Argentina 6 – Peru 0: the story of the alleged biggest fixing of the World Cups between dictatorships and missing persons

In the context of a dictatorship that made opponents disappear daily, the 1978 World Cup was held in Argentina, an embarrassing chapter in the history book of football. “I knew what was happening to those who governed, but I could not imagine that cruelty towards the disappeared,” he said. would justify years later César Luis Menotti, Argentine coach from 1974 to 1982. While the Videla regime used the championship as propaganda Facing the outside world, the Albiceleste team, immersed in the competition and oblivious to the country’s political climate, was overcoming rounds supported by an enthusiastic public. In the decisive match against Peru, Argentina needed four goals to reach the final. He scored six and the controversy that that result raised is still alive today. Since the dawn of the World Cup, Argentina had pursued its organization. Finally, at the FIFA Congress on July 6, 1966, the South American country was chosen as the host country for the 1978 edition. At that same meeting, it was agreed that West Germany would host the 1974 World Cup and Spain would host the 1982 World Cup. Argentina had 12 years ahead of it to properly prepare the event. However, two years before the World Cup was held, events were going to take an unexpected turn. Football to whiten infamy On March 24, 1976, Jorge Rafael Videla carried out a coup d’état that overthrew the democratic government of María Estela Martínez de Perón, popularly known as Isabelita. Videla assumed the head of state at the head of a Military Junta, initiating the cynically called National Reorganization Process, which included a systematic plan to remove anyone suspected of dissidence from circulation. Videla swearing in as president of Argentina in 1974. (Eduardo Di Baia/AP) At first, the blow put the celebration of the championship in check. Belgium and Holland offered themselves as alternative venues, but the time margin was limited and FIFA estimated the show had to go on. Like Hitler at the 1936 Olympic Games or Mussolini in the 1934 World CupVidela used the World Cup for propaganda purposes. The tournament was an instrument to convey to the world the image of an open, advanced and plural Argentina, of a thriving football and political nation. No expense was spared for this: it is estimated that the organization of the tournament ultimately cost ten times what was budgeted, although no accounts were ever rendered. However, the situation in the country was far from the happy Arcadia that the military intended to portray. Kidnappings, torture and murders They were common in the development of relentless repression directed at all those suspected of not being sympathetic to the regime. It is estimated that up to 30,000 citizens He made the Military Junta disappear during those years. On June 1, 1978, a speech by Videla inaugurated the championship: “Within the framework of friendship between man and people, and under the sign of peace, he officially declared this eleventh (sic) World Football Championship 78 officially inaugurated.” At the same time that the ball was rolling in the opening match between West Germany and Poland, The Mothers of Plaza de Mayo metlike every Thursday at 3:30 p.m., to cry out for their missing children. While the Argentine people celebrated Kempes’ goals, thousands of people were silently retaliated against. The screams from the River Monumental Stadium reached the Navy’s Higher School of Mechanics, converted into a detention and torture centerwhich was a few blocks from the stadium. There are many detainees They faced a contradiction: His fan heart longed for the victory of his team, but reason dictated that victory would serve to consolidate the dictatorship. Finalists after beating Peru In terms of football alone, the Argentine team passed the first phase without problems and reached the last game of the second tied on points with Brazilwith Kempes becoming progressively more toned as the tournament progressed. According to the strange format of that World Cup, the winners of the two groups of the second phase went directly to the final, without semi-finals. The Netherlands won in group A, reaching the final for the second consecutive World Cup, despite the enigmatic absence of Johan Cruyff. In group B, Brazil and Argentina played everything on one card in the last match, but the locals played with the advantage of playing their match three hours later, and thus knowing the result of Brazil (FIFA had not yet unified the schedules of the first phase, a measure taken after the El Molinón pact). Brazil did its job and won 3-1 against Poland, a result that forced Menotti’s team to win by a margin of four goals against Peru. The Peruvians had had a formidable first phase, achieving first place in their group ahead of the Netherlands, but they had deflated in the second group and reached the last game without anything at stake. The Argentines dominated the match from the beginning, and at half-time they were already winning 2-0. After the restart, the Albiceleste team came out in a rush and 5 minutes into the second half they had already achieved their goal (4-0) against a Peru that seemed knocked out. Two more goals still fell and, midway through the second half, the scoreboard already showed the final 6-0. Objective achieved: Argentina was in the final of his World Cup. The shadow of a fix From the first moment, Argentina’s massive victory against Peru was surrounded by a halo of suspicionwith different and complementary versions, and crossed accusations between some protagonists. The passivity of the Peruvian defense during some goals raised suspicions, as did the signing of Peruvian defender Rodulfo Manzo for the Argentine team Vélez Sarsfield at the end of the World Cup. The first to raise the hare was Ramón Quiroga, the goalkeeper who defended the Peruvian goal that afternoon at the Gigante Stadium in Arroyito. In an interview with the newspaper La Nación in 1998, Quiroga, Argentine by birth but naturalized Peruvian, revealed his misgivings about the referee (“I think he … Read more

Amazon insisted that its developers use its AI to work. They’re just fixing what AI breaks

AI was going to make us work less and better. In the Amazon offices the reality is being very different. According to several employees of the firminternal tools like Kiro are causing a rebound effect: developers spend more time fixing the code defective that generates that tool than writing your own. From Malaga to Malagon. The situation is ironic, because as some engineers indicate, they are trying to get out of a problem caused by AI by using more AI. Dina, a software developer from New York, joined Amazon two years ago and began her job as writing code. However, what I was doing recently was not writing it, but rather fixing the code that Amazon’s programming AI—called Kiro—broke. According to her, this model was misleading and frequently generated bad code. Days after speaking with The Guardian For that report, Dina was fired. Go-go layoffs. The case of Amazon is especially bloody due to the company’s recent wave of massive layoffs. In recent months has cut its workforce by 30,000 people10% of its corporate strength. At Amazon they deny that these layoffs have to do with AI, but the CEO, Andy Jassy, ​​has suggested in internal communications that the efficiency gains raised by the process automation will allow you to operate with tighter equipment. You are contradicting exactly what the company says without fully meaning it. workplace suicide. Many employees interviewed by this means indicated that they felt like a kind of work suicide. His current job is to document processes in detail and correct system errors to, in essence, prepare for his own replacement by machines. These forced training phases are making employees feel like their cycle at Amazon has an expiration date. I don’t need a hammer anyway. We have experienced what is happening at Amazon in the past. The deployment of AI tools has in many cases been chaotic according to the employees interviewed. They have been forced to use “half-baked” tools born of hackathons without adequately evaluating whether they really provided the appropriate solution. An engineer said it clearly: you can’t look at every problem and think how to use the hammer you have for said problem. The first thing is to know if this problem really needs a hammer. Service outages. AI integration issues are also reportedly responsible for Amazon service outages. Internal reports link at least two of those crashes to code changes that were made with AI tools. These changes were not properly supervised, and although the company can blame “human errors” for these problems, the origin is as usual: delegating critical decisions to systems that are not yet 100% reliable. Amazon knows who uses AI. In this adaptation of Amazon to the age of AI there is also another disturbing element: those responsible are monitoring to the millimeter what your employees do with AI. What they were already doing in the warehouses to measure the performance and productivity of these employees now also happens in the offices. There are dashboards where team leaders monitor who uses AI and how often, and in some teams the goal is for at least 80% of the workforce to use these tools weekly, regardless of whether they are useful or not. Promotions. And whether you use AI tools a little or a lot can also be decisive for promoting internally on Amazon. Documents have been detected in which the candidate is explicitly asked how they have used AI to improve their impact. The message is clear: if you do not embrace this technology, even if it is deficient, your chances of moving up become very complicated. Low morale. Among the employees surveyed, the feeling that everyone perceived was the demoralization of the teams. In fact, more than 1,000 workers signed a petition against that aggressive deployment of AI tools. For them, the company culture is changing and what is now required is work more hours with fewer resources with the excuse that external competition is “hungry.” In Xataka | The role of developers of the future was supposed to be to “review” the code that AI wrote. Claude just buried him

less than fixing the gasoline engine

What if your car’s engine breaks after 10 years? What are you doing with the car? With how expensive it has to be to change an entire engine… do you throw the car into the scrapyard? And if you don’t, do you invest thousands of euros in it? It is very likely that when you have told a friend, a cousin or a co-worker that you are thinking of buying a gasoline car, they have never asked you these questions. What if it were electric? Would they ask you what happens if your battery breaks when the car is 10 years old? In that case, the questions are not so strange anymore. Now, the answer will be less uncomfortable if you are one of the latter, one of those who are thinking about jumping into the electric car. At least not so much if you compare it with a combustion car. As expensive… as a combustion one How much does a serious gearbox breakdown cost? How much does a serious breakdown caused by the timing belt cost? How much does a serious engine cylinder head breakdown cost? These questions, and many others, are answered by RACE. Whether due to the amount of time that has to be invested, either because the replaced parts are expensive or due to a combination of both, the three aforementioned breakdowns can easily cost over 5,000 euros. An electric car, most commonly, does not have a gearbox. It will also not have a timing belt or an engine with cylinder heads, connecting rods or injectors. In fact, its maintenance is so simple that there are those who were wondering If electric cars have oil and if it is necessary to change it. However, there is a large public that continues to worry about the health of the battery and how much the bill may increase in the event of a forced change. This question was already answered by Recurrent study supported by Goldman Sachs. In it it was stated that in 2030 Changing an electric car battery will be as expensive as facing a serious breakdown of a combustion engine. According to his calculations, collected by Hybrids and ElectricsIn less than five years, changing batteries will cost between 3,200 and 4,800 euros for larger batteries. For lower battery cars, the forecast is for it to be below 3,000 euros. The bulk of the calculation to make these estimates is based on the price of its minerals and their impact on battery cells and packs. According to the data of Bloomberg NEFthe total cost of the battery in 2025 stood at $108/kWh. That is, a car battery with an 80 kWh accumulator (for which a highway range of between 350 and 450 kilometers is usually expected) would cost $8,640 right now, just over 7,200 euros. The number, however, has plummeted in a decade. In 2015 they calculated that the cost was $475/kWh and in 2013 it was $827/kWh. The evolution is promising. That Recurrent report already anticipated a price of $65/kWh cost for a complete battery replacement in 2030. That is, a car with the aforementioned 80 kWh battery would cost about $5,200 (about 4,380 euros). The study mentions the chemistry used (NMC are predictably more expensive than LFP) but it does not indicate whether there would be any additional cost between the cars that use CTC or CTB batteries. The first are batteries that are installed on the chassis of the vehicle but in the second the chassis itself is used as the vehicle’s casing and the cells are attached to it. In this way, energy density is increased and, therefore, there is a greater amount of electrical energy available in the same space. What is certain is that the price of changing batteries should fall over the years. The economy of scale itself will lower what remains the main cost of an electric vehicle. To this we must add that firms like Toyota They are already offering guarantees of ten years or one million kilometers if maintenance is carried out in their official workshops. To the above we must also add that some studies suggest thatOnly 2.5% of electric cars replace the battery due to breakdowns. Of course, it must be taken into account that the figure may have been distorted by the high cost that, until now, this operation has had. Photo | seat In Xataka | Toyota’s weapon to dominate the electric car is 1,200 kilometer batteries. And he has already set a date for them

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.