Doraemon could never beat Goku. Until China invented Seedance 2.0

Not so many years ago we ridiculed AI for not being able to create hands with five fingers or not getting Will Smith to non-gloomily eat a plate of spaghetti. Today, he is capable of creating animations that would make the best producer in Hollywood uncomfortable. Seedance 2.0. First of all, what are we talking about. Seedance is an AI content generation platform, specifically designed to create dynamic anime-type content, combat, short cinematic scenes and clip stylization. It works with one or more base images and a descriptive prompt. Behind Seedance 2.0 There is Bytedance, the company behind TikTok and one of the five most relevant Chinese companies in AI. Why the world is going crazy. Although it is not perfect, Seedance 2.0 is one of the video generation models that is offering the best results. To the point that X is being filled with replicas of well-known scenes created with this AI that are practically indistinguishable from reality. In some cases, the visual fidelity and animation pace border on a level that until recently seemed reserved for professional studios. Recreation of an animation never published by the Dragon Ball franchise. Goku vs. Doraemon. Will Smith doing the only thing we know how to ask him to do with AI. Jackie Chan vs Jet Li. The big video moment. The world had its moment ChatGPTits moment DeepSeekits moment Nano Banana and, now, we are in the Seedance moment. Giants like OpenAI and Google have been fighting for the best video generation model for some time, with proposals such as Sora 2 and I see 3. But right now, the top scorer is Bytedance with Seedance. Look out for Bytedance. Bytedance is moving into seventh gear to be one of the Chinese giants leading the AI ​​race. It only needed to have its own chips, something that is about to be solved through an alliance with Samsung. The company has strived to be more than the giant behind one of the most important social networks in China and the rest of the world, to become a powerhouse of artificial intelligence. Image | Improved Seedance with ChatGPT In Xataka | How to create videos with artificial intelligence: 13 essential free tools

The world is amazed by Moltbot (formerly Clawdbot). It turns out that China had already invented it almost a year ago

The phenomenon of the end of January has been Molbotformerly known as Clawdbot. It is one of the AI agents most powerful of the moment, to the point that it warns of its own risks even before being installed. An agent who seemed to have no competitor and to be one of a kind. We were wrong. TARS-1.5. Although it has not made as much noise, in April 2025 it was launched UI-TARS-1.5an open source multimodal agent capable of performing all types of tasks within desktop environments. UI-TARS-1.5 is a multimodal agent designed to interact with the digital world through graphical interfaces, using the screen, mouse and keyboard. It came into the hands of Bytedance, a company behind giants like TikTok and one of the main players in the development of artificial intelligence in China. The difference. 1.5 is an AI agent designed to use a computer as a person would do. See the screen, identify visual elements and act using mouse and keyboard. Unlike Moltbot, it does not execute code or commands directly on the system, but rather interacts with the PC from the outside, at the interface level. It’s safer by design, because you can’t break the system by running arbitrary code. In addition, it reasons before each action, which reduces errors accumulated in long tasks. UI-TARS does not control your computer. He uses it. Moltbot does not use your computer. He controls it. What can you do? UI-TARS interacts “talking” with your computer. It is capable of executing tasks in our interface by analyzing what is in it. Serves as a programming assistant. It can behave like a human to test apps. It works as a tutor to perform complex tasks. You can manage desktop tasks and PC management. Why is it important. The new war for AI will not focus exclusively on models like Gemini, ChatGPT or Claude: the next step is to achieve a local AI capable of acting like a human, but with certain security guarantees. Moltbot, UI-TARS, Kimmi K2.5 (also Chinese)… Although agentic AI sounds distant, the war to make it part of our daily lives has been brewing for years. Image | Xataka In Xataka | Studying with AI without thinking teaches nothing: these tips can help you take advantage of it and really learn

We humans like beer. The big question is whether we like it enough to have invented agriculture

The big question is not whether it was the chicken or the egg first, but rather what our ancestors began to make first: bread or beer? Does about 12,000 years We humans promote one of the most important chapters in our history in the Middle East, the Neolithic Revolution. From being nomads who lived by hunting and gathering, we became sedentary creatures who cultivated the fields. The change was so momentous that anthropologists have long wondered what caused it. It would be reasonable to think that the search for something as simple as bread, but there are those who believe that the answer is another: beer. What if the great catalyst that led us to plow and harvest the fields was not the search for bread but our ancestral hobby to raise your elbow? Cereals, what do I want you for? Scientists have spent the last few decades unraveling the mysteries from our most remote past, but there is one (fundamental) one that they have not yet agreed on: What the hell led humanity to change hunting and gathering for a sedentary life based on agriculture and livestock? What was the catalyst for the Neolithic Revolution, one of the most momentous periods of all time? Since since humans have been human, they need to eat, the answer seems simple: if those men and women settled to plant wheat and barley, it had to be to make bread, right? That is, they began to spend hours and hours tending their fields to obtain grain with which to nourish themselves. In the 50s however a question began to creep into the anthropological debate: What if what really interested them in grain was not bread or porridge but beer? But… And why is that? The debate is not new. It has been on the table for some time and is heated from time to time with new discoveries, such as the one announced in 2018 by a group of Stanford researchers who found “the oldest record of alcohol”, clues that tell us about the manufacture of beer ago 13,000 years. The last one to raise the discussion was Michael Marshall, a scientific journalist and columnist for New Scientist. In December he published a wide chronicle in which he reviews the latest findings on the subject and (most importantly) exposes how much it is costing anthropologists to reach a conclusion. The benefits of beer. To understand the discussion, we must first clarify a key point: neither the bread nor the beer of the Stone Age were like the bread and beer that we know today. The latter in fact has little or nothing to do with the refreshing amber liquid that they serve us in bars. It was more like a puree, a “sweet, slightly fermented porridge,” clarify Professor Jiajing Wang, from Dartmouth College in New Hampshire. “They germinated the grains, cooked them and then used wild yeast.” The result was a nutritious, caloric, protein-rich concoction that could even be safer than drinking water from rivers and wells. After all, it was the result of fermentation. Added to that was its alcohol content, a “social lubricant” that we still use in the 21st century to relax and socialize. Archaeologist Brin Hayden highlights, for example, its use in events that helped structure communities. There is research which suggest that (at least some communities) used it in rituals and for veneration of the deceased. Much more than suspicions. If the debate has been on the table since the 1950s, it is basically because it has been nourished by archaeological findings. Researchers have found traces that tell us about beer brewing at least 5,000 years ago in southern egypt and northern china or how he does 10,000 years Shangshan culture They brewed rice beer. One of the most important revelations in recent years, however, was the one achieved in a cave in Israel in 2018 by a team led by Professor Li Liu, from Stanford University. There they found evidence of beer brewing before the first cereals cultivated in the Middle East. The finding is related to the Natufiansa town dedicated to gathering and hunting, although they also tended to stay for long periods in the same place. “The oldest”. After analyzing residues located in 13,000-year-old mortars located in a cave in Raqefet, a Natufian cemetery near Haifa, Liu and his colleagues discovered remains of beer. Quite a milestone, like she herself stands out: “It is the oldest record of alcohol made by man.” “This discovery indicates that alcohol production was not necessarily a result of agricultural surplus production, but was developed for ritual and spiritual purposes, at least to some extent, before agriculture.” Issue settled? At all. To understand the complexity of the subject, it helps to review the discovery announced in 2018. At least at that time, the oldest known remains of bread, extracted from a Natufian site located east of Jordan, had between 11,600 and 14,600 years old. The traces of beer discovered by Liu’s team move in a similar range: a priori, they could be dated between 11,700 and 13,700 years ago. One of the keys to the problem, explains Marshall in your articleis that basically the making of bread and beer leaves very similar traces, basically starch residues. “We still don’t have conclusive evidence to answer that question,” Liu recognizes on the question of whether we turned to beer or bread first. The reality is more complex: because we don’t know, we don’t even know if some of those foods were the great catalyst that led our ancestors to change their lifestyle. “I wouldn’t be surprised if both were the motivations.” At the end of the day, the ‘beer first, bread first’ debate does not seek definitive conclusions so much as vindicating the weight of both foods. Both beer and bread, bread and beer, played a decisive role in diets and rituals. Images | Gary Todd (Flickr), Enhin Akyurt (Unsplash) and Gerrie van der Walt (Unsplash) In Xataka | The Wari … Read more

In 1792, before the telephone, a Frenchman invented the first telecommunications system in history: the optical telegraph.

We live in full Digital Ageand sometimes we make the mistake of thinking that until the end of the 20th century anything similar to the Internet was pure science fiction. But it is not true, because already in the 19th century the telegraph began to allow us to disseminate information in real time, which has earned Morse’s invention the nickname of the Victorian Internet. optical telegraph. But before Morse invented the telegraph in 1832, there were other attempts to make information travel long distances almost in real time. One of them saw the light in 1792 at the hands of the French inventor Claude Chappe. It is about the optical telegrapha tower with two mobile arms that changed position depending on what was wanted to be communicated, and which today is considered the first practical telecommunications system. The origins. This type of communication medium was first devised in 1684 by the British scholar Robert Hooke, although he never put his theory into practice. In 1767 Sir Richard Lovell Edgeworth proposed a first design optical telegraph to transmit the results of a race, but it was not until Chappe developed his that they began to become popular. Claude Chappe and his brothers developed their communication system in 1792, and it was so successful in France that the country created a network of 556 stations that communicated an area of ​​4,800 kilometers. The system was promoted for commercial use, but Napoleon Bonaparte liked the idea and decided to use it to coordinate his troops over long distances. How it worked. The system was made up of a mast from which two mobile arms came out. At two meters long each, the arms were so large that they could be seen from great distances, and only two levers were needed to make them move. As we see in the image, the position of the arms would determine the number or letter that was wanted to be transmitted. The milestone. The first message with the French optical telegraph network was transmitted from Lille to Paris in 1794, and 22 towers were used to carry it across 230 kilometers. It was used for national communications until the 1850s, and the model was modified and used in other countries such as Sweden, Hungary, the United Kingdom, Germany and the Spain of Charles IV. became famous. In France it enjoyed great popularity, and reached be described in works as important as “The Count of Monte Cristo” by Alexandre Dumas in 1844. But the same desire to quickly and effectively develop communications that drove and led Chappe’s invention to success also ended up being his undoing. In 1846 and after several failed attempts, Samuel Morse finally managed to convince France to replace it with his new electric telegraph, which could be used at night and in poor visibility. And it ended up prevailing despite the fact that many experts of the time predicted its failure due to the ease with which its lines could be cut, although that is another story. Images | Wikimedia (1, 2, 3 and 4)

China dominates technological industries invented by the West

iRobot, pioneer of domestic robotics and creator of the Roomba, has gone bankrupt and ends up in the hands of Piceaa Chinese manufacturer. It is not an isolated case but rather the symbol of a devastating trend in which Western companies develop technologies for decades and China ends up appropriating entire industries. iRobot was founded in 1990 by three MIT researchers. It launched the first Roomba in 2002 and sold 50 million units. For two decades it dominated the robot vacuum cleaner market. In 2021 it was worth $3.5 billion. Today it is worth 140 million25 times less. Picea cancels its 264 million debt and keeps everything. Why is it important. It’s not just about vacuum cleaners. Chinese manufacturers – Roborock, Ecovacs, Dreame, Xiaomi – already control almost 80% of the global robot vacuum cleaner market. With Picea purchasing iRobot, that figure is close to 95%. China not only manufactures cheaper: it now owns Western innovation that it previously only copied. The pattern repeats: Volvo has been Chinese since 2010. Motorola too. Segway, the scooter that was going to revolutionize urban mobility, ended up in the hands of Ninebot. Lenovo bought IBM PC. Haier took over GE Appliances. Geely owns Lotus. Western brands survive, but only as shells with Asian engineering inside. Between the lines. Europe blocked Amazon’s purchase of iRobot in 2024 for fear that it would dominate the smart home. The result: the company was not independent, but ended up owned by its own Chinese manufacturer and creditor. European “protection of competition” resulted in iRobot falling into the hands of its foreign rivals. iRobot outsourced its production to Vietnam to avoid Chinese tariffs, but Trump’s 46% tariffs on Vietnam cost it an extra $23 million in 2025. Meanwhile, Picea was simultaneously its manufacturer, its major creditor, and its indirect competitor. It didn’t even take a hostile takeover: just financial patience. He waited for iRobot will drown in debt and collected the remains. The invisible cost of innovation. iRobot invested decades in R&D: military robotics, space robotics, domestic autonomous navigation… That research is expensive, slow and risky. Chinese manufacturers have not had to pay that cost. They just had to wait for the technology to mature, copy what worked, and improve execution. The asymmetry is total. The West imposes antitrust restrictions on itself that slow domestic consolidations while Chinese companies operate with extensive state support, protected access to a domestic market of 1.4 billion consumers and regulatory scrutiny that cannot even be compared. Europe has recently blocked other similar operations, such as that of Adobe and Figma either that of Broadcom and Qualcomm. Yes, but. It is not about approving any acquisition without scrutiny, but about recognizing that blocking the purchase of Amazon has led to an objectively worse result: pioneering American technology that ends up in Chinese property. If you are truly concerned about Chinese companies dominating strategic sectors, this was a blunder with predictable consequences. Western governments constantly talk about technological sovereignty and their willingness not to depend on China. But concrete actions are producing the opposite effect. Ultimately, the only thing the West loses is not its industry, it is ownership of its technological innovation. In Xataka | The largest food chain in the world is Chinese, surpasses McDonald’s and is unknown in Europe: Mixue Featured image | Onur Binay

iRobot invented and dominated the robot vacuum industry. Now it’s bankrupt

The company that created the Roomba robot vacuum cleaners, iRobot, has declared bankruptcy in the United States. The future of its products seems safe, but only after a move in which the winner is the Chinese technological steamroller. what has happened. The company already r in March, and a potential bankruptcy seemed imminent. The financial results The third quarter certainly didn’t help. This Sunday, those responsible requested entry into the so-called “Chapter 11”, a technical bankruptcy that companies in trouble request. The objective of this process is for a company to reorganize its properties and debts to continue operating instead of liquidating all its assets. Disastrous results. iRobot generated nearly 682 million in revenue in 2024, but its benefits have been fading, mainly due to competition with Chinese manufacturers such as Ecovacas. Although iRobot continues to be a protagonist in markets such as the US and Japan, this competition has forced it to lower prices and see its profit margins reduced. The tariffs. Another cause of the fall according to the documents of that bankruptcy application has been the tariffs. Especially those that apply to imports from Vietnam, where iRobot manufactures its robot vacuum cleaners for the United States, and which are 46%, a figure that is hardly sustainable for the manufacturer. That tax increased costs by $23 million in 2025 and made it more difficult to establish future plans. Amazon has gotten away with a good. amazon announced the purchase of iRobot for 1.7 billion dollars – later the figure was adjusted to 1.4 billion. The operation finally was canceled because as the companies expressed “there was no path to regulatory approval for that agreement.” When that agreement fell apart, iRobot began accumulating debts that Picea, the manufacturer of the Roomba, assumed. iRobot will pass into Chinese hands. The plan to get out of iRobot’s technical bankruptcy consists of something very simple but equally terrible for its creators. Picea will end up taking over 100% of iRobot’s assets and will cancel the $190 million of accumulated debts, in addition to the $74 million of debts that iRobot also owed to Picea under the manufacturing agreement that both had. Users can rest assured. According to iRobot, this process will allow there to be no impact on the functionality and support of its products and applications, its customer programs, its partner relationships or its supply chain. This means that current Roomba users will continue to be able to enjoy them with (theoretically) the same level of support as before. Not only that: Picea will theoretically continue to develop and market new models going forward. In four years they are worth 25 times less. In 2021, iRobot had a valuation of $3.56 billion. The pandemic boosted demand and significantly encouraged sales. Four years later data compiled by LSEG and cited in Reuters They indicate that its value is 140 million dollars, 25 times less than then. Pioneers devastated by the Chinese steamroller. iRobot was created in 1990 by three robotics experts from MIT. Although they initially focused on defense and space projects, in 2002 they launched the first robotic vacuum cleaner Roomba. The product was an absolute success, and today it continues to be the dominant brand in the United States (42% share) and especially in Japan (65%). China takes over the market. In recent years, Chinese manufacturers have managed to innovate faster and end up outselling iRobot models. Roborock, Ecovacs, Dreame and Xiaomi have already managed to outsell iRobot in the first quarter of 2025, and with the current agreement – ​​Picea, a Chinese manufacturer, will be behind the Roomba – China’s effective market share will be almost absolute in this industry. A clean and silent conquest. In Xataka | “Humanoid robberies are a fantasy”: iRobot co-founder believes there is a robotics bubble

There are a lot of people going to libraries to look for books that don’t exist: an AI invented them

Junk content made with AI is sneaking into every corner of the internet: it is ruining the authenticity of Etsythe Wikipediait confuses us search for an apartment in Idealista and of course plague social networks. He ‘slop’ of AI is reaching the real world, specifically libraries. What is happening. They tell it inScientific American. There are people going to libraries and archives in search of books or scientific articles that do not appear anywhere for one reason: they do not exist. International Red Cross has alerted to the situation and blames AI tools such as Gemini, ChatGPT or Copilot. They assure that “These systems do not conduct research, verify sources or collate information. They generate new content based on statistical patterns and, therefore, may produce invented results.” In Xataka He "AI slop" turned into art. A Chinese creator is copying the absurd aesthetics of generative AI, and it’s hilarious Fed up librarians. The research director of the Virginia library estimates that at least 15% of the queries they receive through mail are about documents and works generated by ChatGPT and similar tools. “For our staff, it is much more difficult to prove that there is no single record,” he says. A Bluesky user recounts a similar experience when a student asked him to find a series of references. After searching for a while without success, he asked the student where he got the list from and he confessed that it came from Google’s AI summaries. Made-up dating isn’t something that started happening the day before yesterday,In 2023 there were already discussions about it. Seattle University found that it is often very difficult to verify these invented quotes. The reason is that AI usually gives titles of magazines or books that exist, but what does not exist is the chapter or issue where the information is found. What it does is mix information to make it seem convincing, when in reality it is a dead end. AI and books. Invented references are not the only problem, there are librarians who also They criticize books created entirely with AI for being “incredibly bad” and we have recently learned of the case of South Korea and the resounding failure of its AI school book program. On the other hand we have the copyright problem. As with works of art, books too have been used to train AI without compensating their authors. A group of authors sued Anthropicfor this reason, but The judge ruled in favor of the company. {“videoId”:”x8jpy2b”,”autoplay”:false,”title”:”What’s BEHIND AIs like CHATGPT, DALL-E or MIDJOURNEY? | ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE”, “tag”:”Webedia-prod”, “duration”:”1173″} Papers on AI, made with AI. In an article by Futurism They said that a consequence of the AI ​​slop is that the papers that investigate AI themselves are made with AI. It is estimated that the number of papers on AI has doubled in recent years and journals such as NeurIPS have had to ask doctoral students to help them review them. There is a specific case of a researcher named Kevin Zhu who has participated in more than 100 papers in one year, an exorbitant figure for experts. To no one’s surprise, many of these papers are a real disaster full of made up quotes, blatant errors and sometimes hidden text to manipulate the review systems themselves. hallucinations. That AI invents things is quite common, they are the In AI jargon it is known as hallucinations and one of the weak points of language models; The advances are enormous, but the reality is that We still can’t trust AI and it is necessary to verify the information. Hallucinations are often the reason why those who use AI in their jobs are caught, such as the consulting firm Deloitte, which delivered a report to the Australian government that contained references to completely fabricated reports. Image | Cottonbro studio, Pexels In Xataka | The birth of an anti-reading movement: more and more people admit to using AI to summarize books (function() { window._JS_MODULES = window._JS_MODULES || {}; var headElement = document.getElementsByTagName(‘head’)(0); if (_JS_MODULES.instagram) { var instagramScript = document.createElement(‘script’); instagramScript.src=”https://platform.instagram.com/en_US/embeds.js”; instagramScript.async = true; instagramScript.defer = true; headElement.appendChild(instagramScript); – The news There are a lot of people going to libraries to look for books that don’t exist: an AI invented them was originally published in Xataka by Amparo Babiloni .

“someone invented the plow and we all got rich”

The concept of “bubble” usually makes the heartbeat of those who hear it accelerate, especially if they are an investor, because it is associated with large losses and financial crises. However, Jeff Bezos proposes seeing it from another angle: if the bubble It is “industrial, they are not bad,” said the millionaire. According to Bezos, it will be a source of revolutionary advances that change humanity forever and become the prelude to something much greater and lasting. However, the millionaire warns of a huge real risk for big tech: “When the dust settles and we see who the winners are, society will benefit from those inventions.” Bubbles that leave a legacy. Within the framework of the Italian Tech Week 2025 that has been celebrated In Turin, Bezos clearly defined the situation in which the development of AI finds itself: “There is a bubble, but it is a kind of industrial bubble.” The millionaire assured that investors are so excited about this new technology that it is difficult for them to differentiate the brilliant ideas of those that are not. But this noise and chaos serve to eliminate what is less solid and preserve what has true potential. To give more context to your situation analysisBezos pulled from the newspaper library: “If we go back to the 1990s, when there was a biotech bubble, there were a lot of emerging pharmaceutical companies that were designing drugs and using new techniques, the world got very excited. The investment world got very excited. As a group, everyone lost money. But we got a couple of drugs that saved our lives. We still use those drugs today,” highlighted the founder of Amazon. AI is like a plow. The millionaire did not stop at technicalities, but rather brought the idea down to solid ground using a simple and powerful image. He compared artificial intelligence with the invention of the plow: “10,000 years ago, or whenever, someone invented the plow and we all became richer. And that’s what’s happening,” said the millionaire. This metaphor helps to understand that, in a phase of massive experimentation and risks, advances emerge that radically modify society. Bezos thus points out that AI is not just a business for a fewbut a historical leap comparable to those great inventions from the past. “We build tools and they increase, in terms of the entire civilization, our abundance,” says Bezos. Golden age for technology. The founder of Amazon offers an optimistic vision about the moment that technology is experiencing today. “We have the privilege of living in a time in which multiple golden ages are developing. So you have…Space travel is in the middle of a golden age. AI is living in a golden age. Robotics in the middle of a golden age,” listed an enthusiastic Bezos. Bezos imagines a future where millions of people they will live in space and robots will make regular trips to the Moon: “By 2045 million people will be living in space and there will be robots traveling to and from the Moon.” These space dreams are linked to the technology that is developing nowwith AI as a key piece to develop off-planet infrastructure and accelerate innovation. These visions complement the idea that the AI ​​”industrial bubble”, which today seems a crazy raceis actually the process of building technological foundations that will give new meaning to human life in the coming years. In Xataka | AI data centers are an energy hole. Jeff Bezos’ solution: build them in space Image | Flickr (iafastro)

An educational plan asked to transform teaching with AI. The problem is that it brought a dozen invented sources

The story has some irony: a report of more than 400 pages about education, which took a year and a half to be written in a province of Canada, has been uncovered with a crack difficult to repair. According to CBC Newsthe document contains a variety of false sources, from alleged academic articles to a film that never existed. The contradiction is striking: a text designed to guide schools and universities in times of AI, indicated precisely for an error that reminds of the “hallucinations” of the generative models themselves. What has happened exactly. The document in question is titled ‘A VISION FOR THE FUTURE: TRANS Transforming and Modernizing Education‘. It was presented at the end of August as a ten -year roadmap to transform public and university education into Terranova and Labrador. Its launch was accompanied by great expectations: to serve as a guide for the future of the education system in a province that seeks to adapt to the digital age and the challenges of artificial intelligence. What was not expected is that, after its publication, it would be discovered that at least fifteen of its bibliographic references do not exist. We can find titles impossible to locate in academic databases and that, in some cases, seem copied to fictional examples used in style guides. This finding opened an immediate debate about the reliability of the report and on the supervision of the process that led to its writing. Official reactions contained. The Department of Education recognized the existence of a small number of possible errors in the appointments and assured that they will be corrected in the online version. One of the co -author, Karen Goodnough, just pointed out in an email to the aforementioned medium that “references are being investigated and reviewed, without giving interviews with local media. Today, however, access to the report itself has been complicated: the original link in which it was published He no longer shows it and returns an error 404. Only remains visible in a filed copy. Invented appointments. Among the most striking examples is the mention of an alleged 2008 film produced by the National Film Board, entitled ‘Schoolyard Games’. The agency itself confirmed that this work never existed. The reference, however, appears in the report with all the details of a real bibliographic record, as if it were a verifiable source. The track led to discover something even more disturbing: The appointment matches word by word with an entry included in a university style guide used as a model to write bibliographies. That manual explicitly warns that many of its references are fictitious and are designed only as examples. Despite this, some ended up integrated in the final document as if they were authentic. It is striking because the document not only speaks of AI, but also reserves a specific chapter: use it to customize the teaching, support teachers and simplify administrative processes, while driving competencies in AI, responsible practices and protection of privacy. In its “Calls to Transformion” it proposes to modernize the school system and prepare students for a digital environment where these technologies will be part of the day to day. Was the generative used? The finding of false quotes opened another inevitable question: to what extent did artificial intelligence intervene in the preparation of the report? According to CBC News, some teachers fear that these references have been created with a language model, since these types of systems usually generate plausible titles that do not actually exist, but for now there are no conclusive evidence. Images | Steven Binotto | Screen capture In Xataka | Jensen Huang, Bill Gates and other CEO are clear: the AI ​​has opened the door to the three -day work week

Radiohead has invented a system to hinder entrances. At the expense of buying them is as uncomfortable as ever

Today the tickets of the Radiohead concerts In Madrid: on November 4 to 8 they will perform at the Movistar Arena, on their return to the stage after an absence of seven years. It is an event: the British group will only play in five European cities, adding a total of 20 concerts. But if these shows are attracted for something for something, apart from the desired of their return, it is because of their way of raising the events, distancing themselves from the customs that the live presentations of the first -line artists have plague for a few years. No resale. The first of these novelties is that the ads are for two months. No summer of 2026, they quote us by November 2025, in what is the first of the challenges to the rhythms of the industry it raises Radiohead. The second is a system that tries to prevent mass purchase to resale with inflated pricesthat Companies such as Ticketmaster allow with their mass purchase system. To do this, the group has implemented a previous registration system with identity verification, where those interested in the entries must fill in a form with their data. The system also asks which city can attend, suggesting that they will have more chances of obtaining code who choose the city closest to its residence. The limitations. And here the complications begin (beyond that, as Eldiario.es saidoften the user city automatic detection system does not work). After registration, users received a code by mail, indispensable to access the purchase, and limited to a city already up to four tickets per night. Radiohead reserves the right to cancel multiple purchases for different nights. Obtaining the code does not ensure the entrance to the concert, only access today to official sale. The problems. And here a certain chaos has begun, which is precisely what Radiohead wanted to avoid with the system. Output, the group advised the use of different devices so as not to be detected as bots, and the fact that each city managed the sale with a different platform (Ticketmaster, Axs, CTS Eventim, and in Spain inputs.com) already promised some disruptions when the moment of truth came. The complaints began before today: many potential spectators had not received their ticket for mail, since in many cases they were raffled. Other disruptions. A rapid survey of the general sensation In social networks It allows us to detect a few common complaints. For a start, Tickets.com has fallen into some areas For a good part of the morning, with what that implies when losing positions in the tail. On the other hand, the platform uses its waiting room system, which had not previously been explained to buyers, in the same way that the code had to be introduced into a generic window of “discount code”. That is, a specific platform for the peculiar sales system has not been created, and that has generated certain problems when trying to adapt it to an already created platform. Objective completed. In general, spectators have complained about the usability and accessibility of the process, with continuous queues and waiting, expulsions of buyers from the system and other experiences that will bring Vietnam memories to whom they have tried to buy tickets For some recent massive concert through Ticketmaster. But the primary intention of Radiohead (and more knowing how expected these concerts) was to put a brake or, at least, impediments to the resale. Buying Radiohead tickets has been, apparently, as uncomfortable as ever, no matter how much the resellers (which will be: as simple as putting according to different partners buying four tickets each with different identities) have been partially stopped. In the end, how to treat its fans with dignity remains the eternal subject pending of all the large groups, indies or not. Header | Nicolas Lœuillet in Flickr In Xataka | The problem of concerts in Spain is not the lack of public, it is the distribution of money. And Wegow is the best example

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.