being for all affected individuals,
i can easily see a pattern with my fluid intelligence since i am
smart, since the pattern is that Utilitarianism maximises happiness and well-being by well balancing taking into account not
only the present but also the future, i mean that responability
is inherent to the definition since the well balancing forces us
to be responsability in the present or today so that to maximize
correctly happiness and well being tomorrow or in the future.

I think i am really smart, and what i am trying to explain is that
you have first to know that a language is also an abstraction of the reality, since even a concept is an abstraction of the reality and also
a language is full of concepts, and not only that but a very important
thing in the process of thinking is that you have to know how to
make a difference between what we call in french: "La pensée duale" et
"La pensée multimodale", and it means in english: that there is a thinking that is like a boolean logical of thinking and there is a more efficient thinking that comes with precision in form of nuances etc.
and it is the weakness of the above abstraction of the known Garry Tan,
since his abstraction of how to become rich doesn't come with the right precision and the right nuances, since notice that the becoming rich depends not only on the supply but also on the demand and the demand can be influenced by other factors such as
Covid-19 or the like that prevent
from making rich an individual or individuals in the supply, so
it is why i say that the known Garry Tan above is not so smart.

I can give you another IQ test that i have rapidly invented and
here it is:

So i will give my example of pattern recognition with my fluid
intelligence that permits to understand, here it is:

So if you want to go fast from my country Morocco to another country
called USA , how will you do it ? or what will you do ?

It is like my IQ test..

So if you answer that you need for example to use a fast airplane to go
fast from Morocco to USA, your answer is a stupid answer, so you need
the smart answer, so i will answer that the fast airplane too has to be "reliable" and your "health" has too to permit it and the "weather" has
too to permit it, so now you are clearly noticing that you need to take
into account many "factors" so that to go fast from Morocco to USA, so
you are clearly noticing that being smart needs also a good plan.

More precision of my philosophy about Utilitarianism..

I invite you to read the following definition of what is Utilitarianism:

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


More of my philosophy about the essence of moral superiority and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart and i think i am a wise type of person,
so notice carefully in my below thoughts that i am saying that
moral superiority is what brings order, so is moral superiority
science or technicality ? so i think it can be part of science or
it can be technical or like technical, but i think that its essence is that it is like "synchronization" of processes in software parallel programming, i mean that it is like the right tuning, so being wise is to tune it correctly and wisely, so moral
superiority uses the tools in a wise way by tuning correctly.

More of my philosophy about moral superiority and about American exceptionalism and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart and i think i am a wise type of person,
and i will ask an important philosophical question and it is the following:

As you have just noticed, i have just spoken about from where comes
moral superiority, but the second important question is: Why have we
to be moral superiority ?


I think i am highly smart, and i think that there is not only the being capitalism, but there is also the being moral superiority, but i think that the moral superiority comes from wisdom as i am explaining below, and i think it is also an engine that
makes us order or world order and that makes us transcend our animal instincts that prevent us from thinking correctly, and i think that moral superiority is what has to make american exceptionalism or chinese exceptionalism.

More of my philosophy of from where comes the moral superiority and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart, and i will ask the following really important philosophical questions:

From where comes the moral superiority so that to say if for example
western countries are the morally superior or is Islam or Arab countries
the morally superior ? and how can we efficiently abstract the answer ?

So i think i am highly smart, and i think i am a wise type of person,
and i think i have to find the pattern with my fluid intelligence
that answers efficiently the questions, so here it is:

I think that the pattern is that when you use a tool , it can hurt
or it can be good ! like when you use a knife ! so it is this pattern
that answers efficiently the question, since the moral superiority comes from you having to use the tool in a wise way, so moral superiority doesn't come from you being technologically or/and scientifically superior, but it comes from you using wisely
the tools that are
science and technology. And now so that to be more precise, here
is the correct definition of "wisdom":

"Wisdom is the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment, so then having the good judgment is also being genetically
apt at being a wise type of person, so i think that being a wise
type of person is both genetical and cultural"


And here is one of my proverb that talks about the being wise:

"There is some french that say: "On doit manier bien le verbe", "That we
have to speak or write a sophisticated language" , but they do not say
that speaking or writing a sophisticated language can become a deadly or dangerous weapon, so i answer them in french: "Il faut aussi enseigner
le savoir vivre ensemble en enseignant aussi une philosophie efficace de
vie", that means in english: "That we have to efficiently educate people
by also learning them a good and efficient philosophy so that they know
how to live in harmony"

Here is my other proverbs:

"Being strong can become being weak by containing a small weak part that
makes you weak, and being weak can become being strong by containing a
small strong part of great weight of importance that makes you strong"

Here is my other new proverb:

"When you want to construct a much better version of yourself so
that to become successful, there is the first way of the hard working
way, but the hard working way is not the efficient and smart way, this
is why you can construct a much better version of yourself
by being some creative thinking and by being exponential thinking and by
using the exponential progress and growth brought by digitalization to
sell on internet your product or service from this some creative
thinking so that to be successful, so as you notice that this shows that
we have to be positive about our world, and this shows that my following proverb is truth that actually says the following: The being weak can
become being strong by containing a small strong part of great weight of importance that makes you strong, since the some creative thinking is a
small part of great weight of importance that makes you strong, since it
is not only capital and talents that make you successful, but it is also
some creative ideas that makes the great Capital that makes you
successful and the great capital that attracts talents that makes you
much more successful than successful."

And read all my other new proverbs in the following web link:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/ZyUvFt_nix8

Here is also one important proverb of mine about Resourcefulness that
permits you to understand it:

"Resourcefulness is one of the most important things, and it is a skill,
and the good news is: this skill can be learned and mastered, and resourcefulness is attained only when we combine the resourceful mindset
and skills, so we have to filter out some of the most useful resources
that help us, and resourcefulness is also to know who/what to look for
and what to ask, and when ressourcefulness is attained this becomes an
engine that permits you to have hope and to be energetic and to be
positive in doing what you are doing, since resourcefulness also permits
to easy the jobs for you."

More of my philosophy about the Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan political spirit and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart, and now i will discuss one really important subject in political philosophy and it is about personal responsability, and i will invite you to look at the following video
that talks about this subject in a not wise and not correct way:

The Invention of Individual Responsibility

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tp4FGAv2gks


I think i am highly smart and i think i am a wise type of person,
so notice in the above video how many US and british presidents, like Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher and even Bill Clinton, were not talking wisely and correctly about personal responsability,
since they were saying that they had to cease to be a welfare system
like they were before and they had called the others or the people to be personal responsability and they had done it in a not wise way, since i think, like happiness, personal responsability is a systemic thing and it is multifactorial, so i think i am
smart and notice carefully how i am talking in my below thoughts about the how it is "competition" that brings quality and notice how i am also talking about the "Will to fight", but here again the being this competition is multifactorial, i mean for
example wich of the engines you use so that to be an efficient competition ? so now you are noticing that even the being competition is multifactorial , so then we can logically infer that personal reponsability too is multifactorial, since this personal
responsability too, like competition, needs engines that pushes you forward at being the right personal responsability or the right competition, and now you are noticing that i am highly smart since i say that personal responsability, and thus the being
competition that brings quality, needs engines, and it is why i am talking about those engines that are the being self-confidence and the how to be the positive energy and how to be hope , so read about it in my following smart part of my philosophy so
that to understand my views:

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

More of my philosophy about liberal egalitarian and more about capitalism and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart, and as you have just noticed, i have just
posted, read it below, about how AI(artificial intelligence) from Deepmind had settled on a redistribution mechanism that was similar to liberal egalitarian, but you have to notice that the "egalitarian" of liberal egalitarian is not about strict
equality, but it is about equal access to opportunity, and it looks like the American dream that was initially conceived by Thomas Jefferson as each citizen’s right to the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, this American dream is
not about guaranteed outcomes, of course, but the pursuit of opportunities, so notice carefully that i have just spoken more and more about those kind of opportunities that we have to have and that makes the American dream, like for example my talking in
my below thoughts about Progressive Capitalism, of Joseph E. Stiglitz the recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics, that we have to implement so that to be correctly liberal egalitarian, and notice that Joseph E. Stiglitz is saying in his
videos below that he has advised the democratic party about his reforms of his progressive capitalism, so read my below thoughts carefully so that to understand:

More of my philosophy about how AI from Deepmind had settled on a redistribution mechanism that was similar to liberal egalitarian and more of my thoughts..


AI(artificial intelligence) from Deepmind had settled on a redistribution mechanism that was similar to liberal egalitarian, you can read more about it in the following web link:

https://singularityhub.com/2022/07/04/deepminds-new-ai-may-be-better-at-distributing-societys-resources-than-humans-are/


More of my philosophy of does big money brings happiness and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart and i will answer fast the following philosophical question:


Does big money brings happiness ?


So i think that so that to maximize at best the being rich you have
also to know that you have to for example maximize at best the being educated, like i am showing you below about how the jews maximize at best the being educated , so then as you notice i am not just speaking of happiness as being just individual
happiness, since happiness is also a "systemic" thing, so then i will say that when you maximize at best the being educated and the being responsability, you can then say that big money maximize at best the being happiness, so then i think that the
following video where a religious jewish says that money doesn't produce happiness is not true, but notice that he doesn't say as i am saying that when you maximize at best the being educated and the being responsability, you can then say that big money
maximize at best the being happiness, so look at the following video so that you notice it:

They Are Programmed to be RICH

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


More of my philosophy about jews and more of my thoughts..


I think i am highly smart, and i think that jews(not the religious ones)
are really successful, since they are much more educated, since 61% of them have higher education, also they are good businessmen and good businesswomen and they create a sophisticated network that is based on there merit and that brings much more
quality. So i invite you to look at the following video about why the jews are so much successful so that to notice it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaJ5fCZ3r-A


Also read my below thoughts so that to understand more my views:


More of my philosophy about competition and about quality and more of my thoughts..


I think i am highly smart, i think that quality in an atheistic system comes from "competition", so then so that to be quality , competition is first and foremost the will to fight, since even America’s military argues that “will to fight” is the
disposition and decision to fight, act, or persevere, and notice that this will to fight is a cause of quality that precedes the good smartness or good education as causes of quality, and i think that competition is also the acts of competition of the
acts of being good smartness or/and the acts of being good wisdom and such , so then what we have to be is to be competition that brings the right quality, so then you have to be for example a competition in a fight for life, and you have to be economic
competition of Adam Smith the father of economic Liberalism, and i invite you to read again the following interesting article that proves that humans are naturally and individually selfish and egoistic:

https://thebaynet.com/humans-are-naturally-selfish-study-finds-html/

So as you notice on the above interesting article about a study, that humans are naturally selfish and egoistic since it is like a game of "competition" where you have to get a big profit, but i think that i am highly smart and i say that the seeking the
big profit by being competition is also regulated by antitrust laws, and individual self-interest and egoism creates competition and by the mechanism of competition we become self-interest and egoism of a group and of a society or of a zone such as the
European union and then we become collaboration and cooperation and even solidarity in a society or in a zone such as the European union or in global world and that creates prosperity and happiness of nations, and also we have to say that when we get a
big profit we can also help the others by being solidarity,
so then we have not to be pessimistic about humans that are naturally and individually selfish and egoistic, but we have to be patience since it takes some time so that this individual self-interest and egoism becomes collaboration and cooperation and
even solidarity as i am explaining it, and of course we have to be much more optimistic since capitalism is not a zero sum game, since with a reasonable level of growth, capitalism can both deliver rising living standards for most, and still ensure a
relatively high rate of return to the owners of capital and we have to be much more optimistic since self-interest is most of the time regulated by competition to not lead to corruption, fraud, price-gouging, and cheating, as has said it Adam Smith the
father of economic Liberalism, and notice that we have to look at competition from a broader point of view since competition is also
competition inside a Democracy that fights efficiently corruption by using different political parties and different political groups inside the congress etc. and competition that fights efficiently corruption is also the separation of powers in USA,
since the U.S. constitution establishes three separate but equal branches of government: the legislative branch (makes the law), the executive branch (enforces the law), and the judicial branch (interprets the law), so i think that for example USA is
much less corrupt than African countries or such countries since they lack this kind of "competition" that balances this way the powers.

So then i think i am highly smart and notice the following saying of Hitler:

“The stronger must dominate and not mate with the weaker, which would signify the sacrifice of its own higher nature. Only the born weakling can look upon this principle as cruel, and if he does so it is merely because he is of a feebler nature and
narrower mind; for if such a law did not direct the process of evolution then the higher development of organic life would not be conceivable at all.”
― Adolf Hitler

Read the saying of Hitler here so that to notice:

https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/30691.Adolf_Hitler

I think i am highly smart and i say that Hitler is not at all smart in his above saying, since we have first to define what is "stronger" , so for example the stronger is not the smarter and/or the wiser, since you can be the stronger by having the most
powerful military or the most stronger will to fight without being the smarter and wiser and this can cause that you win the competition or the fight, so when Hitler says in the above saying: "the stronger must dominate", i think from my explanation
above that it is stupid to say so, since also the being stronger is also not the being the smarter and wiser . And i also think this strictness of Hitler is not correct, since he was not understanding the disadvantage of when the genetic algorithm can be
more elitist in the crossover steps, since this kind of Elitism in a genetic algorithm can has the tendency to not efficiently higher the average best of the average members of the population, and you can read more about my below thoughts of the
following web links about the genetic algorithm.

Also Hitler says the following:

“Humanitarianism is the expression of stupidity and cowardice.”
― Adolf Hitler

So i think that this strictness of Hitler is not correct,
since we need a level of humanitarianism that also soften morals
and that makes us less violent.


So i think that Hitler is too much strict and too much violent.

And of course you can take a look at my thoughts in the following web links about competition and about the welfare system and about how competition regulates egoism and selfishness and more:

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/KLEJuMnN3Ho

And read here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/sw5EarahFo8

And now here is a part of my philosophy about how to be self-confidence and about how to be the positive energy and how to be hope so that you notice how my philosophy is smart:

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


More of my philosophy of why the market is first and more of my thoughts..

I have just looked at the following interesting video where Benjamin Netanyahu the previous prime minister of Israel says a very important thing that i have also just said previously in my own way, so look at the video here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8NarTCoVF0


And here is the very important thing that says Benjamin Netanyahu the previous prime minister of Israel in the above video:

"You think that mathematicians and computer engineers or mechanical engineers or doctors are first. They are very important, but they are
not first. They are second.

There was a country that had the best mathematicians, the best physicists, the best metallurgists in the world. But that country was
very poor. It is called the Soviet Union.

What comes first is markets. This was the main thing that i tried to bring to Israel economy, in my own way"


So it is why i am highly smart, and i have just said previously that you can think GDP per capita so that to become a rich country, and read my previous thoughts so that to understand how:

More of my philosophy about Dubai and about Israel and about tech and more of my thoughts..


I think i am highly smart, and i have just looked again at the
following video of a jewish that is saying that since Israel is
much more innovative in science and technology than Dubai,
so Dubai is much less successful than Israel( You can look at the video
here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuPx61911Oo ), but i think he is not right since Dubai is not thinking it like that, but it is thinking it GDP per capita that is also valued in a currency that is convertible to the US dollar or to gold, and it is
what is making Dubai a rich country, it is by highering GDP per capita, but i say that highering the GDP per capita doesn't come only by innovating in technology or/and science, since it can come for example from Foreign direct investments and from being
the good business that can make you a rich country, as i am explaining below, so read my following thoughts so that to understand how:

More of my philosophy about the how many african countries
will become 1st World countries in about 2 decades and more of my thoughts..


I think i am smart, and i say that there is many african countries
that will become 1st World countries in about two decades and
you can look at them on the following video:

Top 10 Wealthiest African countries by GDP Per Capita that would become 1st World Countries

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


More of my philosophy about the economic miracle of Israel and more of my thoughts..

I think i am smart, and i say that Israel is an economic miracle,
since even if Israel is relatively "poor" in natural resources,
its GDP per capita is around the GDP per capita of Canada, and it
is 4 times the GDP per capita of Russia, so i think that Israel can
not be economically compared to USA or Canada, since USA and Canada

[continued in next message]

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