Hello,


More of my philosophy about the deep understanding of the StopWatch and and more about x86 and ARM processors and about solar cells and about AES 256 encryption and TSMC and about China and about the Transformers and about Toyota and about China and
about objective truth and about the objective and about the paper about the multiple universes and about quantum world and about consciousness and about mathematics and about the universe and about mathematical probability and about the positive behavior
and about the positive mindset and about patience and about the positive energy and about the "packaging" or "presentation" and about the ideal and about the being idealistic 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 now we have to attain a "deep" understanding of the StopWatch,
so i think i am highly smart since I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, and i mean that it is "above" 115 IQ, so as you are noticing that i am, with my fluid intelligence, understanding deeply the StopWatch, so i have just
discovered that the following StopWatch: https://www.davdata.nl/math/timer.html , from the following engineer from Amsterdam: https://www.davdata.nl/math/about.html , is not working correctly: since he is calling the function GetTickCount() in the
constructor, but there is a problem and a bug, since when the tick count value in milliseconds returned by GetTickCount() reaches its maximum value in that is high(dword) , it will wrap around to zero and start counting up again. This is because the
tick count is typically stored in a fixed-size data type that has a maximum value, so it is why his way of timing in milliseconds in the constructor that he is using is not working, since it is not safe, so even if this StopWatch of this engineer from
Amsterdam does effectively avoid the overflow problem of the Time Stamp Counter (TSC), since he is using an int64 in 32 bit x86 architecture in the Intel assembler function of getCPUticks() that i am understanding, and this int64 can, from my
calculations, go up to 29318.9829 years , so i think his StopWatch is not working for the reason i am giving just above, and second problem is the accuracy of the timing obtained from the code he provided using rdtsc instruction in assembler is dependent
on various factors, including the hardware and software environment. However, it's important to note that directly using rdtsc for timing purposes may not provide the desired accuracy due to several reasons:

- CPU frequency scaling: Modern CPUs often have dynamic frequency scaling, where the CPU frequency can change based on factors such as power management and workload. This can result in variations in the time measurement based on the CPU's operating
frequency.

- Instruction reordering: The rdtsc instruction itself is not a serializing instruction, which means that it does not necessarily prevent instruction reordering. In certain cases, the CPU may reorder instructions, leading to inaccuracies in timing
measurements.

- Multicore/Threaded environments: If your system has multiple cores or threads, using rdtsc may not provide synchronized timing across different cores or threads. This can lead to inconsistent and unreliable timing measurements.

To achieve accurate timing, it's generally recommended to use platform-specific APIs or libraries that provide high-resolution timers, specifically designed for timing purposes. These timers often take into account factors such as CPU frequency scaling
and provide synchronization across cores and threads for accurate measurements.

If precise timing is critical for your application, it's advisable to explore alternatives such as the QueryPerformanceCounter function on Windows or other platform-specific timing APIs that offer higher accuracy and synchronization capabilities.

So ARM has many important weaknesses , so the first important weakness is the following:

There is no single generic method that can be universally applied to all Arm processors for measuring time in CPU clocks. The available timing mechanisms and registers can vary significantly across different Arm processor architectures, models, and
specific implementations.

In general, Arm processors provide various timer peripherals or system registers that can be used for timing purposes. However, the specific names, addresses, and functionalities of these timers can differ between different processors.

To accurately measure time in CPU clocks on a specific Arm processor, you would need to consult the processor's documentation or technical reference manual. These resources provide detailed information about the available timers, their registers, and how
to access and utilize them for timing purposes.

It's worth noting that some Arm processors may provide performance monitoring counters (PMCs) that can be used for fine-grained timing measurements. However, the availability and usage of PMCs can also vary depending on the specific processor model.

Therefore, to achieve accurate and reliable timing measurements in CPU clocks on a particular Arm processor, it's crucial to refer to the documentation and resources provided by the processor manufacturer for the specific processor model you are
targeting.

And the other weaknesses of ARM processors are the following:

I have just looked at the following articles about Rosetta 2 and the benchmarks of Apple Silicon M1 Emulating x86:

https://www.computerworld.com/article/3597949/everything-you-need-to-know-about-rosetta-2-on-apple-silicon-macs.html

and read also here:

https://www.macrumors.com/2020/11/15/m1-chip-emulating-x86-benchmark/

But i think that the problem with Apple Silicon M1 and the next Apple SiliconM2 is that Rosetta 2 only lets you run x86–64 macOS apps. That would be apps that were built for macOS (not Windows) and aren't 32-bit. The macOS restriction eliminates huge
numbers of Windows apps, and 64-bit restriction eliminates even more.

Also read the following:

Apple says new M2 chip won’t beat Intel’s finest

Read more here:

https://www.pcworld.com/article/782139/apple-m2-chip-wont-beat-intels-finest.html


And here is what i am saying on my following thoughts about technology about Arm Vs. X86:

More of my philosophy about the Apple Silicon and about Arm Vs. X86 and more of my thoughts..

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




Tandem cells using perovskites and silicon make solar power more efficient and affordable

"Research into 'miracle material' perovskite in the past decade is now bearing fruit with more labs crossing the 30 percent barrier for solar cells. Solar is already a cost-effective method for harnessing renewable energy and is deployed across large
parts of the planet in a bid to move away from fossil fuels."

Read more here:

https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/tandem-solar-cells-30-percent-energy-conversion-perovskites-silicon


And Toyota Motor Corporation is a Japanese multinational automotive manufacturer headquartered in Toyota City, Aichi, Japan. It was founded by Kiichiro Toyoda and incorporated on August 28, 1937. Toyota is one of the largest automobile manufacturers in
the world, producing about 10 million vehicles per year, so Toyota announces a battery with a range of 1,200 km and a recharge in 10 minutes! , and Toyota seems to have both definitively solved the problem of stability and production cost, and you can
read about it in the following article (And you can translate the article from french to english):

Toyota announces a battery with a range of 1,200 km and a recharge in 10 minutes!

Read more here:

https://www.futura-sciences.com/tech/actualites/voiture-electrique-toyota-annonce-batterie-autonomie-1-200-km-recharge-10-min-106302/


I invite you to read the following web page from IBM that says that AES 256 encryption is safe from large quantum computers:

https://cloud.ibm.com/docs/key-protect?topic=key-protect-quantum-safe-cryptography-tls-introduction


And read the following so that to understand it correctly:

And IBM set to revolutionize data security with latest quantum-safe technology

Read more here in the following new article:

https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/ibm-revolutionizes-data-security-with-quantum-safe-technology


And I have also just read the following article that says the following:

"AES-128 and RSA-2048 both provide adequate security against classical attacks, but not against quantum attacks. Doubling the AES key length to 256 results in an acceptable 128 bits of security, while increasing the RSA key by more than a factor of 7.5
has little effect against quantum attacks."

Read more here:

https://techbeacon.com/security/waiting-quantum-computing-why-encryption-has-nothing-worry-about


So i think that AES-256 encryption is acceptable encryption for quantum computers.


And Symmetric encryption, or more specifically AES-256, is believed to be quantum resistant. That means that quantum computers are not expected to be able to reduce the attack time enough to be effective if the key sizes are large enough, and to give you
more proof of it, look at the following article from ComputerWorld where Lamont Wood is saying:

"But using quantum technology with the same throughput, exhausting the possibilities of a 128-bit AES key would take about six months. If a quantum system had to crack a 256-bit key, it would take about as much time as a conventional computer needs to
crack a 128-bit key.
A quantum computer could crack a cipher that uses the RSA or EC algorithms almost immediately."

Read more here on ComputerWorld:

https://www.computerworld.com/article/2550008/the-clock-is-ticking-for-encryption.html


And about Symmetric encryption and quantum computers..

Symmetric encryption, or more specifically AES-256, is believed to be quantum resistant. That means that quantum computers are not expected to be able to reduce the attack time enough to be effective if the key sizes are large enough.

Read more here:

Is AES-256 Quantum Resistant?

https://medium.com/@wagslane/is-aes-256-quantum-resistant-d3f776163672


And it is why i have implemented Parallel AES encryption with 256 bit keys in my following interesting software project called Parallel Archiver, you can read about it and download it from here:

https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/parallel-archiver


TSMC: Chinese curbs on rare metal exports will not have immediate effect

Read more here:

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/tsmc-export-curbs-on-rare-metal-exports-will-not-have-immediate-effect


And i invite you to read carefully about the new LongNet that scales sequence length of Transformers to 1,000,000,000 Tokens (and notice
in my below explanation that sequence length is not the context window):

https://huggingface.co/papers/2307.02486


So i say that you have to understand that the sequence length primarily refers to the input length during inference or when using the model for prediction. It determines the maximum length of the prompt or input text that the model can process at once.

During training, the context window or context size is used, which determines the length of the text that the model takes into account for predicting the next token in a sequence. The context window is typically smaller than the maximum sequence length.

So to clarify:

- Sequence length: Refers to the maximum length of the prompt or input text during inference or prediction.

- Context window: Refers to the length of the preceding text that the model considers during training to predict the next token in a sequence.


So i invite you to read in my following thoughts in the following web link about the limitations of Large Language Models such as GPT-4 etc.:


https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/SjBB8Wd-kGI


And OpenAI sets up a division responsible for creating an AI that will control the development of superintelligence

Read more here (and you can translate the article from french to english):

https://intelligence-artificielle.developpez.com/actu/346215/OpenAI-met-sur-pieds-une-division-chargee-de-creer-une-IA-qui-va-controler-le-developpement-de-la-superintelligence-supposee-etre-plus-intelligente-que-l-homme-Elle-pourrait-arriver-d-ici-2030/


Since i am speaking about objectivity in my below previous thoughts, i will ask a philosophical question of:

What is the objective and what is objective truth ?

So i will now discover patterns with my fluid intelligence that answer
the above question, and here they are , so i will start by the objective truth:

What is objective truth and what is subjective truth ?

So for example when we look at the the following equality: a + a = 2*a,
so it is objective truth, since it can be made an acceptable general truth, so then i can say that objective truth is a truth that can be made an acceptable general truth, so then subjective truth is a truth that can not be made acceptable general truth,
like saying that Jeff Bezos is the best human among humans is a subjective truth. So i can say that we are in mathematics also using the rules of logic so that to logically prove that a theorem or the like is truth or not.

So then from the above pattern that i am discovering with my fluid intelligence , i will say that the "objective" is not the truth, but it is the objective information or analysis that is based on factual evidence, verifiable data, and logical reasoning,
but you are noticing that the objective is the "way" to find the truth, but it is not the truth that is the goal of the the way of the objective.

So i have to make you notice that the below paper of 2019 is in accordance with Hugh Everett III model, and when it says that the quantum experiment suggests there’s no such thing as objective reality, i think that it doesn't mean that there is no
reality, but it means that the classical materialistic model is not the right objectivity, since the quantum world has a different way of behaving like with qubits of the register of quantum computers that can be in different states, so that doesn't mean
that this being in different states is not objective, but i think that it means that the classical way of explaining becomes not objective, so in conclusion , i think that the below patterns that i am discovering about the multiple universes that create
our tuned universe is still objective and i think it is correct, so i invite you to read my below thoughts so that to understand my views:.

So the previous pattern that i have just discovered was not so true, since a new paper of year 2019 showed that there is no collapse, and i invite you to look at the following video so that to understand it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h75DGO3GrF4


And you can read about the new paper of year 2019 in the following MIT technology review:

A quantum experiment suggests there’s no such thing as objective reality

https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/03/12/136684/a-quantum-experiment-suggests-theres-no-such-thing-as-objective-reality/


Other than that , i think the below patterns that i have just discovered are true, so i invite you to read them carefully in my following thoughts:

I think i am highly smart since I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, and i mean that it is "above" 115 IQ, so now i have just
discovered another pattern with my fluid intelligence by looking at the following video, and i invite you to look at it:

Is math discovered or invented? - Jeff Dekofsky

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_xR5Kes4Rs


So the important pattern that i am discovering with my fluid intelligence in the above video is the following:

So i think that our universe is an evolutionary process, i mean that it is a random process , but it is not just a random process , since the random process is the "infinite" universes that have processed in like "Parallelly" and "Serially" and "Semi-
Parallelly" in groups of a number of universes, by combining in a kind of manner, so that to create our tuned universe, and the Parallelly is like in parallel programming that accelerates much more the process of creating our tuned universe or other
tuned universes like ours, and the "tuned" means that we are just discovering mathematics as patterns, as i am doing it below, that is the result of our tuned universe .

I think i am highly smart since I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, and i mean that it is "above" 115 IQ, so i have just looked at the following video of Monte Carlo Simulation, and i invite you to look at it, and my
answer to this video is just below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ESK5SaP-bc


So i think that the above video is not so smart, since i am discovering patterns with my fluid intelligence in the above video, so the first important pattern that i am discovering is that when you want for example to find the average height of people
world wide as is saying it the above video, so you have by logical analogy to look at the people world wide like a dice game, i mean even if the people distribution of height of the world is mixed up, it is by logical analogy like a dice, i mean that
they are distributed with a weight that we call height , so when you select randomly a person , you are like, by logical analogy, playing at a dice game, so the selected person has a weight of height from the distribution that looks, by logical analogy,
like a dice, so now you are understanding that when you select randomly more and more persons until for example 10000 persons, it will have the tendency to well approximate the distribution of all the heights of all the people around the world, so i also
say that we have to select randomly since, by logical analogy, we have like to play at for example the game of dice "randomly".

And so that to know my other pattern that i have discovered with my fluid intelligence that explains the logical implication in mathematical logic, you can read my thoughts about it in the following web link:

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


I have just said yesterday the following:


"So i think you are understanding more my philosophy, so you can
say to me how can we be patience in front of life?, but i am a philosopher that says that my philosophy says that you have to be patience with a positive mindset , so patience in front of life can "appear" to be foolishness, but patience organized like a
group with a positive mindset easy the things for you and it is the pleasant and attractive that brings the positive things, so i think that it is the way to go."


So i invite you to read my following thoughts about the positive mindset and behavior so that to notice that it also makes you empathic and kind and it permits to solve the problem that i am talking about in my below thoughts:


A positive mindset and behavior can be pleasant and attractive to others. When individuals display positivity, it often draws people towards them for several reasons:

- Optimism and positivity are contagious: Positive individuals tend to radiate a sense of optimism, enthusiasm, and joy, which can be infectious. People are naturally drawn to those who emit positive energy and exude a sense of happiness. The positive
mindset of one person can inspire and uplift the mood of others, creating a more welcoming and enjoyable atmosphere.

- Emotional support and empathy: People with a positive mindset often display empathy, kindness, and genuine interest in others. They are more likely to offer emotional support, be good listeners, and provide encouragement. This compassionate behavior is
attractive to others who appreciate being understood, supported, and valued.

- Solution-oriented approach: Positive individuals tend to focus on finding solutions rather than dwelling on problems. They approach challenges with a proactive and optimistic mindset, which can be appealing to those who seek a constructive and forward-
thinking approach. People often appreciate being around individuals who can offer practical solutions and a positive perspective when faced with difficulties.

- Enhanced social interactions: A positive mindset can improve social interactions by promoting open communication, active listening, and a sense of inclusiveness. People are naturally drawn to those who create a friendly and welcoming environment.
Positive individuals often have good social skills and are adept at building connections, which can make them more attractive and likable in social settings.

- Increased self-confidence: A positive mindset often goes hand in hand with increased self-confidence. When individuals believe in themselves and maintain a positive outlook, it can be appealing to others. Confidence is attractive because it conveys a
sense of self-assurance, competence, and the ability to handle various situations, which can draw people towards individuals with a positive mindset.

Overall, a positive mindset tends to make individuals more pleasant and attractive to others. It can create a ripple effect, spreading positivity and building strong connections. By cultivating a positive outlook, individuals can not only improve their
own well-being but also attract others who appreciate and value their positive mindset and behavior.



And i invite you to read my following previous thoughts so that to understand my views and so that to understand my philosophy (And don't forget to read my thoughts in the below web link):


So i think i am a smart philosopher and thinker, so i think that there is still an interesting philosophical subject, so i am not of the cynical philosophers , i mean that i am not saying that humans are just guided by egoism, but i mean that there is
like a pressure of the wanting to be happy as i am explaining it in my below thoughts of my philosophy in the below web link, but i think i am not a pessimistic philosopher, since i think that we have by logical analogy to organize it like in Islam, i
mean that we have to be organized as a group around a positive mindset , and from the positive energy of the positive mindset we become pleasant and attractive that counter-balance, so it is in accordance with the below pattern that says that we have to
know how to wrap it in pleasant and attractive way, so my philosophy is also that it is the positive mindset, that by logical analogy with the below pattern, wrap it in a pleasant and attractive way that attracts efficiently people. So i invite you to
reread all my previous below thoughts so that to understand my views:

So you have to understand me more, so i think i am a philosopher
and i am a thinker, so i think that in philosophy one of the most
important thing is to know how wrap the things in a pleasant
and attractive way , i mean that you have not to be naive,
since you can think that black people help correctly the poor and the needy of black people , but you are naive to think so, so i am not racist, but i am a philosopher and i am a wise man that is showing you the way,
so look at my below thoughts about the ideal and about the to be idealistic, and you will notice the pattern, and one of the most important pattern when you want people to help the poor and the needy, is to wrap it in a pleasant and attractive way, so when you are saying to people, for example in a video, to help the poor and the
needy, you have to wrap it in a pleasant and attractive way, so you have for example to show to people the ones that are beautiful of the poor and the needy or you have to show the ones that are beautiful of the handicaped people, so that it be pleasant
and attractive so that people help them , so you have not to be naive, so it is the same for pedagogy and for the high ideal and principles. So i invite you to reread my below thoughts so that to understand correctly my views on different subjects:

I have just looked at the following video, so i invite you to look
at it:

Viktor Frankl on why idealists are real realists

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loay2imHq5E


And i think that the above video is forgetting about an important thing,
and read my second important question to ChatGPT below so
that to understand what is it:

And here is my first question to ChatGPT:


"What is idealism and what is it to be idealistic ?"


And here is what has answered me ChatGPT:


"Idealism is a philosophical perspective that asserts the primacy of ideas or the mind in understanding and shaping reality. It suggests that reality is fundamentally mental or conceptual in nature, and that ideas, thoughts, or consciousness are the
ultimate reality. Idealism stands in contrast to materialism, which posits that the physical world is the primary reality.


[continued in next message]

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