More about division of Labor and about productivity and about specialization..

[World90]

Hello...


More about division of Labor and about productivity and about
specialization..

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

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

Shlomit Weiss returns to Intel as Head of Chip Development

Read more here:

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

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

So i will ask a philosophical question:

How to manage efficiently complexity ?

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

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

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

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

Read more here his thoughts about productivity:

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

And i think he is making a mistake:

Since we have that Productivity = Output/Input

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

And it looks like the following:

About parallelism and about Gustafson’s Law..

Gustafson’s Law:

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

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

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


Load balance is also a crucial factor.


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


---


About the Threadpool..


I have just read the following:


Concurrency - Throttling Concurrency in the CLR 4.0 ThreadPool


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


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


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


And here is my other Threadpool engine with priorities:


https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/threadpool-engine-with-priorities


And read my following previous thoughts to understand more:


About the strategy of "work depth-first; steal breadth-first"..


I have just read the following webpage:


Why Too Many Threads Hurts Performance, and What to do About It


https://www.codeguru.com/cpp/sample_chapter/article.php/c13533/Why-Too-Many-Threads-Hurts-Performance-and-What-to-do-About-It.htm


Also I have just looked at the following interesting video about Go
scheduler and Go concurrency:


Dmitry Vyukov — Go scheduler: Implementing language with lightweight
concurrency


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K11rY57K7k


And i have just read the following webpage about the Threadpool of
microsoft .NET 4.0:


https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/jennifer/2009/06/26/work-stealing-in-net-4-0/


And as you are noticing the first web link above is speaking about the
strategy of "work depth-first; steal breadth-first" , but we have to be
more smart because i think that this strategy, that is advantageous for
cache locality, works best for recursive algorithms, because a thread is
taking the first task and after that the algorithm is recursive, so it
will put the childs tasks inside the local work-stealing queue, and
the other threads will start to take from the work-stealing queue, so
the work will be distributed correctly, but as you will notice that
this strategy works best for recursive algorithms, but when you you
iteratively start many tasks, i think we will have much more contention
on the work-stealing queue and this is a weakness of this strategy,
other than that when it is not a recursive algorithm and the threads are
receiving from the global queue so there will be high contention on
the global queue and this is not good. MIT's Cilk and Go scheduler and
the Threadpool of Microsoft and Intel® C++ TBB are using this strategy
of "work depth-first; steal breadth-first". And as you are noticing
that they are giving more preference to cache locality than scalability.


But in my following invention of a Threadpool that scales very well i am
giving more preference to scalability than to cache locality:


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


Other than that when you are doing IO with my Threadpool, you can use
asychronous IO by starting a dedicated thread to IO to be more
efficient, or you can start another of my Threadpool and use it for
tasks that uses IO, you can use the same method when threads of the my
Threadpool are waiting or sleeping..


Other than that for recursion and the stack overflow problem you can
convert your function from a recursive to iterative to solve the problem
of stack overflow.


Other than that to be able to serve a great number of internet
connections or TCP/IP socket connections you can use my Threadpool with
my powerful Object oriented Stackful coroutines library for Delphi and
FreePascal here:


https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/object-oriented-stackful-coroutines-library-for-delphi-and-freepascal


---


And enhancing productivity is also related to my following powerful
product that i have designed and implemented(that can also be applied to
organizations):


https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/universal-scalability-law-for-delphi-and-freepascal


Please read the following about Applying the Universal Scalability Law
to organisations:


https://blog.acolyer.org/2015/04/29/applying-the-universal-scalability-law-to-organisations/

More of my philosophy about the stupid people..

Here is my just new proverb that i have just invented fast:

"What is the best of the following? the stupid people that think falsely
that Love and tolerance are the way to go, or do the stupid people have
to be made wise so that to know how to be order and how to be happy? so
as you are noticing that making the people wise must be the way to go,
so as you are noticing you have to be careful about the appearances of
the reality that are not the truth, and now you are understanding
my following proverb that is so important and that is related to it:

"Stability is obtained with the force of perfection,
because when you become more perfect you increase
your strenghts , then you better resist instabilities,
and I think this is like a law of Morality"

"La stabilité s'obtient avec la force de la perfection,
car quand vous devenez plus parfait vous augmentez
vos forces et donc vous résistez mieux aux instabilités,
et je pense que ceci est comme une loi de la moralité""

More philosophy about wich way of human life is the right way ?

I think that i am a philosopher that is smart, and i think i am
a wise type of person, so i think that the architectural idea
that is logically inferred is that we have like to make a difference
between the appearance of a reality that is not the truth and the
reality that is the truth, i think that the majority of humans have the
tendency to "distort" reality in there minds (because they are not wise)
or to be deceived by the appearances of the reality that are not the
truth, let's take a quick example so that you understand: Take for
example "sex", there is the "naive" way to look at sex as simply a
pleasure of life, but when you get much more mature and wise, you will
start to also look at sex as a power play or power game(comme un jeu de
pouvoir) that makes the unhealthy relationship, so then you have to
distinguish the right from the wrong, and this pushes me to say the
following in french: "Ce qu'il nous faut en fin de compte c'est du
savoir vivre ensemble qui ramène l'ordre, et cela demande que les êtres
humains soient éduqués correctement â une philosophie de vie efficace."

Here is the translation of my saying in english:

"What we need in the end is knowing how to live together which brings
order back, and this requires that human beings be properly educated
with an effective philosophy of life."

So i think that my important architectural idea is thus understood,
so now you are understanding the why i am inventing many proverbs and
posting them here, since those proverbs of mine permits you to also not
be deceived by the appearances of the reality that are not the truth,
here is some of my proverbs and notice how they permit you to
distinguish quickly:

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

And Here is all my other new proverbs that i have invented fast:

"When you like a beautiful song, you will have the strong tendency
to want to hear it or to buy it, but when you are maturity of
responsability, it can become that you have to like the responsability
of hearing or buying the song and not the beauty of the song, so when
you are intellectual maturity you will start to think about responsability."

Here is my new proverb:

"When you are still organized like human animals you will have the
strong tendency to want to marry with a beautiful women, but when you
are critical thinking you have to ask yourself if all of us have to
marry a beautiful women. So when you are critical thinking you have to
think systemically about order"

Here is my other new proverb:

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

And here is my new proverbs:

"The intelligent favors healthy eating over tasty eating, and by analogy
we can also say that the intelligent also favors the effective speaker
over the sweet talker"

"L'intelligent privilégie le manger santé au manger qui a du goût, et
par analogie on peut aussi dire que l'intelligent aussi privilégie le
parleur efficace au beau parleur."

Here is my just new proverb:

"Even silence makes us advance, since a human life full of silence is
not the right diversity as a balance that makes the good reliance"

Here is my other just new proverb in english and french:

"Learn to lift your head with dignity because even the sea has
threatening waves."

"Apprends à élever la tête avec dignité car même la mer a des vagues qui
menacent."


More of my philosophy about making big money..

Is making big money the right thing to do ?

So there is the philosophical question and there is answering it from
the individualistic point of view, since i think that philosophically we
have to be "perfection" and perfection calls for "order", so you have to
know how to be "order", since we can all start wanting to make big money
quickly, but when you think about it, you will realize that this doesn't
work, so this is why it needs philosophy, not just capitalism, so now
you are realizing that you have to know how to manage human life so this
is why i am talking to you about my philosophy and this is why i am also
writing my thoughts as i am writing them, so it is by logical analogy
like my following thoughts:

More philosophy about R&D and economic growth and more..

I invite you to read the following interesting article that says
that in the last 50 years, R&D has not increased much economic growth,
but we have not to think just economic growth since we have to think the
standard of living, so then we have to understand that the standard of
living generally refers to wealth, comfort, material goods, and
necessities of certain classes in certain areas. So i think that R&D has
increased much the standard of living, so it is good for happiness.

How important is R&D for economic growth?

Read more here:

https://www.rdworldonline.com/how-important-is-rd-for-economic-growth/

So i mean that making big money is by logical analogy like R&D has not
increased much economic growth, but it has increased the quality of
living so i think it has increased happiness, since we have to think the
standard of living, since so that to be order in morality we have also
to think how to be happiness, this is why i have written my thoughts of
my philosophy that explains how to be happiness, read them below, and
here is also what i have said about money:

More of my philosophy about money..

I think i am smart, and what do i think about money ?

Here is my thoughts of my philosophy and my other proverb about it:

More philosophy about adaptation..

As you have just noticed i have just written a proverb about adaptation
by saying: "You have to master the tools of adaptation", notice
that we can say: "the tools for adaptation" or "the tool of adaptation",
read in the following dictionary of psychology, and you will notice that
it is saying the "tools of intellectual adaptation", read here to notice it:

https://dictionary.apa.org/tools-of-intellectual-adaptation

So this proves that the saying of my proverb is correct, here is
my just new proverb and notice it:

"You have to master the tools of adaptation, such as having
a good education with a good education system, since getting
rich quickly is not the wise thing to do, since mastering the
tools of adaptation like having a good education will allow
you to get rich and will allow you to keep you rich."

More of my philosophy of how to be successful..

I think i am smart, and i will explain my way of how to be successful:

1- You have to have the engines that push you forward towards more
and more perfection, so you have also to psychologically find those
engines, so i have talked about some of them in my philosophy, so
read it below.

2- I have to be both smart and creative, so this is why i have invented
many scalable algorithms and algorithms and i am still inventing
scalable algorithms and algorithms and i have invented powerful
software tools and softwares, this first part is what makes me smart,
the second part is that i am creative by inventing my philosophy and
by writing two interesting and powerful books about computer
programming and by having many new creative ideas in my mind etc.

3- I am using exponential thinking and exponential growth of capitalism
so that to grow really fast and so that to build my big business and
so that to sell my products and services.

You can read more about my education and my way of doing here:

Here is more proof of the fact that i have invented many scalable
algorithms and algorithms:

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/V9Go8fbF10k

More of my philosophy about indian meditation and detachment..

I have just used the archaic or nonstandard simple past tense and past
participle of hurt that is "hurted", from the 15th century to the
mid-19th century, hurted was used as a standard alternative to hurt and
various other spellings as the simple past tense and past participle of
to hurt. From the late 19th century, well-known writers have rarely used
it except in jocular fashion or in works for children. It is now
nonstandard, here it is, read about it here:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hurted

So i will correct my mistake:

I invite you to read the following interesting article about
indian meditation:

Meditation as a tool for Detachment

https://jothivita.com/meditation-as-a-tool-for-detachment/

So as you are noticing that i have just talked about indian meditation
by saying that indian meditation wants us to stop seeking
pleasure of the senses so that to lower our expectations so that
to not be hurt by our desires, and when you read the above article
about indian meditation you will notice that it is saying The following:

"Meditation becomes a tool to help develop Detachment"

So as you are noticing that i was correct by speaking as i was
speaking about indian meditation(read it below), but i think i am a
smart philosopher, and i make you notice that there is a logical
analogy between indian meditation and the philosophy of Friedrich
Nietzsche, since the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche wanted to
construct the superhumans from humans and this superhuman in the
philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche is a superhuman that has mastery over
his emotions and it is a superhuman who takes joy in simply existing,
so as you are noticing that indian meditation permits to attain this
level of control, since when you develop detachment with indian
meditation, it easy for you the process of becoming the superhuman of
Friedrich Nietzsche that has mastery over his emotions and who takes joy
in simply existing.

More of my philosophy about how to make friends..

I invite you to look at the following video of a beautiful white
european women:

I Have No Friends | Why I Don't and How I've Learned to be Okay

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umpAC4pKFV4

So as you are noticing in the above video, that the beautiful women is
saying that she has no friends, but i think i am smart and i will
make you understand my way of doing, so how do you think i am making a
lot of friends ? so by logical analogy you have to understand the way of
indian meditation, since indian meditation wants us to stop seeking
pleasure of the senses so that to lower our expectations so that
to not be hurt by our desires, so my way of doing looks like
indian meditation but it is not indian meditation, since by talking
to you as i am talking about my philosophy and by posting here my poems
of Love and by showing to you my kind of personality here in internet
and by showing to you my thoughts... i am like building universal Love,
but i am smart and i know that so that to build universal Love you have
to build a trust relationship with others or a high level of trust
relationship with others, and when you build this trust relationship
with others it becomes easy to become universal Love or it becomes easy
to make a lot of friends, so this is why i am building a trust
relationship with others here in internet and i know that it is the
basis of universal Love, so by logical analogy it is like indian
meditation that wants us to lower our expectations by stopping to seek
pleasure of senses so that to not be hurt by our desires, i mean that i
am like lowering my expectation by being this basis of universal Love
even if i have not a lot of friends, since i am confident that it is the
right way that make us easily become universal Love and make us easily
having a lot of friends. So i am positive.

More of my philosophy about the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche and more..

I have just looked at the following video about:

NIETZSCHE - L'exaltation de la vie

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

I think i am a philosopher that is smart, and i think that the
philosophy of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche is not good, since
he says that: "C'est la volonté de puissance qui doit s'exprimer, non
pas la morale des esclaves ou des faibles.", that means in english: "It
is the will to power that must be expressed, not the morals of the
slaves or the weak.", and he said that it needs to construct a new man
that we call the superhuman, but I think that i am a philosopher that is
smart and i am understanding the philosophy of the philosopher Friedrich
Nietzsche, and i think that it is an inferior philosophy, because it
seeks to construct the superhumans from humans and this superhuman in
the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche is a superhuman that has mastery
over his emotions and it is a superhuman who takes joy in simply
existing, so as you are noticing that it is an inferior philosophy,
because how can you be able to take joy in simply existing ? so as you
are noticing it is illogical and it is as illogical as Stoicism(read my
below thoughts about Stoicism) and i think that it is a violent
philosophy as Stoicism, this is why the philosophy of Friedrich
Nietzsche is a failure as Stoicism, and here is what i said about Stoicism:

More of my philosophy about my philosophy and about Stoicism and
Existentialism..

I invite you to read this very interesting article about philosophy:

Why philosophers could be the ones to transform your 2020

https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20200114-why-philosophers-could-be-the-ones-to-transform-your-2020

And notice that it says the following:

“The Stoics suggest that what’s most important in order to lead a good
life is internal rather than external. It’s about developing the right
character, the right state of mind,”

I think i am a philosopher that is "smart", so i make you notice the
logical bug in the above saying about Stoicism, and it is that
developing the right character and the right state of the mind in
Stoicism needs the cultural side that also comes from the external
reality and hence from the "purpose" and the "meaning of life", and we
can notice that Stoicism is not so smart, because how can we develop
self-control and fortitude as a means of overcoming destructive emotions
and such without the necessary requirements that have to give enough
hope or a meaning of life that gives the necessary self-control and
fortitude? so this is why i think that Stoicism as a philosophy is a
failure, so what's about existentialism of the philosopher Jean-Paul
Sartre ? Jean-Paul Sartre said that: "Existence precedes essence" or in
french: "L'existence précède l'essence", and it is the central claim of
existentialism of the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, but i think that
this claim is not so logical, since it is like a debate that asks the
question of: Wich is more important, the genetical side or cultural
side?, and we have to notice that the essence or nature of a human is
"not" enough and it needs for example a meaning of human life and a
purpose etc. so then notice that existentialism of Jean-Paul Sartre, and
like in absurdism of the philosopher Albert Camus, says that human life
is absurd, but here again my new philosophy says that human life is not
absurd, and read it below.

My philosophy about the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre and more..

I invite you to look at the following video about philosophy:

SARTRE - Le regard des autres

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJIM41TnDHI

I have just noticed by looking at the above video, that it is lacking,
since first you have to understand the following:

Jean-Paul Sartre said that: "Existence precedes essence" or in french:
"L'existence précède l'essence", and it is the central claim of
existentialism of the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre.

But i think people are not understanding the philosopher Jean-Paul
Sartre, since the functionality of our essence is also our genetics that
predetermines to a certain level what is our existence, so the essence
that is our genetics is also important, but since the philosopher
Jean-Paul Sartre was a communist, he has wanted to give much more "hope"
by saying: "Existence precedes essence", and i think this also means that
humans are by essence free, and this also means that the human nurture
is much more important than the human nature, but it is not truth, so i
think that Jean-Paul Sartre has made a big error by saying so. And
Jean-Paul Sartre has also accepted the views of the philosopher Albert
Camus about the absurdism of existence, but i am a philosopher and here
again i am not in accordance with it, since i say that human existence
is not absurd, and read my below thoughts to understand my philosophy:

How can you effectively "measure" how to appreciate human life ?

I think the most important thing is to know that we can measure it
relatively or absolutely, so wich one of the absolute or relative
measure is the right way of measuring ? so now you have to know that
i think that the meaning of human life can not be measured like
absolutely like was doing the philosopher Albert Camus since you will
start to say by measuring like absolutely that human life is "absurd",
and this is not good at all, so now you have to understand the very
basis of philosophy, that philosophy has to give you the will to survive
or the will to live, so then you logically notice that we can say that a
human is smart if he is smart relatively to the distribution of
smartness of humans or such, but if you start to measure it like
absolutely by saying that the smart human is not smart when you look at
all or measuring it by all the difficulties and constraints of our world
or of our universe, i think it is not the right way to do in philosophy,
since you have to give the will to people so that they survive and so
that they live, also you have to give a meaning to human life as
i am doing it in my philosophy(read about it below), so now i
can finally say that you are understanding the how to answer the
above philosophical question since you have to measure how
to appreciate human life "relatively" and "not" like absolutely by
looking at how our past humanity was much less advanced than our today
humanity etc. and so the other important thing is to also understand the
basis of my philosophy by reading it below:

I think that my philosophy is more smart, since in my philosophy
i am also explaining that the day permits to understand the night and
human life is like the alternance of the day and night that brings
beauty, since human life is difficulties and suffering that also permit
us to appreciate much more human life or that permits us to appreciate
much more our kind of civilization and i say in my philosophy that it
also gives more intensity to pleasures of life, so my philosophy doesn't
look like the other philosophies, so i invite you to holistically
understand my philosophy by carefully reading it here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/YZSYxV41-qI

And read my other thoughts of my philosophy here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/8jzgRGMOEHs

More of my philosophy about sex and about civilization..

I think i am smart, and when i look at sex, it is like layers of
sophistication from the low unsophisticated layer that is sex that comes
from our animal instincts to the much higher layer of sophistication
that transcend our animal instincts, sex is for me like an inferior
state of being alcoholic, since sex is for me a really inferior thing,
this is why i am working harder so that to transcend
towards a much higher level of sophistication, and this is
why you are seeing me talking about universal Love as i am talking, and
this is why i am talking about my philosophy and about my strengths,
so you have to read my below thoughts carefully so that to
understand my way of thinking and doing:

More of my philosophy about Gays and Lesbians and bisexuals..

I invite you to look at the following video about gays and lesbians in
France:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgOcE27EXN0

I have just quickly noticed how gays and lesbians and bisexuals of the
above video speak about there weaknesses, so i think that gays and
lesbians and bisexuals have the tendencies to speak about there
weaknesses as such, and it is not my way of doing, and as i can say in
french: "Si j'ai un bouton moche sur mon corps qui ne part pas,
devrais-je parler aux autres de ce bouton moche ? alors tu comprends
bien que ce n'est pas la bonne méthode de faire, car c'est mal vu de
parler ainsi de ses faiblesses aux autres, alors comme tu comprends bien
il faut du savoir-vivre ensemble, car les relations humaines ont besoin
de règles à suivre."

Here is the translation in english:

"If I have an ugly pimple on my body that won't go away, should I tell
others about that ugly pimple? So you understand that this is not the
right way to do, because it is frowned upon to talk about your
weaknesses to others in this way, so as you understand well, you have to
know that human relationships need rules to follow so that to be able
for us to be organized correctly into a society."

This is why you are noticing that i am talking as i am talking by also
showing my strenghts to others, so i invite you to read my following
thoughts so that to understand my kind of personality:

More of my philosophy about what is the american dream..

I will ask a philosophical question of:

Does the american dream exists? and if it exists what is it ?

I think the american dream is the fact that becoming rich doesn't come
only from being smart, since becoming rich can come from "creativity",
and I have just talked before about the importance of the following
statement in business:

"The focus should be on the product, since if the product is good
the profits will follow"

But notice that it is saying that if the product is good then the
profits will follow, so as you are noticing we have to define what
is a good product or service ? and does a good product or service only
comes from science or from engineering or from being smart? not at all
!, since the product and service can become good by the process of
creativity, and then we have to define creativity, and creativity needs
globalization, since creativity and innovation come from ideas
circulating and combining across nations and industries, and i invite
you to read about what is creativity in the following interesting web
page from Yale university:

What Is Creativity?

https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/what-is-creativity

And is the american dream the working hard ? i don't think so,
since i think that working efficiently is the the good way,
since read my following writing so that to notice it:

I invite you to look at the following interesting video to understand
that working efficiently can make you work much less hours,
for example Germany works really efficiently and it works much
less hours than Mexico or USA, so i invite you to look
at the following interesting video so that to understand
that working efficiently is a great thing:

Why is working harder making us poorer?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD784CHYhGM

More of philosophy about one of my proverbs about intellectual openness
and more..

I think i have just invented fast a proverb and i think it is really
important, and here it is:

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

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

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

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/ftf3lx5Rzxo

More of my philosophy about is Human smartness just a particular
survival strategy..

I think i am a smart philosopher and i will explain more,
notice in my below writing that the Senior Consultant (and former
Editor-in-Chief and Publishing Director) of New Scientist and Author of
After the Ice said the following:

"Human "smartness" is just a particular survival strategy"

I think it is stupid, because when you become rich using your smartness
you transcend "survival" and you cease to use smartness as only
a survival strategy and you can start to use your smartness to become
more and more rich or/and to living a much better human life etc. or
when you have a high salary you are not thinking much of the time about
survival since survival is only to remain alive, but you are living and
being in a much better human condition, so this proves that Human
smartness is not just a particular survival strategy.

More of my philosophy about beauty and about human smartness..

I think i am a philosopher that is smart, and as you have just noticed
i have just explained more the basis of my philosophy(read it below)
and now i will ask two philosophical questions and they are the following:

Are humans smarter than other animals?

And does universal beauty exists ?

So i will answer the first philosophical question by saying the following:

So i will start it by inviting you to read carefully the following
webpage from a Senior Consultant (and former Editor-in-Chief and
Publishing Director) of New Scientist and Author of After the Ice:

Why are humans smarter than other animals?

https://www.edge.org/response-detail/12021

So as you are noticing he is saying the following:


--
"The idea of human superiority should have died when Darwin came on the
scene.
Unfortunately, the full implications of what he said have been difficult
to take in: there is no Great Chain of Being, no higher and no lower.
All creatures have adapted effectively to their own environments in
their own way. Human "smartness" is just a particular survival strategy
among many others, not the top of a long ladder. It took a surprisingly
long time for scientists to grasp this. For decades, comparative
psychologists tried to work out the learning abilities of different
species so that they could be arranged on a single scale. Animal
equivalents of intelligence tests were used and people seriously asked
whether fish were smarter than birds. It took the new science of
ethology, created by Nobel-prize winners Konrad Lorenz, Niko Tinbergen
and Karl von Frisch, to show that each species had the abilities it
needed for its own lifestyle and they could not be not arranged on a
universal scale. Human smartness is no smarter than anyone else's
smartness. The question should have died for good."
--


So i think i am smart and say that the above webpage is not so smart,
because the logical reasoning defect is that he is first saying the
following:


"Human "smartness" is just a particular survival strategy"


This is the first logical defect, since he is like using boolean logic
by saying that human smartness is only a particular survival strategy,
and this is not correct logical reasoning, because we have like to be
fuzzy logic and say that not all humans are using smartness for only
survival, since we are not like animals, since we have not to think it
only societally, but we can also say there is a great proportion of
humans that have transcended there "survival" condition with there
smartness to be a much better human condition than only survival. So now
we can say with human smartness (and measure it with human smartness)
that the humans that have transcended there "survival" condition with
there smartness to be a much better human condition have a much superior
smartness than animals, since we can measure it with human smartness,
and here is the definition of surviving in the dictionary:

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/survive

So as you are noticing that survival is only to remain alive, so i am
logical in my thoughts above.

The second logical defect of the above webpage is the following:

Notice that the above webpage that he is saying the following:

"Strangley enough, even evolutionary biologists still get caught up with
the notion that humans stand at the apex of existence. There are
endless books from evolutionary biologists speculating on the reasons
why humans evolved such wonderful big brains, but a complete absence of
those which ask if a big brains is a really useful organ to have. The
evidence is far from persuasive. If you look at a wide range of
organisms, those with bigger brains are generally no more successful
than those with smaller brains — hey go extinct just as fast."

So i think that the above webpage is not right.

So notice again that he is saying that the brain must be successful in
survival, and this is not correct reasoning, since as i said above
smartness is not only about survival, since we have to measure it with
our smartness and notice that from also my above thoughts that we can be
humans that are much more smart than animals even if we go extinct.

So the important thing to notice in my above logical reasoning , is that
you have to measure smartness with smartness, it is the same as my
following logical proof about: Is beauty universal ? , here it is , read
it carefully:

I will make you understand with smartness what about the following webpage:

Look at the following webpage from BBC:

The myth of universal beauty

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150622-the-myth-of-universal-beauty

So notice in the above webpage that it is saying the following about beauty:

"Where starvation is a risk, heavier weight is more attractive"

So you have to understand that the above webpage from BBC is not smart,
i will make you understand with smartness that beauty is universal, so
if we take the following sentence of the above webpage:

"Where starvation is a risk, heavier weight is more attractive"

So you have to put it in the context of the above webpage, and
understand that the way of thinking of the webpage from BBC is not
smart, because it is saying that since in the above sentence starvation
is a risk , so heavier weight can be more attractive, but this can be
heavier weight that is not beautiful for the eyes, so it makes a
conclusion that universal beauty is not universal, but this is not smart
because we have not to measure beautifulness with only our eyes and
say that heavier weight that is not beautiful for the eyes is not
beautiful, because we have to measure it with smartness and say that
smartness says that in the above sentence that heavier weight that is
not beautiful for the eyes is beautiful for smartness because
starvation is a risk, so then with smartness we can say that beauty is
universal. So we have to know that that the system of reference of
measure is very important, by logical analogy we can say that measuring
beautifulness with the eyes is like measuring individual smartness with
only genetics, but measuring beautifulness with both the eyes and
smartness is like measuring individual smartness with both the
genetical and the cultural.

More of my philosophy about the problems of our humanity..

I think the Climate crisis that is a term describing global warming and
climate change will be solved by using science and technology and i have
posted about the new technologies that will be used to solve it, and i
think we can fix capitalism using some reforms and it is not so
difficult, but there is some problems that remain and they are the
following:

As you have noticed(read below), the global average ecological footprint
is 2.84 gha per person while the average biocapacity is 1.68 gha per
person; it takes 1.69 Earth to cover the consumption of humanity; and
this global average ecological footprint brings problems, so this global
average ecological footprint is growing more and more,
so economic growth can be separated from unsustainable resource
consumption and harmful pollution. It is what our humanity has to do by
also using science and technology.

Some benchmarks for the year 2014:

The global average ecological footprint is 2.84 gha per person while the
average biocapacity is 1.68 gha per person; it takes 1.69 Earth to cover
the consumption of humanity; and this global average ecological
footprint brings problems.

A French person needs 4.7 gha to maintain his standard of living. If all
humans consumed as much as a Frenchman, we would need 2.79 planets;

An American needs 8.37 gha for his consumption. If all humans consumed
like an American, we would need 4.97 planets;

A Brazilian has an ecological footprint of 3.08 hag (1.83 planet);

A Chinese has a footprint of 3.71 hag (2.21 planets);

An Indian has a footprint of 1.12 hag (0.67 planet).

a Haitian has a footprint of 0.67 hag (0.4 planet).


And the other problem that remains is the following:

Look at the following video to understand it:

Global Junk Food: How the Western Food Industry is Making Poor Countries Fat

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


Yet more of my philosophy about capitalism..


I just written the following:

---

More philosophy about why raising taxes destroys the economy and more..


I invite you to look at the following interesting video:

Why raising taxes destroys the economy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GChpnX44_Ns

So i think you are understanding more that raising taxes destroys
economy, so there remains an important thing and it is that we have to
fix capitalism in a smart way by more-effective regulation and not by
raising taxes, since there remain the following problem, read about it here:

One last chance to fix capitalism

https://hbr.org/2020/03/one-last-chance-to-fix-capitalism

---


So i invite you to look at the following video about capitalism:

How to Improve Capitalism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOaJe68C-bU

So as you notice in the above video that you can also fix capitalism by
giving voting rights and tax advantages to long-term shareholders and
not by raising taxes, and you need to have sovereign wealth funds and
national pension funds representative of the long term collective
interests etc, so i invite you to look the above video of "How to
improve capitalism" so that to understand more.

More of my philosophy about relative and absolute measuring..

I think i am a philosopher that is smart, so i will ask
a philosophical question of:

How can you effectively "measure" how to appreciate human life ?

I think the most important thing is to know that we can measure it
relatively or absolutely, so wich one of the absolute or relative
measure is the right way of measuring ? so now you have to know that
i think that the meaning of human life can not be measured like
absolutely like was doing the philosopher Albert Camus since you will
start to say by measuring like absolutely that human life is "absurd",
and this is not good at all, so now you have to understand the very
basis of philosophy, that philosophy has to give you the will to survive
or the will to live, so then you logically notice that we can say that a
human is smart if he is smart relatively to the distribution of
smartness of humans or such, but if you start to measure it like
absolutely by saying that the smart human is not smart when you look at
all or measuring it by all the difficulties and constraints of our world
or of our universe, i think it is not the right way to do in philosophy,
since you have to give the will to people so that they survive and so
that they live, also you have to give a meaning to human life as
i am doing it in my philosophy(read about it below), so now i
can finally say that you are understanding the how to answer the
above philosophical question since you have to measure how
to appreciate human life "relatively" and "not" like absolutely by
looking at how our past humanity was much less advanced than our today
humanity etc. and so the other important thing is to also understand the
basis of my philosophy by reading it below:

More of my philosophy about my philosophy..

I think i am a philosopher that is smart, and i have just looked
at the following video about Hedonism, i invite you to look at it:

Why Hedonism Fails

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

But i think that my philosophy is more smart, since in my philosophy
i am also explaining that the day permits to understand the night and
human life is like the alternance of the day and night that brings
beauty, since human life is difficulties and suffering that also permit
us to appreciate much more human life or that permits us to appreciate
much more our kind of civilization and i say in my philosophy that it
also gives more intensity to pleasures of life, so my philosophy doesn't
look like the other philosophies, so i invite you to holistically
understand my philosophy by carefully reading it here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/YZSYxV41-qI

And read my other thoughts of my philosophy here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/8jzgRGMOEHs

More of my philosophy about arabs and muslims in western countries..

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

I invite you to look at this interesting video about muslim immigrants
in Norway:

Norway's Muslim immigrants attend classes on western attitudes to women

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKY600o3CXw

I think that the norwegians don't understand correctly what is
arab and muslim countries and don't understand arab and muslim people,
and since i am a white arab , i invite to read my following proverbs and
thoughts so that to understand more arabs and muslims:

More of my philosophy about humans animal instincts..

I think i am smart, and i will say that humans are behaving like
inferior animals since they are also guided by there "tendencies" of
there animal instincts that want to be too much individualistic or
hedonistic or to want beautiful womens or need to make much more sex
with beautiful womens etc. but i think that the right way is that they
have to love and want to be morality and order, so it is by logical
analogy like my following proverb:

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

The appearance of a reality in my proverb above is by logical analogy
like the tendencies brought by animal instincts of humans that make us
not walk in or take the right path, so we have to educate correctly
humans and to make them love and want to be morality and order.

And i think i am a wise type of person and here my other proverb about
the wise man:

"A wise man is by "logical" analogy like the person that knows how to
prepare a good meal from ingredients, since a wise man is the one that
knows how to prepare a well organized society or well organized global
world from the people."

And Here is all my other new proverbs that i have invented fast:

"When you like a beautiful song, you will have the strong tendency
to want to hear it or to buy it, but when you are maturity of
responsability, it can become that you have to like the responsability
of hearing or buying the song and not the beauty of the song, so when
you are intellectual maturity you will start to think about responsability."

Here is my new proverb:

"When you are still organized like human animals you will have the
strong tendency to want to marry with a beautiful women, but when you
are critical thinking you have to ask yourself if all of us have to
marry a beautiful women. So when you are critical thinking you have to
think systemically about order"

Here is my other new proverb:

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

More philosophy about the problem of western white Europeans..

I have looked at many videos about western white Europeans life style,
i am not speaking about north americans, and i think i have found the
problem of western white Europeans, and here it is, it is what we call
Hedonism, and i invite you to look at the following video so that to
understand:

Why Hedonism fails

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

And i think that my philosophy is not Hedonism, but you have
to understand it holistically so that to understand it correctly,
so i invite you to read my thoughts of my philosophy so that
to understand, and here they are:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/YZSYxV41-qI

And read my other thoughts of my philosophy here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/8jzgRGMOEHs

More of my philosophy about my emancipation..

I am not like the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer movement
and i am not like the feminist movement or such organized groups, i am
alone constructing my emancipation by for example speaking and writing
french and english and arabic , but speaking and writing three languages
is not sufficient for me, so i have also got a Diploma in
microelectronics and informatics, and i have studied operational
research(it uses a lot of mathematics), and i have studied network
administration and i have worked as a network administrator, and i have
also worked as a software programmer consultant for many companies and i
have worked as a software programmer consultant for some hospitals in
USA, but it was not sufficient for me, so i have invented some softwares
such as my PerlZip that looks like PkZip from PkWare and i have sold it
to many companies and individuals around the world, and this was not
sufficient for me, so i have also invented many scalable algorithms and
algorithms and i have invented some very powerful software tools that i
will sell, and i am also writing two books about software programming
that i will sell, so i am alone constructing my "big" business by
inventing scalable algorithm and algorithms and by inventing powerful
software tools and by writing some important books in computer
programming and i will use exponential thinking and exponential growth
of capitalism so that to become powerful and rich.

You can read more about my education and my way of doing here:

Here is more proof of the fact that i have invented many scalable
algorithms and algorithms:

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/V9Go8fbF10k

More of my philosophy about money..

I think i am smart, and what do i think about money ?

Here is my thoughts of my philosophy and my other proverb about it:

More philosophy about adaptation..

As you have just noticed i have just written a proverb about adaptation
by saying: "You have to master the tools of adaptation", notice
that we can say: "the tools for adaptation" or "the tool of adaptation",
read in the following dictionary of psychology, and you will notice that
it is saying the "tools of intellectual adaptation", read here to notice it:

https://dictionary.apa.org/tools-of-intellectual-adaptation

So this proves that the saying of my proverb is correct, here is
my just new proverb and notice it:

"You have to master the tools of adaptation, such as having
a good education with a good education system, since getting
rich quickly is not the wise thing to do, since mastering the
tools of adaptation like having a good education will allow
you to get rich and will allow you to keep you rich."

More of my philosophy about Liberty and emancipation..

Now i want to talk about "emancipation", so i think you already know the
emancipation that comes from the feminist ideas, but how do you think i
am doing it ? i am not thinking about sexual emancipation because sex is
an inferior thing for me and read below how i am explaining it , so the
way that i am doing it is that i am seeking emancipation by using
exponential growth of capitalism and exponential thinking, i am not like
the feminist movement, i am not like a group, i am alone constructing my
"big" business by inventing scalable algorithm and algorithms and by
inventing powerful software tools and i will use exponential thinking
and exponential growth of capitalism so that to become powerful and rich.

More of my philosophy about dignity..

I want you to understand more my way of doing, i am for example
writing and posting my poems of Love and my thoughts of my philosophy in
front of you since i am constructing "confidence" and "order", and this
confidence and order for me is like the basis of universal Love,
since when you take a look at someone and you are confident with his
actions and he is also the right order, then this can easily become
Love, so i am of the ones that are convinced that we have to be this
kind of dignity that brings the universal Love, also i am working on
other of my software projects, for example i am actually writing two
important books about software programming and about my scalable
algorithms and algorithms that i will sell, also i will sell some of my
powerful software tools that i have invented and i think all this will
permit me to become rich, and as soon as i will become rich i will also
help the poor and needy people with my money, since being charity with
the poor and needy people is an important thing for me.

More precision and more philosophy about capitalism..

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

I think i am understanding more, since i think that capitalism
is not savagery, since i think it only needs some reforms, so when
you look at capitalism, it permits also the exponential progress
of our humanity that is powerful, so i think that we have not
to be pessimistic about capitalism, since i think that we don't need
a violent revolution but we need the following reforms:

I invite you to read the following interesting article:

One last chance to fix capitalism

https://hbr.org/2020/03/one-last-chance-to-fix-capitalism

So as you notice that the above interesting article says that so that to
fix capitalism it needs more-effective regulation, progressive taxation,
wealth taxes, or other measures.

More of my philosophy about our today world..

I am a techno-optimist and i think by looking at the exponential
progress of our humanity i think that we have to be optimistic about it,
also you have to read my following thoughts:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/2ws8UPouQbE

So as you notice my above previous thoughts in the above web link are
in accordance with the following new interesting article, and i invite
you to read it carefully:

Life in 2050: A Glimpse at Medicine in the Future

https://interestingengineering.com/life-in-2050-a-glimpse-at-medicine-in-the-future

And there is still an important thing to say and it is that
of the intellectual taste that we have to enhance much more so that
to push the quality of products and services upward and i think it is a
process that is so important, and you have to read about it here in my
thoughts of my philosophy about Adam Smith economist and philosopher:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/ftf3lx5Rzxo

More of my philosophy about the way of how i am solving the problem of
egoism and materialism..

I think i am a smart philosopher, you have to understand more
how i am solving the problem of egoism and materialism, so
i am showing you(read below) that egoism comes from normal
desire of being rich, since when you are not rich you are
not positive and not happy, so this causes that you are "egoistic" with
others, so then the problem becomes: How to make the not rich being
happy without being rich so that to not be egoistic with others?, and
this is what is explaining my philosophy, read it below:

More philosophy about the way of solving the problem of egoism and
materialism..

Here is more proof of the fact that i have invented many scalable
algorithms and algorithms:

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/V9Go8fbF10k

I have just written the following:

---

More philosophy about the human desire and human egoism..

I think i am a philosopher that is smart, and i think that
the problem comes not only from egoism but from the human "desire",
but here again we have to logically "distinguish", since we can
ask a philosophical question of what is the normal desire ?
so you can for example say that the constraints of human life
require from us to be rich so that to be happy, so the normal desire
becomes the desire of being rich, so this kind of normal desire makes us
egoist, so as you are noticing this becomes a psychologically normal
behavior, so then as you are noticing that we have to be smart and think
more, so how can we solve the problem ? i think that i am a smart
philosopher and i have solved the problem by bringing my thoughts of my
philosophy, and you can read how i have solved the problem here in my
thoughts of my philosophy, read it carefully here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/YZSYxV41-qI

And i have talked above about human desire and about egoism, and to
understand more about human egoism, i invite you to read my thoughts of
my philosophy about Adam Smith economist and philosopher:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/ftf3lx5Rzxo

and here:

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

Also read my other thoughts of my philosophy here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/nBO-dfRVMII

----


I think i am a philosopher that is smart, so i am explaining above that
egoism comes from the psychologically normal desire of wanting to be
rich, but you have to understand that the way of indian meditation is to
require to stop seeking pleasure of the senses to also try
to solve the problem of egoism that comes from the "desire", but
i don't think it is the right way to do, so the way of my new philosophy
is to seek much more a kind of pleasure of the senses and here it is:

Am i a philosopher that is a materialistic ?

No, i am not materialistic , i am a philosopher that is seeking like a
"balance" between being materialistic and not being materialistic , and
i am pragmatic, i will give you an example so that you understand my
philosophy:

I think that looking at the videos of youtube is like being not
materialistic, since a video on youtube is like the immaterial, so then
you can enjoy those pleasures of life on internet by looking at the
videos of youtube or by reading facebook etc. by being not
materialistic, so then i am a philosopher that is convinced that we can
be happy even if we are not "rich", since with the sophistication of
internet and such tools, i say that we can be happy without being rich
by accessing internet and enjoying pleasures of life of internet and
such tools with a very low price, and what i predict that in about 10
years from now, and with the exponential progress of our humanity, we
will be happy and much more happy without being rich since this
exponential progress will provide us with much more powerful tools that
enhance much more the quality of our lives.

The Consoomer: Consumerism is Nihilism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zZJ1BFQ1hw

I think the person that is talking in the above video is low IQ, i have
a high IQ and i answer the following:

Capitalism is a "tool" and you have to know how to use this tool and
capitalism is an "engine" that permits to create pleasures of life that
we enjoy (as services or products) so that to be happy(and this being
happy is the meaning of human life in my philosophy below), but notice
that this permits also the not rich to be happy because Mass production
in capitalism resulted in lower prices of consumer goods. Eventually,
economies of scale resulted in the most affordable price of any product
for the consumer without the manufacturer having to sacrifice profits,
and also look at how we are taking advantage of youtube videos or the
like in internet with a low price, and this low prices in capitalism
allows the not rich to be happy, and this at the same time avoids
totalitarianism such as communism and neo-nazism and nazism(because they
are "Fascism" of socialism that is against capitalism), read my below
philosophy to understand more, and notice that dictatorship of communism
of China is not communism, because it is using capitalism as an engine
that permits the people to be happy, so communism of China is not like
communism

More philosophy about R&D and economic growth and more..

I invite you to read the following interesting article that says
that in the last 50 years, R&D has not increased much economic growth,
but we have not to think just economic growth since we have to think the
standard of living, so then we have to understand that the standard of
living generally refers to wealth, comfort, material goods, and
necessities of certain classes in certain areas. So i think that R&D has
increased much the standard of living, so it is good for happiness.

How important is R&D for economic growth?

Read more here:

https://www.rdworldonline.com/how-important-is-rd-for-economic-growth/

More philosophy about why Globalization has become so important and more..

Why has Globalization become so important?

Read more here:

https://smallbusiness.chron.com/globalization-become-important-77671.html

And read the following study to know more about globalization:

The Economic Benefits of Globalization for Business and Consumers

http://ecipe.org/publications/the-economic-benefits-of-globalization-for-business-and-consumers/

More philosophy about venture capital in Silicon Valley and about the
future of financial stability and cyber risk and more..

I invite you to look at the following video, and i am not in accordance
with the english man that is speaking on the following video, because he
is too pessimistic by saying that the culture of venture capital in
Silicon Valley in USA has seen a dramatic shift, and it is that
investors care much less about investing in companies with the potential
to create a massive value and they care much more about investing in
companies that can scale quickly so that they can sell after that and
get more profit, so i think that it is not realistic to say so and it is
too pessimistic to say so, since i think that it is not at all so
problematic and i think that it just needs a more "smarter" culture of
investing and i think that USA is in a good economic shape, look at the
following video to notice how it is pessimistic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydeuxF0AkR8

And i invite you to read the following interesting article
about venture capital so that to understand:

http://parisinnovationreview.com/articles-en/silicon-valley-a-cluster-of-venture-capitalists

More political philosophy about Ray Dalio and about happiness..

Read about Ray Dalio here:

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

And look at the following video of him:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tw0wtyzW6nA

I think that Ray Dalio is not thinking correctly, since he speaks like
an economist and he is not a philosopher, and this way of doing is
lacking intelligence, so i will explain with my smartness:

Read the following about what is the Standard of living:

"Standard of living generally refers to wealth, comfort, material goods,
and necessities of certain classes in certain areas—or more objective
characteristics—whereas quality of life is more subjective and
intangible, such as personal liberty or environmental quality."

So i think that Ray Dalio is making a "mistake" since the world has very
much changed and i think i am a philosopher and Ray Dalio is not
understanding correctly my philosophy: So in my philosophy i am talking
about how to be happiness and joy even if we are not the standard of
living of being highly wealthy etc. i mean even if we are also having a
problem with unequal distribution of income and opportunities because of
globalization, i think we can still be happy and i am giving the way in
my following philosophy, so read my below thoughts of my philosophy so
that to understand:

More philosophy about the future of financial stability and cyber risk..

I have just read rapidly the following very interesting article,
i invite you to read it carefully:

The future of financial stability and cyber risk

https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-future-of-financial-stability-and-cyber-risk/

I think that we have to be positive about the future of financial
stability and cyber risk, since notice that the financial stability
depends on three things:

1- Leverage
2- Maturity and Risk Transformation
3- Procyclicality of the price of risk

Read the above article to notice it, but i think that for the first two,
i mean Leverage and Maturity and Risk Transformation, the financial
institutions have not to put all the eggs in the same basket, so
they need to diversify the risk correctly, and for the third that is the
Procyclicality of the price of risk, i think that it is less risky
since it depends on the "asset" prices that are diversified to a certain
level, and for the cyber risk i am positive since i think we are getting
much more sophisticated in cyber security. So i am positive.

More philosophy about Globalization..

I think that globalization is a good thing, but you have to be smart
and know how to take advantage of it, so i invite you to read
the following about the positive effects of Globalization on developing
countries such as:

1- Globalization has permitted developed nations to invest in less
developed nations which has lead to creation of jobs for poor people.

2- The health and education system in developing countries has benefited
in a positive way due to the contribution of globalization.

And about Globalization and the unequal distribution of income
read my below thoughts of my philosophy about human existence where i am
also speaking about it.

So i invite you to read the following article to notice it:

The effects of Globalization on developing countries

Read more here:

https://medium.com/@BonillaXM/the-effects-of-globalization-on-developing-countries-1e465257c400

And you have to know how to take advantage of exponential growth of
capitalism, so i invite you to read the following article
that speaks about it:

Capitalism switches from linear to exponential growth

http://parisinnovationreview.com/articles-en/capitalism-switches-from-linear-to-exponential-growth

And i invite you to read my thoughts of my philosophy here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/YZSYxV41-qI

Also i invite you to read more of my thoughts of my philosophy here:

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

Also i invite you to read more of my thoughts of my philosophy here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/ftf3lx5Rzxo

Also i invite you to read more of my thoughts of my philosophy here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/WeH9Oh7S-lc

Also you can read more about my thoughts of my philosophy about human
smartness in the following web link:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/Wzf6AOl41xs

More philosophy about the human existence..

I also invite you to read my following philosophy in my following
beautiful webpage about human existence where i am also speaking
about Globalization and the unequal distribution of income:

https://scalable68.godaddysites.com/f/my-philosophy-about-human-existence

More precision about here is my just new proverb and my other proverbs..

Here is more proof of the fact that i have invented many scalable
algorithms and algorithms:

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/V9Go8fbF10k

I think i am really smart, so i have just invented fast another proverb
and here it is:

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

And Here is all my other new proverbs that i have invented fast:

"When you like a beautiful song, you will have the strong tendency
to want to hear it or to buy it, but when you are maturity of
responsability, it can become that you have to like the responsability
of hearing or buying the song and not the beauty of the song, so when
you are intellectual maturity you will start to think about responsability."

Here is my new proverb:

"When you are still organized like human animals you will have the
strong tendency to want to marry with a beautiful women, but when you
are critical thinking you have to ask yourself if all of us have to
marry a beautiful women. So when you are critical thinking you have to
think systemically about order"

Here is my other new proverb:

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

And here is my new proverbs:

"The intelligent favors healthy eating over tasty eating, and by analogy
we can also say that the intelligent also favors the effective speaker
over the sweet talker"

"L'intelligent privilégie le manger santé au manger qui a du goût, et
par analogie on peut aussi dire que l'intelligent aussi privilégie le
parleur efficace au beau parleur."

Here is my just new proverb:

"Even silence makes us advance, since a human life full of silence is
not the right diversity as a balance that makes the good reliance"

Here is my other just new proverb in english and french:

"Learn to lift your head with dignity because even the sea has
threatening waves."

"Apprends à élever la tête avec dignité car même la mer a des vagues qui
menacent."

And here is my other new proverbs, read them carefully:

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/w7wgcbkEEIQ

And read my other new proverbs here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/FPdu0B9_Vlc



Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.