The College of Engineers fears that it will remain like this forever

The AVE to Extremadura is causing quite a few headaches, especially in the bottleneck represented by the part that connects with Castilla-La Mancha. And the provisional branch designed to advance the arrival of high speed to Extremadura without waiting for it to be resolved his complicated passage through Toledohas hit a new obstacle. According to share From ABC, the College of Civil Engineers, Canals and Ports of Castilla-La Mancha demands written guarantees from the Ministry of Transport that this provisional branch will not end up replacing the definitive route. what has happened. The Ministry provisionally approved the informative study of the Pantoja-Bargas branch on May 19 and submitted it to public information through an announcement in the BOE five days later. Now, within this process of allegations, the College of Engineers of Castilla-La Mancha has requested that in the final resolution it be declared in writing that this work has a “strictly transitory” character, according to collect the group itself in a statement cited by ABC. What exactly is it about?. The branch is a connection of just over 18 kilometers between the Madrid-Seville high-speed line and the conventional Madrid-Valencia de Alcántara line. In practice, it would allow trains bound for Extremadura to leave Atocha, take advantage of the high-speed tracks to the Pantoja area and from there connect, via Bargas, with the route to Talavera de la Reina and Extremadura. This is what the Ministry proposes as a shortcut to speed up travel times without having to wait for the final design of the passage through Toledo to be finalized. Why is it important. The passage of high speed through Toledo has been blocked for years. Since the first study of the Madrid-Oropesa line was submitted to public information in 2020, the different allegations presented have forced the routes through Toledo and Torrijos to be revised several times, and in 2024 the City Council, the Provincial Council and the Junta de Castilla-La Mancha proposed alternatives that the Ministry considered important enough to commission a completely new study, according to explained The Extremadura Newspaper. Given the uncertainty of how long this process could take, the Government decided to take the fast track and design a provisional branch. A temporary patch. The College does not oppose the railway improvement to Extremadura, which it considers “strategic” for territorial cohesion, but warns of the risk that a work intended as a temporary patch ends up, in practice, becoming the permanent solution. Its main argument is based on the deadlines, since after 32 months of work it would still be necessary to add the environmental processing, the drafting and approval of projects, the bidding and the tests prior to start-up. Times that, according to the groupthey could dilate enough that the branch ends up settling by default. Money. The provisional branch has a tender budget of 333.9 million euros, a figure that represents 60.8% of what the Toledo Central alternative would cost (549.2 million) and 48.1% of the Toledo Exterior alternative (694 million), according to share from the middle. If the two infrastructures are finally built (first the branch and then a definitive solution through Toledo), the joint investment would be between 883 and 1,028 million euros, without counting price reviews, maintenance, operation or a possible partial dismantling of the branch once it becomes obsolete. What engineers ask for. Beyond the complaint, the College poses that: The Ministry compares all possible scenarios, including the option of directly accelerating the final solution and launching it in phases. That the risk that the provisional work ends up being consolidated be incorporated into the analysis. That it be better detailed how the service will operate during the transitional stage, with frequencies, stations, travel times and compatibility with the trains that currently circulate between Madrid and Toledo. That both the branch line and the future route leave open a connection between the Extremadura and Andalusia lines, which would allow travel between both communities without passing through Madrid. And now what. Despite the allegations, the project continues with its environmental and administrative procedures. What they do add is political pressure on the Ministry at a time when Europe’s objective is to complete the Madrid-Lisbon journey in about five hours in 2030, and in 2034 the aim is to lower the three hours between Madrid and Badajoz. To unblock the disagreement, the College has offered to participate in a technical table together with the Ministry, the Junta de Castilla-La Mancha, the City Council and the Provincial Council of Toledo, and Adif, with the idea that the provisional branch serves to pressure the final agreement, and not to postpone it indefinitely. Cover image | Renfe In Xataka | Salvador Galve, railway expert: “When I go from Zaragoza to Barcelona, ​​I go by car”

this is what agricultural engineers ask for before you arrive

The General Council of Official Colleges of Agricultural Technical Engineers of Spain (CGCOITAE) has called on all people who have chosen to see the solar eclipse on August 12 in rural enclaves. They remember that many of the most privileged places for observation are also spaces for work, food production and biodiversity conservation. For this reason, they insist on the importance of following a series of rules so that neither the crops, nor the ecosystems nor the work of those who carry out their work there are endangered. No sparks or trash. To begin with, the CGCOITAE remember the importance of avoiding any activity that could cause sparks. summer It is a time when the risk of forest fires greatly increasesboth due to the high temperatures and the dry state of the vegetation. Added to this is that these accidents are more likely when there are large gatherings of people. That is why extreme precautions must be taken. In fact, if not done, the consequences can be tragic on many levels. Forestry experts warn that, if there were a fire, many tourists would not know the best escape routes, which could congest rural roads and make evacuation maneuvers difficult. On the other hand, remember that the places where the observations are made must be left the same as they were before we arrived, not full of garbage. Respect private property. Experts warn that you should not enter farms or other private properties, even if they seem like ideal places to see the solar eclipse. In addition, you are urged to follow the access or use restrictions established by the competent administrations. They are workplaces. Since many of these enclaves are workplaces, it is important not to access crops and avoid parking vehicles that could hinder the passage of agricultural machinery. In reality, it is a unique occasion. Far from turning their report into a string of warnings and scoldings, the CGCOITAE points out that this solar eclipse will be a unique opportunity to enjoy the natural environment. many people have chosen vacation destinations that they would never have had among their options just to be able to enjoy this astronomical phenomenon. Therefore, it is a great opportunity for them to see how communities work in these places and, by the way, enjoy nature, both under normal conditions and in a situation as unique as the eclipse. It is likely that, during the maximum two minutes that totality will last, there will be flowers that close, birds that hoot at odd hours or livestock that try to collect themselves ahead of time. All of this cannot be enjoyed in the same way in cities, but it can be enjoyed in nature. The minimum, if we are going to enjoy all of this, is to do it with respect. Image | Magnificent In Xataka | A third of Spain will be completely dark for a minute or two. The astronomical event of the century is approaching

Jeff Bezos says AI won’t destroy jobs. He then launched a company to create artificial engineers

Jeff Bezos is one of the representative figures of current technological optimism regarding artificial intelligence. While in the United States we are seeing the university students who boo to those who claim that AI is the new industrial revolution due to pessimism when it comes to finding a job, Bezos point that this pessimism around AI is “the opposite of reality.” Come on, young people are wrong because what AI is going to do is create jobs. At the same time, Bezos has returned to talk of Prometheusa startup that will open the door to fewer workers being needed… while increasing productivity. It’s a bit of a mess, but it makes sense to Bezos. Prometheus. It is not a model or a technology, but a startup. Founded by Bezos in 2024, it has about 150 employees spread across headquarters in San Francisco, London and Zurich and already has a valuation of $41 billion. The central purpose of Prometheus is to develop AI systems capable of assisting in the entire engineering process from start to finish (end to end, as they call it). This means that the system will cover from the initial design of physical products to their manufacturing and launch, passing through all the simulation and testing phases. It is like a kind of artificial general engineer and does not seek to be just something that supports the engineers, who will then create the physical products. His goal is… that, to be a physical engineer. Accelerate inventions. Beszos’ goal is to empower engineers to be able to invent things more quickly and easily. An example is that this AI product is capable of carrying out all the aforementioned steps to build, for example, a jet engine. And here is the twist, since a jet engine is something extremely complex, but what Bezos is looking for is that what the startup develops allows smaller teams to do much bigger things in much shorter cycle times. Landing it: if before 100 people made you a new generation jet engine, now 10 can make it for you. I don’t know, Rick.… We suppose that in his head it is a good way to reassure those young people worried about the future of work, but in case it is not clear, Bezos commented that the fear of AI and the future of work is “the opposite of reality”, pointing out that what Prometheus does will be a catalyst for work. The curious thing is that he has presented it in a slightly strange way. If AI makes work cheaper, faster and easier, employment will increase because, “even though the number of people needed is being reduced by 10, technology will create opportunities to multiply those jobs by 10.” They are a bit strange accounts, but the boss of Amazon gives as an example a two-person household in which only one will have to work because productivity thanks to AI will be much greater. It does not say what that other person will do or if, thanks to AI, that member of the household who continues to work will earn more to replace one who stays at home. What it suggests is that there will be such a massive increase in productivity that not everyone will have to work, a somewhat questionable message because bills are not paid with productivity, but with money. colossal background. But well, beyond Bezos’ curious message, Prometheus is valued at $41 billion and has raised $12 billion from investors such as JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and BlackRock, apart from Bezos himself. And, currently, it is in deals to raise a fund of 100,000 million. But Bezos isn’t the only one moving to build AI startups. We have the founders of Uber, Coinbase or Robinhood (curious name) building new companies around this technology boom due to something that these profiles are very clear about: It is a new golden era and the best way to start a company. Young Americans are not so clear. In Xataka | Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, on the possibility that we are facing a work apocalypse: “It’s nonsense”

Amazon forces its engineers to use AI and measures who uses it the most. The employee response: anti-AI memes

AI gurus keep selling us that this technology is going to change the world and? the AGI is about to fall. From the outside, everything is promises of automation and productivity, but from the inside the feeling is very different. Yesterday we learned that the engineers who are working on Google AI They don’t stop making fun of her on internal channels. Well, exactly the same thing is happening on Amazon. Sloppenheimer. It’s one of the memes that Amazon employees have shared in the Slack channel called #actual-aws-memes. In it they mock tools like Kiro (Amazon Web Services’ code platform), Claude Code, and the AI ​​agent Meshclaw. They tell it in 404mediawhere they have spoken with several company employees who wanted to remain anonymous. These employees admit that anti-AI memes started circulating quite some time ago (in late 2024), which is when the company started putting more pressure on them to adopt AI tools. Of course, although mockery of AI is very common, they assure that there is a variety of opinions on the matter. Kiro AI. It is the tool that receives the most ridicule. There are several memes that suggest Kiro is pretty mediocre, such as the one that includes the text “Kiro: I confirm I have the full picture” over an image of an iceberg with much of it underwater. Discontent with this tool reached such a point that Amazon closed Kirorank, an internal leaderboard that measured and rewarded employees’ use of Kiro. Amazon’s official version is that employees had already integrated AI into their daily lives and ranking was no longer necessary, but what really happened is that engineers started cheating. They automated absurd and totally useless tasks for the sake of climbing the rankings, adding to the company’s AI bill. Amazon is not the only one. As we said at the beginning, this anti-AI rebellion based on memes is not exclusive to Amazon, exactly the same thing is happening at Google. While CEO Sundar Pichai boasts that 75% of Google’s code is written with AIemployees use an internal channel to make fun of that very thing. For example, while Google announced news in the Google I/O 2026a meme appeared on the channel saying that they were announcing “new ways to slop.” Memes can be voted on with a reaction system and this immediately added 100 thumbs up. They also make fun of the AI bros who do not stop evangelizing about the benefits of AI and point out the enormous work it is to review the code made by AI, often riddled with errors. What companies say. There is an evident disconnection between the official discourse and the internal feeling of the employees. Amazon has responded to the leaks by trying to downplay them. In an email to 404media, Amazon assures that the negative comments come from a few individuals and do not represent the majority. For its part, Google sent a statement to the same media in which they said they encouraged their employees to test and criticize their internal tools, even through memes. And a curious thing, Google sent two almost identical statements, the only difference is that in the first they mentioned that it was “essential that we keep humans in the process, including supervision.” In the second that phrase had disappeared. Image | Xataka with Magnific In Xataka | From “tokenmaxxing” we have moved on to “tokenwasting”: the level of waste in AI is reaching unprecedented levels

Software engineers have become AI overseers. Another profession is going the same way: lawyers

AI already writes faster than many professionals, making it a powerful ally in administrative and legal textsthus lightening the most tedious workload for humans. The problem is that it is an efficient tool, but not infallibleso supervision of its results is necessary. That is, it saves you only part of the work, but maintains the obligation to monitor the results. That is just what the TSXG has put on the table in one case which affects a Galician lawyer, against whom the Galician High Court has opened a case for procedural bad faith after detecting a written appeal with AI in which he had invented 24 legal quotes to argue it. The resource under suspicion. The Superior Court of Xustiza of Galicia maintains that the document presented “multiple spurious citations, non-existent resolutions, others that have nothing to do with what was discussed, or directly invented.” According to the Galician court, the appeal accumulated a series of errors that cannot be attributed to human error, but rather respond “to a notable lack of diligence in professional performance.” The resolution adds that the text followed a “curious structure in the way it was written”, something that the court relates to the use of free generative AI. Although, above all, the TSXG disgraces the lawyer for the lack of subsequent verification to stop the “constant ‘hallucinations’” of the system. Lack of review. As the Galician court’s brief highlights, the procedural bad faith of which the lawyer is accused does not lead to a malicious use of deception, but rather “evidence conduct revealing obvious negligence on the part of someone who, considered an expert in procedural rules and respectful of the deontological principles of his profession, entrusted his work – to what we believe -, without further review, to what the algorithm proposed, omitting the diligence of verifying the existence of what he cited, trusting perhaps in which the abundance of references would not only go unnoticed by this Court, but would also give authority to its assertions.” That is, it is a warning to navigators that AI can speed up writing, but it does not know if a sentence exists or if a decontextualized quote serves to support a legal argument. That process of screening and supervision is still human, and that role of supervising results will be a key piece in the future of the practice of law. Engineers have already changed. The process of changing roles that the legal profession will undergo in the very near future (in fact, as we see, it has already begun) with the arrival of AI is not something new. Software engineers and programmers were the first to experience it. AI is gaining prominence when writing the code of large technology companies like googleMicrosoft and even Anthropic already generates much of its AI with its AI But, at the same time, the engineer has not disappeared, but has gone from having a role as a producer to one of a supervisor who analyzes the results provided by the AI. By that same reasonthe technological have reduced the hiring of junior personnel, who until now were dedicated to those more tedious tasks, and have accelerated the hiring of seniors with the most trained eye for detect errors and inconsistencies in the code. From legal advisor to legal supervisor. The comparison between what is already evident in big technology companies and what is coming in law firms is quite evident. AI is not going to end the figure of the lawyer, but it will generate a shift in work roles towards the supervision of legal texts. In fact, as how I collected Reuterssome law firms are already requiring their junior associates to know how to use and supervise AI. We are only facing one of the cases derived from the improper use of AI in legal texts that have been occurring in recent months. According what was published by Iberley In February, the Superior Court of Justice of the Canary Islands established a financial penalty for a lawyer who had used AI to generate an appeal that contained a total of 48 jurisprudential citations. invented by an AI. Regulate the use of AI for judges. In reality, the impact of AI in the legal field goes beyond its use in drafting routine legal resources and briefs. In Spain, judges have already been sanctioned for using ChatGPT in drafting something as compromised as a sentence. In April 2026, the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) opened a file to a magistrate for having “evaded his jurisdictional functions” by leaving the drafting of a sentence in the hands of an AI. As a result of this case and other controversies, the General Council of the Judiciary has had to approve a “guide” aimed at the use of AI in the judicial career, so that it is established how this tool should be used so as not to incur a neglect of one’s legal responsibilities. Who knows if one of those new professions to be created in the future it will be that of supervisor of sentences. In Xataka | “Unpresentable” and meaningless: the court declares a dismissal unfair due to a letter generated with an AI Image | Unsplash (Romain Dancre and Solen Feyissa)

“They are hiring more engineers”

Are you a software engineer and afraid of getting fired because of AI? Well don’t have it. At least, that is the position of a very interested party in the conversation around artificial intelligence. At this point, the name of Jensen Huang It will not be foreign to you. This is the CEO of Nvidia, a company that has gone from leading the GPU segment for playing video games for two decades to leave that market for focus on AI platforms. We cannot say that they are doing badly, of course, and within the strategy we have a Jensen who has become one of the most important ‘evangelists’ in the segment of the artificial intelligence. Within the framework of the Computex 2026 fair held in Taipei and in which PC manufacturers show their new products, Jensen commented that it is foolish to be afraid that an AI will replace us at work. The logic is that this AI will generate more jobsbut there is a question hanging over that argument: what kind of jobs. Because, if the optimism of all companies focused on the development and popularization of AI is one side of the coin, the other is that of lYoung people who cannot access jobs. And that of the companies themselves firing employees to replace them with… an AI. Jensen Huang is on a mission At Computex, Huang feels at home. Taiwan is home to some of the world’s most important technology companies not so much for their products. There we have giants like Asus, BenQ, Foxconn or Acer (among many others known to gamers). But, above all, we have TSMC. TSMC is the engine of the chip industry and Nvidia its current best client after overtaking Appleand Huang, furthermore, is a rockstar in Taiwan. During his time at the fair, Huang presented his new platform RTX Spark Superchip and a new chip to compete against Intel and AMD in the field of CPUs, but it has also taken advantage of the speaker to demonstrate again your opinion on the future of AI and work. The CEO consider that AI is something positive for both GDP and everyone’s profits, but also pointed out that it is “nonsense” to think that artificial intelligence is leading to people being fired from companies in the profile of software engineers. “The number of software engineers is actually increasing. People talk about AI reducing jobs, but it’s complete nonsense: it’s leading to more software engineers being hired” – Jensen Huang Huang is very vocal on this topic and has spent 2026 taking advantage of any interview, podcast or visit to universities and events to preach about the benefits of AI and the positive relationship between technology and employment. He has gone so far as to say that “AI creates jobs” and that it is the United States’ best opportunity to reindustrialize, pointing out that blaming AI for the very numerous layoffs in industries such as technology and video games is a “too lazy” practice. Now, as in every story, there is part that is true and part that is not so true. On the one hand, Huang is very interested the narrative that AI is a job creator. As we say, it is one of the parties most interested in technology continuing to advance because we are already seeing that it is a sector that moves a lot (a lot) of money and Nvidia is one of those that is taking advantage thanks to both its products and its commercial vision. On the other hand, the reindustrialization discourse is correct. The United States is seeking that reindustrializationthis flowering of the business fabric based on technology and, to this end, it is looking not only for part of its companies to move the industry from Asia to the US, but also to attract giants like the South Korean companies. Samsung and SK Hynix…and the coveted TSMC. Does data kill story? Huang’s argument makes sense. AI creates jobs. What it doesn’t say out loud is what type of job. Because engineers or those who have careers related to the development of AI Yes, it is “easy” to get into jobs related to AI, but the rest, and profiles without much experience, find it increasingly difficult. Technology companies are getting rid of juniorswhich are replaced by AI while those jobs are taken over by developers. AND jobs are opening in record numbers of more than 67,000 offers in engineering and 7,300 in product, but the fine print is that it is almost impossible for young recent graduates to apply for one of these positions due to the high degree of specialization that companies demand. And they are not only the requirements, but the technologies themselves who are citing AI efficiency as a driver for laying off their human workforce. Amazon with 16,000 employees and Microsoft with 15,000 are two examples. Heavyweights like Dario Amodei (CEO of Anthropic) point out that AI could eliminate approximately half of entry-level jobs and there are studies that link AI with almost 55,000 layoffs in the US in 2025 alone. For Huang, all of this is “ridiculous“because it won’t be AI that will make us lose our jobs: it will be because there will be someone who uses AI better than you. Furthermore, according to himAI has created 500,000 jobs in the last two years. And, in the background, we have two currents. On the one hand, the AI ​​optimists. On the other hand, a generation Z that is actively resisting adopting artificial intelligence in their daily lives and, especially at work. Because, compared to those who think that AI is a positive network for humanity because it gives opportunities that favor young people, there are some young people who they can’t find work once they graduate, they are thrown into a disconcerting work scenario and they are starring in a curious soundtrack in recent weeks. That of the boos to the AI ​​evangelists in universities. In Xataka | Companies are … Read more

The engineers who worked at FSD do not trust their own creation

Elon Musk has been ensuring for a decade that full autonomous driving is just around the corner. Although the company has advanced in its driving assistance systems, a Reuters investigation reveals something worrying. Several people who worked on this project have denounced that the technology continues to suffer from basic and dangerous errors, and they confess that they would not get into a Tesla autonomous car for the world. what has happened. In this investigation, Reuters had the testimonies of nine “data taggers”—the people who train that Tesl AI system—as well as a software engineer who worked on the project. According to them, vehicles with these systems collide with animals, ignore the presence of school buses or accelerate in construction zones. One of the team’s veterans summed up everything in one sentence: “we have all seen the FSD fail.” Beware of public demos. Tesla has already launched robotaxi pilot programs in cities like Austin (Texas). Musk claims that his software is a generalized system that can be adapted to any city without high-precision maps, but these interviewees indicate that the operational reality is different. The trick. Tesla staff spent months recording videos and mapping the area of ​​Austin where the tests were to take place, and they spent hundreds of hours labeling curbs or road markings just to avoid problems during the demonstrations. According to these former employees, this level of intervention is unaffordable on a global scale. Comparing pears with apples. To maintain that the FSD system is up to ten times safer than human driving, Tesla uses a methodology criticized by experts. For example, he compares his cars (4.1 years old on average, modern safety systems) with the average American car, which is almost 13 years old. Phil Koopman, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University, explained that “It’s like saying my jet plane is faster than a World War II bomber.” The data reveals that if only accidents with airbag deployment are compared, Tesla’s advantage would not be 10 to 1, but 3 to 1, and even that figure is questionable. The controversial “Mad Max” mode. Internal videos have shown Tesla cars driving at speeds much higher than those allowed after the introduction of certain aggressive driving modes like the so-called “Mad Max”. Some of the employees who participated in the investigation reported cars traveling at almost 100 km/h in zones limited to 40 km/h. This aggressive driving is often treated as a low priority problem by its engineers, despite the risk it poses to road safety in these urban environments. Investigations in progress. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) currently has four open investigations into FSD and Autopilot. These cases include situations in which Tesla vehicles ignored red traffic lights or they turned directly into oncoming traffic. Fatal accidents that occurred are also being investigated in low visibility conditions —fog, sun glare—, and where the Tesla sensors, which are focused entirely on the use of cameras, have turned out to be insufficient. Where are the robotaxis? Almost a year after its launch in Austin, Tesla’s fleet of robotaxis it’s still tinyand consists of about 50 vehicles. It is also limited to very specific areas, and in cities like Dallas or Houston, users have complained that the cars do not drop them off at their exact destination. Besides, many of these vehicles They still have human drivers in the passenger seat who are there to avoid problems. It’s a reasonable practice, but it destroys the promise of full unattended autonomy that these vehicles offer. In Xataka | Elon Musk has come up with two names for Tesla’s self-driving taxi. And legally you can’t put any on it

We thought AI was laying off engineers. In reality, it has pilloried another profile: middle management.

We’ve been hearing for several years that AI was going to change work as we know it. What perhaps no one anticipated is that the first mass casualty They would not be factory operators or data analysts, but the layer of professionals that holds together the structure of any company: middle management. The phenomenon is already leaving a trail of layoffs with the successive restructurings that the big technology companies have been applying for the last year. Departments are reduced by the implementation of AI and become increasingly autonomous in decision-making, so the intermediate step that united everything becomes unnecessary. The profile that worries the most. Middle managers have been acting as a transmission belt between the management that dictates strategies and the teams that execute them for decades. The function of these positions was to collect data, synthesize it, transfer decisions and coordinate day-to-day operations. That intermediary job is exactly the role that AI is automating most easily, making middle managers the most important link. likely to be fired in that chain because it is not related to either decision-making or their execution. The pressure on this intermediate profile has been building for some time and the data confirms it. By the end of 2025, job offers for middle managers in the US were 42% lower to the maximum recorded three years earlier, according to Revelio Labs. The consulting firm Gartner calculated that by 2026 one in five companies will use AI to eliminate more than half of their middle management positions. Companies are applying it. Just a few weeks ago, Block, the payments company founded by Jack Dorsey, announced the dismissal of 40% of its staff and presented a new organizational model in which AI assumes the role of a link between teams. In one later blog postDorsey and councilor Roelof Botha explained this move: “There is no need for a permanent layer of middle management.” Brian Armstrong picked up Dorsey’s baton in your ad of dismissal for 14% of the Coinbase workforce, specifying that the intermediate positions were going to disappear as such and that they were now going to contribute by “getting their hands dirty with their teams.” What is lost when a link disappears. In statements to GuardianFreeland Abbott, former CTO of Square, warned that “AI cannot provide team motivation, human connection, and support the way a person can,” removing the human component from middle management in companies. Furthermore, the elimination of this role could mean another obstacle in promotion options for junior employees, who usually find those opportunities by starting to manage the work of other junior employees as they gain experience. According to the study By Anastassia Fedyk, a professor at the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley, as AI tools allow more work to be shifted from managers to their subordinates, these structural changes could become permanent. Rehire middle management. Matthew Bidwell, professor of management at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, assured on his podcast on the labor market that there are precedents of companies that tried eliminate intermediate hierarchies and they ended up turning back. According to their analysis, middle managers are in an especially vulnerable position in restructurings because it is more difficult for them to demonstrate their value to management. Far from putting an end to the “productive” positions held by engineers and administrators, AI seems to have opened the door and the piece that is being most affected to the point of placing it as a species at risk of extinction are middle managers. Above all, after his post-pandemic proliferation. In Xataka | Generation Z is avoiding promotions to mid-level positions: too much stress and too little reward Image | Unsplash (Austin Distel)

an all-stars of engineers from Porsche, BMW and Lamborghini

It is not easy to build a car brand from scratch. In fact, if you appreciate advice on how to go broke, put all your money into trying to build one. Over the decades, the number of companies that have succeeded in the automotive industry from nothing, completely from scratch, are absolutely exceptional. The electric car has been a breakthrough which has facilitated the entry of new players, such as Tesla, and despite everything, many have failed along the way. Let’s think about Fisker, Dyson, Apple… All of them were projects that were developed with more or less effort but that they have not finished curdling. And to start a new company you need a lot of money. You have to design a car, have access to the factory and the corresponding machinery, distribute the cars and offer after-sales service. And, above all, gaining the trust of the general public, key when it comes to trusting a brand without references, without a story behind it and a brand that has to prove to be solvent enough to get ahead. That opportunity offered by the electric car, as we said, has been taken advantage of by China. For years they have built a supply chain and invested huge amounts of money in researching how to get the best out of this technology. And to do this they have not hesitated to absorb the knowledge of European manufacturers. He all-stars from Xiaomi is a good example. Learning from the classics In its learning to position itself as the market leader in electric cars, China has not hesitated to rely on European knowledge. In the early 2000s, European manufacturers thought that the Chinese state was laying out a red carpet for them to produce their cars on its soil. They did it with one condition: that manufacturers ally with a local company. In this way, the engineers assimilated the knowledge coming from outside and were able to apply it in entirely Chinese companies, already outside the European orbit. He result We have seen it years later. The Chinese customer now prefers the purchase of a locally developed car because it better adapts to their demands and they consider them more advanced than Western ones. The gap, even, has forced Volkswagen to look for engineers in China in order to better understand the market and produce specific vehicles for said market. In the opposite direction, Chinese firms have armed themselves with Western talent to bring their cars closer to the European and American aesthetic standards. We have seen historical designers like Wolfgang Egger, who designed the beautiful Alfa Romeo 8C Competizione, carry out the Yangwang U9, BYD’s supercar. Or Walter de Silva, who built his career in the arms of the Volkswagen Group, designing cars for the BAIC group. But design has not been the only rock on which Chinese manufacturers are building their new house. And Xiaomi is an example of this. Just as Volkswagen has hired Chinese engineers to be able to approach the Asian market, Xiaomi is aware that it has to adapt to European tastes so that their cars find sufficient support outside their borders. A decision that is summarized in a photograph. In it we find the design and research and development team that will lay the foundations of the product that we will see in Europe. Click on the image to go to the original tweet As seen in the image in the post, Xiaomi has built a kind of all-stars of German engineering. And there are such relevant figures in his team that they have directed the teams that have produced cars of the caliber of the Porsche 911 GT3 RS, the Mercedes S-Class or the BMW i8, among others. Where Xiaomi Much emphasis has been placed on design. Jean-Arthur Madelaine He was part of the team that created the Mercedes-Benz Vision GT Concept, a prototype created for the Gran Turismo 6, but his most relevant positions have been as head of interiors for Citroën first and Polestar later. He now heads the Xiaomi electric design team in the plant that the company opened in Germany last year. Julien Cueffwho is in charge of the interiors, worked for Mercedes but has been in the orbit of Chinese manufacturers such as Nio or Lotus for years. Fabian Schmölz-Obermeierdedicated to the exterior appearance of cars, has worked for Porsche and Lamborghini. In this last company he was the person most responsible for the exterior design of a car like the Temerario. But beyond the design, the company has looked for prominent heads in the market to guarantee the good performance of its cars. Simon Schmitt is an engineer specialized in aerodynamics who has been part of the BMW racing team. From the same company they have arrived Claus-Dieter Grollfor the development of the dynamics of their cars, and Kai Langerwho worked for 22 years at BMW and was design director of the Bavarian company’s electric range to lead the team focused on user experience. These names are just a handful of examples. The company seems aware that it needs to get closer to the European public in its expansion strategy outside of China. And in recent years we have seen very good competitors arrive from China but also how some of these cars had not adapted to the tastes and demands of the European public. In Xataka we have counted the case of firms like Omoda/Jaecoo, which have tweaked their cars in record time to make them harder and leave aside dynamics supported by suspensions that are too soft. A good part of the Chinese market needs to delve deeper, for example, into driving assistance systems, which are clearly not tuned for European roads and our way of driving, with narrower lanes. But Chinese manufacturers are demonstrating enormous adaptability. Stellantis assures that Leapmotor vehicles are tuned in Italy To suit our tastes, BYD aims to produce a purely European vehicle with its Hungarian factory. At Ebro they assure … Read more

in DeepMind they use Claude, the rest of Google engineers want to and cannot

Things are hectic at Google. In recent months, some DeepMind engineers have had access to Claude Code and Anthropic models, but in many other parts of the company this tool, which is currently considered the best on the market, has been banned. This has caused strong internal tensions in the company, and is also a sign of something worrying: Google’s AI cannot compete with Anthropic’s at the moment. what has happened. Steve Yegge is a software industry veteran who worked for years at Google. Last week posted a viral tweet in which he explained that after speaking with a current manager, he was concerned about the adoption of AI tools in this company. “The bottom line is that Google engineers have about the same adoption of AI as John Deere, the tractor company,” he said. Or what is the same: one of the most cutting-edge technology companies in the world was being anything but cutting-edge in its use of AI. Demis Hassabis gets angry (and a lot). Recent Nobel laureate Demis Hassabis, head of DeepMind, criticized Yegge’s tweet and told him to stop spreading nonsense. “This publication is totally false and is simply clickbait,” he said. Yegge returns to the fray. The engineer spoke in the following days with more current Google employees and discovered more things that he told in another long tweet. According to their conversations, the internal adoption of AI at Google follows a conventional pattern: 20% reject it, 60% use it in a basic way, and 20% take advantage of it intensively. Either you let me use Claude Code or I’m out of here.. But there was something else: some engineers are prohibited from using Claude Code because it is a competing product, but the vast majority do not have access to those tools because the company wants them to use Google’s tools — that is, the Gemini models in Gemini CLI, its alternative to Claude Code. According to Yeggewhen they tried to force DeepMind engineers to stop using Claude Code and Anthropic models, they refused to stop using the tool and threatened to leave the company. Internal sources of the company confirmed the data published by Yegge in a published news on Business Insider. Sergey Brin gets going. This week, The Information public that Sergey Brin has sent an internal memo to DeepMind engineers and researchers and confirms what was already being said. “To win the final sprint, we must urgently close the gap in agentic execution and turn our models into world-class developers,” the Google co-founder wrote. According to this data, an “assault team” has been created with the direct participation of Brin himself and DeepMind’s CTO, Koray Kavukcuoglu. That statement makes it clear that Gemini is below Claude in capabilities, because otherwise there would be no talk of “closing the gap.” Google and fragmentation. It’s not just that Claude Opus and Claude Code are now better than Gemini and Gemini CLI. Es que además esto ha dejado claro que en empresas tan grandes como Google la fragmentación operativa puede llegar a ser un problema grave. That some can use something that others cannot, and that worse tools are forced just because they are their own, can end up generating internal tensions, as has happened. That is what Google now seems to want to remedy so that all its employees row together. Another victory for Anthropic. All this controversy does nothing but favor Anthopic, which has managed to take the lead in this race – rather marathon – of AI. That the engineers at the prestigious DeepMind prefer their AI platform to Google’s own is an unequivocal sign that today Anthropic is ahead for AI experts. Image | Alex Dudar In Xataka | The tech industry is spending billions of dollars on GPUs for AI. 95% are inactive

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.