soft and program: Digest for comp.programming.threads@googlegroups.com

comp.programming.threads@googlegroups.com

Google Groups

What must be politics of today ? - 1 Update
I correct a last typo because i write fast, please read again - 1 Update
He is my thoughts about a philosophical problem.. - 1 Update
About my "scalable" RWLocks.. - 1 Update
About the future of AI.. - 1 Update
Here is the advantages and disadvantages of automation - 1 Update
Related to my previous post about AI - 1 Update
About artificial intelligence.. - 1 Update
DeepMind AI Passes IQ Test, But Does It Really Think Like Us? - 1 Update
A beautiful arab song - 1 Update

Sky89 <Sky89@sky68.com>: Aug 20 03:24PM -0400

Hello,,

Read this:

What must be politics of today ?

There is a very important thing that you have to understand,
past history was also a history of "inefficiency", for example
communism was not efficient thinking, because efficient thinking is also
correct pragmatism, look at communism of China today, you will notice
that many of there huge investments abroad are inefficient(read bellow
to notice it), so it is causing problems to China, because i think China
is a communist dictatorship that is not "efficient" thinking of
"economy", it is like the old days of inefficiency, and look for example
at USA , USA also was "inefficiency" that has caused the crisis of year
2000(read bellow to notice it), Russia also is inefficiency and
inefficient thinking that is causing problems to its economy, read for
example this:

About Russia's economy...

Read this:

Why Switzerland was ranked the most economically free nation in Europe ?

The important characteristics of Switzerland are:

1. Rule of law

2. Optimization of the Government size

3. Regulatory efficiency

4. Open markets

Read more here:

https://lenews.ch/2016/02/03/why-switzerland-was-ranked-the-most-economically-free-nation-in-europe/

So now about "Russia", Russia lacks many of the requirements for strong
economy, read the following to notice it:

"Russia's transition from a centrally planned economy to a more
market-based system has stalled, and the country remains predominantly
statist. Further economic reforms have been subordinated to the
imperatives of political stability and government longevity. The private
sector has been marginalized by structural and institutional constraints
caused by ever-growing government encroachment into the marketplace.
Large state-owned institutions and an inefficient public sector dominate
the economy. The judiciary is vulnerable to corruption, and weak
protection of property rights undermines prospects for optimal long-term
economic development."

https://www.heritage.org/index/country/russia

So i think that today politics must be efficiency and efficient thinking.

Read the rest to understand better:

I am a white arab and you know me better now..

I think China is having a problem, it is not the trade war, it is
the fact that it has done huge investments abroad, and many of those
investments abroad are "inefficient" investments , they are bad
investment, so it is causing to China more and more debt, and with this
China is taking too much "risk" that is "dangerous" for China, and by
analogy, because it is a risk that is dangerous, this risk that is
dangerous look like the following when i said:

==

I said:

"At the monetary policy level, inject or withdraw a mass
monetary policies help to control inflation and to stimulate
the economy by credit which result in more overall spending which
it leads to economic growth and more investment which is beneficial for
growth , except that monetary policy has a weakness if the borrowers are
too much at risk of bankruptcy as was also the case in the united states
in the crisis of year 2000. "

Here is the proof, read the following:

In 2001, when the recession hit the US economy, the Fed lowered the
federal funds rate, increasing the liquidity in the economy. The
borrowers were mainly those without jobs and income to back these loans,
to buy houses. The easy credit plus upward spiral of home prices, made
investments in high-yielding subprime mortgages increase further.

Read more here:

Reasons For The Late 2000s Financial Crisis

https://themarketmogul.com/reasons-for-the-late-2000s-financial-crisis/

==

Here is the proof about China , look at this interesting video:

Is Xi Jinping HOLDING BACK Chinese EXPANSION?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raooYdCh7vY

And read the rest of my thoughts to understand better:

Still about economy and quality..

Why Doesn't DUBAI care about OIL?

Dubai has done the following to diversify and make successful its
economy and become rich:

- Lower taxes

- Special economic zones

- High degree of immigration freedom

- It has attracted more investment

Look at this video to know more about DUBAI:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEs1uOzt3KM

Still about quality

As you have noticed growth in France will lower
the unemployment in a significant way, but consumption
is also a way in economics to lower unemployment
more, but there is also another way to reduce unemployment is also to
build quality products and services like in Germany to be more
competitive and sell more locally and sell more globally to other
countries, so I think France must also pay attention to the education
sector that should become more efficient and of a better quality,
because innovation and quality are dependent on it! and in
being more effective in economics and education France will attract more
and more smart people who innovate more and who create quality and
growth, but I think that France is better "aware" today to face its
challenges and I think it is able to meet them.

Still on France ..

I understand better the United States, and I also know how
to adopt the best of the United States, you in France you
have a tendency to insist too much on the fact that arabs of the Maghreb
do not integrate better and that they should integrate better, but I do
not agree with the method, because I am a different mentality, and I
think it is necessary to bring "indirectly those arabs to integrate
better, and this "indirectly" it is this entrepreneurial spirit that
wants to bring the president Macron, because since the private sector of
France is of 75%, and that the private sector is important, then it is
necessary to educate better and correctly those arabs of France to be
able for them to be more efficient and more entrepreneurial and to be
able for them to create companies too, and also France has to be more
positive like Macron and show those arabs of France that France is more
positive, from there "indirectly" the arabs of France will want to
build France and to integrate better in France. I think Macron is smart
and he understands my ideas better.

I said below that:

"the french political party that is called FN is also more idealism that
contradicts itself with pragmatism and realism"

I mean that this racial idealism of the FN, as the fact of
wanting to become 100% racially European white is also more idealism
that contradicts itself with pragmatism and realism.

On the entrepreneurial spirit ..

I think that in France you have to understand well the president Macron,
Macron wants to bring and develop an entrepreneurial spirit of
people of France, especially that in France the private sector is at 75%
of workforce and the public sector is only 25%, in Algeria the public
sector is at 35% of workforce, so we should not go through a thousand
ways, president Macron knows that the pessimism of the far right party
of the FN is bad, so Macron is more positive and I think we need to be
more positive, because Macron knows that France is able to solve its
problems in an intelligent way, I give you an example: the FN
says that it's tired of arabs of France, and that people who voted FN do
not want anymore arabs, but Macron understands the finesse of politics
and he knows he has to be smart because immigration is good
for economic growth etc. that's why Macron is more
"realistic", because for him the FN is also more idealism that
contradicts itself with pragmatism and realism, that's why
I find Macron intelligent.

I think that we have not to be pessimistic about France, because
look at its growth and look at its other economic indicators:

First look at the growth of France here:

"Today's growth remains lower than the one that prevailed during the
period 1975-2007, with a rate of 2.1% per year on average," observes
Yannick L'Horty, a professor at the university. Paris-East -
Marne-la-Vallée. However, it helps to increase the number of employees
in the private sector, "so that unemployment will probably start to
decline, at a very measured pace . "

and look also at this about France:

According to Bpifrance's semi-annual business survey, published on
Monday, 41% of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) report
recruitment difficulties, an increase of seven points over a year. This
indicator has never been higher since 2002. This situation reflects the
inadequacy of supply and demand for employment. The government wants to
remedy this , through its Skills Investment Plan (CIP), which plans to
train by the year 2022 two million low-skilled people or remote from the
world of work. But, as Mr. Martin points out, this program "has not yet
produced its effects" since it is still in its infancy.

Read more here to notice it:

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lemonde.fr%2Femploi%2Farticle%2F2018%2F07%2F25%2Fle-nombre-de-chomeurs-a-augmente-de-0-1-au-second-trimestre-2018_5335727_1698637.html

So i think France is on the right path, and France must also balance the
budget and i think that France is capable of doing it.

Also here is my other thoughts of what France can also do:

I observed more closely the model of for example the French system,
and I found that contrarily to England, for example the weight of the
public service in France is much more than that of England, so what can
we also do in France to unlock economic growth and reduce the rate of
unemployment? i think there is another solution that is reduce the size
of the state to increase public revenue too, and also "reduce" taxes,
because it is agreed that a lower taxes mechanically stimulates growth
by the effect of the "multiplier "tax effect": indeed, it results in an
increase in households or corporate profits, which favors consumption
and/or investment, and therefore, indirectly, the production and
employment, so it reduces unemployment.

I have to be more precise about USA:

I said before on my previous post that:

"At the monetary policy level, inject or withdraw a mass
monetary policies help to control inflation and to stimulate
the economy by credit which result in more overall spending which
it leads to economic growth and more investment which is beneficial for
growth , except that monetary policy has a weakness if the borrowers are
too much at risk of bankruptcy as was also the case in the united states
in the crisis of year 2000. "

Here is the proof, read the following:

In 2001, when the recession hit the US economy, the Fed lowered the
federal funds rate, increasing the liquidity in the economy. The
borrowers were mainly those without jobs and income to back these loans,
to buy houses. The easy credit plus upward spiral of home prices, made
investments in high-yielding subprime mortgages increase further.

Read more here:

Reasons For The Late 2000s Financial Crisis

https://themarketmogul.com/reasons-for-the-late-2000s-financial-crisis/

So reread my following thoughts:

About offshoring and immigration and macroeconomics..

I am a white Arab, and here is my questions and my answers about
offshoring and immigration and macroeconomics, read my following thoughts:

Questions:

What do i think about offshoring and macroeconomics?

Answer:

At the monetary policy level, inject or withdraw a mass
monetary policies help to control inflation and to stimulate
the economy by credit which result in more overall spending which
it leads to economic growth and more investment which is beneficial for
growth , except that monetary policy has a weakness if the borrowers are
too much at risk of bankruptcy as was also the case in the united states
in the crisis of year 2000.

Also the second lever is the Keynes tax policy:

Keynes recommends using an expansionary fiscal policy in case
recession: reduce taxes and increase the state. In case of inflation, he
recommends doing the opposite.

The other criticism I make on the far right political parties, is that
the far right makes us think offshoring as being just bad, but I do not
agree with them, because read the following:

Offshoring increases demand for more workers
"qualified" and also have a significant positive effect on
productivity, in Canada it is an increase in the "productivity" of
order of about 10%, also according to some recent research
the Offshoring of materials and services have both a
positive and not negligible effect on productivity.

When it comes to the repercussion on employment, the majority of
empirical studies suggest that the general repercussions of offshoring
on the employment levels are low (Amiti and Wei 2005, Mankiw and Swagel
2006).

For proof, read the following document:

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww150.statcan.gc.ca%2Fn1%2Fpub%2F11f0027m%2F2008055%2Fs6-fra.htm

And about immigration now:

Look at this following video about:

Why Does the USA Need More IMMIGRANTS?

You will notice that the West "needs" immigrants because they are also
good for economic "growth".

But please look carefully at the following video to understand more:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmRgnDrhE9o

Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

I correct a last typo because i write fast, please read again

Sky89 <Sky89@sky68.com>: Aug 20 01:40PM -0400

Hello...

Read this:

I correct a last typo because i write fast, please read again:

I am a white arab that has invented many scalable algorithms and
there implementations, here is my thoughts about a philosophical problem..

I have explained with 2 + 2 = 4 that the "consciousness"
is the "consequence" of "understanding", then once
that you build a hierarchy of ideas and
Logical relations and by also measure, then you will be able to
understand mathematical equality Of 2 + 2 = 4, and once you understand
that, at this very precise moment that you understand mathematical
equality 2 + 2 = 4, then you will be ultimately conscious
Of the mathematical equality of 2 + 2 = 4, that is why I have said that
the process of consciousness is much simpler than the process of
intelligence in action, so I hope that my argumentation is clear. Now
there remains something to be explained is that even if the process of
intelligence in action has not been easy for humanity, the fact that a
human being understands the mathematical equality of 2 + 2 = 4, then
this understanding will greatly reduce complexity and let us see the
"truth" as it really is, a child who tries initially to understand the
the mathematical equality of 2 + 2 = 4 will see this process as being
"difficult", but is that really "truth"? I do not believe because the
understanding of the essence of what is "truth" tells us that truth can
only be reached when there is complete comprehension of a process or a
thing, then the perception of the child who sees in the beginning of the
process of understanding the mathematical equality of 2 + 2 = 4 as being
"difficult" is not the truth, it is rather the perception of the one who
understood "completely" the mathematical equality of 2 + 2 = 4 and which
tells us that equality is easy which is the truth.

I have spoken of the understanding of the very essence of what is
the truth, for example, when you look at the door of a car, can you say
that it's a car ? I do not think, it's who looks and understands
everything that is Car that can say it's a car! do you understand ?
Then, in my opinion, it can be inferred that it is understanding of a
process or thing that greatly reduce or erase "complexity" and which
reveals to us the truth, It is like this for the mathematical equality
of 2 + 2 = 4 If a child in the beginning tries to understand this
equality, he will say that the mathematical equality is "difficult", but
is that the truth? I think no, because it's like the example of the car
which I have just given you, it is once the understanding
of equality is complete that it will greatly reduce or erase the
"complexity" and will confirm that the equality is truly "easy", and
This is the truth and that is the veridic perception and this is the
very essence of truth.

So if you have understood what I'm trying to explain,
Is that we could say that mathematics is easy and simple, our universe
is easy and simple and any thing or process is easy and simple,
But it is because we are limited intellectually or physically that we do
not understand it, i see this as in an axis of reality, i mean that the
complexity of mathematics and knowledge of mathematics is 0.1
on a scale of 100, and we are still weaker at 0.001 on a scale of 100 ,
even though knowledge of the universe and mathematics is easy, we feel
this as difficult.

But my point of view is not complete, I will present my other reasoning:

We can say, for example, that to define what a car is, we have
to "understand" what a car is, then we
can therefore affirm that the completeness of knowledge
of the car brings us to understand in a perfect way
what is a car .. now the important question in logic is: is it possible
to state the same thing about the variable of the "complexity" of
comprehension, that is to say: perfect knowledge leads us to understand
the very nature of the complexity of knowledge, as in the case of the
car i have just given you above, because it is the one who really knows
the car who can define the car, can we say the same thing about the
complexity of understanding? does it is the one who really knows
knowledge that can say what is the complexity of the understanding of
this knowledge? Do you understand my problem that
use logic effectively to solve this problem?
As in the problem of the car, above, what can we
say about the heaviness or the size of the car which characterizes
the car, we can say that it is the one who has knowledge about the car
and who understands the car that can accurately state what the heaviness
or the size of the car, but can we say the same thing about the
characteristic which is called the "Complexity" of understanding? I mean
that by analogy, if complexity is the characteristic of the
size of the car and if comprehension is the understanding of the car,
can we say the same thing and say that the completeness of understanding
can be defined only when there is more complete understanding and that
greatly reduce or erase complexity because when you understand more
fully this leads us to say that understanding is easy? I think that to
solve this problem it is necessary to look that in the case of the car,
the size and the heaviness are not of the variables of the
"comprehension" function, whereas in the case of complexity,
comprehension is, on the other hand, a variable of the complexity of
comprehension, so these are two different problems, so that the nature
of the complexity of Comprehension is relative to comprehension, since
comprehension is a variable of the complexity of comprehension, so the
problem is better solved in this way and complexity should be seen as a
function of comprehension, and more there is comprehension and more
there is understand and more there is less complexity of understanding.

And now here is my definitive proof and solution to this problem:

As you noted in my second reasoning, I have concluded that understanding
is a variable of complexity of understanding, for the more there is
comprehension the more there is less complexity of understanding. The
problem is not resolved as we can assert that understanding is the
theoretical representation of the car example that i have given above,
but since the more we understand theoretically the car, the more there
is less complexity of understanding, so we can say that the theoretical
representation of the understanding of the car system is easy, but this
is not true because, first of all, there is a contradiction, since two
theoretical systems, one which is more complex and another that is less
complex system, can both become as easy when there is definitive
understanding, and since the mechanism of awareness of the theoretical
understanding of the understanding of the car system rely on the speed
of our brain, that means that when you remember an understanding in your
brain, the brain is quick in its computation to do it, and This rapidity
of computation of the brain makes us see comprehension as easy, for
example, when you look at an equality of 2 + 2 = 4, your brain has
already understood this equality before when you were still a child, but
when you look at this equality now, the brain brings back the
understanding of this equality and it does so quickly , and this is what
does our brain, you do not have to understand the equality yet again,
no, the brain makes a quick computation and brings you back the
understanding of this equality quickly, that's what makes it easy to
understand the theoretical representation of the understanding of the
car system, since the theoretical representation of the understanding
of the system of a car is brought back quickly by the brain in the form
of an understanding of the parts of the theoretical system of the car,
as in the case of 2 + 2 = 4, and this shows us the theoretical
representation of understanding of the system of the car as being easy,
it is the brain that is fast and which facilitates because of its speed
of computation as in the case of 2 + 2 = 4.. so the ease of
understanding is a consequence of the speed of computation of the brain,
so it is not the theoretical representation of the understanding of the
car system that is easy. Thus I believe that the problem is definitely
resolved by my logical and effective reasoning.

Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

He is my thoughts about a philosophical problem..

Sky89 <Sky89@sky68.com>: Aug 20 01:26PM -0400

Hello...

Read this:

I am a white arab that has invented many scalable algorithms and
there implementations, he is my thoughts about a philosophical problem..

I have explained with 2 + 2 = 4 that the "consciousness"
is the "consequence" of "understanding", then once
that you build a hierarchy of ideas and
Logical relations and by also measure, then you will be able to
understand mathematical equality Of 2 + 2 = 4, and once you understand
that, at this very precise moment that you understand mathematical
equality 2 + 2 = 4, then you will be ultimately conscious
Of the mathematical equality of 2 + 2 = 4, that is why I have said that
the process of consciousness is much simpler than the process of
intelligence in action, so I hope that my argumentation is clear. Now
there remains something to be explained is that even if the process of
intelligence in action has not been easy for humanity, the fact that a
human being understands the mathematical equality of 2 + 2 = 4, then
this understanding will greatly reduce complexity and let us see the
"truth" as it really is, a child who tries initially to understand the
the mathematical equality of 2 + 2 = 4 will see this process as being
"difficult", but is that really "truth"? I do not believe because the
understanding of the essence of what is "truth" tells us that truth can
only be reached when there is complete comprehension of a process or a
thing, then the perception of the child who sees in the beginning of the
process of understanding the mathematical equality of 2 + 2 = 4 as being
"difficult" is not the truth, it is rather the perception of the one who
understood "completely" the mathematical equality of 2 + 2 = 4 and which
tells us that equality is easy which is the truth.

I have spoken of the understanding of the very essence of what is
the truth, for example, when you look at the door of a car, can you say
that it's a car ? I do not think, it's who looks and understands
everything that is Car that can say it's a car! do you understand ?
Then, in my opinion, it can be inferred that it is understanding of a
process or thing that greatly reduce or erase "complexity" and which
reveals to us the truth, It is like this for the mathematical equality
of 2 + 2 = 4 If a child in the beginning tries to understand this
equality, he will say that the mathematical equality is "difficult", but
is that the truth? I think no, because it's like the example of the car
which I have just given you, it is once the understanding
of equality is complete that it will greatly reduce or erase the
"complexity" and will confirm that the equality is truly "easy", and
This is the truth and that is the veridic perception and this is the
very essence of truth.

So if you have understood what I'm trying to explain,
Is that we could say that mathematics is easy and simple, our universe
is easy and simple and any thing or process is easy and simple,
But it is because we are limited intellectually or physically that we do
not understand it, i see this as in an axis of reality, i mean that the
complexity of mathematics and knowledge of mathematics is 0.1
on a scale of 100, and we are still weaker at 0.001 on a scale of 100 ,
even though knowledge of the universe and mathematics is easy, we feel
this as difficult.

But my point of view is not complete, I will present my other reasoning:

We can say, for example, that to define what a car is, we have
to "understand" what a car is, then we
can therefore affirm that the completeness of knowledge
of the car brings us to understand in a perfect way
what is a car .. now the important question in logic is: is it possible
to state the same thing about the variable of the "complexity" of
comprehension, that is to say: perfect knowledge leads us to understand
the very nature of the complexity of knowledge, as in the case of the
car i have just given you above, because it is the one who really knows
the car who can define the car, can we say the same thing about the
complexity of understanding? does it is the one who really knows
knowledge that can say what is the complexity of the understanding of
this knowledge? Do you understand my problem that
use logic effectively to solve this problem?
As in the problem of the car, above, what can we
say about the heaviness or the size of the car which characterizes
the car, we can say that it is the one who has knowledge about the car
and who understands the car that can accurately state what the heaviness
or the size of the car, but can we say the same thing about the
characteristic which is called the "Complexity" of understanding? I mean
that by analogy, if complexity is the characteristic of the
size of the car and if comprehension is the understanding of the car,
can we say the same thing and say that the completeness of understanding
can be defined only when there is more complete understanding and that
greatly reduce or erase complexity because when you understand more
fully this leads us to say that understanding is easy? I think that to
solve this problem it is necessary to look that in the case of the car,
the size and the heaviness are not of the variables of the
"comprehension" function, whereas in the case of complexity,
comprehension is, on the other hand, a variable of the complexity of
comprehension, so these are two different problems, so that the nature
of the complexity of Comprehension is relative to comprehension, since
comprehension is a variable of the complexity of comprehension, so the
problem is better solved in this way and complexity should be seen as a
function of comprehension, and more there is comprehension and more
there is understand and more there is less complexity of understanding.

And now here is my definitive proof and solution to this problem:

As you noted in my second reasoning, I have concluded that understanding
is a variable of complexity of understanding, for the more there is
comprehension the more there is less complexity of understanding. The
problem is not resolved as we can assert that understanding is the
theoretical representation of the car example that i have given above,
but since the more we understand theoretically the car, the more there
is less complexity of understanding, so we can say that the theoretical
representation of the understanding of the car system is easy, but this
is not true because, first of all, there is a contradiction, since two
theoretical systems, one which is more complex and another that is less
complex system, can both become as easy when there is definitive
understanding, and since the mechanism of awareness of the theoretical
understanding of the understanding of the car system rely on the speed
of our brain, that means that when you remember an understanding in your
brain, the brain is quick in its computation to do it, and This rapidity
of computation of the brain makes us see comprehension as easy, for
example, when you look at an equality of 2 + 2 = 4, your brain has
already understood this equality before when you were still a child, but
when you look at this equality now, the brain brings back the
understanding of this equality and it does so quickly , and this is what
does our brain, you do not have to understand the equality yet again,
no, the brain makes a quick computation and brings you back the
understanding of this equality quickly, that's what makes it easy to
understand the theoretical representation of the understanding of the
car system, since the theoretical representation of the understanding
of the system of a car is brought back quickly by the brain in the form
of an understanding of the parts of the theoretical system of the car,
as in the case of 2 + 2 = 4, and this shows us the theoretical
representation of understanding of the system of the car as being easy,
it is the brain that is fast and which facilitates because of its speed
of computation as in the case of 2 + 2 = 4.. so the ease of
understanding is a consequence of the speed of computation of the brain,
so it is not the theoretical representation of the understanding of the
car system that is easy. Thus I believe that the problem is definitely
resolved by my logical and effective reasoning.

Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

About my "scalable" RWLocks..

Sky89 <Sky89@sky68.com>: Aug 20 01:09PM -0400

Hello...

Read this:

I am a white arab and i am a more serious computer programmer who has
invented many scalable algorithm and there implementations, read this
about some of my scalable algorithms:

About my "scalable" RWLocks..

Based on Intel and Micron's claim, 3D Xpoint is 1000x faster than NAND
and 10x higher density than conventional memory (assume DRAM here). So
latency of PCIe NAND is about 100us, and 1000x faster 3D Xpoint gives
100ns, which is 2 times slower than DRAM's speed of 50ns, so this makes
my scalable RWLocks very useful for 3D Xpoint, so my scalable RWLocks
are for example very useful for Optane SSD 900P that uses 3D Xpoint and
thus they are very useful for such SSDs that use 3D XPoint and that are
used in a "scalable" RAID manner.

Read about Intel Optane SSD 900P Review: 3D XPoint Unleashed

https://www.tomshardware.co.uk/intel-optane-ssd-900p-3d-xpoint,review-34076.html

And here is my scalable RWLocks that i have invented, i have also
invented Starvation-free scalable RWLocks, please look at my scalable
RWLocks that i have invented inside my C++ synchronization objects
library for Windows and Linux here, because it is really powerful:

https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/c-synchronization-objects-library

You will find the Delphi and FreePascal versions of my scalable RWLocks
and there source code here:

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

As you have noticed i am an "inventor" of "scalable" algorithms and
there implementations, i have also invented a fully scalable Threadpool
that is really powerful and i have invented scalable FIFO queues that
are node-based and array-based and i have invented a scalable reference
counting with efficient support for weak references.

So Stay tunned !

Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

About the future of AI..

Sky89 <Sky89@sky68.com>: Aug 20 12:42PM -0400

Hello....

Read this:

About the future of AI..

I think also the future of AI(artificial intelligence) will also be a
composition of both symbolism and connectionism, for example here is
the Deep Symbolic Networks that learns with relatively "small" data than
connectionism alone, and read the paper to notice that it is powerful:

Read the following paper:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.03377

And read the rest of my thoughts about AI:

Related to my previous post about AI, read this:

"Researchers in machine learning argue that computers trained on
mountains of data can learn just about anything — including common sense
— with few, if any, programmed rules."

Read the rest of my thoughts:

About artificial intelligence..

I think that AI (artificial intelligence) is getting more and more
powerful, and i think that even if AI doesn't use abstract reasoning as
humans, it is learning from data and being able to pass IQ tests and
this way (by learning from data) it can get much more powerful, so we
have to be optimistic about artificial intelligence, because AI will
learn from data and get soon (in just about 12 years) "so" powerful that
it will permit us to solve many of our problems, and i think that by
learning from data it can get more powerful than humans in many ways.

This is why i have posted this:

DeepMind AI Passes IQ Test, But Does It Really Think Like Us?

Look at this interesting video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoNsbDVb4PI

And also read the following interesting thoughts to understand more
about AI:

Artificial intelligence is becoming "powerful" because we are now
capable of "general" artificial intelligence, read carefully what
follows, it said that:

"Artificial intelligence up to now, including DeepMind's AlphaGo, have
been limited to perform well only for a specific task - hence the term
'narrow artificial intelligence.' But researchers are beginning to
embrace the arrival of artificial general intelligence, an AI that can
perform any task that a human can. In their recent paper, Google
DeepMind proposes a method into training AGI by using genetic algorithm."

And:

"So how well does PathNet perform in action? DeepMind's experiments show
that PathNet is faster than fine-tuning, and does positively transfer
trained knowledge in supervised learning classification tasks and
reinforcement learning tasks - successfully addressing the three
requirements of an AGI."

Read more here to notice it:

http://www.deepbio.co.kr/2017/03/20/Weekly-paper-DeepMinds-PathNet.html

And read about the following other important step that is Generative
Adversarial Network:

What's a Generative Adversarial Network? Leading Researcher Explains

Read more here:

https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2017/05/17/generative-adversarial-network/

Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

Here is the advantages and disadvantages of automation

Sky89 <Sky89@sky68.com>: Aug 20 12:15PM -0400

Hello....

Read this:

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.

Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

soft and program

Tuesday, August 21, 2018

Digest for comp.programming.threads@googlegroups.com - 10 updates in 10 topics

No comments:

Blog Archive

About Me