- You cannot scale creativity.. - 1 Update
- About human genetics and the difference between a qualitative and quantitative analysis - 1 Update
- Here is my new poem: "Baby i want to hold you in my arms under this beautiful Sun !" - 1 Update
- 2 drugs for Gaucher's disease also fight COVID-19, Israeli defense lab finds - 1 Update
- Drug researcher develops 'fat burning' molecule - 1 Update
- There are two principal approaches to formal verification: model checking and theorem proving - 1 Update
- Coronavirus: tests on hamsters prove the effectiveness of masks - 1 Update
- The future of innovation is in software - 1 Update
| aminer68@gmail.com: Jun 12 03:06PM -0700 Hello, You cannot scale creativity.. I am a white arab that is more smart, and i invite you to read the following thoughts about: "You cannot scale creativity", it is related to my following powerful product that i have designed and implemented, because as you will read below: "The solution is to lessen the need for coordination: have different people work on different things, use smaller teams, and employ fewer managers.", here is my powerful product (that can also be applied to organizations): https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/universal-scalability-law-for-delphi-and-freepascal Please read the following about Applying the Universal Scalability Law to organisations: https://blog.acolyer.org/2015/04/29/applying-the-universal-scalability-law-to-organisations/ So read the following to understand: Read the following from the following PhD computer scientist: https://lemire.me/blog/about-me/ You cannot scale creativity As a teenager, I was genuinely impressed by communism. The way I saw it, the West could never compete. The USSR offered a centralized and efficient system that could eliminate waste and ensure optimal efficiency. If a scientific problem appeared, the USSR could throw 10, 100 or 1000 scientists at it without having to cajole anyone. I could not quite understand why the communist countries always appeared to be technologically so backward. Weren't their coordinated engineers and scientists out-innovating our scientists and engineers? I was making a reasoning error. I had misunderstood the concept of economy of scale best exemplified by Ford. To me, communism was more or less a massive application of the Fordian approach. It ought to make everything better and cheaper! The industrial revolution was made possible by economies of scale: it costs far less per car to produce 10,000 cars than to make just one. Bill Gates became the richest man in the world because software offers an optimal economy of scale: it costs the same to produce one copy of Windows or 100 million copies. Trade and employment can also scale: the transaction costs go down if you sell 10,000 objects a day, or hire 10,000 people a year. Accordingly, people living in cities are typically better off and more productive. This has lead to the belief that if you regroup more people and you organize them, you get better productivity. I want to stress how different this statement is from the previous observations. We can scale products, services, trade and interaction. Scaling comes from the fact that we need reproduce many copies of the essentially the same object or service. But merely regrouping people only involves scaling in accounting and human ressources: if these are the costs holding you back, you are probably not doing anything important. To get ten people together to have much more than ten times the output is only possible if you are producing an uniform product or service. Yet, somehow, people conclude that regroup people and getting them to work on a common goal, by itself, will improve productivity. Fred Brooks put a dent in this theory with his Brook's law: Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later. While it is true that almost all my work is collaborative, I consistently found it counterproductive to work in large groups. Of course, as an introvert, this goes against all my instincts. But I also fail to see the productivity gains in practice whereas I do notice the more frequent meetings. Abramo et al. (2012) looked seriously at this issue and found that you get no more than linear scaling. That is, a group of two researchers will produce twice as much as one researcher. Period. There is no economy of scale when coordinating human brains. Their finding contradicts decades of science policy where we have tried to organize people into larger and better coordinated groups (a concept eerily reminiscent of communism). We can make an analogy with computers. Your quad-core processor will not run Microsoft Word four times as far. It probably won't even run it twice as fast. In fact, poorly written software may even run slower when there are more than one core. Coordination is expensive. The solution is to lessen the need for coordination: have different people work on different things, use smaller teams, and employ fewer managers. Read more here: https://lemire.me/blog/2012/10/15/you-cannot-scale-creativity/ Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| aminer68@gmail.com: Jun 12 02:30PM -0700 Hello, About human genetics and the difference between a qualitative and quantitative analysis: I am a white arab, and i think i am more smart and i think that i am like a genius who has invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations, and i will make you understand more what about genetics of humans.. More about humans and science.. I will make you understand: There is a difference between looking at humans externally to genetics and looking at genetics of humans, science is looking at genetics of humans and saying that there is "very" small differences in genetics of humans, but you have to understand it as a holistic or globalized view of science into genetics, it is not a localized view into genetics(such as looking at genetical smartness), so this is why there is no human race in science, but those small differences in genetics of humans are making differences in the body outside genetics, so i think neo-nazis are making a mistake because scientifically there is no human race and there is no human races, there is only humans. About National Vanguard and neo-nazis.. I think that this National Vanguard full of neo-nazis is lacking on scientific education, because those neo-nazis are saying that human races do exist, but science says that there is only humans, read the following in Scientific American to notice it: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/the-concept-of-race-is-a-lie/ Here is National Vanguard: https://nationalvanguard.org/ But by saying that there is no human races, I think science is measuring human genetics much more quantitatively than qualitatively, because we can say that there is no races because quantitatively there is only very small differences in genetics between humans, but qualitatively we can say that for example human smartness (or such a localized view into genetics) has a "great" weight of importance, so if you prioritize by weights of importance, so then the weights of importance can create a great differences between humans, so then it is as there is human races by measuring it qualitatively, it is also by logical analogy as the difference between an abstraction of a simulation of a real dynamic system in programming and the real dynamic system. This is why you will notice that in my following thoughts about universality of beauty that i am measuring it qualitatively, read again to notice it: Is beauty universal ? I will make you understand with smartness what about the following webpage: Look at the following webpage from BBC: The myth of universal beauty https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150622-the-myth-of-universal-beauty So notice in the above webpage that it is saying the following about beauty: "Where starvation is a risk, heavier weight is more attractive" So you have to understand that the above webpage from BBC is not smart, i will make you understand with smartness that beauty is universal, so if we take the following sentence of the above webpage: "Where starvation is a risk, heavier weight is more attractive" So you have to put it in the context of the above webpage, and understand that the way of thinking of the webpage from BBC is not smart, because it is saying that since in the above sentence starvation is a risk , so heavier weight can be more attractive, but this can be heavier weight that is not beautiful for the eyes, so it makes a conclusion that universal beauty is not universal, but this is not smart because we have not to measure beautifulness with only our eyes and say that heavier weight that is not beautiful for the eyes is not beautiful, because we have to measure it with smartness and say that smartness says that in the above sentence that heavier weight that is not beautiful for the eyes is beautiful for smartness because starvation is a risk, so then with smartness we can say that beauty is universal. So we have to know that that the system of reference of measure is very important, by logical analogy we can say that measuring beautifulness with the eyes is like measuring individual smartness with only genetics, but measuring beautifulness with both the eyes and smartness is like measuring individual smartness with both the genetical and the cultural. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| aminer68@gmail.com: Jun 12 12:31PM -0700 Hello, Here is my new poem: "Baby i want to hold you in my arms under this beautiful Sun !" I was just listening at the following beautiful song, and i have just decided to think fast and write fast a new poem of Love, so i invite you to listen to the following beautiful song reading at the same time my new poem of Love below: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zp1TbLFPp8&list=RD7zp1TbLFPp8&start_radio=1 And here is my new poem of Love: Baby i want to hold you in my arms under this beautiful Sun ! Since i am here and not like anyone Since my love for you is a so beautiful phenomenon ! Baby i want to hold you in my arms under this beautiful Sun ! As i am also speaking beautifully in many tongues ! Baby i want to hold you in my arms under this beautiful Sun ! And what about this earthly marathon ? As you can notice that the beautiful love is not of the dumb ! Baby i want to hold you in my arms under this beautiful Sun ! Since i am as not of the wrong as i am like a smart automaton Baby i want to hold you in my arms under this beautiful Sun ! So look at this beautiful weather and how it is really fun ! Baby i want to hold you in my arms under this beautiful Sun ! So is my Love the Dollar or Yuan or an Amazon ? No, since look at our peaceful and beautiful plan ! Baby i want to hold you in my arms under this beautiful Sun ! Since it is as our beautiful and forever love can not be undone ! Baby i want to hold you in my arms under this beautiful Sun ! Since my love is not the evil of drugs or the methadone Since my beautiful love is here to see for everyone ! Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| aminer68@gmail.com: Jun 12 12:07PM -0700 Hello, 2 drugs for Gaucher's disease also fight COVID-19, Israeli defense lab finds The Defense Ministry-run Institute for Biological Research has found two drugs used to treat a genetic disorder known as Gaucher's disease are also effective against the coronavirus and potentially other viruses as well, the laboratory announced Tuesday. As one of these drugs — Cerdelga — has already been approved for use by the US Food and Drug Administration and the second — Venglustat — has almost completed the approval process, they may be fast-tracked for use with COVID-19 patients, the Defense Ministry said. Read more here: https://www.timesofisrael.com/gauchers-disease-drugs-also-fight-covid-19-israeli-defense-lab-finds/ Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| aminer68@gmail.com: Jun 12 12:02PM -0700 Hello, Drug researcher develops 'fat burning' molecule Scientists have recently identified a small mitochondrial uncoupler, named BAM15, that decreases the body fat mass of mice without affecting food intake and muscle mass or increasing body temperature. Webster Santos, professor of chemistry and his colleagues have recently identified a small mitochondrial uncoupler, named BAM15, that decreases the body fat mass of mice without affecting food intake and muscle mass or increasing body temperature. Additionally, the molecule decreases insulin resistance and has beneficial effects on oxidative stress and inflammation. The findings, published in Nature Communications on May 14, 2020, hold promise for future treatment and prevention of obesity, diabetes, and especially nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), a type of fatty liver disease that is characterized by inflammation and fat accumulation in the liver. In the next few years, the condition is expected to become the leading cause of liver transplants in the United States. Read more here: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200608132539.htm Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| aminer68@gmail.com: Jun 12 09:40AM -0700 Hello, I am a white arab that is an inventor of many scalable algorithms and there implementations. There are two principal approaches to formal verification: model checking and theorem proving. Read more here: Why don't people use formal methods https://www.hillelwayne.com/post/why-dont-people-use-formal-methods/ And here is more of my thoughts about it, read them carefully: https://community.idera.com/developer-tools/general-development/f/getit-and-third-party/71464/about-turing-completeness-and-parallel-programming Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| aminer68@gmail.com: Jun 12 08:00AM -0700 Hello, Coronavirus: tests on hamsters prove the effectiveness of masks Hong Kong researchers have established that "the universal wearing of a mask is really important" to fight against the epidemic of new coronavirus. Hamster tests show that the use of masks significantly reduces the spread of the coronavirus, experts from the University of Hong Kong said on Sunday. Read more here: https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lepoint.fr%2Fsciences-nature%2Fcoronavirus-des-tests-sur-les-hamsters-prouvent-l-efficacite-des-masques-17-05-2020-2375853_1924.php Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| aminer68@gmail.com: Jun 12 07:46AM -0700 Hello, 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 Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.programming.threads+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment