Hello,

More philosophy about Economics and scalability and productivity and
quality..

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

I invite you to read the following interesting paper because it is
so important:

Tipping the scales in AI: How leaders capture exponential returns

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/technology-media-and-telecommunications/our-insights/tipping-the-scales-in-ai

I have just read the above paper and i have understood it and i will
talk more about something really important: In economics, economies of
scale resulted in the most affordable price of any product for the
consumer without the manufacturer having to sacrifice profits, and in
Microeconomics there is a so important thing that we call Diminishing
Marginal Returns in Economies of Scale, and it is a so much important
thing, since the most important in it is that you have to know how to
"avoid" this Diminishing Marginal Returns in Economies of Scale, and i
have invented sophisticated tools to do it, also i have invented
many many scalable algorithms and algorithms and i am still inventing
scalable algorithms and algorithms and i am also inventing other
sophisticated tools softwares.

You can read more about Diminishing Marginal Returns in Economies of
Scale here:

Economies of Scale

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-microeconomics/chapter/economies-of-scale/

Also there is a so much important thing that we call "scalability",
and in economy you have to know how to "scale" efficiently productivity,
but you have to scale efficiently productivity by avoiding the above
problem of Diminishing Marginal Returns in Economies of Scale, and here
is what i am a saying about the scalability of productivity:

I have also just posted about the following thoughts from the following
PhD computer scientist:

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

Read more here his thoughts about productivity:

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

And i think he is making a mistake:

Since we have that Productivity = Output/Input

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

And it looks like the following:

About parallelism and about Gustafson’s Law..

Gustafson’s Law:

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

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

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

Load balance is also a crucial factor.

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

About the Threadpool..

I have just read the following:

Concurrency - Throttling Concurrency in the CLR 4.0 ThreadPool

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

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

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

And here is my other Threadpool engine with priorities:

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

And read my following previous thoughts to understand more:

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

I have just read the following webpage:

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

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

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

Dmitry Vyukov — Go scheduler: Implementing language with lightweight
concurrency

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And you can read more about my thoughts here:

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

And I invite you to read the following article:

The Secret Behind Silicon Valley’s Enduring Success

https://singularityhub.com/2012/07/12/the-real-secret-behind-silicon-valleys-success/

And i have just detected with my smartness the pattern in the above
article, and it is that success of a country comes from: A good
education system and from talents and from capital and from from
attracting the smartest immigrants.

But i think i am smart and i have to be fine-grained and show you more
the important details, so read my following thoughts so that to understand:

And look at the following video:

Why Israel is a Tech Capital of the World

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuPx61911Oo

I think that this jewish from Israel that is talking in the above video
is not thinking correctly, because there is two important things that
you must have so that a country be successful: Capital and talents, the
above video is making a mistake by saying that you need the two so that
to be successful, i mean it is saying that you need Capital and talents,
but i think he is making a mistake, because i think that Capital can
attract talents, so Capital can make you successful as a country, so
then i can logically infer that so that to have capital that make you
successful, you have to know how to construct a product or services that
you can sell from those competitive advantages of competitive part or
parts of product or service that can come from you or/and can come from
different countries of the global world, and it is i think an efficient
way that makes you adapt quickly and efficiently in this globalization,
and notice with me that having competitive part or parts of a product or
service doesn't mean it has to come from R&D(Research and development),
also the above video of the jewish from Israel is not saying that
Capital can come from "democratization" of finance, since
you have to know that our global world has changed very much by being
democratization of technology, democratization of finance, and
democratization of information, read my following thoughts so that you
also understand that Capital also comes from democratization of finance: