Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
More political philosophy about: Is human life absurd?
0 views
Skip to first unread message
amin...@gmail.com
Aug 27, 2020, 8:15:18 PM8/27/20
to
Hello...
More political philosophy about: Is human life absurd?
I am a white arab, and i think i am smart since i have invented
many scalable algorithms, so i will do more political philosophy
about: Is human life absurd ?
So if you have noticed below in my writing, i am inviting you to read
my following political philosophy about Morality:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.culture.morocco/7UmkfURwoU4
So as you are noticing on my thoughts of my web link above, i am not in accordance with the "absurdism" of philosopher Albert Camus, this is why i have written my thoughts of my political philosophy above about Morality, so you have to read them carefully so that to understand, so i think that the mistake of the philosopher Albert Camus is that in his time there was still little or not enough progress of humanity, this is
why we can consider the absurdism of Albert Camus as being subjectivity
that didn't understood that we are actually experiencing an exponential progress of humanity, so we have to be much more positive about
our humanity , since our humanity will soon become "much" "much" more powerful than our today humanity, please read my following thoughts to notice it:
----
You will notice that in political philosophy and morality beauty is
systemic and you will notice that i am explaining that we are not too bad beauty(read my below logical proof), since i think we are also this
"satisfaction" of being the effort, but i am showing below that we are
not beautiful, but i think that our satisfaction is becoming greater and
greater very "quickly" because of the "exponential" progress, so we have
not to be pessimistic , because I think that to be able for us to be
"beautiful" we have like to play it smartly like playing smartly at a
game of chess, being beautiful needs an "effort" of being "smartness",
this is why i am talking as i am talking because i am a strong believer
that "dignity" too comes from smartness, since we can notice it quickly
today by the very important fact that the beautiful of what we call
exponential progress comes too from the following:
Here is the 6 D’s of Exponential Growth:
Digitalization: Once something goes from physical to digital, it gains
the ability to grow exponentially.
Deception: Initial exponential growth is such small increases (.01 to
.02) that it goes largely unnoticed.
Disruption: Either a new market is created, or an old one is overturned.
You either disrupt yourself, or you are disrupted.
Demonetization: The major assets in the industry will become free. Free
music, free reading, free communication.
Dematerialization: Removal of the original product entirely, lumping
alarm clocks, cameras, notebooks, and phones into one smartphone.
Democratization: The costs drop so low that the technology becomes
available to everyone.
Read more here:
The 6 Ds of Tech Disruption: A Guide to the Digital Economy
https://singularityhub.com/2016/11/22/the-6-ds-of-tech-disruption-a-guide-to-the-digital-economy/?fbclid=IwAR1Jx4VJYvIce-BJXeVcajBYjwdKvvP_2y4WOd-2DEtGvXnOye0yzkQVdQU&utm_content=bufferb9891&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook-hub&utm_campaign=buffer
Also capitalism switches from linear to exponential growth
Read more here:
http://parisinnovationreview.com/articles-en/capitalism-switches-from-linear-to-exponential-growth
And read the following:
Exponential Progress: Can We Expect Mind-Blowing Changes In The Near Future
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfM5HXpfnJQ
But as you have just noticed that it is also related to my following
thoughts:
The future of innovation is in software
I keep reading about how the future will be shaped by new cheaper fuel
or amazing new medications. I believe that we are misreading the trends.
Yes, we will have better medications and cheaper fuel in the future.
However, I believe we are clearly in the mist of an information
revolution. The future will be shaped by software, defined broadly.
Specifically, I believe that:
Tele-work, tele-play, tele-learning will soon represent 80% of our lives.
There is much more room for innovation in software than in hardware.
There are few ways to build a house, but many more ways to build a
virtual house.
Read more here:
https://lemire.me/blog/2008/10/27/the-future-of-innovation-is-in-software/
And this related to my following thoughts:
Dematerialising the future: what role can technology and consumers play?
I have just posted before about Dematerialization Through Services,
read it here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/soc.culture.usa/rVZUcghUe5E
The above makes it clear that the evidence indicates that
‘dematerialization through services’ is not a valid policy for
reducing carbon emissions.
But Dematerialising is still important, read the following to notice it:
Dematerialising the future: what role can technology and consumers play?
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/dematerialising-future-technology-consumers
Also read my following thoughts to notice:
About capitalism and the positive correlation between economic growth
and environmental performance..
As an economy expands, resource usage becomes increasingly efficient and
economies tend to move away from ecologically harmful behavior, while
raising the standard of living of its participants. In fact, the 2018
Yale Environmental Performance Index shows a clear positive correlation
between economic growth and environmental performance, read about it here:
https://epi.envirocenter.yale.edu/2018/report/category/hlt
So i think that we are on the right path, so as you are noticing that we
have to dematerialize much more so that to avoid Environmental problems,
but how will look like our near future that will be much more
dematerialized ? look here in the following video to notice that one of
our fellow techlead and software developer is doing it by much more
dematerializing his life and he is happy by doing it:
My minimalist apartment (as a millionaire)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUeqHhbQWFc
More political philosophy about is philosophy just pure reasoning..
I have just read the following new article from the white supremacist
website from USA called National Vanguard:
https://nationalvanguard.org/2020/08/ethics-discovered-not-decided/
So as you are noticing he is making a big mistake, since he is saying
that:
"Philosophy doesn’t gather the facts of reality within itself, whether we are speaking about physics or about ethics. It is as blind for one as it is for the other. Nobody is privileged to choose what is moral, which is what philosophers are really trying to do, however they might present it as an adventure of discovery through pure reason.
You can’t discover anything through pure reason. You might form a self-consistent conjecture that way, but you haven’t made a discovery unless you have gathered data from Nature via observation or experiment. Even the laws of logic weren’t deduced by logic. An attempt to do so would involve an invalid circular argument. Rather, mankind did a lot of informal research, as part of our general life experience, regarding which forms of argument were reliable and which forms of argument were unreliable. That’s the empiricism that informed Aristotle, who first codified the laws of logic."
So as you are noticing he is saying that Philosophy doesn’t gather the facts of reality within itself, so he is saying that Philosophy is just pure reasoning, but i think he is not right because read my following thoughts of my political philosophy about Morality:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.culture.morocco/7UmkfURwoU4
So, let's take an example of my writing, here is what i am writing:
---
Read the following:
https://blog.oup.com/2019/05/albert-camus-problem-absurdity/
And notice that it is saying the following:
"The philosopher asserts that we should embrace the absurdity of human
existence and take on the purpose of creating value and meaning. Efforts
and resilience – not suicide and despair – are the appropriate responses."
---
So as you are noticing that even the philosopher Albert Camus has said that humans have to take on the purpose of creating value
and meaning, and you can easily notice that Albert Camus is saying:
"to take on purpose of creating value and meaning", because he knows about the facts of reality and he has based his thinking of his philosophy on facts of reality, so as you are noticing that philosophy is not pure reasoning without any facts of reality.
More precision about more political philosophy about the good taste..
I am a white arab, and i think i am smart since i have invented many scalable algorithms, and today i will speak about the good taste..
So let us look in the dictionary at what is the taste, it says the following:
"The taste is the sense by which the qualities and flavour of a substance are distinguished by the taste buds."
Read here in the dictionary to notice it:
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/taste
But when you are smart you will also notice that there is also
the intellectual taste from culture or genetics, i mean that
when you are genetically more rational and more smart you will notice that this more rational and more smart is also intellectual taste since with it you are able to be more efficiently selective of your knowledge, so it permits you to enhance quality, and this is also the same for culture, i mean when you enhance more your culture it enhances your intellectual taste and it permits you to be more efficiently selective of your knowledge, so it permits you to enhance quality.
So as you are noticing that the intellectual taste is so important..
And i think that i have a good intellectual taste, read my
thoughts here to notice it:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.programming/eAvSXpZwFgE
Or read also my following thoughts to notice it:
https://community.idera.com/developer-tools/general-development/f/getit-and-third-party/72501/pagerank-algorithm---the-mathematics-of-google-search
Or read my following thoughts to notice it:
https://community.idera.com/developer-tools/general-development/f/getit-and-third-party/71464/about-turing-completeness-and-parallel-programming
This also why i said the following:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a white arab, and i think i am more smart and i am an inventor of
many scalable algorithms, but today i will speak about a very important
thing and it is how to build a civilization, because i think that we
have to be smart and notice that so that to build a civilization there
is a very important requirement and it is that it must be an effort of
building a civilization, so we have not to be like a coward that neglect
to be this effort of building a civilization, so the effort of building
a civilization is so important, so we have to be responsability,
and also we have to know by how we have to be guided to this effort of
building a civilization, so we have to be guided by the good taste
that also permits to be efficiently selective to be able to be a greater
quality or perfection and we have to be not violence that permits to be
less individualistic and that permits to be more order and that permits
to be more organized. And read the following about the good taste:
Why we should stand up for good taste
https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20140605-what-makes-good-taste
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So as you are noticing that i am not saying above that civilization
needs smartness, because you have to understand that since it is
inherent to a civilization that it needs smartness, so i am not talking
about it, i am just talking about the above important requirements to be
a civilization, and you will notice that i am talking about the
following requirement of being civilization: "that we have to be not
violence that permits to be less individualistic and that permits to be
more order and that permits to be more organized", so as you are
noticing that, like in democracy and in morality, it is also extremism
of violence that has to be avoided in a civilization and this is in
accordance with the tendency of the essence of morality(read below to notice it).
Also i said the following(and notice that i am speaking about
how to be selective of your knowledge):
Now today i will do political philosophy about Pedagogy..
Can we ask the question of: What must be an efficient Pedagogy today?,
i think that we have to notice that the exponential progress
and the law of accelerating returns are influencing Pedagogy,
because today we have to be more efficient at learning,
because i think that the level of sophistication of today
is much more than the past and i think that this has
as a cause that we have to be much more sophisticated than
the past to be able to be efficient learning, i think that this is
the "first" requirement of today Pedagogy, and more than that
we have to define the other main parts of what is it to be efficient learning, i mean what are the main parts of "efficient learning" that have a great importance ? take for example choosing the right tools for
learning , so the first question of how to choose the right tools for learning is to know how to choose the right tools, not only that but to be able for the tool to be the right tool, the learning of the right tool must be made more "easier", now you are noticing
that the parts of efficient learning are becoming more clear,
this is why i said before in my political philosophy
the following that permits you to understand more what i am saying:
What is happening in my brain ?
I will speak more about me so that you understand my way of doing since
it is also like my philosophy, to be more smart you have to be capable
of reducing efficiently "complexity" so that to be efficient and so that
to be more successful, but how can you do it ? you have to be able
to know about the steps that guides you into the right direction,
first i will speak about my way so that you understand me better,
first step you have to be able to "prioritize" efficiently, because
to be able to be successful you have to prioritize, so look for example
at me, i have decided to "study" more and to study more "efficiently" so that to be more successful, but this is not "sufficient" to know, because to be able to be efficient at reducing complexity you have to be able to be efficiently selective of your knowledge, and this efficiently "selective" has to adhere in its turn to the process of being efficient at reducing "complexity", so you have to be able to select "efficiently" "efficient" knowledge that is more "easy" to learn so that to reduce complexity, thus you have to be able to ask "questions" to this or that right persons to be able to be efficient at selecting your "knowledge", next step you have to be "tenacity" at studying efficiently and you have to study more and more and you have to ask questions to your professors and next step after you have been able to learn more and more you have to be able at being efficient at "reusability" of your efficient knowledge and this is a very important step , so don't neglect efficient "reusability" of your knowledge, this is also the steps that i have followed and i have also used my "smartness" to be more efficient.
More political philosophy about civilization..
So now i will do more political philosophy about capitalism and governance, i am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have invented many scalable algorithms, now you will hear that Marxism is scientific or communism is scientific, but i don't think they are scientific, since as you are noticing i am using my fluid intelligence so that to logically prove, so first you are noticing that we have to be Meritocracy, but Meritocracy has to define what is the right "value", is the right value only a useful utility ? so now you are understanding that if we define it by simply saying that it is a useful utility to people, so now we are not respecting the principles of Morality, since we have to make our civilization go forward towards more and more perfection, so this going forward towards more and more perfection sets the usefulness of the utility , so then it sets the value, so then you are noticing that Morality is like going forward towards more and more perfection and this process enhance the "quality" and the quality of the utility, so then it sets the value and it sets the usefulness of the utility, and i think this is part of the essence of a civilization.
So read my thoughts of my political philosophy about morality here to notice it:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.culture.morocco/7UmkfURwoU4
But now you will notice that there is something happening, it is
that we have to know how to "tune" diversity and to tune morality so that to not degenerate into a too violent system, and you will notice it by my following thoughts:
More political philosophy about white supremacism and neo-nazism..
Read the following new article from a white supremacist website from USA called national vanguard:
We Know The True American Type And We Know The Liberal
https://nationalvanguard.org/2020/08/we-know-the-true-american-type-and-we-know-the-liberal/
So i am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have invented many
scalable algorithms, so i have to be frank, so look at the following writing of the above article:
"Today it teaches the doctrine of liberalism with its pacifism, its love for the inferior and misbegotten, its internationalism which makes a virtue out of treason, its hatred of all who possess strong national feelings, its toothless desire for racial equality, and its tolerance of everything and everyone, particularly the alien and the unfit."
So as you are noticing that the above article is making a logical inconsistency, since take for example "beauty", we can say by
the same logic as the above article that since beauty is much
less important than technical efficiency, so we have to pay
beauty much less money than technical efficiency, but if
you say so you are questioning the very basic fondations of what
we call a civilization, since our kind of civilization comes with a kind
of tolerance that permits it , this is part of the backbone of our civilization, it is also this kind of tolerance that permits us
to be the right tolerance and compassion towards the unfit
and towards the alien, and if you change this, i think this will make
our societies much more and too violent societies, so you have to understand it so that to understand the backbone of our civilization. Second logical inconsistency of the above article, it is that those
white supremacists are giving too much importance to genetics, neglecting at same time the power of culture and learning and awareness that permit or can permit other ethnic groups such as arabs and south americans and indians to become much better humans.
More precision about capitalism and about National Vanguard..
I will be more rigorous, so read again:
I have just read the following article from a white supremacist website
called National Vanguard:
Why Capitalism Fails
https://nationalvanguard.org/2015/07/why-capitalism-fails/
And it is saying the following about why capitalism fails:
"Capitalism permits inheritance, the command transfer of private property to a designated new owner upon the death of the previous owner. And therein is the flaw: inherited wealth isn’t earned by its owner, yet it leads to a class segregation of men that has nothing to do with how much wealth they have earned; i.e., nothing to do with how much or how well or how significantly they have worked."
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have invented many scalable algorithms, and i will answer with my fluid intelligence:
I think the above article is not taking into account the risk factor and
and the smartness factor, so there have to be mechanisms, that are
like engines, that "encourage" to or/and "make" a part of the people work by taking risks or great risks and by doing there best (so that to become rich) or/and that "encourage" to or/and "make" the smartest to give there best with there smartness (so that to become rich), so i think capitalism has those mechanisms in form of rewards by allowing to become "rich" and in form of rewards by allowing inheritance, the command transfer of private property to a designated new owner upon the death of the previous owner: Since it "encourages" to or/and "makes" a part of the people work by taking risks and by doing there best (so that to become rich) or/and it encourages to or/and makes the smartest give there best with there smartness (so that to become rich).
And notice that i am also defining taking a "risk" as working "hard".
And the above article is saying the following:
"Capitalism constantly looks for ways to reduce labor costs. Automation made human labor less necessary than it had been when capitalism first appeared. When automation did appear, people who had the talent, the skills, and the motivation to make contributions began to find no jobs, or to become uncompetitive with mass-production if they tried to employ themselves."
I think it is not true, because read the following:
https://singularityhub.com/2019/01/01/ai-will-create-millions-more-jobs-than-it-will-destroy-heres-how/
And read the following:
Here is the advantages and disadvantages of automation:
Following are some of the advantages of automation:
1. Automation is the key to the shorter workweek. Automation will allow
the average number of working hours per week to continue to decline,
thereby allowing greater leisure hours and a higher quality life.
2. Automation brings safer working conditions for the worker. Since
there is less direct physical participation by the worker in the
production process, there is less chance of personal injury to the worker.
3. Automated production results in lower prices and better products. It
has been estimated that the cost to machine one unit of product by
conventional general-purpose machine tools requiring human operators may
be 100 times the cost of manufacturing the same unit using automated
mass-production techniques. The electronics industry offers many
examples of improvements in manufacturing technology that have
significantly reduced costs while increasing product value (e.g., colour
TV sets, stereo equipment, calculators, and computers).
4. The growth of the automation industry will itself provide employment
opportunities. This has been especially true in the computer industry,
as the companies in this industry have grown (IBM, Digital Equipment
Corp., Honeywell, etc.), new jobs have been created.
These new jobs include not only workers directly employed by these
companies, but also computer programmers, systems engineers, and other
needed to use and operate the computers.
5. Automation is the only means of increasing standard of living. Only
through productivity increases brought about by new automated methods of
production, it is possible to advance standard of living. Granting wage
increases without a commensurate increase in productivity
will results in inflation. To afford a better society, it is a must to
increase productivity.
Following are some of the disadvantages of automation:
1. Automation will result in the subjugation of the human being by a
machine. Automation tends to transfer the skill required to perform work
from human operators to machines. In so doing, it reduces the need for
skilled labour. The manual work left by automation requires lower skill
levels and tends to involve rather menial tasks (e.g., loading and
unloading workpart, changing tools, removing chips, etc.). In this
sense, automation tends to downgrade factory work.
2. There will be a reduction in the labour force, with resulting
unemployment. It is logical to argue that the immediate effect of
automation will be to reduce the need for human labour, thus displacing
workers.
3. Automation will reduce purchasing power. As machines replace workers
and these workers join the unemployment ranks, they will not receive the
wages necessary to buy the products brought by automation. Markets will
become saturated with products that people cannot afford to purchase.
Inventories will grow. Production will stop. Unemployment will reach
epidemic proportions and the result will be a massive economic depression.
And to know more about economy and capitalism, please read my following thoughts:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.culture.morocco/wlJu5j1xhPk
And read more of my thoughts of my political philosophy here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.culture.morocco/8j-rboLzi38
More political philosophy about Meritocracy..
Read the following article about Meritocracy from the Atlantic:
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/12/meritocracy/418074/
So as you notice it says:
“The pursuit of meritocracy is more difficult than it appears,”
So i think in Meritocracy we can not be strict equality,
so we have to get into the details and into the calculations to tune
it correctly and efficiently so that to make Meritocracy efficient and at the same time less problematic, but we have to notice that Meritocracy is still important.
Read my following previous thoughts of my political philosophy:
More political philosophy about responsability..
I have just read the following article about Putin:
https://www.newsweek.com/putin-says-communism-comes-bible-compares-lenin-saint-781328
And notice that it says the following:
"But Putin argues that like Christianity, communism preaches "freedom, brotherhood, equality." He called the Moral Code of the Builder of Communism, a pamphlet of guiding principles for all party members, a "primitive excerpt from the Bible.""
I agree that the communism was about "freedom, brotherhood, equality.",
but we have to be pragmatic, so we have to be smart and play it smartly since we have to also know how to address the problem of hate, so there must be "responsability", since if we simply call people to freedom and brotherhood and equality, it is not pragmatic, since we have to call them first to responsability that permits to bring such as those qualities, and we have also to be pragmatic since we can not be strict equality(since it is also not Meritocracy, so it is not efficient), but we can be solidarity and collaboration, so now you are understanding why i am talking as i am talking about nationalism and about hate in my thoughts of my political philosophy(read more about hate in my thoughts below), so here is my thoughts of my political philosophy about nationalism:
More political philosophy about globalization and nationalism..
I am a white arab and i think i am more smart, so today i will
talk about a very important subject about Globalization and nationalism,
so i will invite you to look at the following video of Marine Le Pen of
the far-right political party in France:
Marine Le Pen explains why nationalism is important
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNpI9wKnE8Q
As you notice that Marine Le Pen is saying in french that the
fight today is between nationalism and globalization, since
Marine Le Pen says that globalization is a treat to national
identity and is a treat to national sovereignty, but i think that Marine Le Pen is not understanding correctly globalization, since i think that nationalism is too much competition and communism and socialism is too much collaboration , so i think the best way is to seek like a balance between collaboration and competition and when we look
at globalization you will notice that we are collaborating with others by for example sharing Open Source softwares or Free softwares or PhD papers or knowledge on internet etc, and we are also competition by not collaborating with others, and with this new kind of model we are noticing that we are not just one identity like being french, but we are becoming multiple identities because this kind of new model is making a part of us that collaborate "universal", and this is why i think that Marine Le Pen is not understanding correctly this new kind of model of like seeking a balance between competition and collaboration , and i think that this new model is better because it is more efficient , because i think this partly collaboration of this new model is good and more efficient for creativity, innovation, adaptability and speed of progress, i also think in capitalism the price of internet has gotten cheap and the price of computers has gotten cheap, so we are able today to access internet with a low price and benefit from "collaboration" and also sharing in internet, for example look at me, i have invented many scalable algorithms and i have decided to share some of them with the others, and it is of course collaboration , so look for example at my following inventions of scalable algorithms that i have shared with others, here they are:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-mlock
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-reference-counting-with-efficient-support-for-weak-references
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-rwlock
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-rwlock-that-works-accross-processes-and-threads
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.programming.threads/VaOo1WVACgs
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/an-efficient-threadpool-engine-with-priorities-that-scales-very-well
Also i have decided to not share others of my scalable algorithms and it is competition, so i am seeking like a balance between collaboration and competition.
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
More political philosophy about: Is human life absurd?
I am a white arab, and i think i am smart since i have invented
many scalable algorithms, so i will do more political philosophy
about: Is human life absurd ?
So if you have noticed below in my writing, i am inviting you to read
my following political philosophy about Morality:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.culture.morocco/7UmkfURwoU4
So as you are noticing on my thoughts of my web link above, i am not in accordance with the "absurdism" of philosopher Albert Camus, this is why i have written my thoughts of my political philosophy above about Morality, so you have to read them carefully so that to understand, so i think that the mistake of the philosopher Albert Camus is that in his time there was still little or not enough progress of humanity, this is
why we can consider the absurdism of Albert Camus as being subjectivity
that didn't understood that we are actually experiencing an exponential progress of humanity, so we have to be much more positive about
our humanity , since our humanity will soon become "much" "much" more powerful than our today humanity, please read my following thoughts to notice it:
----
You will notice that in political philosophy and morality beauty is
systemic and you will notice that i am explaining that we are not too bad beauty(read my below logical proof), since i think we are also this
"satisfaction" of being the effort, but i am showing below that we are
not beautiful, but i think that our satisfaction is becoming greater and
greater very "quickly" because of the "exponential" progress, so we have
not to be pessimistic , because I think that to be able for us to be
"beautiful" we have like to play it smartly like playing smartly at a
game of chess, being beautiful needs an "effort" of being "smartness",
this is why i am talking as i am talking because i am a strong believer
that "dignity" too comes from smartness, since we can notice it quickly
today by the very important fact that the beautiful of what we call
exponential progress comes too from the following:
Here is the 6 D’s of Exponential Growth:
Digitalization: Once something goes from physical to digital, it gains
the ability to grow exponentially.
Deception: Initial exponential growth is such small increases (.01 to
.02) that it goes largely unnoticed.
Disruption: Either a new market is created, or an old one is overturned.
You either disrupt yourself, or you are disrupted.
Demonetization: The major assets in the industry will become free. Free
music, free reading, free communication.
Dematerialization: Removal of the original product entirely, lumping
alarm clocks, cameras, notebooks, and phones into one smartphone.
Democratization: The costs drop so low that the technology becomes
available to everyone.
Read more here:
The 6 Ds of Tech Disruption: A Guide to the Digital Economy
https://singularityhub.com/2016/11/22/the-6-ds-of-tech-disruption-a-guide-to-the-digital-economy/?fbclid=IwAR1Jx4VJYvIce-BJXeVcajBYjwdKvvP_2y4WOd-2DEtGvXnOye0yzkQVdQU&utm_content=bufferb9891&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook-hub&utm_campaign=buffer
Also capitalism switches from linear to exponential growth
Read more here:
http://parisinnovationreview.com/articles-en/capitalism-switches-from-linear-to-exponential-growth
And read the following:
Exponential Progress: Can We Expect Mind-Blowing Changes In The Near Future
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfM5HXpfnJQ
But as you have just noticed that it is also related to my following
thoughts:
The future of innovation is in software
I keep reading about how the future will be shaped by new cheaper fuel
or amazing new medications. I believe that we are misreading the trends.
Yes, we will have better medications and cheaper fuel in the future.
However, I believe we are clearly in the mist of an information
revolution. The future will be shaped by software, defined broadly.
Specifically, I believe that:
Tele-work, tele-play, tele-learning will soon represent 80% of our lives.
There is much more room for innovation in software than in hardware.
There are few ways to build a house, but many more ways to build a
virtual house.
Read more here:
https://lemire.me/blog/2008/10/27/the-future-of-innovation-is-in-software/
And this related to my following thoughts:
Dematerialising the future: what role can technology and consumers play?
I have just posted before about Dematerialization Through Services,
read it here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/soc.culture.usa/rVZUcghUe5E
The above makes it clear that the evidence indicates that
‘dematerialization through services’ is not a valid policy for
reducing carbon emissions.
But Dematerialising is still important, read the following to notice it:
Dematerialising the future: what role can technology and consumers play?
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/dematerialising-future-technology-consumers
Also read my following thoughts to notice:
About capitalism and the positive correlation between economic growth
and environmental performance..
As an economy expands, resource usage becomes increasingly efficient and
economies tend to move away from ecologically harmful behavior, while
raising the standard of living of its participants. In fact, the 2018
Yale Environmental Performance Index shows a clear positive correlation
between economic growth and environmental performance, read about it here:
https://epi.envirocenter.yale.edu/2018/report/category/hlt
So i think that we are on the right path, so as you are noticing that we
have to dematerialize much more so that to avoid Environmental problems,
but how will look like our near future that will be much more
dematerialized ? look here in the following video to notice that one of
our fellow techlead and software developer is doing it by much more
dematerializing his life and he is happy by doing it:
My minimalist apartment (as a millionaire)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUeqHhbQWFc
More political philosophy about is philosophy just pure reasoning..
I have just read the following new article from the white supremacist
website from USA called National Vanguard:
https://nationalvanguard.org/2020/08/ethics-discovered-not-decided/
So as you are noticing he is making a big mistake, since he is saying
that:
"Philosophy doesn’t gather the facts of reality within itself, whether we are speaking about physics or about ethics. It is as blind for one as it is for the other. Nobody is privileged to choose what is moral, which is what philosophers are really trying to do, however they might present it as an adventure of discovery through pure reason.
You can’t discover anything through pure reason. You might form a self-consistent conjecture that way, but you haven’t made a discovery unless you have gathered data from Nature via observation or experiment. Even the laws of logic weren’t deduced by logic. An attempt to do so would involve an invalid circular argument. Rather, mankind did a lot of informal research, as part of our general life experience, regarding which forms of argument were reliable and which forms of argument were unreliable. That’s the empiricism that informed Aristotle, who first codified the laws of logic."
So as you are noticing he is saying that Philosophy doesn’t gather the facts of reality within itself, so he is saying that Philosophy is just pure reasoning, but i think he is not right because read my following thoughts of my political philosophy about Morality:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.culture.morocco/7UmkfURwoU4
So, let's take an example of my writing, here is what i am writing:
---
Read the following:
https://blog.oup.com/2019/05/albert-camus-problem-absurdity/
And notice that it is saying the following:
"The philosopher asserts that we should embrace the absurdity of human
existence and take on the purpose of creating value and meaning. Efforts
and resilience – not suicide and despair – are the appropriate responses."
---
So as you are noticing that even the philosopher Albert Camus has said that humans have to take on the purpose of creating value
and meaning, and you can easily notice that Albert Camus is saying:
"to take on purpose of creating value and meaning", because he knows about the facts of reality and he has based his thinking of his philosophy on facts of reality, so as you are noticing that philosophy is not pure reasoning without any facts of reality.
More precision about more political philosophy about the good taste..
I am a white arab, and i think i am smart since i have invented many scalable algorithms, and today i will speak about the good taste..
So let us look in the dictionary at what is the taste, it says the following:
"The taste is the sense by which the qualities and flavour of a substance are distinguished by the taste buds."
Read here in the dictionary to notice it:
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/taste
But when you are smart you will also notice that there is also
the intellectual taste from culture or genetics, i mean that
when you are genetically more rational and more smart you will notice that this more rational and more smart is also intellectual taste since with it you are able to be more efficiently selective of your knowledge, so it permits you to enhance quality, and this is also the same for culture, i mean when you enhance more your culture it enhances your intellectual taste and it permits you to be more efficiently selective of your knowledge, so it permits you to enhance quality.
So as you are noticing that the intellectual taste is so important..
And i think that i have a good intellectual taste, read my
thoughts here to notice it:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.programming/eAvSXpZwFgE
Or read also my following thoughts to notice it:
https://community.idera.com/developer-tools/general-development/f/getit-and-third-party/72501/pagerank-algorithm---the-mathematics-of-google-search
Or read my following thoughts to notice it:
https://community.idera.com/developer-tools/general-development/f/getit-and-third-party/71464/about-turing-completeness-and-parallel-programming
This also why i said the following:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a white arab, and i think i am more smart and i am an inventor of
many scalable algorithms, but today i will speak about a very important
thing and it is how to build a civilization, because i think that we
have to be smart and notice that so that to build a civilization there
is a very important requirement and it is that it must be an effort of
building a civilization, so we have not to be like a coward that neglect
to be this effort of building a civilization, so the effort of building
a civilization is so important, so we have to be responsability,
and also we have to know by how we have to be guided to this effort of
building a civilization, so we have to be guided by the good taste
that also permits to be efficiently selective to be able to be a greater
quality or perfection and we have to be not violence that permits to be
less individualistic and that permits to be more order and that permits
to be more organized. And read the following about the good taste:
Why we should stand up for good taste
https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20140605-what-makes-good-taste
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So as you are noticing that i am not saying above that civilization
needs smartness, because you have to understand that since it is
inherent to a civilization that it needs smartness, so i am not talking
about it, i am just talking about the above important requirements to be
a civilization, and you will notice that i am talking about the
following requirement of being civilization: "that we have to be not
violence that permits to be less individualistic and that permits to be
more order and that permits to be more organized", so as you are
noticing that, like in democracy and in morality, it is also extremism
of violence that has to be avoided in a civilization and this is in
accordance with the tendency of the essence of morality(read below to notice it).
Also i said the following(and notice that i am speaking about
how to be selective of your knowledge):
Now today i will do political philosophy about Pedagogy..
Can we ask the question of: What must be an efficient Pedagogy today?,
i think that we have to notice that the exponential progress
and the law of accelerating returns are influencing Pedagogy,
because today we have to be more efficient at learning,
because i think that the level of sophistication of today
is much more than the past and i think that this has
as a cause that we have to be much more sophisticated than
the past to be able to be efficient learning, i think that this is
the "first" requirement of today Pedagogy, and more than that
we have to define the other main parts of what is it to be efficient learning, i mean what are the main parts of "efficient learning" that have a great importance ? take for example choosing the right tools for
learning , so the first question of how to choose the right tools for learning is to know how to choose the right tools, not only that but to be able for the tool to be the right tool, the learning of the right tool must be made more "easier", now you are noticing
that the parts of efficient learning are becoming more clear,
this is why i said before in my political philosophy
the following that permits you to understand more what i am saying:
What is happening in my brain ?
I will speak more about me so that you understand my way of doing since
it is also like my philosophy, to be more smart you have to be capable
of reducing efficiently "complexity" so that to be efficient and so that
to be more successful, but how can you do it ? you have to be able
to know about the steps that guides you into the right direction,
first i will speak about my way so that you understand me better,
first step you have to be able to "prioritize" efficiently, because
to be able to be successful you have to prioritize, so look for example
at me, i have decided to "study" more and to study more "efficiently" so that to be more successful, but this is not "sufficient" to know, because to be able to be efficient at reducing complexity you have to be able to be efficiently selective of your knowledge, and this efficiently "selective" has to adhere in its turn to the process of being efficient at reducing "complexity", so you have to be able to select "efficiently" "efficient" knowledge that is more "easy" to learn so that to reduce complexity, thus you have to be able to ask "questions" to this or that right persons to be able to be efficient at selecting your "knowledge", next step you have to be "tenacity" at studying efficiently and you have to study more and more and you have to ask questions to your professors and next step after you have been able to learn more and more you have to be able at being efficient at "reusability" of your efficient knowledge and this is a very important step , so don't neglect efficient "reusability" of your knowledge, this is also the steps that i have followed and i have also used my "smartness" to be more efficient.
More political philosophy about civilization..
So now i will do more political philosophy about capitalism and governance, i am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have invented many scalable algorithms, now you will hear that Marxism is scientific or communism is scientific, but i don't think they are scientific, since as you are noticing i am using my fluid intelligence so that to logically prove, so first you are noticing that we have to be Meritocracy, but Meritocracy has to define what is the right "value", is the right value only a useful utility ? so now you are understanding that if we define it by simply saying that it is a useful utility to people, so now we are not respecting the principles of Morality, since we have to make our civilization go forward towards more and more perfection, so this going forward towards more and more perfection sets the usefulness of the utility , so then it sets the value, so then you are noticing that Morality is like going forward towards more and more perfection and this process enhance the "quality" and the quality of the utility, so then it sets the value and it sets the usefulness of the utility, and i think this is part of the essence of a civilization.
So read my thoughts of my political philosophy about morality here to notice it:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.culture.morocco/7UmkfURwoU4
But now you will notice that there is something happening, it is
that we have to know how to "tune" diversity and to tune morality so that to not degenerate into a too violent system, and you will notice it by my following thoughts:
More political philosophy about white supremacism and neo-nazism..
Read the following new article from a white supremacist website from USA called national vanguard:
We Know The True American Type And We Know The Liberal
https://nationalvanguard.org/2020/08/we-know-the-true-american-type-and-we-know-the-liberal/
So i am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have invented many
scalable algorithms, so i have to be frank, so look at the following writing of the above article:
"Today it teaches the doctrine of liberalism with its pacifism, its love for the inferior and misbegotten, its internationalism which makes a virtue out of treason, its hatred of all who possess strong national feelings, its toothless desire for racial equality, and its tolerance of everything and everyone, particularly the alien and the unfit."
So as you are noticing that the above article is making a logical inconsistency, since take for example "beauty", we can say by
the same logic as the above article that since beauty is much
less important than technical efficiency, so we have to pay
beauty much less money than technical efficiency, but if
you say so you are questioning the very basic fondations of what
we call a civilization, since our kind of civilization comes with a kind
of tolerance that permits it , this is part of the backbone of our civilization, it is also this kind of tolerance that permits us
to be the right tolerance and compassion towards the unfit
and towards the alien, and if you change this, i think this will make
our societies much more and too violent societies, so you have to understand it so that to understand the backbone of our civilization. Second logical inconsistency of the above article, it is that those
white supremacists are giving too much importance to genetics, neglecting at same time the power of culture and learning and awareness that permit or can permit other ethnic groups such as arabs and south americans and indians to become much better humans.
More precision about capitalism and about National Vanguard..
I will be more rigorous, so read again:
I have just read the following article from a white supremacist website
called National Vanguard:
Why Capitalism Fails
https://nationalvanguard.org/2015/07/why-capitalism-fails/
And it is saying the following about why capitalism fails:
"Capitalism permits inheritance, the command transfer of private property to a designated new owner upon the death of the previous owner. And therein is the flaw: inherited wealth isn’t earned by its owner, yet it leads to a class segregation of men that has nothing to do with how much wealth they have earned; i.e., nothing to do with how much or how well or how significantly they have worked."
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have invented many scalable algorithms, and i will answer with my fluid intelligence:
I think the above article is not taking into account the risk factor and
and the smartness factor, so there have to be mechanisms, that are
like engines, that "encourage" to or/and "make" a part of the people work by taking risks or great risks and by doing there best (so that to become rich) or/and that "encourage" to or/and "make" the smartest to give there best with there smartness (so that to become rich), so i think capitalism has those mechanisms in form of rewards by allowing to become "rich" and in form of rewards by allowing inheritance, the command transfer of private property to a designated new owner upon the death of the previous owner: Since it "encourages" to or/and "makes" a part of the people work by taking risks and by doing there best (so that to become rich) or/and it encourages to or/and makes the smartest give there best with there smartness (so that to become rich).
And notice that i am also defining taking a "risk" as working "hard".
And the above article is saying the following:
"Capitalism constantly looks for ways to reduce labor costs. Automation made human labor less necessary than it had been when capitalism first appeared. When automation did appear, people who had the talent, the skills, and the motivation to make contributions began to find no jobs, or to become uncompetitive with mass-production if they tried to employ themselves."
I think it is not true, because read the following:
https://singularityhub.com/2019/01/01/ai-will-create-millions-more-jobs-than-it-will-destroy-heres-how/
And read the following:
Here is the advantages and disadvantages of automation:
Following are some of the advantages of automation:
1. Automation is the key to the shorter workweek. Automation will allow
the average number of working hours per week to continue to decline,
thereby allowing greater leisure hours and a higher quality life.
2. Automation brings safer working conditions for the worker. Since
there is less direct physical participation by the worker in the
production process, there is less chance of personal injury to the worker.
3. Automated production results in lower prices and better products. It
has been estimated that the cost to machine one unit of product by
conventional general-purpose machine tools requiring human operators may
be 100 times the cost of manufacturing the same unit using automated
mass-production techniques. The electronics industry offers many
examples of improvements in manufacturing technology that have
significantly reduced costs while increasing product value (e.g., colour
TV sets, stereo equipment, calculators, and computers).
4. The growth of the automation industry will itself provide employment
opportunities. This has been especially true in the computer industry,
as the companies in this industry have grown (IBM, Digital Equipment
Corp., Honeywell, etc.), new jobs have been created.
These new jobs include not only workers directly employed by these
companies, but also computer programmers, systems engineers, and other
needed to use and operate the computers.
5. Automation is the only means of increasing standard of living. Only
through productivity increases brought about by new automated methods of
production, it is possible to advance standard of living. Granting wage
increases without a commensurate increase in productivity
will results in inflation. To afford a better society, it is a must to
increase productivity.
Following are some of the disadvantages of automation:
1. Automation will result in the subjugation of the human being by a
machine. Automation tends to transfer the skill required to perform work
from human operators to machines. In so doing, it reduces the need for
skilled labour. The manual work left by automation requires lower skill
levels and tends to involve rather menial tasks (e.g., loading and
unloading workpart, changing tools, removing chips, etc.). In this
sense, automation tends to downgrade factory work.
2. There will be a reduction in the labour force, with resulting
unemployment. It is logical to argue that the immediate effect of
automation will be to reduce the need for human labour, thus displacing
workers.
3. Automation will reduce purchasing power. As machines replace workers
and these workers join the unemployment ranks, they will not receive the
wages necessary to buy the products brought by automation. Markets will
become saturated with products that people cannot afford to purchase.
Inventories will grow. Production will stop. Unemployment will reach
epidemic proportions and the result will be a massive economic depression.
And to know more about economy and capitalism, please read my following thoughts:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.culture.morocco/wlJu5j1xhPk
And read more of my thoughts of my political philosophy here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.culture.morocco/8j-rboLzi38
More political philosophy about Meritocracy..
Read the following article about Meritocracy from the Atlantic:
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/12/meritocracy/418074/
So as you notice it says:
“The pursuit of meritocracy is more difficult than it appears,”
So i think in Meritocracy we can not be strict equality,
so we have to get into the details and into the calculations to tune
it correctly and efficiently so that to make Meritocracy efficient and at the same time less problematic, but we have to notice that Meritocracy is still important.
Read my following previous thoughts of my political philosophy:
More political philosophy about responsability..
I have just read the following article about Putin:
https://www.newsweek.com/putin-says-communism-comes-bible-compares-lenin-saint-781328
And notice that it says the following:
"But Putin argues that like Christianity, communism preaches "freedom, brotherhood, equality." He called the Moral Code of the Builder of Communism, a pamphlet of guiding principles for all party members, a "primitive excerpt from the Bible.""
I agree that the communism was about "freedom, brotherhood, equality.",
but we have to be pragmatic, so we have to be smart and play it smartly since we have to also know how to address the problem of hate, so there must be "responsability", since if we simply call people to freedom and brotherhood and equality, it is not pragmatic, since we have to call them first to responsability that permits to bring such as those qualities, and we have also to be pragmatic since we can not be strict equality(since it is also not Meritocracy, so it is not efficient), but we can be solidarity and collaboration, so now you are understanding why i am talking as i am talking about nationalism and about hate in my thoughts of my political philosophy(read more about hate in my thoughts below), so here is my thoughts of my political philosophy about nationalism:
More political philosophy about globalization and nationalism..
I am a white arab and i think i am more smart, so today i will
talk about a very important subject about Globalization and nationalism,
so i will invite you to look at the following video of Marine Le Pen of
the far-right political party in France:
Marine Le Pen explains why nationalism is important
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNpI9wKnE8Q
As you notice that Marine Le Pen is saying in french that the
fight today is between nationalism and globalization, since
Marine Le Pen says that globalization is a treat to national
identity and is a treat to national sovereignty, but i think that Marine Le Pen is not understanding correctly globalization, since i think that nationalism is too much competition and communism and socialism is too much collaboration , so i think the best way is to seek like a balance between collaboration and competition and when we look
at globalization you will notice that we are collaborating with others by for example sharing Open Source softwares or Free softwares or PhD papers or knowledge on internet etc, and we are also competition by not collaborating with others, and with this new kind of model we are noticing that we are not just one identity like being french, but we are becoming multiple identities because this kind of new model is making a part of us that collaborate "universal", and this is why i think that Marine Le Pen is not understanding correctly this new kind of model of like seeking a balance between competition and collaboration , and i think that this new model is better because it is more efficient , because i think this partly collaboration of this new model is good and more efficient for creativity, innovation, adaptability and speed of progress, i also think in capitalism the price of internet has gotten cheap and the price of computers has gotten cheap, so we are able today to access internet with a low price and benefit from "collaboration" and also sharing in internet, for example look at me, i have invented many scalable algorithms and i have decided to share some of them with the others, and it is of course collaboration , so look for example at my following inventions of scalable algorithms that i have shared with others, here they are:
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-mlock
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-reference-counting-with-efficient-support-for-weak-references
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-rwlock
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-rwlock-that-works-accross-processes-and-threads
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.programming.threads/VaOo1WVACgs
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/an-efficient-threadpool-engine-with-priorities-that-scales-very-well
Also i have decided to not share others of my scalable algorithms and it is competition, so i am seeking like a balance between collaboration and competition.
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
0 new messages