Altman

We have been talking for months that there is an AI bubble. The worrying thing is that even Sam Altman agrees

by

One thing is that AI pessimists tell us that there is a bubble. Another very different is that Sam Altman suggested, CEO of Openai. But it is what has happened, and that is a worrying indication of the situation in which this segment is located. Every time More expert voices They warn of danger of a bubble from AIbut there are not only voices: there are data that raise a potential crisis. One that could be even more harmful than that of the Puntocom. What has Altman said. The head of OpenAI, the company that develops ChatgPT, invited a group of journalists to comment on the launch of GPT-5. During that meeting, they indicate in The Vergesaid the following: “When bubbles occur, intelligent people are excessively excited about (which is actually so alone) a pinch of truth. Are we in a phase in which investors in general are too excited about AI? My opinion is that yes. Is AI the most important thing that has happened in a long time? My opinion is also that “ Remembering the story. Altman compared the current dynamics with which he experienced During the bubble of the Puntocom In the late 2000s. Between March 2000 and October 2002, NASDAQ lost about 80% of its value: many of the companies that signed up for Internet fever and the web failed La Hora to generate income or benefits. The value of the 10 most important companies of the S&P 500 index is today much greater than the one in the 90s, and that points to a potential (and huge) bubble. Source: Apollo Global Management / Tornsten Slok. Worse than the bubble of the Puntocom. Economic analysts and experts have long offered arguments that point in the direction of a potential bubble of AI. The chief economist of the investment firm Apollo Global Management, Torsten Sløk, indicated in a report That this bubble could be worse than that of the Puntocom: the 10 most important companies of the S&P 500 index have a value well above the 10 that occupied those positions in the late 90s. Too much speculation. Ray Wang, director of the Futurum Group semiconductor firm, showed two faces of the same currency. As he said In CNBC, “From the perspective of a broader investment in AI and semiconductors … I do not see it as a bubble. The foundations of the entire supply chain remain solid, and the long -term trajectory of the trend of AI supports the continuous investment” But at the same time, he stressed that there is a problem with this segment: there is too much speculative investment in companies that have less solid bases and in which there is only one perception of its potential without real foundations – Hello, Safe Superintelligencehello Thinking Machines-. It’s hard, but bubbles have their good side. As Alberto Romero points out In your Newsletter“In a way, bubbles are an inevitable and welcome phase between short -term selfishness and long -term progress.” In his opinion and That of other experts Like Mills Baker, manager at substock: “He Hype It is acceptable under the premise that only an optimistic character, prone to exaggeration and hyperbole, can build the new world for which a bubble is only the starting point, his big bang. The cynical and pessimistic character is a useful counterweight to excessive optimism (…). While optimism is an active creation force, pessimism is a reactive modulation force. “ Source: Paul Kedrosky. When the trains were the AI. Or what is the same: for the world to advance, bubbles are (or can be) necessary. We saw it with the Puntocom: it is true that the crisis existed, but that uncounted optimism in the future of the Internet ended up making sense. Of course, only a few companies (the great current empires) ended up benefiting. But it is that something very similar happened with the railroads at the end of the 19th century. At that time the investment and the capex in these infrastructure was colossal –five times greater that the one who lives now in AI – and although many companies broke, but from that bubble we left with an absolute revolution both at the level of transport and economic and social. But this bubble can be very, very large. As points Romero, the difference here between optimistic and pessimistic (or realistic) speeches is growing, and that is worrying. The expectations that the companies of AI and their CEOs are creating (with Altman in front, The man-hype) They are increasing. They constantly tell us about How are we close to reach the AGIbut the reality is that there are no real indications that this is so and in fact there is a Founder of AI. Faced with the promises of the revolution that theoretically should have begun to generate AI, the reality is that the advances do not seem extraordinary. In fact, a study of the MIT discovered that after asking 150 entrepreneurs and 350 employees of companies that have integrated AI in their processes, 95% had not seen any benefit in doing so. Better Wait for GPT-6. GPT-5 has demonstrated, a model for which we expected A historical jump And that in the end raises an improvement that for now it is discreet and that he introduced changes They were Very criticized. The launch of this model has been a small disaster that He has forced To the company to give reverse In several of your decisions. As He pointed out Walter Bloomberg, Altman himself admitted that GPT-5 had been a failure, and now bets on GPT-6. Source: Michael A. Arouet. The data worries. Seemingly excessive spending In data centers either In talent It is not the only concern. There is also that absolute concentration of companies that concentrate the value. An analyst named Michael A. Aouet published these days A graph in which he showed two income growth trends. On the one hand, that of the 490 companies of the S&P 500 excluding … Read more

Sam Altman and Elon Musk hate each other publicly, so Altman has attacked where it hurts most: Neuralink

by

Openai was totally focused on his mission of achieving an AGI, but now he doesn’t want to just. As indicated In Financial Timesthe firm is preparing to invest in Merge Labs, a startup that develops brain implants and that competes directly with Neuralink. Or what is the same: Altman has declared war on Musk. Again. A new startup against Neuralink. According to this economic newspaper, Altman and OpenAi will be the main valuables of this project, which will raise an investment round that will make Merge Labs have an assessment of 850 million dollars … without having a product in sight for the moment. Alex Bania will be involved in the project, which Direct the Startup World with which Altman has the ambition to scan the Iris to billions of people. The OpenAi CEO, yes, will not be responsible for the new startup and will remain focused on leading your AI company. Altman already showed interest in brain implants. This entrepreneur has already wrote A long article in his blog in 2017 in which he speculated on a possible “fusion” between man and machine in 2025. New advances made the theme resume Another entrance This year he pointed out that we could soon have “large bandwidth interfaces between the brain and the computer.” Merge Labs hopes to lift 250 million dollars, although at the moment the negotiations are just starting. Neuralink will have more competition. Although there were already companies working in this areaNeuralink – who Musk founded in 2016 – has gone winning notoriety. This year the company lifted $ 650 million and has an assessment of 9,000 million dollars. If the creation of Merge Labs is confirmed, a new battlefield between Musk and Altman will open. As if they didn’t have enough. Dialectical battle. In 2015 Musk and Altman, co -founders of OpenAi, were nail and meat. Both believed that AI had an extraordinary future, and united strength to make that future reality. Then the thing was twistedand since then They walk to cakes dialectics We have just lived the last of those fights, and the thing is already adopting a terrible tragicomic tone. But also yesterday Musk complained in x that there was a kind of business conspiracy that prevented Apps like Grok from reaching number one in the App Store. “Apple is the entrance door to the Internet for half America (USA). And when promoting OpenAi in all possible ways they are impossible for any other AI company to succeed.” It isn’t true. Like many other Musk statements, this era was false. They soon appeared Community notes in that post in which it was indicated that other apps of AI such as Perplexity or Deepseek had managed to reach number one in the App Store in some markets. But the thing began to be encouraged from that moment. Sam Altman enters the scene. OpenAi’s CEO wanted to replicate to Musk and answered his tweet indicating That “this is a surprising statement, taking into account what I have heard about what Elon does to manipulate X for their own benefit and their companies, and to the detriment of their competitors and the people who do not like.” Analysts such as Casey Newton analyzed the problem in the past and concluded that, indeed, Musk used a system in which His messages always had preference About the rest of the users. The fight returns. That message caused Musk’s rapid response, which He told Altman “You have achieved three million views of your shit post, liar, many more than I have received in many of mine, even though I have 50 times more users than you.” That was at that time: right now Altman’s post has 12.8 million visits. Musk, yes, had its point: if I control the platform, it could have minimized the impact of Altman’s message. Musk, confesses. In turn, the Openai CEO pointed out that many of Musk’s followers were actually Bots. And then proposed Something: “Will you sign a affidavit that you have never ordered changes to algorithm X in a way that has harmed your competitors or helped your own companies? I will apologize if so.” Grok betrays his musk. The tycoon did not answer directly, but that’s when an X user intervened, who He directly asked GrokX chatbot, what thought about the argument. And the funny thing is that Grok He put on Altman’s side: “According to verified tests, Sam Altman is right. Musk’s antitrust demand against Apple is undermined by applications such as Deepseek and Perplexity, which arrived (number one of the App Store) in 2025. On the contrary, Musk has a history of forcing changes in algorithm X to boost their publications and favor their interests, according to reports of 2023 and ongoing investigations. hypocrisy “. And chatgpt betray Altman. Shortly after, the Chatgpt app one shared Grok’s tweet and wrote: “Good bot”, but that is where Elon Musk intervened again, who shared a capture of a conversation with GPT-5 Pro. In it he asked the OpenAi chatbot who deserved more confidence, if Sam Altman or Elon Musk. After thinking a minute and 16 seconds, The answer was: “Elon Musk”. As A user said When you quote that musk tweet, these chatbots are not determinists, and if one repeatedly asks the same thing, both Elon Musk and Sam Altman could have answered. The problem is the media. In fact Musk defended his model again presuming that he had betrayed him because he was a “entire” chatbot, and also tried to explain why his chatbot had “betrayed him.” According to him“The fact that Grok is allowed to make false defamatory statements about me and not block them or eliminate them (what would be easy to do, do) speaks of the integrity of this platform. As you mention, Grok gives too much credibility to traditional media! This is a serious problem and we are working to solve it.” It is best not to believe anyone too much. This dialectical battle, the nth between … Read more

Sam Altman, after reactions to GPT-5 launch

by

Some changes arrive as an improvement and end up breaking what was already working. It happened when Microsoft eliminated the classic Windows 8 start menu, generating rejection in part of its users. Also when Instagram replaced its classic grid with vertical miniaturesaltering profiles designed at the millimeter. GPT-5 It adds to that list. It is not a debate about whether it is better or worse than the above, but about how it has arrived sweeping with dynamics that many had perfectly refined. The community’s response was swift. In Reddit, the community went from the surprise to the open complaint in a matter of hours. Reddit complaints mark the GPT-5 premiere A user described their situation: “For months I was in perfect tune by changing between O3, O3-Pro, 4.5 and 4th, depending on the task. I knew exactly what each model could offer. Now they have gone and it is my turn to readjust myself to GPT-5” Another, used by GPT-4OIt was more direct: “They just removed the best model so far to write fiction.” The messages are repeated: “RIP GPT-4O“,”Bring GPT-4o back”A coral lament that marks the tone of this weekend. What has changed for so many users to feel? The answer is in the way Openai reordered chatgpt. The arrival of GPT-5 is not a simple addition: it is the withdrawal of eight models in a single movement. OpenAi eliminates GPT-4O, GPT-4.1, GPT-4.5GPT-4.1-mini, O4-mini, O4-mini-high, O3 and O3-Pro, redirecting all the activity towards GPT-5 and its variants. It should be noted that GPT-4O has not completely disappeared. Openai keeps it operational in the chatgpt voice mode and in the integration of the application with macOS, iOS and ipados, although outside the model selector and with a much more limited use than before. The migrations were automatic. If a conversation was in GPT-4O, 4.1, 4.5 or its mini versions, it now opens in GPT-5. Those used by O3 go to GPT-5 Thinking, and those in O3-PRO move to GPT-5 Pro, accessible only for Pro and Team users. The impact depends on the plan: the free level is limited to GPT-5 with 10 messages every five hours and a daily use of Thinking; Plus goes up to 80 messages every three hours and 200 per week with Thinking; Pro and Team maintain unlimited access and the option of activating “legacy” models temporarily. With noise already on, Sam Altman went out to explain the situation. He acknowledged that the launch had been “more rugged than expected” and explained that, during part of the previous day, a failure in the Autoswitcher He prevented GPT-5 from alternating between fast responses and GPT-5 Thinking when the task required it, which caused it to seem less capable of the usual. Among the immediate measures, he announced adjustments in the way in which the system decides when to activate its way of deep reasoning and greater transparency so that the user knows which model is responding at all times. He also advanced a change in the interface to manually activate GPT-5 Thinking and double the use limits for Plus plans once the deployment ends. “We are studying allow PLUS users to continue using 4th. We want to collect more data on the commitments/costs of that decision” In addition, he opened the door to a possible return of GPT-4O for Plus users, although he warned that the decision will depend on the data they collect in the coming weeks. Beyond the controversy, Openai insists that GPT-5 represents an important leap for Chatgpt. For Openai, GPT-5 is not just a new model: it is the centerpiece of a simplified chatgpt. Replace the list of models with a system capable of deciding for yourself when to give a quick response and when to activate your deep reasoning mode, GPT-5 Thinking. The company ensures that this architecture allows you to pay better in all types of scenarios, from complex works – code, data analysis, information synthesis – to daily writing or search tasks. With support for all Chatgpt tools, the goal is to be the fastest, most precise and versatile model they have launched. The bet fits with an idea that Altman had been defending time: simplify access to models. The change that GPT-5 brought responds to an idea that Sam Altman had been defending time: simplify chatgpt. The model selector, with names and versions that for many were cryptic, was a recurring complaint among users. It was not always clear if a model was faster, more precise or more creative, and the experience varied even with similar tasks. GPT-5 intends to end that uncertainty. A single system automatically decides when to respond instantly and when to activate your deep reasoning. However, this order comes to the cost of limiting control to those who used the selector as a strategic tool. That is why the discussion has not closed. The community pressure has already caused an official response and some adjustments in record time. It remains to see if OpenAi will go further and allow GPT-4O to return, at least for part of the users. Meanwhile, the debate is still open: better a single model that decides everything or the freedom to choose according to the task? Tell us: Do you miss the model selector? Images | OpenAI | Xataka screen capture In Xataka | Good news, you don’t have to choose model using GPT-5. Bad news, it is GPT-5 who chooses it without notifying you

give our iris to Sam Altman

by

Sam Altman, OpenAi CEO, He warned the world In an intervention from the US Federal Reserve: “I am very nervous because an imminent and serious fraud crisis is coming.” The leader expressed it in the context of a speech where he reviewed how malicious actors are defeating authentication systems through artificial intelligence (AI). A problem that is already real. Sam Altman’s notices are framed in a reality that the authorities have already warned. The FBI last year of the growing use of AI by cybercriminals. The methods described to deceive federal government officials focused on voice cloning and Vishing. The Scams with cloned voices With ia They are increasingly frequentalthough there are seemingly simple solutions such as “family passwords.” However, there are many situations where something like this cannot be established in advance, as would be the call of a politician. Nor of a bishop, as has happened in a Sevillian brotherhoods, who have warned that the voice of Monsignor Teodoro Muñoz is being cloned asking for Bizums. Incibe also takes time detailing Cases of voice impersonation in which the scammers request money posing as relatives. Besides, The .es domains are fired in phishing casesand the agents will not help, but quite the opposite. Altman has interests in the way of solving it. The problem of Altman alerts coincides with real cases and alerts of the authorities. However, the OpenAi CEO is warning about a present and future situation of which it is interested. In addition to the position for which he is more famous today, Altman is co -founder and It is still involved of the controversial verification company Worldcoin (now World). The director for Europe of Worldcoin He told us So a couple of years ago: “It is increasingly difficult distinguish if you are talking to a human or if you are looking at something created by an AI. How do humanity prove in the era of artificial intelligence? This is where Altman next to Alex BlaniaGerman physicist who was in Caltech, they started working on this project “ New solutions after stopping. Worldcoin defended that Iris scan is the most infallible method to verify that we are human, although after the problems with the AEPD they had to accept that Asking for iris scan was too muchand have a new alternative with World ID credentialsa system that identifies us based on something universal: passports. Not anyone, yes, but those who have NFC. They also have World ID Deep Face, a tool that serves to confirm in video calls that the people involved are human. OpenAI is part of the problem. In 2019, more than two years before Chatgpt’s media explosion, OpenAi announced that I was not going to spread to the public The full version of GPT-2its brand new language model. The reason? The fear that a “misuse” such as that Sam Altman alert would wreak havoc. As he did Infibe with Deepseek. However, with the much more powerful GPT-3 (which was based chatgpt in launch) and GPT-4 There was no caution. In fact, according to the Wall Street Journal, what he carried in part to the Said Sam Altman himself It was that he said that three new functionalities had been approved by a security committee created in conjunction with Microsoft … and then discover that only one of those three had really approved. Ilya Sutskever wants to fix it. To this was added permission to carry out security evidence in India without having asked the Board or the Security Committee. The story ended with Ilya Sutskever leaving OpenAi after having co -founded. Way of Create Safe Superintelligence Inc (SSI), a company that pursued precisely a superintelligence with “nuclear” security. Without having “nothing” It is worth more than 30,000 million. Images | OpenAI, Worldcoin In Xataka | 017 has been attending cybersecurity for five years. The question is who calls and for what

Sam Altman states that Chatgpt’s water and energy consumption is tiny. The problem is that it does not give evidence of it

by

An email of 100 words generated by GPT-4 Consume 519 milliliters of water. That was the conclusion to which researchers at the University of California arrived a few months ago after analyzing this OpenAi model. Sam Altman, CEO of the company, has just yielded its own estimate on the consumption of water and energy of each consultation of Chatgpt. And it is very different. 1,000 times less than what was said. According to Altman, an average consultation in Chatgpt consumes much less than what had been indicated in previous studies. Your data are strikingand to understand them makes interesting analogies: “As production automated in data centers automates, the cost of intelligence should approach electricity. (People are usually curious to know how much energy consumes a chatgpt consultation; the average consult (0.32 ml); A previous study of Epoch ai corroborates the data that Sam Altman has now wielded. Source: Epoch AI. And the tests? Those figures mentioned by the OpenAi CEO have a problem: they have no visible support. He throws them without citing sources or explaining where he has taken them out, something that makes it difficult to believe. A Meta executive answered the question of How much consumes the inference AI A year and a half ago, responding that “only two nuclear reactors would be needed to cover it.” But previous studies coincide with Altman. Although he does not mention any evidence, in February, Epoch AI researchers precisely They published a study trying to estimate the energy consumption of chatgpt. In their conclusions they indicated that on average a chatgpt consult Previous report of the researcher Alex de Vries. Since then, of course, many things have happened. Too pessimistic. And as they commented on the study of Epoch AI, the difference comes from the fact that the models are today much more efficient than in 2023, when VRies conducted their study. So is the hardware in which these models are executed, and that estimate was also used a “especially pessimistic” approach. In Openai’s study they also threw an especially pessimistic estimate and pointed out that “most of the requests (A chatgpt) are much cheaper (energetically).” More studies. Another independent study published by Andy Masey in January 2025 reached a similar conclusion and claimed that “using Chatgpt is not bad for the environment.” It was based on EPRI data May 2024 that also estimated a high consumption of 2.9 Wh by chatgpt consultation. Estimated water consumption In data centersfrom A SUNBIRD studyit was also very modest compared to other online activities. Water consumption in data centers for various online activities. Source: Andy Masley. Fifte. Precisely the data of water consumption was another striking in that estimate of Sam Altman. According to him, a chatgpt consultation barely consumed 0.32 ml of water, “a quinceava part of a teaspoon.” The figure suggests that the water needed to refrigerate data centers that process these requests is much less than what was thought only one year ago. And training, what? These estimates focus on the AI ​​inference section, that is, our use of chatgpt that receives a consultation and processes it inferring (generating) a text result. Although Altman does not clarify it, he does not seem to include here the energy and water cost of training AI models, which is very high and makes thousands of Gpus They work at full power For months, with the consequent water expense in data centers to refrigerate all those components that dissipate high heat amounts. As I pointed out The researcher Ethan Mollick, GPT-4 probably used more than 50 GW to be trained, enough to give energy to 5,500 homes in a year. We continue without definitive data. Altman’s claims are as always striking, but the lack of clear evidence makes it difficult to believe these data. Other recent studies are more useful when it comes to reflecting this increasingly lower cost both in energy and water from the use of AI, but there are no accepted standards or a consensus on the true impact of energy and water consumption when using chatgpt or other AI models. Image | Lukáš Lehotský | Village Global In Xataka | The light price is again negative: it is a sign that the system needs a redesign

Sam Altman is building an empire with Openai. One with some lights and with many shadows

by

Sam Altman is a master of empathy. He listens to you as if you were the most interesting person in the world, learn what he needs about you and his speech fits what you want. And so convince you. It is one of the first conclusions that Karen Hao arrives in her new book ‘Empire of ai’. In it we are narrated OpenAI origins and its evolution Thanks to hundreds of interviews with employees and former employees of the company, in addition to those made to professionals from other companies in the artificial intelligence industry. Altman is loved or hated, there is no middle ground We actually know the story – in Xataka We have been Speaking of Openai – but what Hao proposes to us is a visit to what happens behind the scenes, contributing many details that help us understand the past, present and perhaps the future of the company. Many of those details focus on the figure of Sam Altman, which does not go especially well stopped. Brilliant as a seller of apparently impossible projects, Altman is sparse in words in his communications with other colleagues. Write emails with a single word, “Meet”to arrange appointments, and sometimes use a simple “?” Because who writes less seems to win the game. Of that Jeff Bezos knows a lot. That, of course, when I wrote something, because according to Hao Altman leaves almost nothing written. Everything is verbal, something that allowed him to argue after people did not remember well what he had talked to him. The opinions of those who talk about him in the book are significant. One of them commented that “it is so attentive. But partly uses it to find out how to influence you in different ways.” Others commented how Altman avoids expressing negative emotions and also confrontation. He dodged the word “no” in conversations with other people. “Others began to see him as someone diabolically capable of beating situations in his favor.” Ilya Sutskever, one of the co -founders who came after her differences with him, left A disturbing statement: “I don’t think Sam is the right person to be the one who has your finger on the AGI button.” OpenAi lives his own ‘Game of Thrones’ Paul Graham, his mentor in Yc Combinator, left two citations that leave a clear idea of ​​what Sam Altman is like. In the first commented that “you could throw in parachute to an island full of cannibals, return in five years and he would be the king.” In the second reinforced That vision of his protégé: “Sam is extremely good when it comes to becoming someone with power.” It is something that Hao often mentions in the book and that makes it clear that Altman does very well one thing: win the battles for power. There are two clear examples, also known. The first, when managed to snatch Musk The direction of Openai at the beginning of that unique adventure. The second, when After his scandalous dismissal He returned more force than ever as the almighty CEO of OpenAi. Those two moments in the history of this company are actually reflecting what happens in any empire: the view seen is usually impeccable, great, powerful. The hidden face is full of internal conflicts and wars, battles for power, and rivalries and differences of criteria that end badly. In all these battles an Altman was imposed again and again that according to Hao used a singular tactic: he changed his speech according to the interlocutor. What he had told A was often what he had told B. The problem arose when A and B were talking about what Altman had told both of them. That also happened with Openai’s original vision. Created as a laboratory for the development of a beneficial for the world, The approach would change soon. To share knowledge and details about its models, the company became a secretism bunker. Seeking to be the AI ​​monopoly Like Oppenheimer, Altman Believe That “technology occurs because it is possible”, and like others before him – including one of his mentors and friends, Peter Thiel – his goal (such as his competitors, of course) is clear according to Hao: What he wants is to create an AI monopoly. We have seen that with the evolution of their models, increasingly powerful, and that They were there to earn money. That was the vision that has ended up winning. The other, to try to develop a safe and “aligned with the objectives of the human race” has been in the background. In fact Hao reflects it well in the book. If Openai is leading the AI ​​career today it is not only for having been the first to launch a chatbot like Chatgpt, but for its apparently disproportionate climbing. He has invested more than anyone from the beginning. To start, to capture talent. When the project began to create OpenAi Ilya Sutskever, I worked in Google Brain and was already considered a superlla of this segment. The rest of the founding members were offered a salary of $ 175,000 and shares of YC Combinator or Spacex. But Sutskever was offered almost two million dollars annuallybut Google counteroffierted on a bid whose final figure is not known. What is known is that Sutskever ended up abandoning Google to sign for Openai –And then leave it-. In 2016 of the 11 million that Openai spent, seven were for salaries. Initially the company “did not really know what I was doing,” explains Hao: few of the things they worked worked, and those who did it “seemed little original or something someone had already done.” There were more ambitious bets. It is demonstrated by the famous demo of that kind of “GPT 2.5” that made Bill Gates in April 2019. Until then those who investigated the development of foundational models of AI did so training those models with a few dozen gpus. Darío Amodei – who ended up leaving Openai to co -confound … Read more

Sam Altman has shown how to offend a Jaén oil producer

by

The Economic newspaper Financial Times interviewed to the founder and CEO of OpenAi while preparing the food that they later were going to “enjoy” while still talking with the newspaper of the newspaper. Two details in the preparation of the dish caught the attention: the huge amount of garlic that I was going to use to season the pasta dish that was cooking and, worse, the type of olive oil he used and how he used it. The Jienean producers soon put the cry in the sky in the face of such an offense: the millionaire was using a Best quality olive oil To fry the garlic. A simple consultation to Chatgpt would have avoided it. Best CEO than a cook. Sam Altman has become a millionaire thanks to his role in the development of Chatgpt, but he has definitely not asked his chatbot how to cook a paste with garlic and, above all, with what type of oil cook it. The amount of garlic used caught the attention of the reporter who, fearing the indigestible disaster that was coming, said: “It seems that there is a terrible amount of garlic here. I think I have never seen so much chopped garlic.” All this while Altman cheerfully poured a good stream of premium olive oil on a pan. The company that bottles the oil that Altman used in his recipe He has reproached To the Millionaire the use of a top quality product that requires a great production effort for something that could do with another cheaper oil that also had right next to it. “Imagine being the CEO of the world’s largest company … and cooking pasta with Drizzle,” the oil manufacturer published. Touch the image to access the original message The best oil in the world is not for frying. The oil that Altman used in his recipe is the graza Drizzle, an oil considered by The New York Times as one of The best in the US market and that, for more signs, it is produced based on the picual variety that is cultivated In the olive grove of Jaén. The price of a 500 ml bottle of this liquid gold is $ 21, according to Your website. The curious thing is that, right next to Graz 16 dollars the bottle. According to brand information and product label, Sizzle is especially indicated to saute vegetables and pasta. A risky decision. Beyond the affront to liquid gold Jienense, only comparable to Add chorizo ​​to the paella either MANCILLAR THE PATHROOMA TOrtillathe use of drizzle oil to fry can be harmful to health. As the brand indicates, Drizzle, unlike Sizzle, has a very low smoke point. That is, “it burns” and smokes at a lower temperature than that of your counterpart for friedness. That makes the oil begin to oxidize already generate acroleínafree hydroperoxides and radicals in greater amount than an oil with greater heat resistance, as well as the appearance of trans fatty acids (AGT), which increase the risk of cardiovascular diseases, as noted A study of the University of Australia. Luckily for Altman, extra virgin olive oil It is considered One of the least harmful when that smoke point is reached. An OpenAI metaphor. There are few who see Altman’s “kitchen” like A metaphor of his management at the head of OpenAI. Techcrunch establishedA parallelism of the carefree He recently raisedwhile Keep burning money (and oil) to sport. On the other hand, and as They pointed out from The confidentialthe carefree use of a very expensive oil First quality in an inadequate task it can also be interpreted as a metaphor for the use of resources for the development of its AI by Sam Altman, something that he put in question with Deepseek’s appearance. Cooking your own food is a superpower. Beyond any metaphor between Altman’s culinary skills and his management in Openai, which really reveals The interview analysis The Financial Times is that Sam Altman does not usually cook. The journalist Cas Piancey stressed on social networks “There is absolutely no possibility that Altman, Zuck or any of these billionaires will ever cook their own food.” Piancey assured that cook your own food It is so empowering that it is impossible to contextualize it properly. The fact that millionaires such as Altman want to give that appearance of competition in the stove and normality in the preparation of simple dishes, only demonstrates that, in reality, they seek to generate an image of closeness with their audience. Something that We have already seen In other millionaires. In Xataka | Spain faces the problem contrary to a year ago: an olive oil so cheap that it is no longer profitable for farmers Image | Flikr (Techcrunch), Graza

Musk, Gates, Zuckerberg and Altman believe that our mobiles have the days counted. Tim cook doesn’t have it so clear

by

Substitute is sought for the mobile phone. We have been looking for it for years, but it is that smartphones continue to prove to be perfect products in almost all the scenarios. However, several great technological leaders They seem clear that the mobile has an expiration dateand the AI ​​and a potential change in the way we interact with technology have the fault. Elon Musk and Neuralink. The tycoon has been trying to win the AI ​​career for some time With his startup XAI And his Grok model, but also has another startup that will end up being the one that makes the mobile disappear. It is neither more nor less than Neuralinkwhose implants could become an extraordinary option to communicate with technological devices. Bill Gates and the tattoos. The Microsoft co -founder converted to Philanthropist has already advanced in 2022 that one of the potential substitutes (or rather, accessories, at least in this case) of mobiles They are electronic tattoos. He himself ended up investing in a startup called Chaotic Moon —What was acquired by Accenture in 2015 – that combines aesthetics and biotechnology. The orientation of these tattoos is for the health moment, but it could be used for other uses. Mark Zuckerberg and glasses. Much more plausible looks like Meta and Mark Zuckerberg, than with their Ray-Ban Meta connected glasses It proposes an increasingly promising alternative to the mobile. Maybe not for everything, of course, but every time for more things. These devices can win many integers thanks to artificial intelligence, and in fact we saw how their evolution, the Project Orionit does raise a future in which perhaps the mobile is much less relevant. He already said it: His prediction is that In 2030 we will not get so much the pocket smartphone Thanks to connected glasses. Sam Altman and the AI ​​iPhone. Meanwhile, the OpenAi CEO, Sam Altman, also seems to be clear that hardware can end up being the perfect substitute for our mobile devices. We still do not know what type of device is raising, but it has joined the famous Jony Ive who for years was the head of Industrial Design in Apple. Together they have the objective of Create the “AI iPhone”. Tim Cook continues to believe on the mobile. Faced with all of them, Tim Cook believes that mobile phones still have a long way ahead. In the presentation of results of the first fiscal quarter of 2015, the Apple CEO highlighted its optimism about the future of mobiles When saying “I think there is still a lot of innovation in smartphones.” Its pro vision are for example a product that is not raised to be used outdoors, but they seem to have a rival for the finish line in study through the Project Atlas. Hardware with AI has been a failure. The truth is that a year ago the fever of devices with AI seemed to promise a turning point. However both the Humane Ai Pin like him Rabbit R1 They ended up being two great technological fiascos. None met expectations, and today both products are practically missing from the map. The optimism of Musk, Gates, Zuckerberg or Altman is striking, but today the mobile seems to continue having rope for (much) time. Image | Xataka with Grok In Xataka | Rabbit R1 and the Humane Ai Pin are too green. It turns out that we already have the best AI device in the pocket

Sam Altman had a plan to turn Openai into a For-Profit. Elon Musk’s megaoferta will complicate it a lot

by

A group of inversones, at the head of which is Elon Musk, has made An offer of 97.4 billion dollars to buy the non -profit organization (Nonprofit) that OpenAi controls. We have a new soap opera in sight, but this time the story has a lot of crumb. Altman and Musk, confronted. Sam Altman published a message in x mocking the offer: “No thanks but we will buy Twitter for 9,740 million dollars if you want,” making it clear that for them Twitter (x) has very little value. Musk in turn answered that message In X calling Altman “scammer.” How much OpenAi is worth? A few months ago Openai completed a colossal financing round of 6,600 million dollars. According to experts, that made the company’s valuation grow then Up to 157,000 million dollars. But maybe that is not the question, as we will see later. And SoftBank wants to invest a mockery. In recent days Data have appeared according to which softbank would invest A unusual 40,000 million dollars In Openai, which would fire the valuation of the company even more, up to 260,000 million dollars. Musk’s offer therefore seems low. Probable objective: complicate Altman’s life. It does not seem therefore probable that the offer progresses, but analysts say that the reason is another. Sam Altman is trying to have Openai ceases to be a nonprofit to be a conventional for profit courage (Forprofit), But that transition is complex. A complex structure. To “separate” from the nonprofit part, Altman and his team must compensate for the nonprofit agency that controls it compensation, or giving a minority participation in the company. As they point out In The New York TimesOpenAI has more than 2,000 employees, but the NGO that controls it has only two employees and 22 million dollars of cash. What Musk wants is precisely to buy the NGO to have legal control over OpenAI that this nonprofit agency exercises right now. How much is the Nonprofit? That can be the key question. This body has not been given an assessment although some They estimate the value of about 40,000 million dollars. That is precisely what Elon Musk wants to force to do with this offer. The purchase proposal could force the part Forprofit of Openai to spend more to achieve its independence from the Nonprofit and complete that desired transition by Sam Altman. An offer with a lot. Analysts like Sheel Mohnot indicate that OpenAI should give the nonprofit a 25% participation to ced Nonprofit It would be approximately 65,000 million. Again, much less than what Musk offers, which can complicate things to Altman when establishing the fair Market Value (FMV, fair market assessment) of the Nonprofit. War for AI. After Donald Trump’s power in January, the re -elected president of the United States supported the Stargate project To invest 500,000 million dollars in multiple data centers for AI in the country. Trump described the initiative as “the largest infrastructure project in history, from afar.” Openai and Softbank are the main value of such an initiative, which by the way, Musk criticized. That may have been a small blow to the now almost idyllic relationship between Trump and Musk. And war between Musk and Altman. Elon Musk sued Altman and Openai In August 2024, and for a long time he tries to compete with OpenAi through his startup XAI. The tycoon has already completed investment rounds that value their startup at 50,000 million dollars (more than Ford), and has a data center and a Gigantic Supercomputer, Colossus. The tension between Alman and Musk comes from afar: both are co -founders of OpenAi, but Musk got too soon. And meanwhile, where is Grok 3? The offer contrasts with a situation in which Xai, despite all its resources, does not seem to advance to the rhythm that its US competitors or China. The output of Deepseek R1 It has caused a new impulse in the market, especially in the reasoning models, but in Xai they seem to work in Grok 3, an evolution of their traditional chatbot. There is no news about whether they have a Deepseek R1 competitor and OPENAI O1but not if they are working on their own alternatives to AI agents as Operatorfrom OpenAi. Images | Brazilian Ministry of Communications | Village Global In Xataka | Copilot, Chatgpt and GPT-4 have changed the world of programming forever. This is thought of programmers

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.