Sky89
2018-08-19 21:29:05 UTC
Hello...
I am a white arab..
My goal here is to defend white people civilization !
But there is some of you who will say that this white people
civilization is not a civilization !
But i don't agree with them !
Because we have to define what is it to be a civilization !
If you are stupid you will define civilization by being a
"real" civilization !
But that's inferior thinking !
Civilization has to be defined by measuring it with reliability,
because as i have explained before that morality is reliability,
so if white people civilization is "relatively" more civilized than the
others , so we will call it "the" civilization ! reliability
works the same , the goal of reliability is to solve problems,
and when you solve all problems we will call it absolute
reliability or absolute happiness. And as you have noticed
i have taken the definition of reliability as being:
Look at the dictionary here:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reliability
It says that:
Reliability is: The quality or state of being reliable.
So read the rest of my thoughts to understand better:
What is the essence of human evolution ?
(read all my following post to understand better my thoughts)
I have to do more philosophy with more "smartness" to understand it..
I said that morality is reliability(read my proof of it bellow)..
Now i think there is something really important about the essence of
humanity, i think that it is "related" to morality, i said that morality
is reliability, and the essence of reliability and the essence of
perfection is that they solve problems so that to be able to attain the
goal of philosophy or the goal of life that is to attain absolute
perfection or absolute happiness, so morality that is reliability is
pushed towards absolute perfection or absolute happiness, but we have to
do more philosophy to understand better the essence of human evolution,
i think that morality of past history has needed more "diversity" to
be able for humans to survive and to be more quality, and diversity has
given "immensity" or big "quantity", and you can notice it inside the
evolution of life, that life has needed a greater number of monkeys and
many tests and failures by evolution on them to evolve towards quality
and smartness and so that the monkey become human and smartness of
human. So as you are noticing "diversity" has given "immensity" or
"big" "quantity" and that both diversity and immensity or big quantity
have given quality and smartness. This is how "morality" has evolved,
morality has needed diversity and immensity or big quantity so that
to be perfection, this is why morality too of today is needing
diversity and immensity or big quantity so that to be perfection,
and morality of today knows that perfection of today is also
having the right "imperfections" (that are also diversity) to be
able to be the right perfection. Now you are understanding
the essence of human evolution more, but you have also to understand
the near future, because in about 15 years or 20 years from now, and
because of this exponential progress of technology and because of the
law of accelerating returns and because of artificial intelligence,
we will be able to enhance our genetics an become more smart and more
beautiful and more strong etc. and we will be able to do much much more
than that because we will be so powerful in about 15 years or 20 years
from now, this is why i think that we will be able to avoid more
diversity and quantity to create quality and perfection, so morality in
about 15 years to 20 years from now will be different in this regard,
morality will need "less" diversity and less "quantity" to realize
perfection and reliability, this is why i think that humans will be able
to be much more "united" in the near future of about 15 years to 20
years from now.
More precision about the definition of reliability
Look at the dictionary here:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reliability
It says that:
Reliability is: The quality or state of being reliable.
This is why when i say bellow on my writing that:
"The essence of reliability and the essence of perfection is that they
solve problems"
You have to understand that reliability is the "state" of being reliable.
Read the rest of my thoughts of my proof of morality is reliability,
and about my thoughts on the law of accelerating returns etc.:
Here is more precision and more proof of what i was
saying about the law of accelerating returns and about
the exponential progress of technology etc. read for example, as i was
saying, what will happen in about 15 years to 20 years from now because
of that:
Read this to notice it:
==
The coming biotechnology revolution will allow us, in the next 15 to 20
years, to reprogram our genes to resist both aging and disease. By
mid-century, we may all be kept healthy and young by billions of
nanorobots inside of our bodies.
Of all the technologies riding the wave of exponential progress,
Kurzweil identifies genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics as the three
overlapping revolutions which will define our lives in the decades to
come. In what ways are these technologies revolutionary?
-The genetics revolution will allow us to reprogram our own biology.
-The nanotechnology revolution will allow us to manipulate matter
at the molecular and atomic scale.
-The robotics revolution will allow us to create a greater than
human non-biological intelligence.
Look at this interesting video to notice it:
==
And read the rest of my thoughts to understand more my thoughts:
What is our today world ?
White europeans want to fight arabs, and China wants to fight USA ,
and USA wants to fight China, and European union wants to fight USA,
and neo-nazism is crazy and it is pure fight for fight like craziness !
and India wants to fight China, and China wants to fight India , and
France wants to fight USA and Israel wants to fight arabs, and arabs
want to fight Israel and so on and so on etc. etc. it is "like" brute
force fighting that we are noticing today, it is becoming much more
violent, and that's "not" smartness, you have to be more smart and
understand my way of doing, read again:
What is it that i am ?
You have seen me here writing, and you know me more that i am a white
arab, and i speak and write english and french and arabic, and
i am a more serious computer programmer, and as you have noticed
i have invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations,
and you have seen me writing poetry, and you have seen me writing
political philosophy, so you know me more now, now i will ask
you a question, what do you think that i am ? if you say stupidly
that i am an arab and you start to be racist , that's stupidity
because you don't understand my way of doing, you have to be more
serious and precise thinking to know me more.. i will explain also
my way of doing so that you will be more smart, i have
said previously on my political philosophy the following, read it carefully:
==
My wisdom of today..
A better politics..
Now you know me more by my writings, and now i will give you an
important wisdom:
One of my previous important wisdom in politics was:
Today we have to know how to get out from "idealism" without being
pessimistic or without getting into pessimism and violence.
My other wisdom of today is:
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with a minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
This is why i told you before another wisdom by saying the following:
Violence is "easy" today, so destruction is easy, but "wisdom"
is to know how to transcend our living conditions by being
discipline of technology and science and by being sophistication
of technology and science and by being wisdom that knows
how to guide our world and humanity in the right and wise way.
This wisdom looks like my above one that says:
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
===
Do you understand my above writing ?
Read also again that i wrote above:
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
This is my kind of smartness that i am..
Because i will ask you a question:
How do you think have i invented many scalable algorithms and there
implementations so that to sell some of them to Microsoft or to
Google or to Embarcadero ?
You will realize that i am applying my following thinking to
"complexity" too:
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
I explain, i was aware of the "complexity" of science and of
the complexity of serious computer programming , so what i have
done is like martial art, it is that i have successfully reduced
by much the "complexity" of learning complex programming and
the complexity of inventing scalable algorithms by avoiding at best
complexity by a minimum of "effort" or "brute" force to score and to
succeed "big", tthis is my way of doing, and this is the way of
smartness, and smartness in politics also is:
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
And also you have to know me more:
I said that i am a white arab, but you have to be more smart to
understand me more, because read the following to know me more,
because i am not like an arab, because i have constructed a "new" man
that is called myself, read my following thoughts to understand better
my way of thinking:
What is smartness ?
Smartness is also knowing that lots of violence today is easy thinking !
but you have to be more smart at avoiding violence ! smartness
is also avoiding violence without getting into violence or war !
we have to be more smart and keep focussed on smartness !
this is why i am suggesting to construct a new type of man that
is more futuristic ! you have to understand it correctly
and be aware of it ! and you have not to be pessimistic about it !
because we have to be more smart so that this law of accelerating
returns and exponential progress of technology work correctly ! i will
be more confident if the guys that govern us are more smart and are
more futuristic as i have explained and are science and technology,
this Donald Trump is not science and technology, and because he is not a
PhD in science or/and technology, so we have to be more patience and
try in the future to elect a PhD in science and/or technology
that will govern us so that the world be more smart.
More philosophy..
Human differences causes too much violence...
So we have to be smart and know how to attenuate efficiently this kind
of violence such as racism..
Look at you, there a not negligeable proportion of men that
want to have sex with beautiful women, so they are like in a hurry
to have sex with beautiful women, but this is racism and this
is violence against less beautiful women, so we have to be wisdom..
but from where can we get this wisdom ? i have talked about racism
and i think that an efficient way to reduce racism is to be more
futuristic, this is the kind of new man that we have to construct,
so being more futuristic is to know about the law of accelerating
returns and to know about the exponential progress of technology and
saying to oneself that since this law of accelerating returns
and since this exponential progress of technology will cause
big events in just about 20 years from now by making us able to enhance
our genetics and become more smart and more beautiful and more
strong etc. so we have "not" to give so much "importance" to
the fact that we are less beautiful or of being of another race
than our race because we have to be more tolerance since
we are going to be "so" much different and a "so" much different world
in just about 20 years from now.. this is the kind of new man that is
futuristic that we have to be.
This is why i said the following:
How to construct a new man ?
I know about communism, communism has tried to construct a new man.
But how today can we construct a new man ?
I think the new man must be more "futuristic", it must be
aware of the law of accelerating returns and aware about this
exponential progress of technology, and since exponential progress of
technology and this law of accelerating returns will cause a really
"big" event in about 15 years or 20 years, that means that in about 15
years or 20 years we will feel the progress of technology as being
exponentially so so powerful ! thus i think that in about
20 years we will able to enhance our genetics we humans and make us more
smart and more beautiful etc. and in about 20 years we will be capable
of doing much much more than that ! so we have not to waste our time
with the fact that we are of such race or such other race, because we
have to be more "futuristic" and be more aware of this law of
accelerating returns and this exponential progress of technology. this
is the kind of new man that we have to construct.
Read the rest of my thoughts:
About Israel..
As you have noticed i am a white arab that is a more serious computer
programmer and i have invented many scalable algorithms and there
implementations..
But if you ask me the following question:
Why Amine are you not attacking Israel with your words ?
You know my friends, i am not like ISIS and i am not like arabs,
i am a new man, i have constructed a new man that is myself,
communism also has tried to construct a new man, i have also done
it for myself, and i am a man that look like more "futuristic",
and as you have noticed i am speaking of the "near" future
of 2030 or 2035, and i am preparing myself to this law of
accelerating returns, and i am sure that in about 7 years or 8 years
you will start to feel this exponential progress of technology that
will become "powerful", this is why i am following this exponential
progress of technology, this is the kind of new man that i am, and i am
also futuristic by "inventing" scalable algorithms and there
implementations, and i am futuristic by speaking about 3D chips and
about this law of accelerating returns, and you have to be careful guys,
because in about 8 years you will start to feel that technology has
become exponentially powerful, and in about 12 years you will start to
feel that technology has become exponentially "really" powerful, and in
about 20 years you will start to feel it exponentially so so powerful !
so i am preparing myself to those events ! this is why i am thinking as
i am thinking, and this is the kind of new man that i have constructed
that is called myself.
Read again what follows to notice my kind of thinking:
Yet more precision about 3D chips, read the following webpage it says:
IBM reckons that 3D chips could allow designers to shrink a
supercomputer that currently fills a building to something the size of a
shoebox.
Read here:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/26/vanishing-point-rise-invisible-computer
And read now the rest of my writing to understand more:
More calculations about artificial intelligence
Read this it says:
"Already, IBM’s “Blue Gene” supercomputer, now being built and scheduled
to be completed by 2005, is projected to provide 1 million billion
calculations per second (i.e., one billion megaflops). This is already
one twentieth of the capacity of the human brain", which I estimate at a
conservatively high 20 million billion calculations per second (100
billion neurons times 1,000 connections per neuron times 200
calculations per second per connection)."
Read here:
http://www.kurzweilai.net/the-law-of-accelerating-returns
And read for example this:
The world’s most powerful supercomputer is tailor made for the AI era
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611077/the-worlds-most-powerful-supercomputer-is-tailor-made-for-the-ai-era/
Notice that this new machine is capable, at peak performance, of 200
petaflops — 200 million billion calculations a second, it is more than
the capacity of a human brain, and 3D CPUs will bring 1000X more
performance than this new machine of 200 petaflops, so by around 2021
we will have 3D CPUs and we will be able to attain singularity and/or a
very "big" advancement in artificial intelligence and science.
Read the rest to understand more:
More precision about 3D CPUs..
I forgot to post about the year of 3D CPUs availability,
here it is, it is around year 2021, because read the following it says:
"3D CPUs aren’t expected until the 2021 – 2024"
Read more here:
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/232342-moores-law-scaling-dead-by-2021-to-be-replaced-by-3d-integration
And reread my following writing to understand more:
I am a white arab, and a more serious computer programmer that
has invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations.
I think here is the next revolution of 3D Computer Chips, notice
that Moore's law stated that the performance of CPUs double every
1.5 years, so i think we are on the right way to a "big" gain
with 3D Computer Chips that Could be 1,000 Times Faster Than Existing
Ones, it means that those 3D Computer Chips will give 13.5 years of
Moore's law advancement on CPUs immediatly, so around year 2021 3D
Computer Chips will be available, so around 2021 we will be projected by
13.5 years directly into year 2034.5, so i think around 2021 we will be
able to attain singularity and/or a very big advancement in artificial
intelligence and science.
Read here to notice it:
3D Computer Chips Could Be 1,000 Times Faster Than Existing Ones
https://www.livescience.com/52207-faster-3d-computer-chip.html
and read also this:
3D-chip technology seeks to pack artificial intelligence into smaller spaces
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/mit-stanford-3d-chip-technology/
More philosophy about the essence of science
I will ask a question of what is it that we call science ?
I think science by "analogy" with morality, is also the fact that
both science and morality have to be "RELIABILITY", because as i said
morality is RELIABILITY or perfection at best(read my proof bellow about
it), so since science is RELIABILITY too, so morality too has also the
same "essence" that they must be both RELIABILITY or perfection at best,
but how to be this reliability ? the first "requirement" of morality and
science is that it is "smartness" that has to create morality and that
has to create science, that means that it is "smart" people that have to
create science and to create morality(that means the laws and politics
etc.), and we have to notice that there is more "softer" science and
there is "harder" science, i mean for example computer science is
somewhat "softer" than hard science that is mathematics or physics, but
i think that computer science is still a science because it requires a
high level of "smartness", and too "serious" computer programming can be
called a science because it requires a high level of "smartness", i give
you an example, i am a more serious computer programmer that has
invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations, and
as you will notice to be able for me to do that, this requires a higher
level of smartness, this is why we can also call science my work of
inventing many scalable algorithms and there implementations, look for
example at what i wrote before to notice that my work of "inventing"
many scalable algorithms and there implementations can be called
"science" because also it needs a higher level of smartness:
About Extreme Scaling in CAE Applications..
I have just read the following about Ansys company:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansys
Notice that Ansys develops and markets finite element analysis software
used to simulate engineering problems.
I think that i have thought about this, and i have "invented"
a Scalable Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient Linear System Solver Library,
in fact it scales "very" well, my library contains a Scalable Parallel
implementation of Conjugate Gradient Dense Linear System Solver library
that is NUMA-aware and cache-aware, and it contains also a Scalable
Parallel implementation of Conjugate Gradient Sparse Linear
System Solver library that is cache-aware.
Sparse linear system solvers are ubiquitous in high performance
computing (HPC) and often are the most computational intensive parts in
scientific computing codes. A few of the many applications relying on
sparse linear solvers include fusion energy simulation, space weather
simulation, climate modeling, and environmental modeling, and finite
element method, and large-scale reservoir simulations to enhance oil
recovery by the oil and gas industry.
Conjugate Gradient is known to converge to the exact solution in n steps
for a matrix of size n, and was historically first seen as a direct
method because of this. However, after a while people figured out that
it works really well if you just stop the iteration much earlier - often
you will get a very good approximation after much fewer than n steps. In
fact, we can analyze how fast Conjugate gradient converges. The end
result is that Conjugate gradient is used as an iterative method for
large linear systems today.
You can download my Scalable Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient Linear
System Solver Library from here:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-parallel-c-conjugate-gradient-linear-system-solver-library
Read the following about Extreme Scaling in CAE Applications, this is
why i have invented my Scalable Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient Linear
System Solver Library that scales very well:
https://www.cray.com/blog/extreme-scaling-in-cae-applications/
And read my following writing to also notice it:
What is computing for me ?
It is first finding an efficient "abstraction" and being able
to hide or reduce "complexity", and also Loose coupling is also like
hiding or reducing complexity, i am always doing it on my software
projects, and to be able to do it more efficiently you have to be more
smart, also i am always looking to reduce efficiently the serial part of
the parallel program, i am calculating it by CPU cycles and this part of
my work is like "assembler", and this to be able to "predict" more
correctly scalability, look for example at my Parallel Compression
Library or my Parallel archiver here:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/parallel-compression-library
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/parallel-archiver
Notice that it says:
- It's NUMA-aware and NUMA efficient on windows (it parallelizes the
memory reads and writes on NUMA nodes)
and
- It minimizes efficiently the contention so that it scales well
and
Now it uses only two threads that do the IO (and they are not
contending) so that it reduces at best the contention, so that it scales
well.
and
- Now it supports processor groups on windows, so that it can use more
than 64 logical processors and it scales well.
And notice that it says the following:
I have done a quick calculation of the scalability prediction for my
Parallel Compression Library, and i think it's good: it can scale beyond
100X on NUMA systems.
The Dynamic Link Libraries for Windows and Dynamic shared libraries for
Linux of the compression and decompression algorithms of my Parallel
Compression Library and for my Parallel archiver were compiled from C
with the optimization level 2 enabled, so they are very fast.
So as you noticed i am making my Parallel Compression Library and
Parallel archiver efficient.
Also computing for me is also finding a good and more efficient way to
ensure reliability and stability, and this part of my work has been
enhanced more by my "experience" in computing and by implementing more
serious softwares.
Also computing for me is also making my software portable, this why i
said before the following:
About portability of my software projects
I have thought more, and as you have noticed i have written Intel
assembler routines for 32 bit and 64 bit for atomically incrementing and
and for atomically CompareExchange etc. so now they are working with x86
AMD and Intel processors for 32 bit and 64 bit, but i will soon make my
Delphi and FreePascal and C++ libraries portable to the other CPUs like
ARM(for Android) etc. for that i will use the following Delphi methods
for Delphi:
http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/Libraries/XE8/en/System.SyncObjs.TInterlocked.CompareExchange
and
http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/Libraries/Tokyo/en/System.SyncObjs.TInterlocked.Exchange
And I will use the same functions that you find inside FreePascal, here
they are:
https://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/rtl/system/interlockedexchange64.html
and
https://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/rtl/system/interlockedexchange.html
and
https://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/rtl/system/interlockedcompareexchange.html
and
https://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/rtl/system/interlockedcompareexchange64.html
I will use them inside my scalable lock that is called scalable MLock
that i have "invented", so that it will be portable, here it is:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-mlock
And when my scalable MLock will become portable on Delphi and FreePascal
i will port with it all my other libraries that uses atomically
increment and decrement etc., so my libraries will become portable to
the other CPUs like ARM for Android etc., so i think you will be happy
with my work.
Also what is computing for me ?
Read the rest to understand better my work:
What about the today computing ?
You have to know me more..
I am not thinking becoming an expert of "coding"..
I am not like that..
Because I am an "inventor", and i have invented many scalable algorithms
and there implementations to do better HPC(high performance computing),
i am thinking NUMA systems, and i am thinking "scalability" on manycores
and multicores and on NUMA systems etc. this is my way of "thinking",
and as a proof look at my new scalable reference counting with efficient
support for weak references, here it is:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-reference-counting-with-efficient-support-for-weak-references
As you have noticed it is "fully" scalable reference counting, so this
is HPC(high performance computing) , and i have implemented this
scalable algorithm that i have "invented" in Delphi and on the Delphi
mode of FreePascal , so that to make Delphi and FreePascal "much"
better, and notice with me that you will not find it on C++ or Rust.
This is my way of thinking , i am "inventing" scalable algorithms and
there implementations.
And i said the following:
"I think that this Parallel ForEach and ParallelFor are like futulities,
because they don't bring "enough" high level abstraction to consider
them interesting, because i think my Threadpool with priorities that
scales very well is capable of easily emulating Parallel ForEach with
"priorities" and ParallelFor with "priorities" that scale very well, so
no need to implement Parallel ForEach or Parallel For."
But to be "nicer", i think i will soon implement both Parallel ForEach
with "priorities" that scales very well and ParallelFor with
"priorities" that scales very well using my Threadpool with priorities
that scales very well, and they will be integrated as methods with my
Threadpool with priorities that scales very well, so that you will be happy.
So i will ask you ? where will you find my Threadpool with priorities
that scales very well? and where you will find my Parallel ForEach and
Parallel For with priorities that scales very well ?
You will not find them on C++ and you will not find them on Rust,
because i have "invented" them, because i am an "inventor", and this is
my way of thinking.
Here is my powerful Threadpool with priorities that scales very well,
read about it and download it from here:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/an-efficient-threadpool-engine-with-priorities-that-scales-very-well
It is a very powerful Threadpool, because:
More precision about my efficient Threadpool that scales very well, my
Threadpool is much more scalable than the one of Microsoft, in the
workers side i am using scalable counting networks to distribute on the
many queues or stacks, so it is scalable on the workers side, on the
consumers side i am also using lock striping to be able to scale very
well, so it is scalable on those parts, on the other part that is work
stealing, i am using scalable counting networks, so globally it scales
very well, and since work stealing is "rare" so i think that my
efficient Threadpool that scales very well is really powerful, and it is
much more optimized and the scalable counting networks eliminate false
sharing, and it works with Windows and Linux.
Read the rest:
Read the rest:
You have to understand my work..
I have invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations, here
is some of them that i have "invented":
1- Scalable Threadpools that are powerful
2- Scalable RWLocks of different sorts.
3- Scalable reference counting with efficient support for weak references
4- Scalable FIFO queues that are node-based and array-based.
5- My Scalable Varfiler
6- Scalable Parallel implementation of Conjugate Gradient Dense Linear
System Solver library that is NUMA-aware and cache-aware, and also a
Scalable Parallel implementation of Conjugate Gradient Sparse Linear
System Solver library that is cache-aware.
7- Scalable MLock that is a scalable Lock.
8- Scalable SeqlockX
And there is also "many" other scalable algorithms that i have "invented".
You can find some of my scalable algorithms and there implementations in
Delphi and FreePascal and C++ on my website here:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/
What i am doing by "inventing" many scalable algorithms and there
implementations, is wanting to make "Delphi" much better and making
FreePascal on the "Delphi" mode much better, my scalable algorithms
and there implementations are like HPC(high performance computing,
and as you have noticed i said also:
You will ask why have i invented many scalable algorithms and
there implementations? because also my work will permit us also to
"revolutionise" science and technology because it is HPC(high
performance computing), this is why i will also sell some of my scalable
algorithms and there implementations to companies such as Google or
Microsoft or Embarcadero.
Also HPC has revolutionised the way science is performed. Supercomputing
is needed for processing sophisticated computational models able to
simulate the cellular structure and functionalities of the brain. This
should enable us to better understand how our brain works and how we can
cope with diseases such as those linked to ageing and to understand more
about HPC, read more here:
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/blog/why-do-supercomputers-matter-your-everyday-life
So i will "sell" some of my scalable algorithms and there
implementations to Google or to Microsoft or to Embarcadero.
I will also enhance my Parallel archiver and my Parallel compression
Library that are powerful and that work with both C++Builder and Delphi
and to perhaps sell them to Embarcadero that sells Delphi and C++Builder.
Also I will implement soon a "scalable" Parallel For and a Parallel
ForEach..
This why i said before that:
"I think that this Parallel ForEach and ParallelFor are like futulities,
because they don't bring "enough" high level abstraction to consider
them interesting, because i think my Threadpool with priorities that
scales very well is capable of easily emulating Parallel ForEach with
"priorities" and ParallelFor with "priorities" that scale very well, so
no need to implement Parallel ForEach or Parallel For."
But to be "nicer", i think i will soon implement both Parallel ForEach
with "priorities" that scales very well and ParallelFor with
"priorities" that scales very well using my Threadpool with priorities
that scales very well, and they will be integrated as methods with my
Threadpool with priorities that scales very well, so that you will be happy.
And my next step soon is also to make my Delphi and FreePascal and C++
Libraries portable to other CPUs like ARM etc. because currently they
work on x86 AMD and Intel CPUs.
And my next step soon is also to make my "scalable" RWLocks NUMA-aware
and efficient on NUMA.
This is some parts of my everyday computing..
And here is my proof that morality is RELIABILITY perfection at best,
read all my following thoughts to understand it:
About politics..
You have seen me writing about morality, and hope you have
understood my writing..
What do you think is capitalism ?
Capitalism is not as neo-nazism that starts from the idea that
it has to be european whites to be "perfection" and it wants to be
european whites, because this is a contradiction ! because perfection of
today needs "imperfections" of for example being more "weak" or "less"
beautiful to be able to be perfection ! this is the contradiction of
nazism and neo-nazism ! nazism and neo-nazism is not understanding it
correctly ! perfection of today is also the weak that needs the strong
and the strong that needs the weak ! and perfection of today has to know
how to accept some level of imperfections to be able to be the right
perfection ! this is what is not understanding neo-nazism and nazism !
this is why neo-nazism and nazism is intellectual inferiority. So now
you are more equipped to understand more what is morality.
Read the rest of my thoughts to understand better:
Yet about philosophy and political philosophy
You have to be smart to do philosophy and political philosophy
correctly..
You have seen me doing philosophy and political philosophy about morality..
But we have to be smart, because when you will read my previous post
about morality, you will start to understand more and to see more,
this is the goal of philosophy, and as you have noticed i have explained
to you why morality is the concept of RELIABILITY, and it is also
perfection at best, so you are feeling more its essence, so as you have
noticed we are pushed towards absolute perfections that will give total
happiness, so we have to solve our problems to attain like absolute
perfection, this is the essence and the goal of reliability: it is
solving problems, so you are understanding that capitalism too is
constrained by "reliability", because it must be "reliable" to advance
towards the goal that is happiness, so it must be also responsability ,
because capitalism that is composed of today capitalism and of the
future of capitalism must be responsability that knows how to manage our
world and the system.
Read the rest of my thoughts to understand better:
Here is my new thoughts of today about philosophy and political philosophy..
What i am doing is finding the essence of things like in philosophy
and i am using the tool of logic that permits also to "measure"
and to "calculate" precisely like in mathematics and it permits to
reason better, so what is my new thoughts of today ? as you have noticed
i have defined previously what is morality, it is like finding its
"essence" that i have done in my previous post, now an important
question is inferred from this act of thinking, is that what is
the essence of our "civilization" ? finding its essence with more
"precise" thinking is an act of "philosophy", so what is its essence ?
i think its essence is coming from the fact that a process or a thing
can have an advantage and a disadvantage, and the general "reference" is
morality that is, by more expressiveness, "performance" and
"reliability", or simply "reliability" that can model morality correctly
as i have proved it(read my proof bellow), so the essence of our
civilization is the act of coordinating and organizing those advantages
and disadvantages on each of us or on each thing or in each process to
be capable of giving an efficient morality that has as an essence
"reliability", and as a validation of my model, you will notice that we
are decentralizing "governance", and each of the decentralized parts of
the governance are grouping the "advantages" and trying to minimize the
disadvantages of each of us that do the governance , democracy is also
the same , because democracy is a system that wants to escape a "local"
maximum towards a global maximum like in artificial intelligence, and
democracy is doing it by applying itself to selecting the best among the
actors of politics etc. to govern us, this is the essence of
civilization, is the act of maximizing the benefits or the advantages by
optimization, as i have just explained to you.
Now about the essence of reliability
I am still doing philosophy, and you will notice what is smartness..
About the essence of reliability to be able for you to understand
the essence of morality..
What is the essence of reliability ? how reliability must be measured ?
If you say that being reliable is solving problems or not, it doesn't
show what is really reliability, you have to understand philosophically
its essence, i think that reliability is measured also by what is it
to be "happiness", the goal of human is being this "happiness", but
happiness has necessary "requirements", and the "nature" of requirements
is also being like absolute perfection that solves all our problems to
be able to be happiness, and this is why morality is pushed towards
absolute perfection that is absolute reliability that permit us to be
real happiness.
More precision about the essence of morality
I said before that:
"You have seen me defining to you morality as being: perfection at best,
or quality at best , or that it is RELIABILITY !"
When i say morality is RELIABILITY, i mean it is the concept of
RELIABILITY, because we can prove it by philosophy, because
the "goal" of human life is to be able be happiness, and to be able
to be happiness is solving like all our problems, and solving problems
is the essence of reliability, so morality is the goal of life
that is solving problems to be able to be "happiness", this is smartness.
I am a white arab and a more serious computer programmer that has
invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations and
i will sell some of them to Microsoft or to Google or to Embarcadero.
Now about the right abstraction of morality
What is it a more correct abstraction of morality ?
This is a good question in philosophy !
It is like mathematics , you have to be more "logical" and be more
"measure" and be more "precise", and being more logical and more measure
and more precise is like doing mathematics !
Why have you seen me defining and explaining to you what is morality ?
It is a very serious subject, and you have to be smart to understand it !
Because philosophy, like the philosophy of the philosopher that is Sir
Immanuel Kant, must be a philosophy that is more "precise" calculations
with logic and measure that has as a goal to make us understand what is
all about morality ! this is what also i am doing ! and i will continu
to do it in front of your eyes..
So my question of today is:
What is it a more correct abstraction of morality ?
A more correct abstraction of morality is first a definition
of morality that is sufficient and necessary to be able to see
more the big picture of what is morality, you can define morality as
being a composition of a priori pure moral inferred from reason
and of empirical moral inferred from experience, but i think that
this definition is too much abstraction that doesn't show us the big
picture of what is morality, so we have to be more smart , this
is why you have seen me thinking more smartly to find what is morality,
and you have noticed that my first definition of morality was that
morality is: Performance and reliability or is by just one word
reliability, and i have also defined morality by saying that it is:
perfection and strongness , and i have finally explained and give
another definition of morality that is: morality is contineous
perfection that is possible towards the absolute perfection, this
abstraction is more correct also , i explain:
So when i said that morality is: performance and reliability, is it
a correct definition ?
It is like philosophy that i am doing..
So notice that i have proved it this way:
==
From where can we infer that "performance" is inherent to morality ?
Philosophically we can say that the essence of organization is: we are
organizing because of our weaknesses to transcend our weaknesses, so
from this we can feel the essence of our humanity and we can feel our
essence , because the essence of humanity that is perfection and
strongness is dictated by survival too ! and is dictated by the fact
that we must transcend our living conditions towards a better world ! so
this is part of morality, so then we can say that performance is
inherent to morality.
So my way of thinking and proving shows better what must be the
conception of our organization as a society, it must also be based on
"performance".
===
So as you have noticed that this proves the part of my definition
of morality that it is also "performance", now the second part
of the definition of morality is that morality is also "reliability",
and i have "proved" it like this:
==
What is the essence of reliability ?
What is reliability ?
We can simply say that we measure reliability by the fact that the
"reference" of measure is the fact that we want to solve and it is
also the fact that what we have do solve or not, if it solves that's the
measure that permit us to say that it is reliable, so being the right
"perfection" that solves our problems is also "reliability",
and being this right perfection is also "morality", and being this right
perfection is dependent also on the standard of quality, so to be
a correct morality we have to be high standards of quality to be
able to solve and to succeed, and as i said Morality is contineous
perfection that is possible towards the absolute perfection, and when i
say "that is possible", that means that "compassion" when it is
"possible" is also inherent to morality,so this definition avoids
"extremism" that is too violent. So it
is like mathematics.
==
So now you are seeing more the big picture of what is morality,
because the essence of reliability is solving problems and
the essence of perfection is also the same , it is solving problems,
and "performance" is inherent to the concept of reliability ,
because to be able to solve problems, reliability must
be also performance or strongness, this is why i said that
the definition of morality can be also only: RELIABILITY ,
or it can be also Performance and reliability or it can
be perfection and strongness,
You can define morality as being a composition of a priori pure moral
inferred from reason and of empirical moral inferred from experience.
You will say that this definition is a "general" definition.
Now what about my definitions of morality ?
We have to be more smart..
I think that morality can not be morality if it is not good
for us ! i think this is inherent to morality, and you will
notice that this "good for us" can be "not" yet absolute "perfection",
but we have to speak about a constraint over morality,
that morality can not be called morality if the living conditions are
too bad ! so this will abstract more correctly the definition
of morality, so now we can say that my definition of morality
as being performance and reliability is correct, also empiricism tells
us that the essence of our life shows us that to be able to "survive"
we have to be also this performance and this reliability, and
when i say reliability is inherent to my definition of morality, that
means it is the "right" reliability because it is also inherent to it,
so my definition is also correct, and this applies also to my other
definitions of morality that i think are correct. So i think my logical
proof is valid
Morality is also "diversity"
I said it to be able to be more correct abstraction,
i give you an example: if you say like neo-nazism that "all" of us that
are not handicaped have to work "hard" to not be a parasite of the
system, i think that's lack
of maturity that doesn't recognize that there is also "constrains"
that we have to deal with, and saying like neo-nazism that all
that are not handicaped have to work hard to not be a parasite is also
an "idealism" that is not correct morality, this is why you have to be
more "maturity" that is pragmatism, that means that is realistic to be
able to be an appropriate morality, today because of our world is
not a perfect world, competitiveness and prioritization dictate
that high IQ individuals can group together (like Google)
and make "much" "much" more money than the less smart individuals,
and also because of Risks and competitiveness we are allowing
the Banks to make more and more money, this is also morality that
takes into account the constrains, but how in this context can we take
more money from the rich and give it to the poorer ? i think
that capitalism such as the one of USA knows also about pragmatism,
because capitalism of USA is a policeman that doesn't want capitalism to
be changed in more favor of the poorer because it fears imperfections
of humans and it fears the "mess" of socialism and it fears
the "mess" of communism and it fears the mess of other ideologies
like neo-nazism or nationalism, this is why capitalistic systems are
"conservatism" of there capitalism.
More about the essence of morality..
We have to be more smart, what is it doing philosophy about
the essence of morality ? it is something really interesting,
and you have seen me doing more philosophy about the essence of
morality, but i was thinking more about philosophy, and i think my
philosophy about the essence of morality makes us understanding the
essence of philosophy in itself ! because by applying yourself at doing
philosophy about morality you will understand more what is philosophy !
understanding what is the essence of political philosophy or philosophy
is something "great" or of a great importance ! now you have to
understand my thinking of philosophy about the essence of morality:
if we say that the essence of morality or what is morality is
that morality is (like was defining it the philosopher Immanuel Kant):
A priori pure moral inferred from reason and it is also empirical moral
inferred from experience, i said that this definition is too much
abstraction, and more than that the goal of my philosophy is also
to find like if morality is more safer ! and since i am a more
serious computer programmer, like programming safety-critical systems,
i was giving also a "high" priority and importance to being "security",
this is why you have seen me defining more the essence of morality as
being that morality can not be called morality if it is too "bad"
living conditions ! so morality i think must be more "decency"
and more "stability" to be able to call it morality ! i think
that's inherent to morality ! so now you are feeling more the essence
of morality that it is also that we call a "civilization" ! so
you have seen me defining to you morality as being: perfection at best,
or quality at best , or that it is RELIABILITY ! because the essence
of reliability is measured by the fact that we solve problems and we
call it reliable or not ! and if we solve all our problems we say that
we are absolute reliability ! or that we are absolute perfection !
since i think that perfection has the same essence as reliability, and
there essence is solving problems ! but also i said that
morality that is reliability or perfection at best knows about
stability and that it can not be "easily" instability, because
morality that is instability can not be called morality or civilization
! thus this essence of morality ensure us also of more "responsability"
! so now you are feeling more what is morality and morality is
what also gives laws and politics etc. ! so i have also introduced in
my previous writings what i called "guidance" of "moral", and i said
that guidance of moral is inherent to our essence , guidance of moral
is the fact that we are knowing what is happiness and what is tolerance
and what is compassion , and happiness and tolerance and compassion
permit us to "measure" our morality or our civilization , and notice
with me that happiness is measured also by "reliability" or by what we
call "morality", because we can say that we are more happy "relatively"
to others that are less happy, and from this, morality is inferred, so
this guidance of moral is important because it is like guiding us
to a more appropriate "way", so as you have noticed
my philosophy permits us to feel the essence of morality !
and it permits to be less pessimism about morality !
Yet more philosophy and political philosophy..
What is the essence of an idea ?
I need a more correct abstraction..
So how can we start to solve by thinking ?
Let us look for example at its characteristic..
If we look at its platonism, its reification of the future or past or
present experience is a platonism that can be considered a
characteristic of an idea that can be considered a special
characteristic that makes the idea not considered getting old ! this is
why the idea is really special, and does an idea is material or
immaterial ? i think the immaterial part of an idea exists, because
it reifies a future or past or present experience ! so like
empiricism or rationalism, you have to be both rationalism
and empiricism to be able to be correct morality or correct
thinking ! i think the idea is composed of an immaterial and a
material ! and the proof is that ideas can reify
the experience of the future and that doesn't yet exist(please read
bellow my thoughts as a proof) ! or ideas can be immaterial of a
concept that doesn't yet exist ! so i am not in accordance with the
philosopher Plato that have said that an idea is just an idea that is
immaterial, and also i say that an idea is like more light weight
because i think ideas can be perfected faster(so better) and better than
physical world because ideas has less "constrains" than the physical
world. Read the rest of my thoughts to understand better my philosophy:
In philosophy we have to define correctly what is a "reification"..
And if you have noticed i am also "logical" by considering the fact
that a thing "exists" in the "real" world as being a "reification",
and here is my proof that:
Can we travel back in time?
Here is my thoughts:
It is a very interesting question that demands rationality
and logical thinking to answer it ...
To answer it, i start from a mathematical subject which is the
mathematical arithmetic series.
An arithmetic series has as its main characteristic that
the difference between its terms is constant ... and that its sum
gives (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), a_n being the last term ... now you have
to be smart and notice with me that just before the final step of the
final calculation that resulted as a general equation of the arithmetic
series, the calculation of the arithmetic series required of us a much
bigger time to solve the series .. But as soon as the result (a_n * (a_n
+ 1)) / 2 has been reached, the time for the resolution of the
arithmetic series has greatly diminished, therefore the time preceding
the resolution has compressed a lot and allowed us to travel in the the
future quickly, the resolution of the arithmetic series which gave: (a_n
* (a_n + 1)) / 2), it's like a wormhole in the universe permit us to
time travel in the future more quickly, but understand with me that the
time travel in the future that allows you to make the equation of (a_n *
(a_n + 1)) / 2) is relative to the time taken previously by the
arithmetic series just before the discovery of the equation (a_n * (a_n
+ 1)) / 2), and thus that the universe is computable and that ultimately
it allowed a time travel and thanks to mathematics that is something
extra-ordinary in itself.
Now I will be more logical and ask myself the following question:
Is there any contradiction in my evidence since a car
is not a machine to allow time travel in the future to
the simple reason that the regions where we will travel and arrive
faster with a car will not have aged in time that corresponds to the
future time in which one arrives by the feet?
I answer this in a more logical way:
Notice that when I said that the mathematical equation
of the arithmetic series (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2) is a time travel machine
that permits to travel in the future, because it is an equation that
also predicts the result more quickly to which one arrives by paper
without this equation, so the time has no hold on the theoretical result
that is predicted faster so that there is no contradiction when it comes
to theoretical prediction. Also when you use this invention That is this
mathematical equation of the arithmetic series: (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2),
it is that you are living the future of the one who has not yet
invented or used this equation and who will arrive there in its future,
therefore it is for this reason that this equation is also a time travel
machine that permits to travel in the future and it has a predictive
characteristic.
So there is no contradiction and therefore we can
consider a car as a time traveling machine to travel in the future, like
the microprocessor, and like several other mathematical inventions
as the mathematical equation of the arithmetic series.
Here is one of my conclusion:
If you are traveling from Montreal to Paris
by airplane, and that another person swims and walk
by foot to Paris, and assume that the person who moves by swiming
and walking wants to see Paris and answer some questions,
And if you travel to Paris by plane and you
answer these questions more quickly since you are going to see Paris
more quickly than the person swimming and and walking , so that
has a predictive character as the mathematical equation of the
arithmetic series (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), since you will be able
to send an email quickly to the person who wants to
to swim and walk to Paris and give him
the answers he's looking for, so you'll be able to see
the answers of his future, and this predictive characteristic
can be considered as a time travel machine that permits to travel in the
future,
so the aircraft and the car are like time travel machines that permit to
travel in the future ... as well as the processors and other
mathematical inventions and others...
Rationality and logic also have a predictive characteristic,
so you must also reason better in a more scientific manner and take into
account the scientific and empirical evidence to
be ahead of others, like a time machine that permits to travel in the
future..
If a first person receives a valuable advice and this advice
of value allows him to better control his future and to succeed in his
life in the future by executing this valuable advice and also it allows
him to predict his future, and besides, imagine that a second person
will receive in its future this valuable advice, then the first person
will be able to guess with CERTITUDE the future of the second person
which will be the consequence of the execution of this valuable advice ,
and not only the first person will have lived the future of the second
person before the second person, since the two will have lived the same
event by the execution of this valuable advice, then in my opinion we
must reason as in fuzzy logic rather than in boolean logic and
notice that since the first person will guess with CERTITUDE
The future of the second person and will also live the future event of
the second person, then those two theoretical and
empirical evidences confirms that the first person has lived the future
event of the second person, so this valuable advice could be called by
mathematical approximation a time machine that permits to travel in the
future, I say "approximation", because we by analogy are as in fuzzy
logic rather than in boolean logic, in addition to that, that the fact
that the first person guesses with CERTITUDE the future of the second
person, this informs in a logical manner that this certainty change our
way of perceiving, for this certainty, even if
it is not travel in the future, it is by approximation
as a journey into the future, for a journey into the future
will lead to the same certainty, and as a result
the same certainties permit us to affirm by approximation
that the valuable advice is a time machine that permits us to travel
in the future.
Then you understand that I am also a Platonist,
Because you noticed that I can define this time travel in the future as
a platonic event, so when i said that a valuable advice is a time
machine that permits to travel in the future, you understand that it
makes us live platonically the future of others, and since I am a also
Platonist, I affirm that a valuable advice is a time travel machine
that permits us to travel in the future of others since time has no hold
on the ideas, and that the same idea through time inside two
persons, is the same idea, therefore my proof is made that the valuable
advice is a time machine that permits us to travel in the future.
When you imagine a circle, I asserts that not only can you imagine the
circle in material or matter but also in immaterial, as was my proof
that I have just given you , this immaterial essence of the idea is
reified by our reason, and that is the reason that gives it existence.
So this in my opinion is sufficient proof that the idea exists because
we feel it by our reason and it pays homage to our beloved philosopher
Plato.
It is this reification of the immaterial essence of the idea
by reason which gives the necessary and even sufficient approximation to
call even a valuable advice a time machine that permits to travel in the
future.
Then since the idea exists and since a sensation also exists,
then one can not also distinguish an idea from the generated sensation
by the execution as an automaton of a valuable advice at a time t1 and a
time t1 + t2, and since an idea does not age then we can affirm that
valuable advice is a time machine that permits us to travel in the
future, and the valuable advice has a predictive characteristic, because
the approximation is sufficient since we are not in boolean logic but in
fuzzy logic.
There is a smart question inherent to my previous question of:
How to reconcil high priority of survival and order ?
and it is:
Do we need to fear capitalism of today or fear "more" free market
internationally of today because it is not "order" ?
I think we have to understand the "spirit" of capitalism of today
to understand more what is happening, i think capitalism of today
is more "soften", and it ressembles a "sportive" competition,
but it can not be called a violent fight, because the actual capitalism
lives in a more appropriate "context" that constrain it to be more
respect ! because capitalism has to not ignore "Fordism", and has to not
ignore consumer confidence index that it must higher globally and
locally and this causes more respect, and high economic growth of many
countries like african countries and arab countries is more
attractive for economic investment etc. etc. and i think that this more
interconnected economies bring more peace and more stability and Fordism
has notice.
And now i also will ask myself a smart question !
How to reconcil high priority of survival and order ?
This is an interesting subject of political philosophy..
Because even a violent ideology like nazism base its ideology
on "order" first !
So it is easy to see that the first very important thing is order !
You can not call a country a country if order is not satisfied !
So from wich causes we get more order ?
I think that order comes from the fact that we are security
for oneself and others, and what are the causes that we
are security for oneself and others ? we are security
for oneself and others for different causes, here they
are:
1- We are good morality that takes
care of security.
2- We are "sensibility" that takes care of security
3- We are more disciplined to take care of the system
as a critical system that needs the right requirements
for the right security both locally and globally.
4- We are fear that takes care of security of oneself
or others.
And this is related to my following thoughts:
You have to understand Buddha
I think the main point of Buddha is that he wanted from us
to have more "hindsight" and he wanted from us
to be capable of introspection, and he has started to discipline
his followers to be capable of guiding there instincts that
are more "savage" to the right direction. This permit us also to be
more "security" for oneself and for others, and this more security
is also like love and compassion.
This is why i said before:
If we ask a question of how can we be more love or/and compassion ?
I am also like Buddha, so i will answer like this..
Even if you are not "equipped" with the right genetical requirements of
more sensibility and love, you have to know that fear for others
and oneself also make us "care" for oneself or others , but
if you don't fear for yourself or others , so to "emulate" fear for
oneself and for others or to emulate compassion and love, like
emulation in software programming, you have to be more rational and more
disciplined and think the system like a critical system that needs
"security", so you have to be more capable, so
more "educated" to be able to set the right requirements for
security locally and globally, this needs of course more quality
and more perfection.
But i think also that this main point of Buddha is also the "basis" of
today psychology, i think the main point of psychology is also to permit
us to "understand" more ourselves, this means also to have more
"hindsight" and more "introspection", and after this first step,
psychology wants
also from us to be capable to make more "order" in our lives(and
"discipline" is inherent to "order" because of today constraints of
empirical world), and psychology wants from us to be able of guiding
our instincts that are more savage in the right direction, and all this
is like the main point of Buddha.
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
I am a white arab..
My goal here is to defend white people civilization !
But there is some of you who will say that this white people
civilization is not a civilization !
But i don't agree with them !
Because we have to define what is it to be a civilization !
If you are stupid you will define civilization by being a
"real" civilization !
But that's inferior thinking !
Civilization has to be defined by measuring it with reliability,
because as i have explained before that morality is reliability,
so if white people civilization is "relatively" more civilized than the
others , so we will call it "the" civilization ! reliability
works the same , the goal of reliability is to solve problems,
and when you solve all problems we will call it absolute
reliability or absolute happiness. And as you have noticed
i have taken the definition of reliability as being:
Look at the dictionary here:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reliability
It says that:
Reliability is: The quality or state of being reliable.
So read the rest of my thoughts to understand better:
What is the essence of human evolution ?
(read all my following post to understand better my thoughts)
I have to do more philosophy with more "smartness" to understand it..
I said that morality is reliability(read my proof of it bellow)..
Now i think there is something really important about the essence of
humanity, i think that it is "related" to morality, i said that morality
is reliability, and the essence of reliability and the essence of
perfection is that they solve problems so that to be able to attain the
goal of philosophy or the goal of life that is to attain absolute
perfection or absolute happiness, so morality that is reliability is
pushed towards absolute perfection or absolute happiness, but we have to
do more philosophy to understand better the essence of human evolution,
i think that morality of past history has needed more "diversity" to
be able for humans to survive and to be more quality, and diversity has
given "immensity" or big "quantity", and you can notice it inside the
evolution of life, that life has needed a greater number of monkeys and
many tests and failures by evolution on them to evolve towards quality
and smartness and so that the monkey become human and smartness of
human. So as you are noticing "diversity" has given "immensity" or
"big" "quantity" and that both diversity and immensity or big quantity
have given quality and smartness. This is how "morality" has evolved,
morality has needed diversity and immensity or big quantity so that
to be perfection, this is why morality too of today is needing
diversity and immensity or big quantity so that to be perfection,
and morality of today knows that perfection of today is also
having the right "imperfections" (that are also diversity) to be
able to be the right perfection. Now you are understanding
the essence of human evolution more, but you have also to understand
the near future, because in about 15 years or 20 years from now, and
because of this exponential progress of technology and because of the
law of accelerating returns and because of artificial intelligence,
we will be able to enhance our genetics an become more smart and more
beautiful and more strong etc. and we will be able to do much much more
than that because we will be so powerful in about 15 years or 20 years
from now, this is why i think that we will be able to avoid more
diversity and quantity to create quality and perfection, so morality in
about 15 years to 20 years from now will be different in this regard,
morality will need "less" diversity and less "quantity" to realize
perfection and reliability, this is why i think that humans will be able
to be much more "united" in the near future of about 15 years to 20
years from now.
More precision about the definition of reliability
Look at the dictionary here:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reliability
It says that:
Reliability is: The quality or state of being reliable.
This is why when i say bellow on my writing that:
"The essence of reliability and the essence of perfection is that they
solve problems"
You have to understand that reliability is the "state" of being reliable.
Read the rest of my thoughts of my proof of morality is reliability,
and about my thoughts on the law of accelerating returns etc.:
Here is more precision and more proof of what i was
saying about the law of accelerating returns and about
the exponential progress of technology etc. read for example, as i was
saying, what will happen in about 15 years to 20 years from now because
of that:
Read this to notice it:
==
The coming biotechnology revolution will allow us, in the next 15 to 20
years, to reprogram our genes to resist both aging and disease. By
mid-century, we may all be kept healthy and young by billions of
nanorobots inside of our bodies.
Of all the technologies riding the wave of exponential progress,
Kurzweil identifies genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics as the three
overlapping revolutions which will define our lives in the decades to
come. In what ways are these technologies revolutionary?
-The genetics revolution will allow us to reprogram our own biology.
-The nanotechnology revolution will allow us to manipulate matter
at the molecular and atomic scale.
-The robotics revolution will allow us to create a greater than
human non-biological intelligence.
Look at this interesting video to notice it:
==
And read the rest of my thoughts to understand more my thoughts:
What is our today world ?
White europeans want to fight arabs, and China wants to fight USA ,
and USA wants to fight China, and European union wants to fight USA,
and neo-nazism is crazy and it is pure fight for fight like craziness !
and India wants to fight China, and China wants to fight India , and
France wants to fight USA and Israel wants to fight arabs, and arabs
want to fight Israel and so on and so on etc. etc. it is "like" brute
force fighting that we are noticing today, it is becoming much more
violent, and that's "not" smartness, you have to be more smart and
understand my way of doing, read again:
What is it that i am ?
You have seen me here writing, and you know me more that i am a white
arab, and i speak and write english and french and arabic, and
i am a more serious computer programmer, and as you have noticed
i have invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations,
and you have seen me writing poetry, and you have seen me writing
political philosophy, so you know me more now, now i will ask
you a question, what do you think that i am ? if you say stupidly
that i am an arab and you start to be racist , that's stupidity
because you don't understand my way of doing, you have to be more
serious and precise thinking to know me more.. i will explain also
my way of doing so that you will be more smart, i have
said previously on my political philosophy the following, read it carefully:
==
My wisdom of today..
A better politics..
Now you know me more by my writings, and now i will give you an
important wisdom:
One of my previous important wisdom in politics was:
Today we have to know how to get out from "idealism" without being
pessimistic or without getting into pessimism and violence.
My other wisdom of today is:
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with a minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
This is why i told you before another wisdom by saying the following:
Violence is "easy" today, so destruction is easy, but "wisdom"
is to know how to transcend our living conditions by being
discipline of technology and science and by being sophistication
of technology and science and by being wisdom that knows
how to guide our world and humanity in the right and wise way.
This wisdom looks like my above one that says:
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
===
Do you understand my above writing ?
Read also again that i wrote above:
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
This is my kind of smartness that i am..
Because i will ask you a question:
How do you think have i invented many scalable algorithms and there
implementations so that to sell some of them to Microsoft or to
Google or to Embarcadero ?
You will realize that i am applying my following thinking to
"complexity" too:
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
I explain, i was aware of the "complexity" of science and of
the complexity of serious computer programming , so what i have
done is like martial art, it is that i have successfully reduced
by much the "complexity" of learning complex programming and
the complexity of inventing scalable algorithms by avoiding at best
complexity by a minimum of "effort" or "brute" force to score and to
succeed "big", tthis is my way of doing, and this is the way of
smartness, and smartness in politics also is:
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
And also you have to know me more:
I said that i am a white arab, but you have to be more smart to
understand me more, because read the following to know me more,
because i am not like an arab, because i have constructed a "new" man
that is called myself, read my following thoughts to understand better
my way of thinking:
What is smartness ?
Smartness is also knowing that lots of violence today is easy thinking !
but you have to be more smart at avoiding violence ! smartness
is also avoiding violence without getting into violence or war !
we have to be more smart and keep focussed on smartness !
this is why i am suggesting to construct a new type of man that
is more futuristic ! you have to understand it correctly
and be aware of it ! and you have not to be pessimistic about it !
because we have to be more smart so that this law of accelerating
returns and exponential progress of technology work correctly ! i will
be more confident if the guys that govern us are more smart and are
more futuristic as i have explained and are science and technology,
this Donald Trump is not science and technology, and because he is not a
PhD in science or/and technology, so we have to be more patience and
try in the future to elect a PhD in science and/or technology
that will govern us so that the world be more smart.
More philosophy..
Human differences causes too much violence...
So we have to be smart and know how to attenuate efficiently this kind
of violence such as racism..
Look at you, there a not negligeable proportion of men that
want to have sex with beautiful women, so they are like in a hurry
to have sex with beautiful women, but this is racism and this
is violence against less beautiful women, so we have to be wisdom..
but from where can we get this wisdom ? i have talked about racism
and i think that an efficient way to reduce racism is to be more
futuristic, this is the kind of new man that we have to construct,
so being more futuristic is to know about the law of accelerating
returns and to know about the exponential progress of technology and
saying to oneself that since this law of accelerating returns
and since this exponential progress of technology will cause
big events in just about 20 years from now by making us able to enhance
our genetics and become more smart and more beautiful and more
strong etc. so we have "not" to give so much "importance" to
the fact that we are less beautiful or of being of another race
than our race because we have to be more tolerance since
we are going to be "so" much different and a "so" much different world
in just about 20 years from now.. this is the kind of new man that is
futuristic that we have to be.
This is why i said the following:
How to construct a new man ?
I know about communism, communism has tried to construct a new man.
But how today can we construct a new man ?
I think the new man must be more "futuristic", it must be
aware of the law of accelerating returns and aware about this
exponential progress of technology, and since exponential progress of
technology and this law of accelerating returns will cause a really
"big" event in about 15 years or 20 years, that means that in about 15
years or 20 years we will feel the progress of technology as being
exponentially so so powerful ! thus i think that in about
20 years we will able to enhance our genetics we humans and make us more
smart and more beautiful etc. and in about 20 years we will be capable
of doing much much more than that ! so we have not to waste our time
with the fact that we are of such race or such other race, because we
have to be more "futuristic" and be more aware of this law of
accelerating returns and this exponential progress of technology. this
is the kind of new man that we have to construct.
Read the rest of my thoughts:
About Israel..
As you have noticed i am a white arab that is a more serious computer
programmer and i have invented many scalable algorithms and there
implementations..
But if you ask me the following question:
Why Amine are you not attacking Israel with your words ?
You know my friends, i am not like ISIS and i am not like arabs,
i am a new man, i have constructed a new man that is myself,
communism also has tried to construct a new man, i have also done
it for myself, and i am a man that look like more "futuristic",
and as you have noticed i am speaking of the "near" future
of 2030 or 2035, and i am preparing myself to this law of
accelerating returns, and i am sure that in about 7 years or 8 years
you will start to feel this exponential progress of technology that
will become "powerful", this is why i am following this exponential
progress of technology, this is the kind of new man that i am, and i am
also futuristic by "inventing" scalable algorithms and there
implementations, and i am futuristic by speaking about 3D chips and
about this law of accelerating returns, and you have to be careful guys,
because in about 8 years you will start to feel that technology has
become exponentially powerful, and in about 12 years you will start to
feel that technology has become exponentially "really" powerful, and in
about 20 years you will start to feel it exponentially so so powerful !
so i am preparing myself to those events ! this is why i am thinking as
i am thinking, and this is the kind of new man that i have constructed
that is called myself.
Read again what follows to notice my kind of thinking:
Yet more precision about 3D chips, read the following webpage it says:
IBM reckons that 3D chips could allow designers to shrink a
supercomputer that currently fills a building to something the size of a
shoebox.
Read here:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/26/vanishing-point-rise-invisible-computer
And read now the rest of my writing to understand more:
More calculations about artificial intelligence
Read this it says:
"Already, IBM’s “Blue Gene” supercomputer, now being built and scheduled
to be completed by 2005, is projected to provide 1 million billion
calculations per second (i.e., one billion megaflops). This is already
one twentieth of the capacity of the human brain", which I estimate at a
conservatively high 20 million billion calculations per second (100
billion neurons times 1,000 connections per neuron times 200
calculations per second per connection)."
Read here:
http://www.kurzweilai.net/the-law-of-accelerating-returns
And read for example this:
The world’s most powerful supercomputer is tailor made for the AI era
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611077/the-worlds-most-powerful-supercomputer-is-tailor-made-for-the-ai-era/
Notice that this new machine is capable, at peak performance, of 200
petaflops — 200 million billion calculations a second, it is more than
the capacity of a human brain, and 3D CPUs will bring 1000X more
performance than this new machine of 200 petaflops, so by around 2021
we will have 3D CPUs and we will be able to attain singularity and/or a
very "big" advancement in artificial intelligence and science.
Read the rest to understand more:
More precision about 3D CPUs..
I forgot to post about the year of 3D CPUs availability,
here it is, it is around year 2021, because read the following it says:
"3D CPUs aren’t expected until the 2021 – 2024"
Read more here:
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/232342-moores-law-scaling-dead-by-2021-to-be-replaced-by-3d-integration
And reread my following writing to understand more:
I am a white arab, and a more serious computer programmer that
has invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations.
I think here is the next revolution of 3D Computer Chips, notice
that Moore's law stated that the performance of CPUs double every
1.5 years, so i think we are on the right way to a "big" gain
with 3D Computer Chips that Could be 1,000 Times Faster Than Existing
Ones, it means that those 3D Computer Chips will give 13.5 years of
Moore's law advancement on CPUs immediatly, so around year 2021 3D
Computer Chips will be available, so around 2021 we will be projected by
13.5 years directly into year 2034.5, so i think around 2021 we will be
able to attain singularity and/or a very big advancement in artificial
intelligence and science.
Read here to notice it:
3D Computer Chips Could Be 1,000 Times Faster Than Existing Ones
https://www.livescience.com/52207-faster-3d-computer-chip.html
and read also this:
3D-chip technology seeks to pack artificial intelligence into smaller spaces
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/mit-stanford-3d-chip-technology/
More philosophy about the essence of science
I will ask a question of what is it that we call science ?
I think science by "analogy" with morality, is also the fact that
both science and morality have to be "RELIABILITY", because as i said
morality is RELIABILITY or perfection at best(read my proof bellow about
it), so since science is RELIABILITY too, so morality too has also the
same "essence" that they must be both RELIABILITY or perfection at best,
but how to be this reliability ? the first "requirement" of morality and
science is that it is "smartness" that has to create morality and that
has to create science, that means that it is "smart" people that have to
create science and to create morality(that means the laws and politics
etc.), and we have to notice that there is more "softer" science and
there is "harder" science, i mean for example computer science is
somewhat "softer" than hard science that is mathematics or physics, but
i think that computer science is still a science because it requires a
high level of "smartness", and too "serious" computer programming can be
called a science because it requires a high level of "smartness", i give
you an example, i am a more serious computer programmer that has
invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations, and
as you will notice to be able for me to do that, this requires a higher
level of smartness, this is why we can also call science my work of
inventing many scalable algorithms and there implementations, look for
example at what i wrote before to notice that my work of "inventing"
many scalable algorithms and there implementations can be called
"science" because also it needs a higher level of smartness:
About Extreme Scaling in CAE Applications..
I have just read the following about Ansys company:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansys
Notice that Ansys develops and markets finite element analysis software
used to simulate engineering problems.
I think that i have thought about this, and i have "invented"
a Scalable Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient Linear System Solver Library,
in fact it scales "very" well, my library contains a Scalable Parallel
implementation of Conjugate Gradient Dense Linear System Solver library
that is NUMA-aware and cache-aware, and it contains also a Scalable
Parallel implementation of Conjugate Gradient Sparse Linear
System Solver library that is cache-aware.
Sparse linear system solvers are ubiquitous in high performance
computing (HPC) and often are the most computational intensive parts in
scientific computing codes. A few of the many applications relying on
sparse linear solvers include fusion energy simulation, space weather
simulation, climate modeling, and environmental modeling, and finite
element method, and large-scale reservoir simulations to enhance oil
recovery by the oil and gas industry.
Conjugate Gradient is known to converge to the exact solution in n steps
for a matrix of size n, and was historically first seen as a direct
method because of this. However, after a while people figured out that
it works really well if you just stop the iteration much earlier - often
you will get a very good approximation after much fewer than n steps. In
fact, we can analyze how fast Conjugate gradient converges. The end
result is that Conjugate gradient is used as an iterative method for
large linear systems today.
You can download my Scalable Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient Linear
System Solver Library from here:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-parallel-c-conjugate-gradient-linear-system-solver-library
Read the following about Extreme Scaling in CAE Applications, this is
why i have invented my Scalable Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient Linear
System Solver Library that scales very well:
https://www.cray.com/blog/extreme-scaling-in-cae-applications/
And read my following writing to also notice it:
What is computing for me ?
It is first finding an efficient "abstraction" and being able
to hide or reduce "complexity", and also Loose coupling is also like
hiding or reducing complexity, i am always doing it on my software
projects, and to be able to do it more efficiently you have to be more
smart, also i am always looking to reduce efficiently the serial part of
the parallel program, i am calculating it by CPU cycles and this part of
my work is like "assembler", and this to be able to "predict" more
correctly scalability, look for example at my Parallel Compression
Library or my Parallel archiver here:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/parallel-compression-library
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/parallel-archiver
Notice that it says:
- It's NUMA-aware and NUMA efficient on windows (it parallelizes the
memory reads and writes on NUMA nodes)
and
- It minimizes efficiently the contention so that it scales well
and
Now it uses only two threads that do the IO (and they are not
contending) so that it reduces at best the contention, so that it scales
well.
and
- Now it supports processor groups on windows, so that it can use more
than 64 logical processors and it scales well.
And notice that it says the following:
I have done a quick calculation of the scalability prediction for my
Parallel Compression Library, and i think it's good: it can scale beyond
100X on NUMA systems.
The Dynamic Link Libraries for Windows and Dynamic shared libraries for
Linux of the compression and decompression algorithms of my Parallel
Compression Library and for my Parallel archiver were compiled from C
with the optimization level 2 enabled, so they are very fast.
So as you noticed i am making my Parallel Compression Library and
Parallel archiver efficient.
Also computing for me is also finding a good and more efficient way to
ensure reliability and stability, and this part of my work has been
enhanced more by my "experience" in computing and by implementing more
serious softwares.
Also computing for me is also making my software portable, this why i
said before the following:
About portability of my software projects
I have thought more, and as you have noticed i have written Intel
assembler routines for 32 bit and 64 bit for atomically incrementing and
and for atomically CompareExchange etc. so now they are working with x86
AMD and Intel processors for 32 bit and 64 bit, but i will soon make my
Delphi and FreePascal and C++ libraries portable to the other CPUs like
ARM(for Android) etc. for that i will use the following Delphi methods
for Delphi:
http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/Libraries/XE8/en/System.SyncObjs.TInterlocked.CompareExchange
and
http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/Libraries/Tokyo/en/System.SyncObjs.TInterlocked.Exchange
And I will use the same functions that you find inside FreePascal, here
they are:
https://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/rtl/system/interlockedexchange64.html
and
https://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/rtl/system/interlockedexchange.html
and
https://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/rtl/system/interlockedcompareexchange.html
and
https://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/rtl/system/interlockedcompareexchange64.html
I will use them inside my scalable lock that is called scalable MLock
that i have "invented", so that it will be portable, here it is:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-mlock
And when my scalable MLock will become portable on Delphi and FreePascal
i will port with it all my other libraries that uses atomically
increment and decrement etc., so my libraries will become portable to
the other CPUs like ARM for Android etc., so i think you will be happy
with my work.
Also what is computing for me ?
Read the rest to understand better my work:
What about the today computing ?
You have to know me more..
I am not thinking becoming an expert of "coding"..
I am not like that..
Because I am an "inventor", and i have invented many scalable algorithms
and there implementations to do better HPC(high performance computing),
i am thinking NUMA systems, and i am thinking "scalability" on manycores
and multicores and on NUMA systems etc. this is my way of "thinking",
and as a proof look at my new scalable reference counting with efficient
support for weak references, here it is:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-reference-counting-with-efficient-support-for-weak-references
As you have noticed it is "fully" scalable reference counting, so this
is HPC(high performance computing) , and i have implemented this
scalable algorithm that i have "invented" in Delphi and on the Delphi
mode of FreePascal , so that to make Delphi and FreePascal "much"
better, and notice with me that you will not find it on C++ or Rust.
This is my way of thinking , i am "inventing" scalable algorithms and
there implementations.
And i said the following:
"I think that this Parallel ForEach and ParallelFor are like futulities,
because they don't bring "enough" high level abstraction to consider
them interesting, because i think my Threadpool with priorities that
scales very well is capable of easily emulating Parallel ForEach with
"priorities" and ParallelFor with "priorities" that scale very well, so
no need to implement Parallel ForEach or Parallel For."
But to be "nicer", i think i will soon implement both Parallel ForEach
with "priorities" that scales very well and ParallelFor with
"priorities" that scales very well using my Threadpool with priorities
that scales very well, and they will be integrated as methods with my
Threadpool with priorities that scales very well, so that you will be happy.
So i will ask you ? where will you find my Threadpool with priorities
that scales very well? and where you will find my Parallel ForEach and
Parallel For with priorities that scales very well ?
You will not find them on C++ and you will not find them on Rust,
because i have "invented" them, because i am an "inventor", and this is
my way of thinking.
Here is my powerful Threadpool with priorities that scales very well,
read about it and download it from here:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/an-efficient-threadpool-engine-with-priorities-that-scales-very-well
It is a very powerful Threadpool, because:
More precision about my efficient Threadpool that scales very well, my
Threadpool is much more scalable than the one of Microsoft, in the
workers side i am using scalable counting networks to distribute on the
many queues or stacks, so it is scalable on the workers side, on the
consumers side i am also using lock striping to be able to scale very
well, so it is scalable on those parts, on the other part that is work
stealing, i am using scalable counting networks, so globally it scales
very well, and since work stealing is "rare" so i think that my
efficient Threadpool that scales very well is really powerful, and it is
much more optimized and the scalable counting networks eliminate false
sharing, and it works with Windows and Linux.
Read the rest:
Read the rest:
You have to understand my work..
I have invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations, here
is some of them that i have "invented":
1- Scalable Threadpools that are powerful
2- Scalable RWLocks of different sorts.
3- Scalable reference counting with efficient support for weak references
4- Scalable FIFO queues that are node-based and array-based.
5- My Scalable Varfiler
6- Scalable Parallel implementation of Conjugate Gradient Dense Linear
System Solver library that is NUMA-aware and cache-aware, and also a
Scalable Parallel implementation of Conjugate Gradient Sparse Linear
System Solver library that is cache-aware.
7- Scalable MLock that is a scalable Lock.
8- Scalable SeqlockX
And there is also "many" other scalable algorithms that i have "invented".
You can find some of my scalable algorithms and there implementations in
Delphi and FreePascal and C++ on my website here:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/
What i am doing by "inventing" many scalable algorithms and there
implementations, is wanting to make "Delphi" much better and making
FreePascal on the "Delphi" mode much better, my scalable algorithms
and there implementations are like HPC(high performance computing,
and as you have noticed i said also:
You will ask why have i invented many scalable algorithms and
there implementations? because also my work will permit us also to
"revolutionise" science and technology because it is HPC(high
performance computing), this is why i will also sell some of my scalable
algorithms and there implementations to companies such as Google or
Microsoft or Embarcadero.
Also HPC has revolutionised the way science is performed. Supercomputing
is needed for processing sophisticated computational models able to
simulate the cellular structure and functionalities of the brain. This
should enable us to better understand how our brain works and how we can
cope with diseases such as those linked to ageing and to understand more
about HPC, read more here:
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/blog/why-do-supercomputers-matter-your-everyday-life
So i will "sell" some of my scalable algorithms and there
implementations to Google or to Microsoft or to Embarcadero.
I will also enhance my Parallel archiver and my Parallel compression
Library that are powerful and that work with both C++Builder and Delphi
and to perhaps sell them to Embarcadero that sells Delphi and C++Builder.
Also I will implement soon a "scalable" Parallel For and a Parallel
ForEach..
This why i said before that:
"I think that this Parallel ForEach and ParallelFor are like futulities,
because they don't bring "enough" high level abstraction to consider
them interesting, because i think my Threadpool with priorities that
scales very well is capable of easily emulating Parallel ForEach with
"priorities" and ParallelFor with "priorities" that scale very well, so
no need to implement Parallel ForEach or Parallel For."
But to be "nicer", i think i will soon implement both Parallel ForEach
with "priorities" that scales very well and ParallelFor with
"priorities" that scales very well using my Threadpool with priorities
that scales very well, and they will be integrated as methods with my
Threadpool with priorities that scales very well, so that you will be happy.
And my next step soon is also to make my Delphi and FreePascal and C++
Libraries portable to other CPUs like ARM etc. because currently they
work on x86 AMD and Intel CPUs.
And my next step soon is also to make my "scalable" RWLocks NUMA-aware
and efficient on NUMA.
This is some parts of my everyday computing..
And here is my proof that morality is RELIABILITY perfection at best,
read all my following thoughts to understand it:
About politics..
You have seen me writing about morality, and hope you have
understood my writing..
What do you think is capitalism ?
Capitalism is not as neo-nazism that starts from the idea that
it has to be european whites to be "perfection" and it wants to be
european whites, because this is a contradiction ! because perfection of
today needs "imperfections" of for example being more "weak" or "less"
beautiful to be able to be perfection ! this is the contradiction of
nazism and neo-nazism ! nazism and neo-nazism is not understanding it
correctly ! perfection of today is also the weak that needs the strong
and the strong that needs the weak ! and perfection of today has to know
how to accept some level of imperfections to be able to be the right
perfection ! this is what is not understanding neo-nazism and nazism !
this is why neo-nazism and nazism is intellectual inferiority. So now
you are more equipped to understand more what is morality.
Read the rest of my thoughts to understand better:
Yet about philosophy and political philosophy
You have to be smart to do philosophy and political philosophy
correctly..
You have seen me doing philosophy and political philosophy about morality..
But we have to be smart, because when you will read my previous post
about morality, you will start to understand more and to see more,
this is the goal of philosophy, and as you have noticed i have explained
to you why morality is the concept of RELIABILITY, and it is also
perfection at best, so you are feeling more its essence, so as you have
noticed we are pushed towards absolute perfections that will give total
happiness, so we have to solve our problems to attain like absolute
perfection, this is the essence and the goal of reliability: it is
solving problems, so you are understanding that capitalism too is
constrained by "reliability", because it must be "reliable" to advance
towards the goal that is happiness, so it must be also responsability ,
because capitalism that is composed of today capitalism and of the
future of capitalism must be responsability that knows how to manage our
world and the system.
Read the rest of my thoughts to understand better:
Here is my new thoughts of today about philosophy and political philosophy..
What i am doing is finding the essence of things like in philosophy
and i am using the tool of logic that permits also to "measure"
and to "calculate" precisely like in mathematics and it permits to
reason better, so what is my new thoughts of today ? as you have noticed
i have defined previously what is morality, it is like finding its
"essence" that i have done in my previous post, now an important
question is inferred from this act of thinking, is that what is
the essence of our "civilization" ? finding its essence with more
"precise" thinking is an act of "philosophy", so what is its essence ?
i think its essence is coming from the fact that a process or a thing
can have an advantage and a disadvantage, and the general "reference" is
morality that is, by more expressiveness, "performance" and
"reliability", or simply "reliability" that can model morality correctly
as i have proved it(read my proof bellow), so the essence of our
civilization is the act of coordinating and organizing those advantages
and disadvantages on each of us or on each thing or in each process to
be capable of giving an efficient morality that has as an essence
"reliability", and as a validation of my model, you will notice that we
are decentralizing "governance", and each of the decentralized parts of
the governance are grouping the "advantages" and trying to minimize the
disadvantages of each of us that do the governance , democracy is also
the same , because democracy is a system that wants to escape a "local"
maximum towards a global maximum like in artificial intelligence, and
democracy is doing it by applying itself to selecting the best among the
actors of politics etc. to govern us, this is the essence of
civilization, is the act of maximizing the benefits or the advantages by
optimization, as i have just explained to you.
Now about the essence of reliability
I am still doing philosophy, and you will notice what is smartness..
About the essence of reliability to be able for you to understand
the essence of morality..
What is the essence of reliability ? how reliability must be measured ?
If you say that being reliable is solving problems or not, it doesn't
show what is really reliability, you have to understand philosophically
its essence, i think that reliability is measured also by what is it
to be "happiness", the goal of human is being this "happiness", but
happiness has necessary "requirements", and the "nature" of requirements
is also being like absolute perfection that solves all our problems to
be able to be happiness, and this is why morality is pushed towards
absolute perfection that is absolute reliability that permit us to be
real happiness.
More precision about the essence of morality
I said before that:
"You have seen me defining to you morality as being: perfection at best,
or quality at best , or that it is RELIABILITY !"
When i say morality is RELIABILITY, i mean it is the concept of
RELIABILITY, because we can prove it by philosophy, because
the "goal" of human life is to be able be happiness, and to be able
to be happiness is solving like all our problems, and solving problems
is the essence of reliability, so morality is the goal of life
that is solving problems to be able to be "happiness", this is smartness.
I am a white arab and a more serious computer programmer that has
invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations and
i will sell some of them to Microsoft or to Google or to Embarcadero.
Now about the right abstraction of morality
What is it a more correct abstraction of morality ?
This is a good question in philosophy !
It is like mathematics , you have to be more "logical" and be more
"measure" and be more "precise", and being more logical and more measure
and more precise is like doing mathematics !
Why have you seen me defining and explaining to you what is morality ?
It is a very serious subject, and you have to be smart to understand it !
Because philosophy, like the philosophy of the philosopher that is Sir
Immanuel Kant, must be a philosophy that is more "precise" calculations
with logic and measure that has as a goal to make us understand what is
all about morality ! this is what also i am doing ! and i will continu
to do it in front of your eyes..
So my question of today is:
What is it a more correct abstraction of morality ?
A more correct abstraction of morality is first a definition
of morality that is sufficient and necessary to be able to see
more the big picture of what is morality, you can define morality as
being a composition of a priori pure moral inferred from reason
and of empirical moral inferred from experience, but i think that
this definition is too much abstraction that doesn't show us the big
picture of what is morality, so we have to be more smart , this
is why you have seen me thinking more smartly to find what is morality,
and you have noticed that my first definition of morality was that
morality is: Performance and reliability or is by just one word
reliability, and i have also defined morality by saying that it is:
perfection and strongness , and i have finally explained and give
another definition of morality that is: morality is contineous
perfection that is possible towards the absolute perfection, this
abstraction is more correct also , i explain:
So when i said that morality is: performance and reliability, is it
a correct definition ?
It is like philosophy that i am doing..
So notice that i have proved it this way:
==
From where can we infer that "performance" is inherent to morality ?
Philosophically we can say that the essence of organization is: we are
organizing because of our weaknesses to transcend our weaknesses, so
from this we can feel the essence of our humanity and we can feel our
essence , because the essence of humanity that is perfection and
strongness is dictated by survival too ! and is dictated by the fact
that we must transcend our living conditions towards a better world ! so
this is part of morality, so then we can say that performance is
inherent to morality.
So my way of thinking and proving shows better what must be the
conception of our organization as a society, it must also be based on
"performance".
===
So as you have noticed that this proves the part of my definition
of morality that it is also "performance", now the second part
of the definition of morality is that morality is also "reliability",
and i have "proved" it like this:
==
What is the essence of reliability ?
What is reliability ?
We can simply say that we measure reliability by the fact that the
"reference" of measure is the fact that we want to solve and it is
also the fact that what we have do solve or not, if it solves that's the
measure that permit us to say that it is reliable, so being the right
"perfection" that solves our problems is also "reliability",
and being this right perfection is also "morality", and being this right
perfection is dependent also on the standard of quality, so to be
a correct morality we have to be high standards of quality to be
able to solve and to succeed, and as i said Morality is contineous
perfection that is possible towards the absolute perfection, and when i
say "that is possible", that means that "compassion" when it is
"possible" is also inherent to morality,so this definition avoids
"extremism" that is too violent. So it
is like mathematics.
==
So now you are seeing more the big picture of what is morality,
because the essence of reliability is solving problems and
the essence of perfection is also the same , it is solving problems,
and "performance" is inherent to the concept of reliability ,
because to be able to solve problems, reliability must
be also performance or strongness, this is why i said that
the definition of morality can be also only: RELIABILITY ,
or it can be also Performance and reliability or it can
be perfection and strongness,
You can define morality as being a composition of a priori pure moral
inferred from reason and of empirical moral inferred from experience.
You will say that this definition is a "general" definition.
Now what about my definitions of morality ?
We have to be more smart..
I think that morality can not be morality if it is not good
for us ! i think this is inherent to morality, and you will
notice that this "good for us" can be "not" yet absolute "perfection",
but we have to speak about a constraint over morality,
that morality can not be called morality if the living conditions are
too bad ! so this will abstract more correctly the definition
of morality, so now we can say that my definition of morality
as being performance and reliability is correct, also empiricism tells
us that the essence of our life shows us that to be able to "survive"
we have to be also this performance and this reliability, and
when i say reliability is inherent to my definition of morality, that
means it is the "right" reliability because it is also inherent to it,
so my definition is also correct, and this applies also to my other
definitions of morality that i think are correct. So i think my logical
proof is valid
Morality is also "diversity"
I said it to be able to be more correct abstraction,
i give you an example: if you say like neo-nazism that "all" of us that
are not handicaped have to work "hard" to not be a parasite of the
system, i think that's lack
of maturity that doesn't recognize that there is also "constrains"
that we have to deal with, and saying like neo-nazism that all
that are not handicaped have to work hard to not be a parasite is also
an "idealism" that is not correct morality, this is why you have to be
more "maturity" that is pragmatism, that means that is realistic to be
able to be an appropriate morality, today because of our world is
not a perfect world, competitiveness and prioritization dictate
that high IQ individuals can group together (like Google)
and make "much" "much" more money than the less smart individuals,
and also because of Risks and competitiveness we are allowing
the Banks to make more and more money, this is also morality that
takes into account the constrains, but how in this context can we take
more money from the rich and give it to the poorer ? i think
that capitalism such as the one of USA knows also about pragmatism,
because capitalism of USA is a policeman that doesn't want capitalism to
be changed in more favor of the poorer because it fears imperfections
of humans and it fears the "mess" of socialism and it fears
the "mess" of communism and it fears the mess of other ideologies
like neo-nazism or nationalism, this is why capitalistic systems are
"conservatism" of there capitalism.
More about the essence of morality..
We have to be more smart, what is it doing philosophy about
the essence of morality ? it is something really interesting,
and you have seen me doing more philosophy about the essence of
morality, but i was thinking more about philosophy, and i think my
philosophy about the essence of morality makes us understanding the
essence of philosophy in itself ! because by applying yourself at doing
philosophy about morality you will understand more what is philosophy !
understanding what is the essence of political philosophy or philosophy
is something "great" or of a great importance ! now you have to
understand my thinking of philosophy about the essence of morality:
if we say that the essence of morality or what is morality is
that morality is (like was defining it the philosopher Immanuel Kant):
A priori pure moral inferred from reason and it is also empirical moral
inferred from experience, i said that this definition is too much
abstraction, and more than that the goal of my philosophy is also
to find like if morality is more safer ! and since i am a more
serious computer programmer, like programming safety-critical systems,
i was giving also a "high" priority and importance to being "security",
this is why you have seen me defining more the essence of morality as
being that morality can not be called morality if it is too "bad"
living conditions ! so morality i think must be more "decency"
and more "stability" to be able to call it morality ! i think
that's inherent to morality ! so now you are feeling more the essence
of morality that it is also that we call a "civilization" ! so
you have seen me defining to you morality as being: perfection at best,
or quality at best , or that it is RELIABILITY ! because the essence
of reliability is measured by the fact that we solve problems and we
call it reliable or not ! and if we solve all our problems we say that
we are absolute reliability ! or that we are absolute perfection !
since i think that perfection has the same essence as reliability, and
there essence is solving problems ! but also i said that
morality that is reliability or perfection at best knows about
stability and that it can not be "easily" instability, because
morality that is instability can not be called morality or civilization
! thus this essence of morality ensure us also of more "responsability"
! so now you are feeling more what is morality and morality is
what also gives laws and politics etc. ! so i have also introduced in
my previous writings what i called "guidance" of "moral", and i said
that guidance of moral is inherent to our essence , guidance of moral
is the fact that we are knowing what is happiness and what is tolerance
and what is compassion , and happiness and tolerance and compassion
permit us to "measure" our morality or our civilization , and notice
with me that happiness is measured also by "reliability" or by what we
call "morality", because we can say that we are more happy "relatively"
to others that are less happy, and from this, morality is inferred, so
this guidance of moral is important because it is like guiding us
to a more appropriate "way", so as you have noticed
my philosophy permits us to feel the essence of morality !
and it permits to be less pessimism about morality !
Yet more philosophy and political philosophy..
What is the essence of an idea ?
I need a more correct abstraction..
So how can we start to solve by thinking ?
Let us look for example at its characteristic..
If we look at its platonism, its reification of the future or past or
present experience is a platonism that can be considered a
characteristic of an idea that can be considered a special
characteristic that makes the idea not considered getting old ! this is
why the idea is really special, and does an idea is material or
immaterial ? i think the immaterial part of an idea exists, because
it reifies a future or past or present experience ! so like
empiricism or rationalism, you have to be both rationalism
and empiricism to be able to be correct morality or correct
thinking ! i think the idea is composed of an immaterial and a
material ! and the proof is that ideas can reify
the experience of the future and that doesn't yet exist(please read
bellow my thoughts as a proof) ! or ideas can be immaterial of a
concept that doesn't yet exist ! so i am not in accordance with the
philosopher Plato that have said that an idea is just an idea that is
immaterial, and also i say that an idea is like more light weight
because i think ideas can be perfected faster(so better) and better than
physical world because ideas has less "constrains" than the physical
world. Read the rest of my thoughts to understand better my philosophy:
In philosophy we have to define correctly what is a "reification"..
And if you have noticed i am also "logical" by considering the fact
that a thing "exists" in the "real" world as being a "reification",
and here is my proof that:
Can we travel back in time?
Here is my thoughts:
It is a very interesting question that demands rationality
and logical thinking to answer it ...
To answer it, i start from a mathematical subject which is the
mathematical arithmetic series.
An arithmetic series has as its main characteristic that
the difference between its terms is constant ... and that its sum
gives (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), a_n being the last term ... now you have
to be smart and notice with me that just before the final step of the
final calculation that resulted as a general equation of the arithmetic
series, the calculation of the arithmetic series required of us a much
bigger time to solve the series .. But as soon as the result (a_n * (a_n
+ 1)) / 2 has been reached, the time for the resolution of the
arithmetic series has greatly diminished, therefore the time preceding
the resolution has compressed a lot and allowed us to travel in the the
future quickly, the resolution of the arithmetic series which gave: (a_n
* (a_n + 1)) / 2), it's like a wormhole in the universe permit us to
time travel in the future more quickly, but understand with me that the
time travel in the future that allows you to make the equation of (a_n *
(a_n + 1)) / 2) is relative to the time taken previously by the
arithmetic series just before the discovery of the equation (a_n * (a_n
+ 1)) / 2), and thus that the universe is computable and that ultimately
it allowed a time travel and thanks to mathematics that is something
extra-ordinary in itself.
Now I will be more logical and ask myself the following question:
Is there any contradiction in my evidence since a car
is not a machine to allow time travel in the future to
the simple reason that the regions where we will travel and arrive
faster with a car will not have aged in time that corresponds to the
future time in which one arrives by the feet?
I answer this in a more logical way:
Notice that when I said that the mathematical equation
of the arithmetic series (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2) is a time travel machine
that permits to travel in the future, because it is an equation that
also predicts the result more quickly to which one arrives by paper
without this equation, so the time has no hold on the theoretical result
that is predicted faster so that there is no contradiction when it comes
to theoretical prediction. Also when you use this invention That is this
mathematical equation of the arithmetic series: (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2),
it is that you are living the future of the one who has not yet
invented or used this equation and who will arrive there in its future,
therefore it is for this reason that this equation is also a time travel
machine that permits to travel in the future and it has a predictive
characteristic.
So there is no contradiction and therefore we can
consider a car as a time traveling machine to travel in the future, like
the microprocessor, and like several other mathematical inventions
as the mathematical equation of the arithmetic series.
Here is one of my conclusion:
If you are traveling from Montreal to Paris
by airplane, and that another person swims and walk
by foot to Paris, and assume that the person who moves by swiming
and walking wants to see Paris and answer some questions,
And if you travel to Paris by plane and you
answer these questions more quickly since you are going to see Paris
more quickly than the person swimming and and walking , so that
has a predictive character as the mathematical equation of the
arithmetic series (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), since you will be able
to send an email quickly to the person who wants to
to swim and walk to Paris and give him
the answers he's looking for, so you'll be able to see
the answers of his future, and this predictive characteristic
can be considered as a time travel machine that permits to travel in the
future,
so the aircraft and the car are like time travel machines that permit to
travel in the future ... as well as the processors and other
mathematical inventions and others...
Rationality and logic also have a predictive characteristic,
so you must also reason better in a more scientific manner and take into
account the scientific and empirical evidence to
be ahead of others, like a time machine that permits to travel in the
future..
If a first person receives a valuable advice and this advice
of value allows him to better control his future and to succeed in his
life in the future by executing this valuable advice and also it allows
him to predict his future, and besides, imagine that a second person
will receive in its future this valuable advice, then the first person
will be able to guess with CERTITUDE the future of the second person
which will be the consequence of the execution of this valuable advice ,
and not only the first person will have lived the future of the second
person before the second person, since the two will have lived the same
event by the execution of this valuable advice, then in my opinion we
must reason as in fuzzy logic rather than in boolean logic and
notice that since the first person will guess with CERTITUDE
The future of the second person and will also live the future event of
the second person, then those two theoretical and
empirical evidences confirms that the first person has lived the future
event of the second person, so this valuable advice could be called by
mathematical approximation a time machine that permits to travel in the
future, I say "approximation", because we by analogy are as in fuzzy
logic rather than in boolean logic, in addition to that, that the fact
that the first person guesses with CERTITUDE the future of the second
person, this informs in a logical manner that this certainty change our
way of perceiving, for this certainty, even if
it is not travel in the future, it is by approximation
as a journey into the future, for a journey into the future
will lead to the same certainty, and as a result
the same certainties permit us to affirm by approximation
that the valuable advice is a time machine that permits us to travel
in the future.
Then you understand that I am also a Platonist,
Because you noticed that I can define this time travel in the future as
a platonic event, so when i said that a valuable advice is a time
machine that permits to travel in the future, you understand that it
makes us live platonically the future of others, and since I am a also
Platonist, I affirm that a valuable advice is a time travel machine
that permits us to travel in the future of others since time has no hold
on the ideas, and that the same idea through time inside two
persons, is the same idea, therefore my proof is made that the valuable
advice is a time machine that permits us to travel in the future.
When you imagine a circle, I asserts that not only can you imagine the
circle in material or matter but also in immaterial, as was my proof
that I have just given you , this immaterial essence of the idea is
reified by our reason, and that is the reason that gives it existence.
So this in my opinion is sufficient proof that the idea exists because
we feel it by our reason and it pays homage to our beloved philosopher
Plato.
It is this reification of the immaterial essence of the idea
by reason which gives the necessary and even sufficient approximation to
call even a valuable advice a time machine that permits to travel in the
future.
Then since the idea exists and since a sensation also exists,
then one can not also distinguish an idea from the generated sensation
by the execution as an automaton of a valuable advice at a time t1 and a
time t1 + t2, and since an idea does not age then we can affirm that
valuable advice is a time machine that permits us to travel in the
future, and the valuable advice has a predictive characteristic, because
the approximation is sufficient since we are not in boolean logic but in
fuzzy logic.
There is a smart question inherent to my previous question of:
How to reconcil high priority of survival and order ?
and it is:
Do we need to fear capitalism of today or fear "more" free market
internationally of today because it is not "order" ?
I think we have to understand the "spirit" of capitalism of today
to understand more what is happening, i think capitalism of today
is more "soften", and it ressembles a "sportive" competition,
but it can not be called a violent fight, because the actual capitalism
lives in a more appropriate "context" that constrain it to be more
respect ! because capitalism has to not ignore "Fordism", and has to not
ignore consumer confidence index that it must higher globally and
locally and this causes more respect, and high economic growth of many
countries like african countries and arab countries is more
attractive for economic investment etc. etc. and i think that this more
interconnected economies bring more peace and more stability and Fordism
has notice.
And now i also will ask myself a smart question !
How to reconcil high priority of survival and order ?
This is an interesting subject of political philosophy..
Because even a violent ideology like nazism base its ideology
on "order" first !
So it is easy to see that the first very important thing is order !
You can not call a country a country if order is not satisfied !
So from wich causes we get more order ?
I think that order comes from the fact that we are security
for oneself and others, and what are the causes that we
are security for oneself and others ? we are security
for oneself and others for different causes, here they
are:
1- We are good morality that takes
care of security.
2- We are "sensibility" that takes care of security
3- We are more disciplined to take care of the system
as a critical system that needs the right requirements
for the right security both locally and globally.
4- We are fear that takes care of security of oneself
or others.
And this is related to my following thoughts:
You have to understand Buddha
I think the main point of Buddha is that he wanted from us
to have more "hindsight" and he wanted from us
to be capable of introspection, and he has started to discipline
his followers to be capable of guiding there instincts that
are more "savage" to the right direction. This permit us also to be
more "security" for oneself and for others, and this more security
is also like love and compassion.
This is why i said before:
If we ask a question of how can we be more love or/and compassion ?
I am also like Buddha, so i will answer like this..
Even if you are not "equipped" with the right genetical requirements of
more sensibility and love, you have to know that fear for others
and oneself also make us "care" for oneself or others , but
if you don't fear for yourself or others , so to "emulate" fear for
oneself and for others or to emulate compassion and love, like
emulation in software programming, you have to be more rational and more
disciplined and think the system like a critical system that needs
"security", so you have to be more capable, so
more "educated" to be able to set the right requirements for
security locally and globally, this needs of course more quality
and more perfection.
But i think also that this main point of Buddha is also the "basis" of
today psychology, i think the main point of psychology is also to permit
us to "understand" more ourselves, this means also to have more
"hindsight" and more "introspection", and after this first step,
psychology wants
also from us to be capable to make more "order" in our lives(and
"discipline" is inherent to "order" because of today constraints of
empirical world), and psychology wants from us to be able of guiding
our instincts that are more savage in the right direction, and all this
is like the main point of Buddha.
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
