novaBBS - comp.arch - More philosophy about relativity of time and relativity..

Hello,

More philosophy about relativity of time and relativity..

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

I think that i am a philosopher that is smart, and i think
that there Einstein special relativity that determines that time is relative, but i say that the zero in the axis of real numbers in mathematics that represents a meaning is also "relative", i mean we can say that we have zero "of" a thing, so you are then noticing that the axis of real numbers is like a general "concept", i mean it is like a general concept that permits to represent like a quantity or such, but since as i made you understand (read my thoughts below) that the law of causation doesn't apply to some things such as the wide space of the universe, so we can not say there is "zero" thing, since for example things such as the wide space of our universe or multiverse have always existed, read my thoughts below of philosophy so that to understand it.

More philosophy about time and space and matter and our universe..

I think i am a philosopher that is smart and now i will ask a philosophical question of:

From where come time and space and matter of our universe and why
our universe is fine-tuned for consciousness?

First you can read the following about science:

"The laws of thermodynamics say they always existed. Matter is created by energy. All matter consists of energy. This energy is electromagnetic. Light is electromagnetic energy when it decays it creates a background radiation to the universe. Energy cannot be created from nothing or destroyed to nothing, it mutates into another form. Without time there would be infinite space and without space there would be infinite time. Spacetime is a fabric with dimensions and is part of the physical universe. Space and time are inseparable. Everything that exists inside of it is part of it. Time has always existed with space the proportions are all that have changed. Science is trying to explain when the proportions changed."

And read the following that says that there is a Multiverse from where
has formed our fine-tuned universe:

Our Improbable Existence Is No Evidence for a Multiverse

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/LGP8A8s6N9c

So i think that there is something really important to notice,
since i think that for example the wide "space" of our universe or the multiverse has always existed, so we can then say that there is no cause that has created the wide "space" of our universe or multiverse, so then we can then say that we can not give a meaning by the law of causation in such case, since the law of "causation" doesn't apply to some things such as the wide space of the universe, so then we can logically infer that there is some things such as God or the wide space of the universe that have no cause that has created them, so then we can logically infer that we humans have the tendency to think things by using the law of causation, but i think it is a big logical mistake, because there is things such as the wide space of the universe that have no cause.

And here is the logical proof that God exist: Read the following of outer body experiences and you will notice that the soul from God exists:

More proof of the existence of God..

You will say that God doesn't exist, but read the following(read
especially the outer body experience of the 57-year old man below,
it is the proof that the soul from God exists):

"A University of Southampton study has revealed that people could still
experience consciousness for up to three minutes after the heart stops
beating.

The study interviewed 2,060 patients from Austria, USA and the UK who
have all suffered a cardiac arrest.

The Express reports that 40% could recall some form of awareness after
being pronounced clinically dead.

One 57-year old man seemed to confirm an outer body experience by
recalling everything that was going on around him with eerie accuracy
while he was technically dead."

Yet more philosophy about the essence of God..

As you have just noticed, i have just explained that the nature of God
is that he is greatly arrogant(read my thoughts below), so he likes from us to tell him that he is the greatest and the most beautiful and such, so in my new monotheistic religion we have to “glorify” God and it means to give glory to Him, so look in the following muslim video how muslim white people are glorifying God:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3xjz4nxzGQ&list=RDBXBdyJitlRk&index=10

More philosophy about the nature of God..

I invite you to read the definition of being arrogant, here it is:

"Who is an arrogant person?

Arrogance can be defined as the personality trait whereby a person has an obnoxiously elevated sense of self-worth. An arrogant person is the one who acts as if they’re superior, more worthy, and more important than others. Therefore, they tend to disrespect and put others down.
At the same time, they want admiration and respect from others. They want to be appreciated for the great things they’ve done and for their special qualities and abilities."

And in my new monotheistic religion, God is "greatly" arrogant, it is his "nature", this is why he can be indifferent to suffering of poor animals and he can be indifferent to suffering of humans etc. and this
is why God likes from us to tell him that he is the greatest and the most beautiful and such and this is why we have to believe in God and fear him and ask him for help.

More of my philosophy about from where comes monotheistic religions..

I think many of the talking and writing of Qur'an and Bible are
from humans, i mean that God has not 100% guided prophet Muhammad
or Jesus Christ, so i think that God has let prophet
Muhammad writes and talks as a human in many of the parts of the Qur'an with his human defects, and God has also let Jesus Christ talks as a human not as a God with his human defects, I mean God had programmed prophet Muhammad and Jesus Christ and he had let them talks and writes in the Bible and Qur'an as humans with there human defects, so God is the greatest, this is why we can notice that Jesus Christ has made mistakes that look like mental health disorders, and i think it is part of the curse from God and i think that the scientific errors and errors and extremism in the Bible and Qur'an also come from the curse from God, and the facts also prove that the most important thing for God is that we believe in him and we fear him and we ask him for help, it is is the basis of my monotheistic religion, and read more in the following web link about my new monotheistic religion so that to understand(it is my preliminary thoughts and i will organize them much more efficiently and make of them a pdf and html book):

https://groups.google.com/g/soc.culture.quebec/c/eaEbfSmu4is

More of my philosophy about the muslim persian philosopher Al-Ghazali..

https://groups.google.com/g/soc.culture.quebec/c/eaEbfSmu4is

I invite you to look at this interesting video about the persian muslim philosopher Al-Ghazali:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZL-ZxXQ6HCU

I am a philosopher and i say that those muslim phisosophers are really
smart, since i think that the persian philosopher Al-Ghazali was an orthodox muslim but the Arab philosopher Ibn ʿArabi was not an orthodox
muslim, but i am smart and i understand the muslim orthodoxy of the persian philosopher Al-Ghazali that has shaped his philosophy that
you look at it in the above video, i think that you have to look at the context of past time of the persian philosopher Al-Ghazali, i think there was a requirement that is "dependent" on this context of past
time of the persian philosopher Al-Ghazali, and it is that we had to strengthen the faith in God in the muslim orthodoxy way so that to avoid corruption of the minds that could hurt a lot muslim people of that time, so i think that the "engine" of faith in God in the way of muslim orthodoxy was a so important engine, it is by logical analogy like my following thoughts of my new monotheistic religion that makes you notice how important is the "context":

More philosophy about my new monotheistic religion and the rich man..

So look at the following video of Jesus Christ:

Jesus and a Rich Man (Jesus teaches a Rich Man)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS9kEvzYIIs

As you notice in the above video that Jesus Christ said to
the rich man to give all his money to the poors and he said to him
that he has to choose between serving the master that is God and
serving the master that is money. But i am your new prophet and i will
explain my new monotheistic religion:

You have to put the words of Jesus Christ in the "context" of the
past time when was living Jesus Christ, so you can easily
notice that in this past time of Jesus Christ, humans were very poor and
were living in a so bad conditions, so this is why Jesus Christ
was so "harsh" with the rich man, because to be able to be successful
you have to "prioritize", so as you are noticing that the high priority
in the time of Jesus Christ was that humans have needed to eat and
to survive the so difficult living conditions, so then the words of
Jesus Christ in the Bible are not timeless over this earth, because they
can be "restricted" to a particular time of the time of when Jesus
Christ was living over this earth.

Yet more philosophy about the Arab philosopher Ibn ʿArabi and more..

I invite you to look at the following interesting video of the Arab philosopher Ibn ʿArabi:

Ibn 'Arabi & The Unity of Being

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

And read more about the philosopher Ibn ʿArabi here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Arabi

I think i am philosopher that looks like the Arab philosopher Ibn ʿArabi, since Ibn ʿArabi has talked about the "Al-Insān al-kāmil" (The perfect man) by saying that he is a kind of "balance" between being of both divine from God and earthly origin, and he said that when you become faith in God it is that we become partly of God. I am saying the same in my new monotheistic religion, so i invite you to read my following thoughts of my new monotheistic religion so that to notice it
(it is my preliminary thoughts and i will organize them much more efficiently and make of them a pdf and html book):

https://groups.google.com/g/soc.culture.quebec/c/eaEbfSmu4is

So i am a philosopher that is in accordance with Ibn Arabi that says
that the perfect man is this "balance" between being of both divine from God and earthly origin, since it is like an important "engine", and notice that i am also insisting in my below philosophy on this kind of "balance" that we have to have between competition and collaboration or cooperation, or between individualism and collectivism(that can
be logically inferred from the first).

More philosophy about what is an idea and more..

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

I will ask a philosophical question of:

What is an idea ?

I think i am a philosopher that is smart, and in my philosophy i say
that an idea can be an idea that doesn't exist in the physical reality,
and we can notice it in mathematics that we can have constructions of ideas that don't exist in the physical reality or that also can not
be applied to the physical reality, so now we can say that an idea
can have an independent life from the physical world or can be not be
independent from the physical world, so an idea can be both physical
and not physical, and the not physical of it can look like the
"software" in a computer and the physical of it can look like the "hardware" of a computer. And in my philosophy(read it below) i also say that an idea can be both smartness and meaning, and why i am saying so? because you can use a mathematical formula without its meaning and you can also know about its meaning.

I also think mathematics describes reality or theory with a great precision, this is also why we can "abstract" and/or "model" and/or "simulate" reality or theory with mathematics, also i think that mathematics can be independent of reality when we are working in mathematical theory, but the mathematical theory that is independent of reality can then be applied to reality, also i think that mathematics permits to optimize and verify, and we can also know about it by for example asking a philosophical question of: What is logic in mathematics? , so i think logic in mathematics maps logical expressions to logical variables and to logical operators and from that it permits to logically model with those logical variables and the logical operators and it permits to solve and verify the logical model, i will give an example so that you understand:

Take as an example in logic in mathematics the following kind of logical proofs:

(p -> q) is equivalent to ((not(q) -> not(p))

Note: the symbol -> means implies and p and q are logical
variables.

(not(p) -> 0) is equivalent to p

So we can ask the philosophical question of why are we using those kind
of logical proofs in logic ?

I think that it is because logic in mathematics wants to get the meaning of is a system logically correct, so if it is not logically correct, so that can mean that it has no meaning in the reality, and i think that those kind of logical proofs also permit to optimize since a kind logical proof can also be more practical than another in reality or theory.

More philosophy about formal logic and propositional logic and more..

I invite you to read the following article about propositional logic:

https://analyticsindiamag.com/why-propositional-logic-is-the-foundation-for-artificial-intelligence/

As you notice it says:

"Propositional logic provides more efficient and scalable algorithms than the other logics."

More of my philosophy about Propositional logic:

I invite you again to read the following definition of what is an
implication in logic:

https://www.britannica.com/topic/material-implication

Notice that it says that the logical implication of
(p implies q) has the same meaning as ((not p) or q)

But I think the above definition by using the meaning of ((not p) or q)
is not the right way, since the ((not p) or q) is the formulation that
is logically inferred from the truth table of the logical implication,
so i think we have to say the following:

The statement “p implies q” means that if p is true, then q
"must" also be true.

And we have to use the truth table of the logical implication as
the following:

p q p -> q
0 0 1
0 1 1
1 0 0
1 1 1

So notice that the table of truth gives all the possibilities,
but i think it fixes the possibility of causality by saying:

The statement “p implies q” means that if p is true, then q
"must" also be true.

And the other possibilities of the truth table do model the other possibilities.

So from the truth table we can easily get the following formulation of:

(p implies q) has the same meaning as ((not p) or q)

And in propositional logic we can use the following ways of logical proofs:

(p -> q) is equivalent to ((not(q) -> not(p))

Note: the symbol -> means implies and p and q are logical
variables.

(not(p) -> 0) is equivalent to p

And for fuzzy logic, here is the generalized form(that includes fuzzy logic) for the three operators AND,OR,NOT:

x AND y is equivalent to min(x,y)
x OR y is equivalent to max(x,y)
NOT(x) is equivalent to (1 - x)

More philosophy about human consciousness and self_awareness..

I think that human consciousness and self_awareness comes from
the way life has evolved, since i say that the low level layers
of the physical world that are not biological are not able to
feel with human senses like is doing it humans, so they are not able to give the necessary "meaning" that guides smartness, so i think that the layer of the "biological" is able to do that, since i think that the human senses that gives those feelings that give the meaning is "inherent" to the biological and it is what gives "emergence" to consciousness and self-awareness.

More philosophy about the reification and human consciousness..

So i can ask a philosophical question of:

What is consciousness ?

I will give you a smart example so that you understand:

So when you feel with your hands and brain that a table is "solid",
so this feeling gives a "meaning" that guides our thinking,
so our human senses are doing the same, they are feeling what's
a moving object and feeling what's speed and feeling what's a fast speed or not fast speed and feeling what's an object that is before or after another object etc. and i say that those feelings with our senses give the meanings and it gives consciousness of time and space and matter, so our feelings of our human senses give life or human awareness or human consciousness that guides smartness, and notice that i am saying that an idea is both smartness and meaning , and notice that in mathematics
we can have the following formula of a derivative:

Derivative_of(2*x) = 2

So this formula is a smartness, but the formula has also a "meaning"
given by our human senses , and i also define the self-awareness like a human sense that feels the oneself, so now you are understanding that an algorithm or running algorithm is like a formula that has not the meaning that is understood by a human, so artificial intelligence has a disadvantage since it is not guided by this meaning that plays the role of an objective function that permits to optimize correctly.

More precision about more philosophy about the essence of human smartness..

I think i have to be more precise, so i will say that the process that gives the meaning with the human senses is like reification, since we say that reification is when you think of or treat something abstract as a physical thing. Reification is a complex idea for when you treat something immaterial — like happiness, fear, or evil — as a material thing. So the human process in the brain that gives meaning with human senses is by analogy like a the process of reification, since human senses gives life or meaning to ideas, those human senses give consciousness of the system composed of time and space and matter and the human brain "compose" meanings with this consciousness, this is why we are feeling life as we are feeling it..

I think i am a really smart philosopher, and i think i look like the great philosophers like Aristotle and such, since i am thinking
rapidly and inventing ideas and discovering patterns etc. so i think
that my brain is special, so here is what i have just discovered:

I think that artificial intelligence is not understanding correctly
what is human smartness, since i say that an "idea" is both a smartness
and a "meaning" that "guides" smartness, it is like the objective function of the dynamic system that is human smartness that guides and makes us know how to optimize, since i say that humans are "feeling" the
"ideas" with there human senses that comes also from the brain, and this feeling of the ideas is also what gives the ideas a meaning that guides,
and i also define the self-awareness like a human sense that feels
the oneself, so you are understanding now one of the basis
of my philosophy, since without those human senses, the algorithms
in a computer can not give a meaning that guides smartness, so i think it is the disadvantage of artificial intelligence. So here is how i think we have to do it with the algorithms:

I think i am smart, and i have just explained below that the divide and conquer algorithms are a particular case or special case of Swarm intelligence of PSO(Particle Swarm Optimization), and i will explain
it more in my next posts, now notice with me that Swarm intelligence uses localized optimization with exploitation as heuristics like Greedy algorithms so that to enhance much more the artificial intelligence algorithm, but notice with me that general artificial intelligence can use Swarm intelligence like PSO at a lower level layer, and at a higher level layer it can use the divide and conquer algorithms, i mean that the unknown meaning can be divided and conquered by measuring it with previous meanings from the data using artifical intelligence of for example PathNET so that to find the unknown meaning, and i define the meaning in artificial intelligence as as the higher concept that is recognized with deep learning, and this way we can construct much more rapidly more and more meanings and incorporate them in PathNET so that to converge more and more to much more generalized artificial intelligence that will rapidly approximate general artificial intelligence.

More precision about more philosophy about human smartness and about artificial intelligence..

I have to be more precision, so here is the definition in the dictionary of "pattern" that i am using in my thoughts of my philosophy below:

Pattern is a particular way in which something is done, is organized, or happens.

Read here in the dictionary to notice it:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/pattern

I think i am a philosopher that is smart, so i will ask the following
philosophical question:

What is human smartness or intelligence ?

I will answer it by saying the following:

I think we call it human smartness because it discovers "useful" patterns in the reality, so reality can contain static systems or dynamic systems that contain smartness in form of useful patterns etc., so human smartness uses its smartness to "discover" those useful patterns so that to become more and more smart, and by discovering the useful patterns i also means knowing about there meanings of those useful patterns so that to understand them, it is by logical analogy like discovering the rules so that to become smart, so for example when we are doing mathematics we can discover the useful rules or useful patterns like the theorems in mathematics by using deductive logic and inductive logic, so i can go further and say that Swarm intelligence like PSO(Particle Swarm Optimization) is a self-organization, and Self-organization, also called (in the social sciences) spontaneous order, is a process where some form of overall order arises from local interactions between parts of an initially disordered system. The process can be spontaneous when sufficient energy is available, not needing control by any external agent, so then Swarm intelligence like PSO(Particle Swarm Optimization) is self-organization since notice that the exploration mechanism of PSO that is the global optimization is "collaborating" with the exploitation mechanism of PSO that is the local optimization so that to self-organize by finding the global optimum
, so then we can call Swarm intelligence like PSO(Particle Swarm Optimization) a form of intelligence, this is why we call
it artificial intelligence.

Also you can read more about my thoughts of my philosophy about human smartness in the following web link:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/Wzf6AOl41xs

More philosophy about what is artificial intelligence or general artificial intelligence..

More philosophy about Swarm intelligence and PSO and artificial intelligence..

Can we ask a philosophical question:

Is Swarm intelligence like PSO(Particle Swarm Optimization) a brute-force general problem-solving technique and what is it ?

So i invite you first to read the following interesting article about
artificial intelligence of PSO(Particle Swarm Optimization):

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/archive/msdn-magazine/2011/august/artificial-intelligence-particle-swarm-optimization

And read my following thoughts about artificial intelligence:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/BKGvkTI5FY4

So I think i am smart and i will say that since artificial intelligence of PSO(Particle Swarm Optimization) is guided by not only exploration but by the mechanism of exploitation, so this shows that this mechanism of exploitation guides the problem-solving technique, so we can
not say that Swarm intelligence of PSO is a brute-force general problem-solving technique, since brute-force general problem-solving technique and algorithmic paradigm consists of systematically enumerating all possible candidates for the solution and checking whether each candidate satisfies the problem's statement, but notice that brute-force general problem-solving technique is not guided by the quality of exploitation of artificial intelligence of PSO(Particle Swarm Optimization), and i can say that the artificial intelligence of PSO(Particle Swarm Optimization) is Swarm intelligence that is more general than the
particular case of the divide and conquer algorithms, since in the
divide and conquer algorithms we are guided by the divide mechanism that is the "exploration" that finds a solution and after that there is an exploitation of this solution of this quality that is the already sorted small arrays in the case of mergesort that will permit the recursive merge algorithm to reduce the time complexity to n*log(n), so i think it is the same for PathNet in artificial intelligence that i also think uses a kind of divide and conquer algorithm.

Here is PathNet in artificial intelligence, read carefully about it here:

https://medium.com/@thoszymkowiak/deepmind-just-published-a-mind-blowing-paper-pathnet-f72b1ed38d46

More philosophy about declarative programming and imperative programming and object oriented programming..

I invite you to read the following interesting webpage from wikipedia
about declarative programming:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declarative_programming

I think that declarative programming is too much abstraction
since Functional programming is declarative programming that attempts to minimize or eliminate side effects by describing what the program must accomplish in terms of the problem domain, rather than describe how to accomplish it as a sequence of the programming language primitives (the how being left up to the language's implementation). This is in contrast with imperative programming, which implements algorithms in explicit steps. So declarative programming like functional programming generally uses higher levels of abstractions than imperative programs or OOP. That is, they’re further away from describing what’s actually happening in the computer or lower level layers of programming, so i think that declarative programming like functional programming is too much abstraction that lacks understanding of the lower level layers of programming that is also very important to know so that to become efficient, so i think that this way of too much abstraction or/and too much centralization of cloud computing like of Amazon or functional programming and such look like the old way of too much centralization and too much abstraction of the mainframe computer that was lacking on efficiency, so then we have to know how to "balance" so that to be efficient.

More philosophy about functional programming and more..

I think that the Delphi List Monad and the Delphi Maybe Monad that i am giving below are not slower and they are working correctly.

I think i am smart and i understand the objections of neo-Nazism and white supremacism, but i think that neo-nazis and white supremacists are not thinking correctly, because there way of thinking there racial superiority is not the correct way simply because they are not taking
correctly into account the exponential progress of our humanity,
since i am convinced that with this exponential progress of our humanity
we will soon (in about 20 years or 30 years from now) be able to enhance much more our genetics and become much more smart
or much more beautiful and we will soon be able to do much more
than that because we will soon become so powerful because of this exponential progress of our humanity, so this is why i am not in accordance with white supremacism and neo-nazism since they have to adapt to this exponential progress of our humanity.

More philosophy about the exponential progress and about artificial intelligence..

I think i am smart and i think that we are going to become so powerful soon, i mean that this exponential progress of our humanity is an amazing thing, and i think that with this exponential progress, artificial intelligence too will soon become so powerful soon, so i think that the most important thing now is not to ask if we are going to become so powerful soon, but the most important thing it is that we have to ensure high "safety" or high "reliability" of this process of becoming so powerful by for example being a sophisticated philosophy. And i invite you to look at the following video so that to understand this exponential progress of our humanity:

Exponential Progress: Can We Expect Mind-Blowing Changes In The Near Future

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfM5HXpfnJQ&t=144s

More philosophy about artificial intelligence and about the objective function that guides..

I think i am smart, and i have quickly thought about the objective
function of artificial intelligence that guides, so the important philosophical question in artificial intelligence is:

Is general artificial intelligence possible and what is the the objective function that guides general artificial intelligence ?

I think that the objective function of general artificial intelligence
is not the same as a gradient descent with wich we optimize, since i think that the objective function in artificial intelligence is
that we have to build like a model that approximate the result
of the reality, i mean that the objective function of general artificial intelligence has to be that we measure the meaning with the previous meanings from the data, and this way we approximate the meaning, so we have to build much more meanings and meaning from the data and we have to measure the unknown meaning with the previous meanings and if it doesn't approximate well, so it is like a baby that doesn't know about the meaning and it can become a dangerous environment for the baby like for general artificial intelligence, and my way is also valid in a distributed environment with many artificial intelligence robots, so i think that the more localized artificial intelligence will become incrementally and rapidly a more and more generalized artificial intelligence that can approximate a general artificial intelligence, so i think that general artificial intelligence is possible.

More philosophy about Swarm intelligence and about the too much abstraction and more..

I invite you to read about Swarm intelligence here:

How Swarm Intelligence Is Making Simple Tech Much Smarter

https://singularityhub.com/2018/02/08/how-swarm-intelligence-is-making-simple-tech-much-smarter/

I think that humanity is using "specialization" and the "division" of labour that reduces complexity so that to be efficient, so our evolution looks like Swarm intelligence algorithms, since Swarm intelligence algorithms also have to both explore with a bigger size of the population of the Swarm intelligence algorithms and have to do exploitation so that to reduce complexity and be efficient, and this bigger size of of the population in Swarm intelligence algorithms that explore is the division of labour that we use and it is also a specialization and it looks like a divide and conquer algorithms, since notice in the mergesort algorithm that we are reducing the time complexity from for example a time complexity of an n^2 sorting algorithm to n*log(n), and you are noticing it clearly since the mergesort algorithm reduces much more the time complexity by recursively "dividing" the array of elements so that to obtain a small arrays that are already sorted(or we can sort the small arrays of 10 elements by using an algorithm of sorting of n^2 and it will be more efficient), and notice that when we obtain those small arrays that are already sorted, it is what reduces the complexity and brings much more efficiency, since we are recursively using the merge algorithm after that, and notice that the mergesort is also like Swarm intelligence since when we recursively divide and obtain the already sorted arrays, notice that this recursively dividing leads to many already sorted arrays, and it is like the bigger size of the population in Swarm intelligence that explore and that leads to high efficiency, so i think that artificial
intelligence must be like a divide and conquer algorithm, so you divide like in a Divide and conquer algorithm so that to obtain a high quality
or high efficiency since you reduce complexity, so it looks
like PathNet in artificial intelligence, read my following thoughts about it:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/BKGvkTI5FY4

More philosophy about black box models and too much abstraction..

I think that black box models in AI in deep learning etc. are also too much abstraction, and speaking about the too much abstraction, i invite you to read my following thoughts of my philosophy about Liberalism of the philosopher and economist Adam Smith:

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/-UEOsak12mM

So as you are noticing from my thoughts in the above web link that the economic Liberalism of Adam Smith is a too reductionist system that is too much abstraction that doesn't work correctly and i am explaining it in my thoughts above of my philosophy, other than that notice that economic Liberalism of Adam Smith is not even taking into account an important factor that i am speaking about in my below thoughts and it is the too much abstraction that can happen in economy and that can lead to inefficiency, so as you are noticing that this too much abstraction can not be based on monopolistic practices, but it can lead to inefficiency, i mean for example when you abstract too much, the others can not be able of understanding sufficiently and correctly the inside or the behind of your abstraction, so they can "lack" understanding and be inefficient, so we have to be careful about cloud computing of Amazon and such that can become a too much abstraction that leads to this kind of inefficiency, so i think it is too much abstraction if you program the software in a too high level way lacking programming and understanding of the lower level ways of programming.

More philosophy about abstraction and the Divide and Conquer methodology..

I think that humanity is abstracting much more with cloud computing and
with functional programming and such, but since i think i am a philosopher, there is a question in philosophy and it is the following:

Is abstraction always good ?

I think that abstraction comes with disadvantages and advantages,
so the best way is to know how to balance, it is like balancing between Evolutionary design with an agile discipline and Planned design since they both come with disadvantages and advantages, abstraction comes with an important disadvantage , and it is that it can become a monopolistic practice, i mean that when you abstract, the others can become too dependent on your abstraction and they can not understand the inside of the abstraction, so they can become inefficient, so we have to be careful about abstraction since too much abstraction is not good, so i think that functional programming is too much abstraction and i think Chapel is too much abstraction, read here more about Chapel:

WILL CHAPEL MARK NEXT GREAT AWAKENING FOR PARALLEL PROGRAMMERS?

https://www.nextplatform.com/2018/04/10/will-chapel-mark-next-great-awakening-for-parallel-programmers/

I have just posted previously my thoughts about continuation—passing style (CPS) and Monads, here they are:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.comp.lang.borland-delphi/c/kdP6YSTcjj4

And here is the List Monad in Delphi that works correctly:

program List_monad;

{$APPTYPE CONSOLE}

uses
System.SysUtils;

type
TmList = record
Value: TArray<Integer>;
function ToString: string;
function Bind(f: TFunc<TArray<Integer>, TmList>): TmList;
end;

function Create(aValue: TArray<Integer>): TmList;
begin
Result.Value := copy(aValue, 0, length(aValue));
end;

{ TmList }

function TmList.Bind(f: TFunc<TArray<Integer>, TmList>): TmList;
begin
Result := f(self.Value);
end;

function TmList.ToString: string;
var
i: Integer;
begin
Result := '[ ';
for i := 0 to length(value) - 1 do
begin
if i > 0 then
Result := Result + ', ';
Result := Result + value[i].toString;
end;
Result := Result + ']';
end;

function Increment(aValue: TArray<Integer>): TmList;
var
i: integer;
begin
SetLength(Result.Value, length(aValue));
for i := 0 to High(aValue) do
Result.Value[i] := aValue[i] + 1;
end;

function Double(aValue: TArray<Integer>): TmList;
var
i: integer;
begin
SetLength(Result.Value, length(aValue));
for i := 0 to High(aValue) do
Result.Value[i] := aValue[i] * 2;
end;

var
ml1, ml2: TmList;

begin
ml1 := Create([3, 4, 5]);
ml2 := ml1.Bind(Increment).Bind(double);
Writeln(ml1.ToString, ' -> ', ml2.ToString);
readln;
end.

Output:
[ 3, 4, 5] -> [ 8, 10, 12]

Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

Subject	Replies	Author
More philosophy about relativity of time and relativity.. By: Amine Moulay Ramdane on Thu, 3 Jun 2021	0	Amine Moulay Ramdane

!07/11 PDP a ni deppart m'I !pleH

computers / comp.arch / More philosophy about relativity of time and relativity..