Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘Bill Gates

Is “Homo Deus” is explaining how global “Elite” class will behave in the future?

But It is still behaving the same in last century.

Yuval Noah Harari in his latest book “Homo Deus” argues that humanity’s progress toward bliss, immortality, and divinity is bound to be unequal—some people will leap ahead, while many more are left behind.

As if those “left behind” is Not the fact every since history of societies was told

Yuval Noah Harari is re-telling us how the new biological and technological breakthrough has benefited the well-to-do. Bill Gates argues that new vaccines have been spread in less developed States a year after their discovery, just to refresh our memories that foundations are at work and mean to do good to humanity at large.

Question:

Suppose “Elite” class worldwide with plenty of money, privileges, connections…manages to give birth to totally healthy babies, healthy till late age, live without daily worries though “third party” that save them to stay in line for public transaction and AI robots to take care of domestic maintenance… what kinds of purposes could they invent for their life?

Get addicted to something like gambling, hard drugs, “immoral behaviors”, indifferent opinions, serial murderer of everyone disturbing their comfort zone, getting favourite seats to every event, driving like crazy on closed circuits, bungee jumping everyday, sky diving, acquiring more wealth by aggressive financial risk taking and monopolies in order to head the list of the richest families…

Do you believe that we really have organized to meet basic human needs: being happy, healthy, and in control of the environment around us?

Mind you that China alone has a middle class far numerous that the combined middle classes in the world. The same reality is at work in India.

May be the hotbeds for the coming revolutions against inherited, and unwritten entitlements will surge from these two most populated nations.

Do you think it is right to underpay workers from a decent living wage so that wealthy owners or planning to be wealthy people achieve some kind of dreams? Is this Not Capitalism entitlement at its ugliest level?

That a large pool of poor people must be maintained to serve those with money, privileges and entitlement?

But this is Not the future: It has been going on for more than a century.

Note: Bill Gates wrote that “Rather than looking back, as Sapiens does, Homo Deus looks to the future”. As if what Yuval describes in “Homo Deus” is different of what we have been observing for more than a century.

World’s Richest Man Enters the Cannabis Industry

By Benjamin Adams

With a net worth of 81.1 billion dollars, you can do whatever you want- and that’s precisely what Bill Gates is doing by investing in the cannabis industry.

Bill Gates is proud to announce that Microsoft has partnered with KIND Financial to provide a seed-to-sale tracking system. The partnership will create ATM-like kiosks and a way for cannabis collectives to deal in cash without risking their lives.

Four years ago, Bill Gates voted ‘Yes’ in favor of recreational marijuana in the form of Initiative 502 in his home state of Washington.

“It’s an experiment, and it’s probably good to have a couple states try it out to see before you make that national policy,” he said at the time. “Can they keep it out of minors’ hands? Will it reduce alcohol consumption? Are there some people who use it at levels you might think of as inappropriate? Will drug gangs make less money?”

Government workers will be the first to use Bill Gates new cloud software, Azure.

”KIND Financial is building solutions on our government cloud to help these agencies regulate and monitor controlled substances and items, and manage compliance with jurisdictional laws and regulations,” a representative of Microsoft told the Independent.

By sending the new software straight to government workers, he’s working from the inside out.

This definitely isn’t the first time Bill Gates has made a stand surrounding pot legalization.

Everybody who works for Microsoft knows that they don’t drug test– unlike the majority of major companies in the United States.

“We do think there will be significant growth [in the marijuana business],” Kimberly Nelson, Microsoft’s executive director for state and local government solutions, told The New York Times. “As the industry is regulated, there will be more transactions, and we believe there will be more sophisticated requirements and tools down the road.”

This make Microsoft the first multinational business in the world to embrace cannabis and the potential behind it.

Bill Gates experimented with cannabis while a student at Harvard. “I don’t think I was unusual in any of those dimensions, plus or minus,” he said in 1991.

A 1994 book Gates: How Microsoft’s Mogul Reinvented an Industry—and Made Himself the Richest Man in America reveals all. “Marijuana was the pharmaceutical of choice, but in [roommate Sam] Znaimer’s words, ‘on a couple of well-planned isolated occasions we’d go off to the country and spend time contemplating the universe’,” reporters Stephen Manes and Paul Andrews wrote.

In 1977 Gates was pulled over, searched and arrested but no record containing the specifics has ever been found. It is widely assumed that Gates was either arrested for a DUI or for the possession of a controlled substance. It may remain a mystery forever.

In 1992, Gates allegedly broke up with his girlfriend and former employee Stephanie Reichel in a coffeeshop in Amsterdam. It’s safe to say that he’s a pot smoker.

It is good that people like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs experimented with soft drugs like cannabis- if they hadn’t, we might have never gone as far as we have with programming.

A few excerpts of Steve Jobs biography and comments

From the biography of Walter Isaacson. He claimed that Jobs refused to read any notes or a draft version. And this book is pretty thorough.

On June 29, 1975, Steve Wozniak typed a few characters on his invented machine (a keyboard, a screen, a monitor and a microprocessor) and letters were displayed.

Wozniak had spent 2 months hard working on the program.

This inspiration of creating a personal computer was the result of attending the Homebrew Computer Club that displayed the technical file of the Altair Kit microprocessor.

On January 24, 1984, Apple Computer launched the Macintosh. The motto was “You will understand why 1984 will Not be as 1984” (A reference to George Orwell book)

Ridley Scott (director of Blade Runner) shot the story-board of Lee Clow in London. The grey industrial complex was packed with skinheads listening to the speech of Big Brother. A blonde athlete woman (disk thrower) runs and smash the big screen the moment Big Brother (IBM)  is declaring “We are going to win”.

IBM PC had snatched the personal computer market.  By then, Steve Jobs had lost his fire as a renegade, a pirate: The Macintosh had a steep price ($2,500) with no external extensions. Computer geeks could Not add their own cards, functions, or even open the box.

After he was diagnosed with cancer, Jobs said at the graduation ceremony in Stanford, June 2005:  

“Remembering that I will die soon was the catalyst for taking the greatest of decisions of my life.
The waiting, pride, fear of failure and feeling embarrassed…all that vanished in the face of death
Remain what count

The best way Not to fall in the trap of believing that we have anything to lose
We are already naked.
Why Not start listening to your heart?”

If you hire a commercial PDG instead of a product designer, don’t be surprised for your enterprise to fail in the medium term.
If you sell your start ups, blame yourself for failing to build a perennial institution

(A closed, vertical integrated product of materials, programs and applications performs better for common users. Looks like many start-ups needed certain constraints to deliver on their products. For professionals and institutions, open systems suit better and enhance technology and start ups.)

the 21st century is the intersection of technology and Art designs.
After he was diagnosed with cancer and his son Rees got interested in DNA processes, Steve said:
The current century is the Intersection of technology and Biology

As he was getting ready to pass away, Jobs said:

“It is difficult to admit that all the experiences and wisdom we acquired can vanish at death.
At least, I like to believe that conscious survives
Most probably, life is like an off/on interrupter.
I never installed this kind of on/off alternatives on Apple products”
After the implant of a new liver, the nurse tried to install an oxygen mask for Jobs. He snatched it away while barely coming out of anesthesia, on the ground that it was Not aesthetically designed. He ordered to have 5 version submitted to him to select the best designed.

Lisa Brennan (Steve’s daughter from Chrisann) said of what Steve’s believed in:

1. Everything leads to its contrary

2. The best harvest are produced in arid soils

3. Pleasure is generated from privation

Tina Redse, the first love of Steve’s that lasted 5 passionate years and till the end of his life, described the character of Steve as emanating from the psychological syndrome ör pathology of  “Troubled narcissistic personality” that matched perfectly the behaviour of Steve’s, mainly a deficit in empathy

Steve connected with his biological mother after his adoptive mother passed away in 1986. He refused to meet with his biological father (originally from Syria)

The author Mona Simpson was his sister and they met and linked up and became great friends. She looked like him and was a red-headed person.

Daniel Kottke was one of the closest friends of Steve Job. He attended with him the Reed University for 2 years, joined him on his trip to India for a year, shared an apartment with him where Job’s girlfriend was pregnant, and worked with him in the garage developing Apple II.
Jobs refused to give him a single share when Apple went public on the ground that Kottke was just a technician.

Many wanted to give Kettke a few shares but Job was adamant: Zero shares.
Wozniac distributed 2,000 shares on 40 people in his team who were able to purchase their dream homes.
If Wozniak behaviors are considered naïve and ill-matured, then these labels must be common to most well-adjusted, caring and compassionate people.

A few quotes by Jobs:

1. If you want to develop a program, try to figure out the machines that will use it

2. The best way to predict the future is by inventing it

3. The good artist copies, the genius steal (from Picasso)

From Stewart Brand in Whole Earth Catalogue (1968):

“Free access to tools that permit private and individual power to tailor-make education, to find inspiration, model our environment and share our adventure with all who need them

The genius of Jobs (rip, mix, burn) was to transform the personal computer into a digital hub for all portable electronic gizmos, such as camcorders, iTunes, iPod, iPad…The computer served as a center for producing and generating videos, movies, clips…iMovie, iDVD, iTune…

Jobs also got totally engaged in the Cloud technology and succeeded in closing the loop.

Note 1: Bill Gates is Not an outlier: He is pretty much mainstream of the proper timing for new technology. Steve Jobs is an outlier: He could Not program but made all the nerds in electronics and programmers rally to his distorted reality

Note 2: There are plenty of geniuses in human history and in all kinds of disciplines.
Rare are those geniuses who could invent (intuition) and do the demonstration also.

One common traits among those rare geniuses is that they had to write down that they discovered and in two versions (Not the case of Jobs):
1. A version for their own benefit translating their mental processes for ease recollection when re-read, and
2. A version for publication to satisfy the rational processes for the period

I am thinking of Blaise Pascal, Galileo, Kepler, Lavoisier, Kamel Hassan Sabbah and scores of ancient Arab scientists who experimented before publishing their thesis

Note 3: And how would you “want to change the world” Sir?
Are more lunatics those who make apologies of the fools who claim their mission is to change the world
Like all those cult-like minds who want the world to behave according to their world views
What do you want to change Sir?
1. The standard of living all over the world?
2. Behavors of individuals?
3. The standard norms of communities?
4. Reforming system institutions to cater better to the common people requests?
5. Re-structuring the administrative institutions that are meant to control and rule the masses?
6. How about focusing first on your own community, and provide draft projects for its approval?
7. How about accepting the many idiosyncrasies surrounding you and your community?

Note 4: We have a structural problem to approach climate change.
You can simultaneously understand the medium to long-term risks of climate change and also come to the conclusion that it is in your short-term economic interest to invest in oil and gas.
Which is why anybody who tells you that the market is going to fix this on its own is lying to you.
But the government institutions are wary of changing this mid-fix of market stupid fixing of anything that drastic and existential

Note 5: Any man-made system must necessarily be fraught with errors, faults and limitations on its intended usage.
Any man-made system (product, service, administrative, management, political, control…) is doomed to fail when designed to cater for complex tasks and objectives: It will end up tying up many teams targeted for training, maintenance, redesigning, repairing…

Man-made designs barely consider the idiosyncrasies of users and the environment of the community and the designers lack the necessary knowledge, technically and the socio-psychological intricacies and interrelationship of the users and community.

The diversity of users and environments will easily pinpoint the deficiencies in any system.
The proper functioning of any system in the medium term relies solely on the acceptance of the idiosyncrasy of the community, regardless of the level of performance the system is delivering, particularly in health and safety usage and applications

Are Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg And Tech-Giant Supergroup Teaming Up Against Climate Change?

A dream team of tech giants – Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Richard Branson, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Jack Ma from Alibaba, along with a host of international tech leaders – have announced they’re coming together to combat climate change.

Note:  After you read this propaganda piece, revert to this link of Naomi Klein to discover how these tech-giants are fooling their audience and customers on what they claim to support green climate https://adonis49.wordpress.com/2015/12/12/this-greenwashing-trend-of-big-business-and-its-effects-on-the-planet-and-our-own-bodies/

Tom Hale. November 30, 2015

The Breakthrough Energy Coalition hopes to inspire and, more importantly, fund start-up companies that are developing technology to tackle climate change.

The coalition also hopes to challenge the stagnant model of separate public versus private development and start a new paradigm where governments, businesses, and researchers can all collaborate and benefit together.

On their website, they say:

The existing system of basic research, clean energy investment, regulatory frameworks, and subsidies fails to sufficiently mobilize investment in truly transformative energy solutions for the future. We can’t wait for the system to change through normal cycles.

“Experience indicates that even the most promising ideas face daunting commercialization challenges and a nearly impassable Valley of Death between promising concept and viable product, which neither government funding nor conventional private investment can bridge.

“This collective failure can be addressed, in part, by a dramatically scaled-up public research pipeline, linked to a different kind of private investor with a long term commitment to new technologies who is willing to put truly patient flexible risk capital to work.”

Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg announced the plan through a Facebook post on Sunday.

By no coincidence, the announcement coincides with the UN Climate Change Conference in Paris this week.

The group of billionaire super-geeks hope to add pressure and inspire the talks, stressing that addressing climate change can’t just come from governmental funding and law alone, but aslo through innovation, investment and business.

Note: First, these tech giants and billionaire have to desist investing in giant oil companies and decrease the plane flight that rely on degraded climate sources

 

How Many Jobs Will Be Replaced By Software Bots and droids? 

Bill Gates: People Don’t Realize How Many Jobs Will Soon Be Replaced By Software Bots

“Robots and algorithms are getting good at jobs like building cars, writing articles, translating.
Jobs that once required a human. So what will we humans do for work?” Andrew McAfee

As it turns out, when tens of millions of people are unemployed or underemployed, there’s a fair amount of interest in what technology might be doing to the labor force.

And as I look at the conversation, it strikes me that it’s focused on exactly the right topic, and at the same time, it’s missing the point entirely.

The topic that it’s focused on, the question is whether or not all these digital technologies are affecting people’s ability to earn a living, or are the droids taking our jobs? And there’s some evidence that they are.

0:43 The Great Recession ended when American GDP resumed its kind of slow, steady march upward, and some other economic indicators also started to rebound, and they got kind of healthy kind of quickly.

Corporate profits are quite high.

In fact, if you include bank profits, they’re higher than they’ve ever been. And business investment in gear, in equipment and hardware and software is at an all-time high. So the businesses are getting out their checkbooks.

What they’re not really doing is hiring.

So this red line is the employment-to-population ratio, the percentage of working age people in America who have work. And we see that it cratered during the Great Recession, and it hasn’t started to bounce back at all.

1:29 But the story is not just a recession story. The decade that we’ve just been through had relatively anemic job growth all throughout, especially when we compare it to other decades, and the 2000s are the only time we have on record where there were fewer people working at the end of the decade than at the beginning.

This is not what you want to see. When you graph the number of potential employees versus the number of jobs in the country, you see the gap gets bigger and bigger over time, and then, during the Great Recession, it opened up in a huge way. I did some quick calculations.

I took the last 20 years of GDP growth and the last 20 years of labor productivity growth and used those in a fairly straightforward way to try to project how many jobs the economy was going to need to keep growing, and this is the line that I came up with. Is that good or bad?

This is the government’s projection for the working age population going forward. So if these predictions are accurate, that gap is not going to close.

2:32 The problem is, I don’t think these projections are accurate. In particular, I think my projection is way too optimistic, because when I did it, I was assuming that the future was kind of going to look like the past with labor productivity growth, and that’s actually not what I believe.

When I look around, I think that we ain’t seen nothing yet when it comes to technology’s impact on the labor force. Just in the past couple years, we’ve seen digital tools display skills and abilities that they never, ever had before, and that, kind of, eat deeply into what we human beings do for a living. Let me give you a couple examples.

3:10 Throughout all of history, if you wanted something translated from one language into another, you had to involve a human being. Now we have multi-language, instantaneous, automatic translation services available for free via many of our devices all the way down to smartphones. And if any of us have used these, we know that they’re not perfect, but they’re decent.

3:34 Throughout all of history, if you wanted something written, a report or an article, you had to involve a person. Not anymore. This is an article that appeared in Forbes online a while back about Apple’s earnings. It was written by an algorithm. And it’s not decent, it’s perfect.

3:51 A lot of people look at this and they say, “Okay, but those are very specific, narrow tasks, and most knowledge workers are actually generalists, and what they do is sit on top of a very large body of expertise and knowledge and they use that to react on the fly to kind of unpredictable demands, and that’s very, very hard to automate.”

One of the most impressive knowledge workers in recent memory is a guy named Ken Jennings. He won the quiz show “Jeopardy!” 74 times in a row, took home three million dollars. That’s Ken on the right getting beat three to one by Watson, the “Jeopardy!”-playing supercomputer from IBM.

When we look at what technology can do to general knowledge workers, I start to think there might not be something so special about this idea of a generalist, particularly when we start doing things like hooking Siri up to Watson and having technologies that can understand what we’re saying and repeat speech back to us.

Now, Siri is far from perfect, and we can make fun of her flaws, but we should also keep in mind that if technologies like Siri and Watson improve along a Moore’s Law trajectory, which they will, in six years, they’re not going to be two times better or four times better, they’ll be 16 times better than they are right now. So I start to think that a lot of knowledge work is going to be affected by this.

5:12 And digital technologies are not just impacting knowledge work.

They’re starting to flex their muscles in the physical world as well. I had the chance a little while back to ride in the Google autonomous car, which is as cool as it sounds. (Laughter) And I will vouch that it handled the stop-and-go traffic on U.S. 101 very smoothly.

There are about three and a half million people who drive trucks for a living in the United States. I think some of them are going to be affected by this technology. And right now, humanoid robots are still incredibly primitive. They can’t do very much. But they’re getting better quite quickly, and DARPA, which is the investment arm of the Defense Department, is trying to accelerate their trajectory.

5:54 The droids are coming for our jobs.

In the short term, we can stimulate job growth by encouraging entrepreneurship and by investing in infrastructure, because the robots today still aren’t very good at fixing bridges. But in the not-too-long-term, I think within the lifetimes of most of the people in this room, we’re going to transition into an economy that is very productive but that just doesn’t need a lot of human workers, and managing that transition is going to be the greatest challenge that our society faces. Voltaire summarized why. He said, “Work saves us from three great evils: boredom, vice and need.”

6:36 But despite this challenge, I’m personally, I’m still a huge digital optimist, and I am supremely confident that the digital technologies that we’re developing now are going to take us into a utopian future, not a dystopian future. And to explain why, I want to pose kind of a ridiculously broad question. I want to ask what have been the most important developments in human history?

6:58 Now, I want to share some of the answers that I’ve gotten in response to this question. It’s a wonderful question to ask and to start an endless debate about, because some people are going to bring up systems of philosophy in both the West and the East that have changed how a lot of people think about the world.

And then other people will say, “No, actually, the big stories, the big developments are the founding of the world’s major religions, which have changed civilizations and have changed and influenced how countless people are living their lives.”

And then some other folk will say, “Actually, what changes civilizations, what modifies them and what changes people’s lives are empires, so the great developments in human history are stories of conquest and of war.”

And then some cheery soul usually always pipes up and says, “Hey, don’t forget about plagues.” 

There are some optimistic answers to this question, so some people will bring up the Age of Exploration and the opening up of the world.

Others will talk about intellectual achievements in disciplines like math that have helped us get a better handle on the world, and other folk will talk about periods when there was a deep flourishing of the arts and sciences.

So this debate will go on and on. It’s an endless debate, and there’s no conclusive, no single answer to it.

But if you’re a geek like me, you say, “Well, what do the data say?”

And you start to do things like graph things that we might be interested in, the total worldwide population, for example, or some measure of social development, or the state of advancement of a society, and you start to plot the data, because, by this approach, the big stories, the big developments in human history, are the ones that will bend these curves a lot.

8:39 So when you do this, and when you plot the data, you pretty quickly come to some weird conclusions.

You conclude that none of these things have mattered very much.

They haven’t done a darn thing to the curves. There has been one story, one development in human history that bent the curve, bent it just about 90 degrees, and it is a technology story.

9:06 The steam engine, and the other associated technologies of the Industrial Revolution changed the world and influenced human history so much, that in the words of the historian Ian Morris, they made mockery out of all that had come before. (Anything that increase power?)

And they did this by infinitely multiplying the power of our muscles, overcoming the limitations of our muscles. Now, what we’re in the middle of now is overcoming the limitations of our individual brains and infinitely multiplying our mental power. (Our individual mental power or the multinational knowledge power?)

How can this not be as big a deal as overcoming the limitations of our muscles?

So at the risk of repeating myself a little bit, when I look at what’s going on with digital technology these days, we are not anywhere near through with this journey, and when I look at what is happening to our economies and our societies, my single conclusion is that we ain’t seen nothing yet. The best days are really ahead. (Increased unemployment is that good?)

9:59 Let me give you a couple examples. Economies don’t run on energy. They don’t run on capital, they don’t run on labor. Economies run on ideas. (Then why economy is still reliant on cheap oil and gas?)

So the work of innovation, the work of coming up with new ideas, is some of the most powerful, some of the most fundamental work that we can do in an economy.

And this is kind of how we used to do innovation. We’d find a bunch of fairly similar-looking people we’d take them out of elite institutions, we’d put them into other elite institutions, and we’d wait for the innovation.

As a white guy who spent his whole career at MIT and Harvard, I got no problem with this.

But some other people do, and they’ve kind of crashed the party and loosened up the dress code of innovation. 

So here are the winners of a Top Coder programming challenge, and I assure you that nobody cares where these kids grew up, where they went to school, or what they look like. All anyone cares about is the quality of the work, the quality of the ideas.

11:07 And over and over again, we see this happening in the technology-facilitated world.

The work of innovation is becoming more open, more inclusive, more transparent, and more merit-based, and that’s going to continue no matter what MIT and Harvard think of it, and I couldn’t be happier about that development.

11:25 I hear once in a while, “Okay, I’ll grant you that, but technology is still a tool for the rich world, and what’s not happening, these digital tools are not improving the lives of people at the bottom of the pyramid.”

And I want to say to that very clearly: nonsense. The bottom of the pyramid is benefiting hugely from technology. The economist Robert Jensen did this wonderful study a while back where he watched, in great detail, what happened to the fishing villages of Kerala, India, when they got mobile phones for the very first time, and when you write for the Quarterly Journal of Economics, you have to use very dry and very circumspect language, but when I read his paper, I kind of feel Jensen is trying to scream at us, and say, look, this was a big deal.

Prices stabilized, so people could plan their economic lives. Waste was not reduced; it was eliminated. And the lives of both the buyers and the sellers in these villages measurably improved.

Now, what I don’t think is that Jensen got extremely lucky and happened to land in the one set of villages where technology made things better. What happened instead is he very carefully documented what happens over and over again when technology comes for the first time to an environment and a community.

The lives of people, the welfares of people, improve dramatically.

12:40 So as I look around at all the evidence, and I think about the room that we have ahead of us, I become a huge digital optimist, and I start to think that this wonderful statement from the physicist Freeman Dyson is actually not hyperbole.

This is an accurate assessment of what’s going on. Our digital — our technologies are great gifts, and we, right now, have the great good fortune to be living at a time when digital technology is flourishing, when it is broadening and deepening and becoming more profound all around the world.

13:10 The droids are taking our jobs, but focusing on that fact misses the point entirely.

The point is that then we are freed up to do other things, and what we are going to do, I am very confident, what we’re going to do is reduce poverty and drudgery and misery around the world. (If these were to happen, they would have been proven in the data and the world would not be in such a dismal condition. And I’m not talking rates and ratio, but actual numbers)

I’m very confident we’re going to learn to live more lightly on the planet, and I am extremely confident that what we’re going to do with our new digital tools is going to be so profound and so beneficial that it’s going to make a mockery out of everything that came before.

I’m going to leave the last word to a guy who had a front row seat for digital progress, our old friend Ken Jennings. I’m with him. I’m going to echo his words: “I, for one, welcome our new computer overlords.”

Patsy Z and TEDxSKE shared this link on FB.
Robots and algorithms are getting good at jobs like building cars, writing articles, translating.
Jobs that once required a human. So what will we humans do for work?
Andrew McAfee walks through recent labor data to say: We ain’t seen nothing yet. But then he steps back to look at big history, and…
ted.com|By Andrew McAfee

Current list of Billionaires

A few facts:

70% of Saudi wealth is in the hands of its billionaires, versus 24% in the Gulf Emirates

Ankara, the Capital of Turkey, has the most number of millionaires, about 45,000

London has the most concentration of wealthy people, tackled by New York

Apparently, Bill Gates overtook Carlos Slim Helu this year. What Gates did to increase his wealth for about $10 bn in a single year?

 

Rank Name Net Worth Age Source Country of Citizenship
1

Carlos Slim Helu & family

$73 B 73 telecom Mexico
2

Bill Gates

$67 B 58 Microsoft United States
3

Amancio Ortega

$57 B 77 Zara Spain
4

Warren Buffett

$53.5 B 83 Berkshire Hathaway United States
5

Larry Ellison

$43 B 69 Oracle United States
6

Charles Koch

$34 B 78 diversified United States
6

David Koch

$34 B 73 diversified United States
8

Li Ka-shing

$31 B 85 diversified Hong Kong
9

Liliane Bettencourt & family

$30 B 91 L’Oreal France
10

Bernard Arnault & family

$29 B 64 LVMH France
11

Christy Walton & family

$28.2 B 59 Wal-Mart United States
12

Stefan Persson

$28 B 66 H&M Sweden
13

Michael Bloomberg

$27 B 71 Bloomberg LP United States
14

Jim Walton

$26.7 B 66 Wal-Mart United States
15

Sheldon Adelson

$26.5 B 80 casinos United States
16

Alice Walton

$26.3 B 64 Wal-Mart United States
17

S. Robson Walton

$26.1 B 70 Wal-Mart United States
18

Karl Albrecht

$26 B 93 Aldi Germany
19

Jeff Bezos

$25.2 B 50 Amazon.com United States
20

Larry Page

$23 B 40 Google United States
21

Sergey Brin

$22.8 B 40 Google United States
22

Mukesh Ambani

$21.5 B 56 petrochemicals, oil & gas India
23

Michele Ferrero & family

$20.4 B 88 chocolates Italy
24

Lee Shau Kee

$20.3 B 85 diversified Hong Kong
24

David Thomson & family

$20.3 B 56 media Canada
26

Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Alsaud

$20 B 58 investments Saudi Arabia
26

Carl Icahn

$20 B 77 leveraged buyouts United States
26

Thomas & Raymond Kwok & family

$20 B real estate Hong Kong
29

Dieter Schwarz

$19.5 B 74 retail Germany
30

George Soros

$19.2 B 83 hedge funds United States
31

Theo Albrecht, Jr. & family

$18.9 B 63 Aldi, Trader Joe’s Germany
32

Alberto Bailleres Gonzalez & family

$18.2 B 82 mining Mexico
33

Jorge Paulo Lemann

$17.8 B 74 beer Brazil
34

Alisher Usmanov

$17.6 B 60 steel, telecom, investments Russia
35

Iris Fontbona & family

$17.4 B 71 mining Chile
36

Forrest Mars, Jr.

$17 B 82 candy United States
36

Jacqueline Mars

$17 B 74 candy United States
36

John Mars

$17 B 77 candy United States
36

Georgina Rinehart

$17 B 59 mining Australia
40

German Larrea Mota Velasco & family

$16.7 B 60 mining Mexico
41

Mikhail Fridman

$16.5 B 49 oil, banking, telecom Russia
41

Lakshmi Mittal

$16.5 B 63 steel India
43

Aliko Dangote

$16.1 B 56 cement, sugar, flour Nigeria
44

Len Blavatnik

$16 B 56 diversified United States
44

Cheng Yu-tung

$16 B 88 diversified Hong Kong
46

Joseph Safra

$15.9 B 75 banking Brazil
47

Rinat Akhmetov

$15.4 B 47 steel, coal Ukraine
47

Leonid Mikhelson

$15.4 B 58 gas, chemicals Russia
49

Leonardo Del Vecchio

$15.3 B 78 eyeglasses Italy
49

Michael Dell

$15.3 B 48 Dell United States
51

Steve Ballmer

$15.2 B 57 Microsoft United States
52

Viktor Vekselberg

$15.1 B 56 oil, metals Russia
53

Paul Allen

$15 B 60 Microsoft, investments United States
53

Francois Pinault & family

$15 B 77 retail France
55

Vagit Alekperov

$14.8 B 63 Lukoil Russia
56

Phil Knight

$14.4 B 75 Nike United States
56

Andrey Melnichenko

$14.4 B 41 coal, fertilizers Russia
58

Dhanin Chearavanont & family

$14.3 B 74 food Thailand
58

Susanne Klatten

$14.3 B 51 BMW, pharmaceuticals Germany
58

Vladimir Potanin

$14.3 B 53 metals Russia
61

Michael Otto & family

$14.2 B 70 retail, real estate Germany
62

Vladimir Lisin

$14.1 B 57 steel, transport Russia
62

Gennady Timchenko

$14.1 B 61 oil & gas Russia
64

Luis Carlos Sarmiento

$13.9 B 80 banking Colombia
65

Mohammed Al Amoudi

$13.5 B 69 oil, diversified Saudi Arabia
66

Tadashi Yanai & family

$13.3 B 64 retail Japan
66

Mark Zuckerberg

$13.3 B 29 Facebook United States
68

Henry Sy & family

$13.2 B 89 diversified Philippines
69

Donald Bren

$13 B 81 real estate United States
69

Serge Dassault & family

$13 B 88 aviation France
69

Lee Kun-Hee

$13 B 72 Samsung South Korea
69

Mikhail Prokhorov

$13 B 48 investments Russia
73

Alexey Mordashov

$12.8 B 48 steel, investments Russia
74

Antonio Ermirio de Moraes & family

$12.7 B 85 diversified Brazil
74

Abigail Johnson

$12.7 B 52 money management United States
76

Ray Dalio

$12.5 B 64 hedge funds United States
76

Robert Kuok

$12.5 B 90 diversified Malaysia
78

Miuccia Prada

$12.4 B 64 Prada Italy
79

Ronald Perelman

$12.2 B 71 leveraged buyouts United States
80

Anne Cox Chambers

$12 B 94 media United States
81

Stefan Quandt

$11.9 B 47 BMW Germany
82

Ananda Krishnan

$11.7 B 75 telecoms Malaysia
82

Alejandro Santo Domingo Davila

$11.7 B 36 beer Colombia
82

James Simons

$11.7 B 75 hedge funds United States
82

Charoen Sirivadhanabhakdi

$11.7 B 69 drinks Thailand
86

Zong Qinghou

$11.6 B 68 beverages China
87

Dirce Navarro De Camargo & family

$11.5 B construction Brazil
87

John Fredriksen

$11.5 B 68 shipping Cyprus
89

Gerald Cavendish Grosvenor & family

$11.4 B 62 real estate United Kingdom
90

Harold Hamm

$11.3 B 68 oil & gas United States
91

Rupert Murdoch & family

$11.2 B 82 News Corp United States
91

John Paulson

$11.2 B 58 hedge funds United States
91

Azim Premji

$11.2 B 68 software India
94

Ernesto Bertarelli & family

$11 B 48 biotech, investments Switzerland
94

Charlene de Carvalho-Heineken

$11 B 59 Heineken Netherlands
94

Hans Rausing

$11 B 87 packaging Sweden
94

Jack Taylor & family

$11 B 91 Enterprise Rent-A-Car United States
98

Lui Che Woo

$10.7 B 84 gaming Hong Kong
98

Laurene Powell Jobs & family

$10.7 B 50 Apple, Disney United States
100

Eike Batista

$10.6 B 57 mining, oil Brazil

« BackNext 

Smart people? Sharing same habits good and bad…

There is no one picture of intelligence, but many people with high IQs do tend to share some of the same habits — both good and bad.

For example, according to research complied by Online-PHD-Programs.org, while those with high IQs tend to set goals and read avidly, they are also more likely to drink more heavily and suffer from anxiety.

Kathleen Davis, associate editor at Entrepreneur.com, posted this Sept. 13, 2013

The Habits of the World’s Smartest People  (Infographic)

Read more: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/228313#ixzz2ndaRCuUG

Read more: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/228313#ixzz2ndaGaVcw

For more on the habits of smart people, including a look at the IQs of icons such as Albert Einstein and Bill Gates, check out the infographic below.

Click to Enlarge+

The Habits of the World's Smartest People (Infographic)

Note 1: Looks like I have all the good qualities and none of the bad qualities of genius people of IQ over 160 without sharing their high IQ quotient or their achievements as far as I recall.

I have submitted voluntarily and by coercion to all kinds of tests and exams, except taking this ignominious IQ Test that defines a person in school and throughout life. I am glad that I had not this opportunity to submit to an IQ test, other wise I would have felt more stupid than I am.

Suppose I take this test at an advanced age and the score is somewhere below 100? And the interpreter of the result to scream: “Impossible. You were not supposed to be able to learn reading and writing, and in 3 languages. Impossible, You should have been forbidden to go through the PhD program and earn the highest degree in one of the hardest in engineering field… You have cheated and failed yourself. No one on the left tail of the graph ever reached this achievement. Your behavior is utterly unethical…”

Note 2: What could be the problem with me for not achieving much? Probably that I hate to plan for my actions, except in my daydreaming project, never were I exposed to any artistic talent to practice, and never had a strong inclination to a practical field to work on…

Read more: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/228313#ixzz2ndaRCuUG

Read more: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/228313#ixzz2ndaGaVcw

Read more: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/228313#ixzz2nda6nrQa

For more on the habits of smart people, including a look at the IQs of icons such as Albert Einstein and Bill Gates, check out the infographic below.

Does foreign aid work?

The answer to this question mostly depends on:

1. How you define aid

2. How you quantify what exactly constitutes foreign aid, and

3. Where you stand in the ongoing debate about the effectiveness — or the lack of it — of foreign aid.

Do you define “Foreign aid is a transfer of money from one country’s government (mostly a developed western country) to another country’s government (mostly a developing country in the global south – Africa, Asia and Latin America), or basically a financial transaction between nations…?”

In this case, the aid is an official bribe to secure “colonial” interests in the underdeveloped States

Is foreign aid an exchange in kind of exporting modern skills and equipment in order to obtain higher “added values” from cheaper labor…?

Is foreign aid a mechanism of funding NGO, indirectly paid by governments, in order to facilitate exchange of skills and setting up programs tailor-made to the mentality of the developed culture…?

Is foreign aid what the international institutions lend to developing countries, such as IMF and World Bank…? Under unbearable restrictions…

Is foreign aid what is directly extended to specific communities at their own initiatives…?

Can we categorize the work extended by UN peace keeping forces as foreign aid?

The-under-developed-countries-are-plagued-with-common-disease, should medical aid and facilities be given priorities? (Read note 1)

Evidences point that development-programs-in-Africa-are-planned-poverty (Read note 2)

There are those who strongly believe that it works, like Bill Gates and Jeffrey Sachs.

And there are those who wholeheartedly believe it simply does not work and actually harms those it seeks to help, like William Easterly and Dambisa Moyo.

Image

If “Foreign aid is a transfer of money from one developed country’s government to a developing country’s government…” then there has been an enormous amount of data lately, which is gaining popularity, proving that aid might actually not work.

Dambisa Moyo, in her famous Dead Aid book about foreign aid in Africa, forcefully argued that aid perpetuates dependency and is unhelpful for accountability in recipient countries since it’s free. She recommended shutting it off and heading to financial markets for capital for those countries in need – and to do it within 10 years!

Recently, the criticism has even spread to the work of NGOs mushrooming in developing countries. In a recent informative and now popular TED talk, Ernesto Sirolli, an Italian former do-gooder, reflected on what he did in Zambia.

In what sounds like confession, Sirolli offers details of the white elephants they built. He puts it bluntly this way:

‘Every single project we set up in Africa failed …… everything we touched we killed’

And offers this advice to prospective do-gooders:

‘Best shut up when you arrive in a community: Never begin with any ideas …. Just learn to first listen’

Some are even going further and questioning the effectiveness and impact of aid in emergency situations, an area long thought to be the only where aid works among its detractors. Take Haiti for example.

The catastrophic earthquake in 2010 struck the island,  killed 316,000 people, injured 300,000 others, and left a million people homeless.

After such a disaster from Mother Nature, whether in poor or rich countries, you would only expect support for aid and solidarity.  Not so.

Haiti, nicknamed the republic of NGOs, attracted a lot of emergency aid immediately after the disaster, but things just don’t seem to improve. Despite billions of dollars in pledges (most of it still unfulfilled – a problem of free gifts), a recent article in The Economist noted:

‘And yet more than 350,000 Haitians are still living in tents in scattered camps; many of those who have moved out have returned to substandard housing in hillside shanties and seaside slums.

A cholera outbreak that has killed more than 7,500 people since October 2010 remains a threat, with cases spiking after each tropical storm. Epidemiologists blame poor hygiene at a military base of the UN peacekeeping mission for the outbreak, though the UN has denied responsibility’.

Another recent article in the Wall Street Journal reckoned the same thing, that charity has not done much for Haiti and charges:

‘…Foreign aid—whether it goes through the governments or NGOs—distorts both politics and commerce, undermining the evolution of market economics. Free resources reduce the pressure on politicians to make the reforms necessary to attract capital. When food and services are given away, entrepreneurs who might serve those markets are shut out’.

Could the lack of improvement be blamed on aid?

Is aid in itself bad or is it the way it’s delivered?

The jury is still out.

Responding to those who are struck by emergencies, and finding the best way to help those in need remains a human imperative to which we must find adequate solutions.

Obadias Ndaba is President of World Youth Alliance

This entry was posted on January 20, 2013, in Global

Note 1: https://adonis49.wordpress.com/2009/02/17/the-under-developed-countries-are-plagued-with-common-diseases-any-resolutions/

Note 2: https://adonis49.wordpress.com/2010/01/19/%E2%80%9Cdevelopment-programs-in-africa-are-planned-poverty%E2%80%9D

Note 3: Apparently, Obadias Ndaba obadiasndaba@gmail.com, claims that this article or part of it is his, and want it removed. Why? . If there are corrections or changes, why not update the article? /


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

August 2020
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

Blog Stats

  • 1,408,121 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 758 other followers

%d bloggers like this: