errors mine alone chris.macrae@yahoo.co.uk Statistician DAMTP Cambridge, residing Bethesda, MD: AT CU.com please find my attempt to celebrate my greatest personal privilege: to visit women empowered Bangladesh 15 times from 2007 during last 13 years of life of Fazle Abed. From 2012 we discussed AbedMOOC and 2015 onwards at his 80th birthday AbedAI. Back in 2001, Abed 65th birthday hosted by Steve Jobs in Silicon Valley changed both of these human genii's life work. Even today I dont spend time exploring America AI with any engineers or practitioners of health or education, food or safety or finance, who dont want to know what they (we humans all) owe to Steve J. By 2003 Jobs' pixar, Nvidia, and Hopkins radiologists started replacing coding of binary by coding of pixels - welcome to AI century 2]
2026:Christmas comes early to Ai Youth - Nvidia GTC-DC Nov 30 to Dec 2
Pretraining proposal Gemini (model UYKB: Layer 6 AI+Media)
7-Layer Intelligence Discourse GTC D.C. adds 2 layers to Jensen 5-layer AI Cake!
Because the D.C. summit sits in the heart of the nation’s capital at the Ronald Reagan Building, Jensen Huang’s team is prepping a narrative explicitly tailored to reindustrialization, national security, and state-backed compute. [1, 2]
  • Layer 1 (Nature's Energy) & Layer 2 (Machine Brainpower): The central conversation focuses on the Vertically Integrated Sovereign AI Factory. Nvidia will address the West's current power grid constraints, pushing for multi-gigawatt computing nodes tied directly to protected modular nuclear baseloads or sovereign energy fields to fuel the upcoming Vera Rubin chip architecture deployment. [1]
  • Layer 3 (Sovereign Data Infrastructure): This is the crown jewel of the D.C. agenda. Nvidia is moving rapidly away from selling chips solely to hyper-scalers (like Microsoft or Amazon) to marketing Layer 3 "Sovereign AI" packages directly to federal agencies, the Department of Defense, and international allies. The talk centers on how nations can utilize Nvidia hardware to train national models on state-owned text, military telemetry, and geographic data without leaking information to corporate data monopolies. [1]
  • Layer 5 (Civic Applications) & Layer 7 (The Deterministic Truth Layer): The D.C. floor will showcase heavy-industry integrations. A major thread is how federal systems can use AI Digital Twins and Quantum-resistant encryption to safeguard public infrastructure against adversarial cyber warfare. By pairing generative logic with hardcoded physics modeling, Nvidia wants to show the Pentagon that its models can function as an un-hallucinated layer of deterministic truth. [1, 2, 3]
The Direct Line: Berlin Crisis (October) to Washington D.C. (December)
The D.C. summit will act as the direct remedy and strategic response to the systemic frictions exposed weeks prior at the Berlin GTC. The two events are deeply intertwined across the 7 layers: [1]
[ GTC BERLIN • OCTOBER 2026 ]                     [ GTC WASHINGTON D.C. • DEC 2026 ]
       "The Crisis Echo"                                 "The Sovereign Fix"

               |                                                  |
• Severe European Layer 1 energy shortages.      • Unveiling federal multi-gigawatt grids.
• Layer 3 splintering (EU Data Act friction).    • Hardcoded Layer 3 Allied AI networks.
• Debate over relying on U.S. cloud giants.     • Bypassing public clouds via local edge nodes.
  1. The Energy Realignment (Layer 1): In Berlin, Jensen Huang will confront the grim reality of Europe’s highly fragmented, expensive, and legally constrained green grids. The "Berlin Crisis" refers to the continent's inability to spin up gigawatt-scale data factories fast enough to match the U.S. or China. When Huang lands in D.C., he will use the European shortfall to pressure Congress to fast-track defense-grade energy allocations for American compute clusters. [1, 2]
  2. The Sovereignty Conflict (Layer 3 & 4): Berlin will highlight severe regulatory friction over European data sovereignty and the EU Data Act. European public broadcasters and governments are terrified of routing their localized data through American corporate monopolies. Washington GTC will capitalize on this by formalizing a blueprint for "Allied AI" networks—demonstrating how Europe and the U.S. can exchange open-weight models securely across borders while maintaining local, sovereign hardware boundaries. [1]
  3. The Physical AI Transition (Layer 5): While Berlin will focus heavily on Germany’s specialized precision engineering and factory-floor robotics, the D.C. summit will elevate those industrial applications to a geopolitical scale. The discussions in Washington will center on deploying those exact autonomous robotics playbooks into automated naval shipyards, military logistics pipelines, and aerospace satellite defense systems. [1, 2, 3, 4]
Would you like to drill down into the specific Department of Defense T4NG contract vehicles Nvidia partners are mobilizing for the D.C. event, or examine the open-weight software microservices (NIMs) being deployed to appease European sovereignty regulations in Berlin? [1, 2, 3]



Before AI lifted off in late 2000s 3 underacknowlefgen Happenings: 1 steve jobs hosted Fazle Abed's 65 th birthday party silicon valley 2001; .jensen hunag and steve jobs went from coding binary to cosinf pixels; Fazle abed clarified that paulo freire culture celebrated poorest asian womens ebd poverty networking miracle -- largest NGO, providing education, health services, microcredit and livelihood creation programmes for a significant part of the population of Bangladesh. What lies behind this huge success, Caroline Hartnell asked Fazle Abed, founder of BRAC and still very much at the helm. Questioning everything they do and being prepared to tackle whatever is needed to make their programmes successful are certainly part of the secret behind the success of this extraordinarily entrepreneurial organization. The secret of success? Asked what lies behind BRAC’s phenomenal success, the first thing Fazle Abed mentions is determination: ‘We were determined to bring about changes in the lives of poor people.’ The second thing is thinking in national terms: ‘We always had a national goal; we never thought in terms of working in a small area. We thought, all right, if we work with the poorest people in this community, who’s going to work with the poorest people in that other community? So we felt that whatever we do, we should try and replicate it throughout the nation if we can.’ The third thing he mentions is inspiration. ‘We always thought nationally, worked locally, and looked for inspiration globally. We were inspired by Paolo Freire’s work on the pedagogy of the oppressed, which he came out with in 1972. It was wonderful to have a thinker who was thinking about poor people and how they can become actors in history and not just passive recipients of other people’s aid. He made us realize that poor people are human beings and can do things for themselves, and it’s our duty to empower them so they can analyse their own situation, see how exploitation works in society, and see what they need to do to escape these exploitative processes.’ Finally, he says, ‘one needs to have not only ambition but also the ability to do the work. The organization must be competent to take on national tasks. That confidence we got from the campaign for oral rehydration, to cut down diarrhoeal mortality, in the 1980s. That involved going to every household in rural Bangladesh, 13 million households, and it took ten years to do it. Then we became a little more ambitious. We thought that if we can go to every household, then we can cover the whole country with everything we do.
..
NB any errors below are mine alone chris.macrae@yahoo.co.uk but mathematically we are in a time when order of magnitude ignorance can sink any nation however big. Pretrain to question everything as earth's data is reality's judge
Its time to stop blaming 2/3 of humans who are Asian for their consciously open minds and love of education.

Wednesday, September 1, 2021

1.3 ultra poverty asian development bank

 

Proof in – extreme poverty can end. What are we waiting for?

https://blogs.adb.org/blog/proof-extreme-poverty-can-end-what-are-we-waiting
\The “ultrapoor” spend 80% or more of their income on food. A street beggar in Bandung, Indonesia.
  Subscribe to Newsletter

By Betty Wilkinson

The ultrapoor want desperately to escape poverty and have richer, more meaningful lives. Governments and NGOs want inclusive growth and prosperity. There is a proven way we can address all these challenges – the ultrapoor graduation model.

“Much of the news about global poverty is depressing, but this is fabulous: a large-scale experiment showing, with rigorous evidence, what works to lift people out of the most extreme poverty.” – Nicholas Kristof, The New York Times columnist. People want to help. All of us do. We in ADB want to eliminate poverty. The poorest—those who spend 80% or more of their income on food, and consume on average only 80% of basic nutritional needs—want desperately to escape poverty and have richer, more meaningful lives. Governments and NGOs want inclusive growth and prosperity. There is a proven way we can address all these challenges – the ultrapoor graduation model. Essentially the argument is this: we need a blend of measures to pull people out of extreme poverty and be sustainably better off over time. The needs of the poorest are complex, so responses have to be holistic; the poorest households are too busy finding enough food to have energy, time, or hope for anything else. The ultrapoor graduation program, created and shaped by BRAC in Bangladesh, is a cluster of services provided over a 24-month period. These include a grant for a productive asset such as a cow or goat, skills training and support, life skills coaching and follow-up, temporary cash consumption support, and, typically, access to savings accounts and health information or services. Implementing partner organizations, mainly NGOs, work with the beneficiaries, visiting households weekly. The program involves significant and careful field monitoring.

This multi-pronged approach is relatively expensive, but the theory of change is that the combination of these activities is necessary to obtain a persistent impact. The hoped-for result is that a single intensive engagement over two years can provide households with increased assets and food security, improved savings and money management, better coping and productive skills, better health, and more optimism about the future. And that the results would be sustained after the program closes.

Productive assets like farm animals make a huge difference for the “ultrapoor.” Women farmers feed a cow in rural Bangladesh.

Supported by the Ford Foundation and financial inclusion group CGAP, 10 organizations in 8 countries piloted the graduation model in areas in Ethiopia, Ghana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Pakistan, Peru, and Yemen. About 3,700 individuals and their families were selected as the poorest by careful onsite participatory wealth ranking. In most places the implementers were microfinance- and livelihood paired-NGOs, although in Yemen 2 government agencies implemented the program.   This might be one of the most intensively studied models that I have ever observed. Research was conducted during implementation between 2007 and 2014 by a blend of academics and implementers from various organizations. The most well known are Dean Karlan, the founder of Innovations for Poverty Action and a Yale professor, and his colleague Nathanael Goldberg; and Esther Duflos and Abhijit Bannerjee of MIT and Harvard, respectively, who are also the leaders and founders of the Abdul Jameel Poverty Action Lab. The research involved randomized control trials, often called the gold standard of evaluations, as well as qualitative research in the field and market survey work. The academics examined the “sufficiency” claim of the package of interventions: A year after the conclusion of the overall program, and 3 years after the asset transfer, were program participants earning more income and achieving stable improvements in their wellbeing? The researchers measured impacts on consumption, food security, productive and household assets, financial inclusion, time use, income and revenues, physical health, mental health, political involvement, and women’s empowerment. Details of the methodology, work and findings were published in May in Science, a respected, peer-reviewed journal. The researchers established beyond any reasonable doubt that this 24-month-long multifaceted approach to increasing income and well-being for the ultra-poor is sustainable and cost-effective.

Let’s talk about the changes after the program. Income increases on average by 11.7% and is sustained over time. There are significant and sustained improvements in food security (5% increase over the control level), household productive assets of 15% more than the control group, which do not decline after the program is over, nor does debt increase), household savings higher than comparators by 55%, people spending 10.6% more time in productive work, and have better mental health.

Families that benefited from the “ultrapoor” graduation program reported to be happier and have less stress a year after the program closed. Smiling children in Suva, Fiji.

Households continue to report that they are happier and have lower stress a year after the program closes. Participants were more likely to become involved in village-level group activities, and women reported having a greater say in household decisions on health and home improvements during the program (although, unfortunately, not thereafter). The results varied per country, but the robust data shows that the results are consistently achieved in all countries. And no one was worse off. Scaling up is now starting in 20 countries, with replication ranging from 105 households in Zambia to 3 million in Ethiopia; most are either a small pilot under 2,000 people or a medium scale-up of 10-50,000 people. The researchers and implementers are fully committed to assist with reducing the costs of implementation while sustaining the results. They believe in this and are putting brainpower, time, and money behind it. And there are some serious minds at work. So what can you do? Treat this as a key intervention worthy of immediate action. Empower your teams to implement the ultrapoor graduation program.

  • No donor is currently taking ownership of this model and scaling it up significantly across countries. Push the development community to replicate.
  • Discuss these results with all country governments where poverty is an issue for action. Do field trials or scale this up now in countries, particularly those with high numbers of very poor; or those where government interest is already evident.
  • Incorporate missing elements of this holistic program into existing “partial” programs such as cash transfer, financial inclusion projects, agricultural development projects to make the model complete; talk to researchers about how to modify existing programs to make them complete.

With tools like these, we do have a real opportunity to eliminate extreme poverty. We just need to grasp them.

Published: 15 July 2015

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)