[continued from previous message]

in the government of Isreal, and Yasser Arafat was not liked by USA
so this was not helping palestinians or this was causing a lot of
problems to Palestinians.

More of my philosophy about Israel and about Palestine and more..

I think i am smart, and i will say that when you have a high IQ like
mine you will know how to solve the problem between Israel and
Palestine, first you have not to talk about the consequences of
the problem, so you have to talk about the causes of the problem,
and the causes of the problem is for example that Yasser Arafat was not
liked by USA since he was part the extremist hard left or far-left as
was the Syrian government, and the hard left or the far-left was much
more violent, so it was causing extremism in the other side of Israel by bringing more violent extremists to government, it is like what is
happening today with the Israel government, since the Prime minister of
Israel today that is called Naftali Bennett is an extremist hard-liner
of the "far-right" of the politics, so he is much more violent like the far-left, so what has happened so that such an extremist premier
minister is governing today Israel? i think that it is like what was
happening in the time of Yasser Arafat, i mean that Yasser Arafat was
the far-left that was much more violent, and today there is the Islamist political party of Hamas that is an extremist political party that is
governing a part of Palestine, so then so that to solve the problem is
that Hamas must accept to not govern in the part of Palestine, and
Palestine must not be governed by extremists such as the far-left such
as Yasser Arafat, and Iran has not to help such Islamist political
parties such as Hamas so that we get rid of the extremists in the Israel government, and i think that after that we will easily solve the
problems between Israel and Palestine.

More of my philosophy about Algeria and Syria and such countries and more..

I invite you to look at the following video of an algerian journalist
that is taking refugee in France from his persecusion in Algeria by the algerian government, so look at him carefully in the following video:

Le régime algérien commence la nouvelle année 2022 avec une sévère condamnation des experts de l'ONU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrPfBd1UCbs


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

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

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


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

Shlomit Weiss returns to Intel as Head of Chip Development

Read more here:

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

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

So i will ask a philosophical question:

How to manage efficiently complexity ?

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

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

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

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

Read more here his thoughts about productivity:

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

And i think he is making a mistake:

Since we have that Productivity = Output/Input

But better human training and/or better tools and/or better human
smartness and/or better human capacity can make the Parallel
productivity part much bigger that the Serial productivity part, so it
can scale much more (it is like Gustafson's Law).

And it looks like the following:

About parallelism and about Gustafson’s Law..

Gustafson’s Law:

• If you increase the amount of work done by each parallel
task then the serial component will not dominate
• Increase the problem size to maintain scaling
• Can do this by adding extra complexity or increasing the overall
problem size

Scaling is important, as the more a code scales the larger a machine it
can take advantage of:

• can consider weak and strong scaling
• in practice, overheads limit the scalability of real parallel programs
• Amdahl’s law models these in terms of serial and parallel fractions
• larger problems generally scale better: Gustafson’s law


Load balance is also a crucial factor.


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


---


About the Threadpool..


I have just read the following:


Concurrency - Throttling Concurrency in the CLR 4.0 ThreadPool


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


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


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


And here is my other Threadpool engine with priorities:


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

[continued from previous message]

in God , but notice how he is saying that you have to go out the belief in God and not believe in God and then you have to fight for life, and here again there is like a logical contradiction , since how to tune correctly this fight for life so that to
not be too much savagery ? so then you will say that you have to tune correctly the fight for life by being fight for life, and it becomes circular logic that is not good and that doesn't solve the problem of how to tune correctly the fight for life, and
it is the big weakness of philosophy and of the philosophers, and it is why i have constructed quickly my new monotheistic religion that solves the problems and that solves the problems of previous monotheistic religions. So read more about my new
monotheistic religion:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/kFxTDu6_jus


More of my philosophy about Existentialism and about artificial intelligence and more of my thoughts..


So in the philosophy of Existentialism, the philosophers Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus said that the meaning of human life must be constructed through courageous choice in the face of this absurd situation of life, and this kind of choice cannot be
understood as achieving moral certainty; rather it is moral heroism within an essentially morally vague and chaotic world, but i think i am a philosopher and i say that the way of constructing the meaning of the philosophers Jean-Paul Sartre Sartre and
Albert Camus is not logical, since i say that the engine that is able to construct the meaning of human life can not come from the absurd situation of life and the fact that they want to use courage as an engine that constructs the
meaning is a weak way of doing it, since the absurd situation of life is so strong, and it is why i am explaining my way as a philosopher to construct the meaning of human life by inventing a new monotheistic religion that creates the meaning of human
life, and read my following thoughts about it:


Here is my new smart proverb:


"Human life is like a house, so the house has advantages that
makes it valuable, and an ideal like the communist ideal is the same,
it has to be valuable and to be exportable to certain level so
that to be valuable, so human life is the same since if you say that
we have to make it beautiful , so are we going to wait a long time so that to make it beautiful ? so are you understanding my question ? so if you want to say that human life has to make big money the most important thing , so is it the right way ? so
as i have said that so that to be smart you have not to say that having big money is the most important thing, since it is about adaptation, so you have to say that good adaptation is the most important thing so that to guide the having big money in the
right direction, so i say that even an ideal has to be guided by for example the meaning of human life, so i think in philosophy we can say that the meaning precedes the language, and in philosophy we can also say that the meaning of human life is what
precedes and guides the ideal and guides human life and it is why i am talking as i am talking about the meaning of human life and it is why i have invented quickly a new monotheistic religion so that to create the meaning of human life, and you can read
about it below"


And here is my new monotheistic religion and read about it in the following web link, and read my below thoughts about the meaning of life and about nihilism:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/kFxTDu6_jus

And read my following thoughts of my philosophy so that you understand correctly my views about the meaning of human life:


More of my philosophy about nihilism and about the meaning of human life and more of my 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, and i think i am a philosopher, so now i will invite you to look carefully at the following video:

Life Has Never Been Easier: So Why Is Everyone Depressed?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJ-zyVHYxyw


So i am quickly discovering patterns with my fluid intelligence in
the above video, and the patterns are the following:

So notice that the above video is saying that life has never been easier so why everyone is depressed, but i think that i am a philosopher and i say that the above video is making a big mistake and it is that he is comparing our human life with the old
human life and it is a mistake , since by logical analogy i can for example say: What is it that we call a genetically smart human a genetically smart human ? so as you notice that the calling a genetically smart human is a relative way of measuring
against the normal distribution of the genetical smartness, but is it the right answer if we measure like absolutely ? so i think that now you are noticing the big mistake, since humans are not measuring relatively the meaning of human life, but since in
our today world there are many medias and there is democratization of medias and democratization of knowledge and information, so then humans are much more conscious about there human conditions than humans in the old world or in the past, and it is why
they are becoming nihilistic, since they are like measuring absolutely and saying that humans are so weak when they look at all those constraints of human life and the constraints of our universe, so they say that human life is really bad, so then it is
like a kind of nihilism, so the being nihilistic is to flirt with despair and the sentiment that life is not worth living, and of course notice that nihilism is also the sentiment that life is not worth living, so i am a philosopher and i say that a kind
of nihilism can be the also believing that human life is not worth living without the negative emotions that comes with it and even if you live it in a kind of way , and of course i say that in nihilism, the flirting with despair can be not the negative
emotions that comes with it, and of course this kind of nihilism makes humans really impatient and it creates a kind of disorder and it creates violence, and it is why this kind of nihilism is bad, and of course as you notice that i am defining nihilism
as the following so that to construct a meaning of human life or life:

I invite you to read the following article about the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche and about nihilism so that to understand:

https://academyofideas.com/2022/11/nietzsche-and-nihilism-a-warning-to-the-west/

So notice carefully in the above article that it defines nihilism as
the following:


"Nihilism is the conviction that there is no meaning to life, that the world is inhospitable to our highest hopes and values, and that there are no gods or higher purposes to justify our suffering. To be a nihilist is to flirt with despair and the
sentiment that life is not worth living."

So then i can say that in philosophy you have to make a difference between the problematics of the lack of the meaning of human life and of that of the becoming rich by for example the way of the engine of egoism as has said it the philosopher and
economist Adam Smith the father of economic Liberalism, since i am a philosopher that says that you can become rich as a country, but the lack of meaning of human life can make the "way" or the "path" of the becoming rich of the country not good, since
the lack of meaning of human life makes humans really impatient and it creates a kind of disorder and it creates violence, and it is the deficiency of the philosophy of absurdism of the french philosopher Albert Camus, since Albert Camus says in his
absurdism philosophy that there is a lack of meaning of human life, but he doesn't give us the "right" way to give a meaning to human life and he doesn't talk correctly about the problematics that are caused by the lack of meaning of human life.



Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

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