Hello,

Read again, i correct about more of my philosophy about my kind of brain
and more..

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

Here is more about my genetical type:

I have come to Canada when i was 20 years old, and i am living
in Canada Quebec for 33 years and now i am 53 years old , but i am
genetically like an athletic guy and i feel that i am still young
because i am more athletic and i am 6 Feet tall, and i am beautiful
from the inside since i am a gentleman type of person and it is also
genetical in me, and you can take a look at my photo that i have just
put here in my website(I am 53 years old):

https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/jackson-network-problem

But i have to explain a very important thing:

You have to distinguish between, in one side, the intellectual gifted
brain with the high prenatal testosterone that is an agressive and
violent brain that doesn't know how to think correctly and that doesn't
behave correctly, and, in the other side, my kind of brain, since my
genetical type is also that I have an extremely masculine brain with the
need of very defined structures and with the need for clear rules and
systemization and with overconfidence in myself, but i have not a
violent brain and i think it is good for good thinking, and i had high
prenatal testosterone, and i can see it here on my fingers too, and i
have passed a certified IQ test and i have scored high and well above
115 in it, so i invite you to look carefully at the following
interesting video that explains the two types of intellectual gifted
brains, my type of brain with the high prenatal testosterone and the
other type of brains with the low prenatal testosterone:

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

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

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

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

More of my philosophy of why i am more positive about our world..

I am more positive about our world since and i am explaining why
by posting my following writing and thoughts, you can read them
in the following web links:

More of my philosophy about capitalism and innovation:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/cf3Wa4z8Xmc

And here:

More of my philosophy about the future of humanity:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/0X024jfzNvM

And here:

More of my philosophy about artificial intelligence and neuroevolution
and common sense and more:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/awfCypJ9iRE

Also read my following thoughts and writing about our Era of
democratization of technology and democratization of information and
democratization of finance so that to be more positive:

More about "democratization" of finance..

This "democratization" of finance is also for Research and Development
(R&D))..

And look at the following "democratization" of finance so that to
understand:

The 4 tools making capital more abundant than it’s ever been

Read more here:

https://singularityhub.com/2018/07/19/the-4-tools-making-capital-more-abundant-than-its-ever-been/

About democratization of digital technology and technology and Research
and Development (R&D) investment

This is also why i said the following:

Look at the following interesting video:

Can South Korea lead global innovation in Fourth Industrial Era?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUw8gCShEcI

But i think that this minister of education, science and technology
of south Korea looks somewhat archaic since he is not taking correctly
into account the democratization of digital technology and Technology
that permits you to economically grow very rapidly and much cheaply than
using "expensive" Research and Development (R&D) investment, so i think
that he is not correctly adapting to the realities, because the economic
realities have very much changed, since also our era of globalization
has been characterized by the democratization of technology,
democratization of finance, and democratization of information.

Here is more proof of what i am saying:

2. Question: What do you mean by “Democratizing Innovation”?

Eric von Hippel:

The tools for designing high-quality innovations are getting so cheap
and so ubiquitous that individuals can innovate for themselves at a
steadily higher quality and at a steadily decreasing cost. These
sophisticated modern tools are computer-based, and require relatively
little training and practice. As a result, even hobbyist users find they
can use them to design new products and services.

Read more here:

Democratizing Innovation: The Shift of Innovation to Users

https://www.ideaconnection.com/interviews/00010-Democratizing-Innovation-The-Shift-of-Innovation.html

And read my following thoughts of my philosophy so that to understand more:

More of my philosophy about the smart IQ tests and the scalable
algorithms and algorithms..

Bonita Montero a software engineer has just written to me the following
about my new invention below:

> Multiple reader, exlusive writer locks are *never*
> starvation-free. Readers can hold the lock infinitely
> and writers as well,

And i have just answered the following:

>> But i think she is not right, since this holding
>> the lock infinitely is not counted, since you have
>> just to use it correctly and avoid this case, so I
>> think she is making a mistake and she is not
>> understanding what is that a Multiple-Readers-Exclusive-Writer
>> Lock is starvation-free, so what i mean by starvation-free
>> is that in my invention of my algorithm the readers don't
>> starve the writers and the writers don't starve the readers,
>> and the writers don't starve and readers don't starve, it
>> is what we call starvation-free, and i think my invention is
>> scalable and starvation-free and fair.

And Branimir Maksimovic answered me the following:

>>> If used correctly you don't need any lock :P
>>> Locks are for synchronization, which is not
>>> good thing :P

Please read here:

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/NOJrZoQ3-qk

But I think my answer is correct and i think i am really smart, and here
is my explanation:

Since my answer is like a smart IQ test, and it is that my answer is
first that you to know how the: "you have just to use it correctly" is
logically in "relation" with the "avoid this case" in my sentence,
so if what i mean in my answer is that the: "you have just to use it
correctly" of my sentence is not the cause of the: "avoid this case"
of my sentence, so you are failing the smart IQ test of my answer,
since you are just thinking the case where: "you have just to use it
correctly" is the cause of the "avoid this case", and the second case
is if we say: "you have to use it correctly", it also mean that you have
to use it in the right environment, so if it is not, so it doesn't just
mean don't use it, but it also mean change the environment that is
causing the Multiple-Readers-Exclusive-Writer Lock to wait indefinitely.
So you are again failing the smart IQ test.

More of my philosophy about the effects of a commercial society based on
the pursuit of self-interest..

I think that we have to understand the work of the philosopher and
economist Adam Smith about economic Liberalism, i think the defect of
his theory or work is that he is for example saying the following:

"Human egoism is the engine of the properity and happiness of nations"

But i think i am a philosopher that is not in accordance with
the philosopher and economist Adam Smith, since you have to understand
that Adam Smith says about his economic Liberalism that self-interest is
most of the time regulated by competition to not lead to corruption,
fraud, price-gouging, and cheating, and self-interest and competition is
the engine of the properity and happiness of nations described the
opposing, but complementary forces of self-interest and competition as
the invisible hand, it means that while producers and consumers are not
acting with the intent of serving the needs of others or society, they
do, since when you work, your goal is to earn money, but in the process
you provide a valuable good or service that benefits others and society,
so it is the basis of the following saying of Adam Smith: "Human egoism
is the engine of the properity and happiness of nations", but i think
that the most important defect of economic Liberalism of Adam Smith is
the following: How to bring the positive or the much more positive
spirit since the way of egoism and competition of economic Liberalism of
Adam Smith brings a negative spirit that causes disorder and violence ?
Also i think that a much more positive or positive spirit is better for
economy, this is why my new model that i call coopetition that is a well
balance between cooperation and competition is better, this is why i am
sharing a number of my inventions of scalable algorithms and algorithms
and softwares with the public or people so that to bring the positive or
the much more positive spirit(and you can find all of them here in my
website: https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/), and i think that
this positive spirit or much more positive spirit is good for economy,
but you have to play it "smartly", and i give you a proverb of mine that
shows how it is important: