Star

OpenAI had to choose between being the star app of the US army and its users. And the users have chosen for it

by

Last Saturday there were 295% more uninstallations of the ChatGPT mobile app in the United States. Many users felt terrible that OpenAI reached a theoretically unethical agreement with the US Department of Defense to replace Anthropic, and they have punished it with a “Cancel ChatGPT” movement on social networks which has also had an impact on those uninstallations. what has happened. The consulting firm Sensor Tower, which monitors the status of mobile application stores, has indicated that the ChatGPT uninstall rate has increased by 295% on Saturday, February 28 compared to the previous day. Normally, the uninstall rate is around 9% from one day to the next, but that day it was clear that many users decided to get rid of the app at the same time. The reason is obvious. The Pentagon vs. Anthropic. The pentagon it had been months working with Claude, Anthropic’s AI, which was already used on classified documents. Anthropic had made it a condition not to use its AI for mass espionage and the development of autonomous weapons, but the Department of Defense (DoD, which many now call the “War Department”) wanted Anthropic remove those limitations. Anthropic refusedand that’s where OpenAI comes in. and opportunistic. Sam Altman first praised Anthropic’s stance. A few hours later he announced that they had reached an agreement with the DoD to replace Claude with ChatGPT. This has been widely criticized for OpenAI’s lack of ethics and opportunistic attitude, and led to a “ChatGPT cancellation” movement which has had an immediate impact on the downloads and uninstallations of this chatbot. Altman wants to clear things up. He OpenAI announcement It was unclear whether OpenAI actually imposed the same limits that Anthropic had imposed, but Altman soon announced that had added amendments to the agreement to avoid any confusion. Apparently they have been added protections against mass surveillancebut nothing is mentioned about the development of lethal autonomous weapons. Punishment for OpenAI. Not only has it been noticeably uninstalled, but in the opinions of the ChatGPT app many users have given a single star out of five in a very high proportion: those bad opinions grew by 775% on Saturday and then by 100% on Sunday according to Sensor Tower. Five-star reviews fell by 50%. Claude has overtaken ChatGPT in downloads as a result of the latest events with the Pentagon. Source: Appfigures. And Claude already surpasses it in downloads. Another consultancy that monitors the download market, appfiguresindicated that on Saturday Claude’s downloads surpassed those of ChatGPT in the US for the first time. In fact, Claude has become the most downloaded app in at least six countries outside the US: Belgium, Canada, Germany, Luxembourg, Norway and Switzerland. Streisand Effect. We are facing another case of Streisand effect: trying to censor certain information or a certain company ends up being counterproductive. The Pentagon tried to make Anthropic the bad guy, but what has happened is that the company is now seen as the great defender of ethics and “AI alignment.” This has made people perceive it as a more morally respectable option than ChatGPT. But Anthropic has problems. According to Reuters Several US government departments and agencies have made the switch to OpenAI and have begun to stop using Anthropic models for their work. That is already a problem for Anthropicbut even more so is the fact that their recent investment round, in which they raised 60,000 million dollars, could be in danger. If the DoD decides to label Anthropic a “supply chain risk,” its contracts and agreements with dozens of companies would be at risk, and its own future as a company would be at risk. It would be an extraordinary measure and it seems unlikely that the US would go to that point, but nothing is certain today. Image | Village Global In Xataka | The war between Anthropic and the Pentagon points to something terrifying: a new “Oppenheimer Moment”

A star 1,540 times larger than the Sun is mutating in real time and it is something that baffles astronomers

by

The universe is rarely in a hurry, since stellar processes usually be measured in millions or billions of yearsso witnessing the metamorphosis of a great star in the span of a single human life is practically unheard of. And this is precisely what is happening with WOH G64a true cosmic monster located in the Large Magellanic Cloudabout 163,000 light years from Earth. Big changes. Astronomers have been analyzing this astronomical giant for years, and now the red supergiant is changing radically in front of our telescopes as it heats up rapidly and opens a heated scientific debate. The question that the community is asking itself right now is whether we are facing the transformation towards a very rare yellow hypergiant or if it is simply the fierce interaction of a binary system before collapsing. What we knew. Discovered in the 1970s, WOH G64 has long held the title of one of the largest stars known. The data we know about it is no wonder, since it has a radius 1,540 times greater than that of our Sun, an approximate mass of 28 solar masses and shines 282,000 times brighter than our star. Despite its enormous size, it is an extremely young star, since it is barely 5 million years old. And if we put it into context, in the ruthless world of astrophysics, the largest stars “live fast and die young”, devouring the fuel inside them at great speed. The script twist. Until recently, everything fit the classic profile of an extreme red supergiant, placing its temperature at 3,400 ± 25 degrees Kelvin. But a turning point came in the last decade after the data published in Nature Asia which pointed out that the star suffered a mysterious dimming in 2011, followed by a sudden warming of more than 1,000 ºC and significant chemical alterations in the atmosphere. Now, a new study analyzes the photometry and optical spectroscopy accumulated over more than thirty years of this star. And the conclusion they have reached is that between 2013 and 2014, WOH G64 began to transition from red supergiant to yellow hypergiant. What are they? Yellow hypergiants are an exceptionally rare transition phase of which we barely have data and, above all, it is very ephemeral. In this case, the dramatic thermal evolution could be due to the star having partially ejected its outer envelope or to its stellar companion aggressively stripping away material. The debate is served. As is often the case on the frontier of astrophysics, not everyone agrees that the transition is complete. Rigorous science requires fact-checking constant, and recent research adds nuance to this story. This same year, one study pointed out because the star continues to maintain its classic red supergiant characteristics, questioning whether it has become a rare yellow hypergiant. The most logical explanation they see in this case is that the interaction with its companion star is causing these large temperature changes. This generates a great debate, since it goes completely against the other part of astrophysics that is convinced that we are facing a great twist in the script. A supernova. The big question that everyone is asking is how this titan will end, and some voices suggest that we are seeing the prelude to an imminent supernova. However, in astronomical terms, “imminent” is an elastic concept, since core collapse could occur in a time frame ranging from 100 to a few thousand years. And even if it collapses, even a spectacular explosion is not guaranteed. Although there is also the possibility that it fails in its attempt to explode and, instead, collapses directly in on itself, silently forming a black hole. Likewise, what happens seems to be something that our next generations will see. Images | European Southern Observatory In Xataka | We have analyzed the universe for 20 years looking for ET and all we have are 100 signals that China is now investigating

This Star Trek movie was canceled in 1977 because science fiction had no future. Two weeks later Star Wars premiered

by

In the mid-1970s, ‘Star Trek‘ was experiencing a unique phenomenon in the entertainment industry. The original series, canceled in 1969 after three seasons of discreet audiences, had found an unexpected second life. Continuous reruns and fan enthusiasm (the first phenomenon of its kind to develop pop culture) encouraged Paramount to extend the original mythology. In 1976, a full-page advertisement appeared in ‘The New York Times’ proclaiming the imminent production of a Star Trek film: ‘Planet of the Titans’, and which aspired to take the franchise into uncharted cinematic territories. The origin. Producer Gerald Isenberg assumed executive control of the project in July 1976, intending to transform ‘Star Trek’ into a first-rate cinematic event. To direct, Paramount hired Philip Kaufman, a filmmaker whose profile was unconventional for a franchise. Kaufman would direct acclaimed works such as ‘Chosen for Glory’ and would delve into a science fiction very different from ‘Star Trek’ in the remake of ‘Invasion of the Ultracorps’ in 1978. But by 1976 he had already directed the western ‘No Law or Hope’ and the arctic adventures of ‘The White Dawn’. Chris Bryant and Allan Scott, British writers of the superb and extremely rare ‘Shadow Menace’, were chosen as scriptwriters. The conceptual basis of the project was nourished by ambitious sources: Kaufman and Isenberg structured the narrative inspired by the novel ‘The Last and the First Humanity’ by Olaf Stapledon, which traces human evolution over billions of years. As a scientific advisor, Paramount hired Jesco von Puttkamer, a NASA engineer. Ralph McQuarriewhose conceptual work for ‘Star Wars’ was then in full development, would do the designs. The conflicts. Creative tensions quickly emerged. Kaufman aspired to create a cinematographic work that would dialogue with ‘2001: A Space Odyssey‘ in visual and philosophical complexity. Gene Roddenberry, creator of the original series, defended its essence. Bryant and Scott they were trapped between these two incompatible visions, trying to balance the artistic ambitions of one and the fidelity of the other. The budget, initially set at three million dollars, rose to 10 million. What was it about? Captain James T. Kirk has disappeared three years ago, during a rescue mission near a black hole. The Enterprise remains operational, but Spock has returned to Vulcan. When Starfleet detects anomalous energetic emissions coming from the same black hole where Kirk was lost, Spock rejoins. They discover a planet trapped inside the black hole, the mythical home of the Titans, an ancient civilization possessing technology superior to that of humans. The planet is being inexorably sucked into the black hole. Spock locates Kirk, scarred by years of isolation and transformed by cosmic forces. The planned outcome was the most radical bet: to escape collapse, the Enterprise deliberately enters the black hole, emerging not in its time, but in our prehistory. The crew discovers that they themselves are the Titans of mythology. Kirk is Prometheus, the bringer of fire to early humanity. The script does not clarify whether the crew would finally manage to return to their time or would be trapped observing the slow development of human history that they themselves had started. Kirk is dead. But… why make a movie in which the legendary Kirk is practically absent? William Shatner’s contract with Paramount had expired, leading Bryant and Scott to develop a first draft that eliminated Kirk. After several weeks of work, the studio informed them that an agreement had been reached and that Kirk should be reinstated as the lead. This twist forced a substantial rewrite of the material. And the situation with Leonard Nimoy was even more complex: the actor withdrew from the project due to a conflict over the unauthorized use of his image as Spock in a Heineken advertisement, but an agreement was finally reached. The cancellation. Bryant and Scott submitted their first completed draft on March 1, 1977, after months of intense creative negotiations, but ultimately walked away from the project. Kaufman personally took on the rewrite of the script. His version intensified the role of Spock and developed the dynamic with a Klingon played by none other than the legendary Toshiro Mifune. Just when he was convinced he had found the definitive story, he was told that Paramount had canceled the project. This happened in May 1977, just seventeen days before the premiere of ‘Star Wars’. Kaufman would always remember the phrase that a studio executive told him as justification for the cancellation: “there is no future in science fiction.” Why was it cancelled? They converged different factors: the increase in costs, the fear that ‘Star Wars’ would saturate the science fiction market and the belief that they had distanced themselves too much from the original series. When ‘Star Wars’ grossed more than $775 million worldwide, Paramount pitched ‘Star Trek: Phase II,’ a television series planned as the flagship of a new company television network. It would also be cancelled, although one of its scripts would eventually become the basis for ‘Star Trek: The Motion Picture’, released in December 1979. The legacy. ‘‘Planet of the Titans’ was not the first failed attempt to bring ‘Star Trek’ to the cinema, but rather one more link in a chain of frustrated projects that reflected Paramount’s uncertainty about how to capitalize on the franchise: there are cases as popular as the legendary and disturbing film ‘The God Thing’, written by Roddenberry himself in 1975, or the many attempts to recruit science fiction authors to contribute ideas for films, as happened with Harlan Ellison in the late seventies. And although something remained from the film in the future after the cancellation of ‘Planet of the Titans’ (for example, the concept designs They were reused in 2017 in ‘Star Trek: Discovery’), this cursed movie is the perfect example of what ‘Star Trek’ has always been. A sign that there are more ways to do science fiction outside of spectacle pulp of Star Wars and, at the same time, the confirmation that it is very complicated to do so. In Xataka | More and more … Read more

you will never see a green star

by

There will be those who are too lazy to walk the dog at night (especially in winter) or at 6:30 in the morning, but I love finding it all asleep and being able to calmly raise my head so that, while I walk around the outskirts of my city so that my dogs can do their things, look at the sky to see what I find. One of my hobbies is, like when I was little, trying to distinguish what I find: The Polar Star, at this time of year also El Carro, the very bright Sirius with a bluish white or orange tone Aldebaranthe red Betelgeuse or the blue supergiant Rigel. Although there is light pollutionFortunately, I live near several municipalities starlight and it doesn’t take much to find authentic shows. I have seen stars of a few colors, but never green. The reality is that I look at the stars with no other instrument than my eyes and that implies only see those bright enough to emit enough light to activate the conesthe color-sensitive cells that are in the retina. But still, the stars I encounter seem white, blue, red, orange or yellow. Viewing the sky with a telescope things change and there you can see fainter stars or even go up a level and take a look (and try to interpret what space telescopes see). What is hard to see are green stars. Spoiler: it is as much a matter of the stars as it is of our eyes and their way of perceiving color. The Sun’s peak emission is green. There are several reasons why we never see it that color. A star behaves like a black bodythat is, it emits light depending on its temperature. Simply put: they emit light because they are hot. In fact, their color depends on their temperature: the coldest ones emit red light and those that are very hot glow blue. Different Planck curves for stars of classic colors: blue, yellow, red. POT However, this is a simplification: they actually emit in a wide range of colors but in different proportions in an asymmetrical bell shape (the Planck curve that you see above these lines) and it is the mixture that gives that final color. The relationship between the temperature of a star and the color where it emits the greatest amount of energy (the tip of the curve) is obtained from the Wien Displacement Law. If a star has a temperature of about 5,500K (very similar to that of the Sun), its peak emission would be precisely in that green zone. But we have never seen the sun be green. Here our eyes come into play: the color of a star is not an intrinsic property of light, but rather an interpretation of our eyes against that jumble of photons. The eyes have three types of coneseach of them sensitive to red, green or blue light respectively. That is, if an object emits or reflects red light, only the red cones would send a signal to the brain to perceive it that way. Obviously the brain can interpret more colors: the key is that these three types of cones can send the signal in different proportions and then they are mixed in the brain. Precisely what happens with the Sun, which although it emits the greatest amount of light in blue and green, simultaneously emits so much red and blue light that the combination ends up averaging in the brain as white (another thing is that is classified like a yellow dwarf star. Due to the physics of black bodies, there is no stellar temperature that excites only the green cones of the eye without also activating the red and blue cones. And since cameras imitate the vision of the eyes, the stars do not appear green in the photos either. Yes, but. After all this explanation it turns out that there are a couple of stars that some people claim to see green, but no: in reality They are brain tricks. It is the case of Almacha star system formed by a giant, bright orange star and a triple system of three blue stars so close that from our perspective they cannot be distinguished separately, but rather blend into a point of light. Our brain tries to balance orange with its complementary color, green. The result: we can perceive it as orange. Of course, the cameras do not take issue with this biological processing error. The other is Zubeneschamalia solitary star whose color we confuse either by subjective perception or by effects of the atmosphere. That doesn’t mean there aren’t green celestial objects in the sky. There are a few nebulae with a very striking green tone thanks to the intense emission of oxygen atoms, we have also seen emerald green comets (the blame lies with diatomic carbon) or planets like Earth for obvious reasons and even Uranus because of the methane in its atmosphere and how it absorbs light. In Xataka | We thought that the red color in a galaxy told us that it was dead. There are those who believe that we are wrong In Xataka | We have been deceived by the distances of the Solar System: the closest neighbor to Neptune is Mercury Cover | Parastoo Maleki

a star that moves like it’s drunk

by

Astronomers love mysteries, and Kepler-56 has been one of the great puzzles of our galaxy for years. This red giant, located about 3,000 light years from Earth, rotates too fast and with its internal structure literally twisted. Now, we have an explanation. A star that spins wrong. To understand why Kepler-56 is so strange, just compare it with any similar star in its old age. When a star like the Sun runs out of fuel, it expands and becomes a red giant. Typically, as it increases in size, its rotation slows down, like a skater extending his arms. However, Kepler-56 does the opposite: its outer shell rotates at an absurd speed, 10 times faster than normal for a red giant of its type. And the strangest thing is that the core of the star and its outer envelope rotate with axes inclined in different directions. Something didn’t add up. Kepler-56 has two confirmed planets orbiting it (Kepler-56 by Kepler-56 c), gas giants that orbit very close to their host star. Until now, the theory trying to make sense of Kepler-56’s strange movements was that these two planets pulled on the star using tidal forces, accelerating its spin. But Takato Tokuno, a researcher at the University of Tokyo, He realized that this explanation did not hold up.. For those planets to be responsible, the tidal efficiency would have to be orders of magnitude higher than what physics dictates. Another actor was needed in this crime scene. It was bad digestion. He study led by Tokuno seems to have reconstructed what happened: the Kepler-56 system had a third planet, but the star ate it. This third planet, a hot Jupiter, orbited dangerously close to the star, closer than the two planets we see today. So much so that, when the star began to age and expand, it was absorbed. It was not a smooth process. Tokuno explains the effect with a clear analogy: like a giant meteorite hitting the Earth glancingly. The planet would absorb the energy of the impact and accelerate its rotation. As it was engulfed, the planet transferred its angular momentum to the star’s atmosphere, causing it to spin at full speed. When hit at an odd angle, the star’s outer shell ended up spinning on a different axis than its core. The planetary life cycle. According to mathematics, the engulfed planet must have had a mass between 0.5 and 2 times that of Jupiter, and a frenetic orbital period of between one and six days. Its end was not unusual for a planet. We know that stars devour planets. In fact, our own Sun is expected to engulf Mercury, Venus and probably Earth within about 5 billion years. But catching a star still digesting is extremely difficult. And that’s what we’re apparently seeing. Image | David A. Aguilar (CfA) In Xataka | What is the Fermi paradox and why the architect of the atomic bomb gave a twist to the search for extraterrestrial life

Cheese and oil have skyrocketed so much in Türkiye that travel agencies have a star destination: a Lidl in Greece

by

The cost of living has skyrocketed. Except the cocaine marketa multitude of basic products have risen in price when salaries have not grown at the same level. In Spain we have a year-on-year inflation of around 3%. In Türkiye, on the same date, it is 33%, and that is leading thousands of Turks to travel to Greece every week, and not for pleasure. But to Lidl for make the purchase. Supermarket migration. In the mid-2010s, the Greek economy was a drama. The purchasing power is collapsed and the country’s debt crisis forced many households to squeeze every euro. Neighboring countries that also used the euro were no consolation, so they looked east: to Türkiye. Within the economic context, the lira was cheap and the euro strong, so many Greeks, especially from the islands, went to Turkish bazaars and supermarkets to buy clothes, utensils and food. The ferries they were bursting. It is estimated that the cost per visit was about 120 euros and, since filling the shopping cart in Turkey was considerably cheaper, the Greeks bought large shipments of cheese, oil, meat and sausages. One of the “supermarket corridors” was Lesbos-Ayvalik, and in the middle of the decade spoke up to 100,000 visits annually. Now, the tables have turned. The tragedy of the lyre. More than two decades of controversial policiesamong other factors, have led to the collapse of the lira. The cost of imports has multiplied and the inflation rate does not reach 80% of a few years agobut it has stagnated at that more than 30% that is suffocating the population. It is something that is disproportionately affecting food, including basic necessities. Now it is the Turks who have enormous problems when buying fresh productsmeats, cheese and oil. The situation does not seem to be changing in the short term due to massive debt, default rates (with the penalty that entails) and that price increase in subsistence products. It is the “typical”: products that increase a lot and stagnant salaries, the perfect combination to ruin the purchasing power of families. To Lidl in the neighboring country. What is happening? That this dynamic of cross-border purchases has been completely reversed. If a decade ago it was the Greeks who crossed the border, now it is the Turks who, with a euro that is not so buoyant, but enough to make it worth it compared to the prices in their local markets, flock to Greece to make that weekly purchase. In a report by Bloomberg There are concrete figures that compare a Lidl in Alexandroupolis (about 40 kilometers from the Turkish border) and a Turkish Carrefour. For example, minced meat costs 9.36 euros per kilo in Greece, compared to 12.10 in Türkiye. Greek sausages cost half as much as Turkish ones, Gouda cheese costs a third and oil makes one of the biggest differences: 10 euros per liter in Greece compared to 20 in Turkey. Social networks. Social networks are a loudspeaker – let them tell it to the influencers from Australian mines-, and those who visit Greek cities to make purchases share their experience through networks such as TikTok. The word spreads and more citizens are encouraged to take the leap. For Alejandrópolis, it represents an injection of money for both food businesses and restaurants. Bloomberg details how, after a day of shopping, Turks have a drink in Greek restaurants while sharing the experience. and it esteem that there are 3,000 Turks who are making this weekly trip. travel agencies. Because if we have to define this it is as a need, yes, but also with that word: experience. Because although it may be something private for a family to do, travel agencies are organizing tours to Greek cities, with groups of supermarket tourists who do not want to visit the city, but rather the Lidl on duty. For about 50 euros, buses loads of Turkish shoppers leave on Friday afternoons and arrive in Greek cities on Saturday morning and spend three and a half hours in the supermarkets. Then they spend some free time around the citythey can go to eat and, in the afternoon, on the way home with a full cart. The biggest annoyance? Apart from having to go to another country to buy because in yours the cost of living is very expensive, of course, it is the line at border control. How long will this last? Türkiye trust to halve inflation by 2026, but it will still remain extremely high. We will see how long this situation lasts, which, from January to September of this year, has carried to the fact that 6% of the Turks who visited Greece did so only with the aim of filling the car. Images | Zoshua Colah, Aldin Nasrun In Xataka | Private labels are having an unexpected effect on the food industry: the biggest price drop since 2014

Einstein is the biggest rock star of the 20th century

by

Every now and then a news story is published where this or that scientist claims to have achieved something surprising: deny or confirm a theory put forward by Albert Einstein more than a hundred years ago. The unusual interest that the physicist arouses today is only the result of a process that already occurred while he was still alive: his status as a “star”, his status as celebrity. How is it possible that a theoretical physicist has achieved such fame and recognition? At Xataka we believe we have the answer: remove Adele and Taylor Swift because, behind Einstein’s casual hair, hides the biggest pop-rock star of the 20th century. Einstein’s story has everything to succeed, a story that could be called “the gravitational physics equation that made Spielberg cry”: that of a young Jewish man, shy, somewhat clumsy and with speech problems who fails his exams and, as he finishes his degree, cannot find a job. in yourshas to get to work in a gray patent office. That young man will take three years to revolutionize the world of physics and, by extension, the world in general. The tours Einstein spent much of the 1920s and 1930s on tour. Precisely, he was outside Germany when the Nazis took power and that, taking into account the desire they had for himsurely saved his life. He visited many places and there are hilarious anecdotes. Of course he was also in Spain. And the media and society at the time went a little crazy. Julio Camba wrote in El Sol that “the public that filled the classroom of the Faculty of Sciences. Mr. Einstein was welcomed with a great round of applause. Undoubtedly, all of us gathered there admired him a lot; but if someone asks us why we admired him, they will put us in quite a serious situation.” Cartoons like this image of Bagaria that we attach below filled the front pages of the newspapers in Madrid, Zaragoza and Barcelona. After all, he was already a Nobel Prize winner (the diamond disk of science). Thanks to that it became popular even among the popular classes, such as says historian Thomas Glickwalking down the street, a chestnut seller recognized him on the street and shouted to him “Long live the inventor of the automobile!“How long live it!” The groupies and the haters There is no rock star without groupies. That’s how it is. Fans sneaking into the singer’s house to steal a souvenir are a classic in the world of music. It also happened to Einstein. In late May or early June 1978, Michel Aron (newly named editor of New Jersey Monthly) approached a 27-year-old editor named Steven Levy and said, “I want you to find Einstein’s brain.” Rumors had been circulating for years about the brain in question. Steven Levy scoured the entire United States to find the coroner who performed the physicist’s autopsy. When he found Thomas S. Harvey He confessed that he had stolen the organ without the family’s permission and had been taking it around the United States for more than 30 years. Undoubtedly, Einstein also took the fan phenomenon to another level. Einstein some strong smear campaigns. It is logical, taking into account that among his detractors were some of the greatest experts on haterism in history. “100 scientists against Einstein“was perhaps the most aggressive campaign. But he resolved it with a phrase: “One hundred? Why so many? If I were wrong, only one would be enough…”. For the rest, the truth is that it must be recognized that he quickly became an endearing, distracted and somewhat crazy being. Einstein for a while They say that at a social gathering, Marilyn Monroe crossed paths with Albert Einstein, they started talking and, at some point, she said to him: “Professor, we should get married and have a child together. Can you imagine a baby with my beauty and intelligence?” Einstein very seriously responded: “Unfortunately I fear that the experiment will go the other way and we will end up with a son with my beauty and intelligence.” The anecdote, which is almost certainly lieshows the social and cultural stature of that Jew from Ulm called Albert Einstein. A carving that has generated countless cultural products. Some tremendously good. Become a symbol of peace, creativity and the use of science to help humanity, any excuse is good to celebrate it publicly. For our part, we just need to finish with what is perhaps the most important quote that Einstein said in his life. “Rest and be relatively good.” In Xataka | Einstein’s first violin had passed unnoticed. Until an auction house put it up for sale. In Xataka | What is a light year and why it is impossible to travel it in less than a year, according to Einstein’s relativity In Xataka | More than 100 years ago Einstein predicted gravitational lensing. Thanks to this we have discovered a “dark matter bridge” Image | Collab Media

Meta’s star AI scientist plans to leave the company, according to the FT. The new goal is eating the old goal.

by

The head of artificial intelligence at Meta, Yann LeCun, would be preparing to leave the company to found his own startup, according to inform Financial Times. The departure of the prestigious researcher, winner of the Turing Award and considered one of the fathers of modern AI, symbolizes the radical change that Mark Zuckerberg is giving to Meta’s strategy around AI. The changing of the guard. LeCun, who led the Fundamental AI Research Laboratory (FAIR) since 2013, is now in an uncomfortable position within Meta. This summer, Zuckerberg hired Alexander Wang28, to lead a new “superintelligence” team, paying $14.3 billion to take 49% of Scale AI, the data labeling startup Wang had founded. As a result of this restructuring, LeCun went from reporting to chief product officer Chris Cox to reporting to Wang, according to account Financial Times. A philosophical divorce. The tension is not only organizational, but conceptual. LeCun has long publicly defended that the language models on which Zuckerberg has focused his strategy are “useful” but will never be able to reason or plan like humans. His bet from FAIR has been different: the so-called “world models”AI systems that learn from the physical environment through videos and spatial data, not just language. A path that, according to LeCun himself, could take a decade to bear fruit. Meta’s problems with AI. Zuckerberg’s reorganization comes after several setbacks. The launch of Call 4 It has not gone as the company would have liked, falling below the most advanced proposals from OpenAI, Google and Anthropic. Additionally, Meta AI, the company’s chatbot, has also not gained traction among users. Meanwhile, Zuckerberg has hired dozens of engineers and competing researchers with pay packages of up to $100 million, creating a dedicated team called TBD Lab to accelerate the development of new versions of its language models. The cost of pivoting. The shift toward practical AI appears to have generated internal chaos. Sources cited by TechCrunch In August they revealed the frustration of new hires when facing the bureaucracy of a large company, while the previous generative AI team saw its scope reduced. In October, Meta laid off 600 people of its AI research unit to cut costs and accelerate product launches. Also in May Joelle Pineau left the companyvice president of AI research, who joined Canadian startup Cohere. What’s coming now. According to two sources Cited by the Financial Times, LeCun’s new project will focus on continuing his work on world models, and he has already started talks to raise funding. His departure, scheduled for the coming months, represents more than the departure of a brilliant scientist: it is confirmation that Meta’s old long-term focus has been relegated by the urgency of competing in the short term with more practical solutions. As Wall Street pressures Zuckerberg to justify an investment in AI that could exceed $100 billion In 2025, the company would be losing one of its most recognized brains along the way. Cover image | Goal and AFP In Xataka | AI was supposed to reduce costs and reduce staff. The Coca-Cola ad illustrates how much we were wrong

The Star Destroyer is the terror of Star Wars. But as one fan has calculated, building it in real life wouldn’t be cheap.

by

‘Star Wars’ is full of iconic ships. From the Millennium Falcon and its Kessel Corridor in just 12 parsecs to silhouettes identifiable at a glance such as the X-Wing or the TIE Fighter. We associate ‘Star Wars‘ with frenetic combats in space, but we also have iconic mastodons, authentic galactic monsters like the unmistakable Imperial Star Destroyer. Well: now we not only know how much it impresses us, but also how much it would cost us. What is a Star Destroyer. This 1.6 kilometer long, wedge-shaped beauty exhibits measurements and characteristics that make it a mini space station of considerable power. Let’s see: Approximate mass: 40 million metric tons Engines: Three KDY Destroyer-I ion engines and Cygnus Spaceworks Gemnon-4 units Maximum speed in atmosphere: 975 km/h Hyperlight Capability: Yes, with a class 2 impeller Heavy and medium turbolasers located in batteries throughout the ship Ion cannons to disable enemy systems 30 torpedo launchers or missile slots Ability to deploy 72 TIE fighters, as well as AT-AT and AT-ST ground vehicles Estimated total crew: between 37,000 and 60,000 people It functions as a small floating city, with areas for operations, daily life, maintenance and storage So the money what. Although less monumental than the Death Star, Star Destroyers require immense resources to construct. Estimates based on scientific analysis and data from the saga and collected on the website Gamestar They suggest that building, maintaining, and even disposing of when the time comes for a single Star Destroyer could cost a fortune. Used as a basis for comparison the price it costs to build a real aircraft carrier: between 13,000 and 17,000 million dollars each. And that’s just the beginning. We’re not just talking about construction itself. Resources and construction time skyrocket when considering mass production, as the Empire deploys dozens of destroyers to maintain its dominance. In addition, training and supplying personnel generate recurring costs. And maintenance, of course: refueling, repairing war damage, technological updates and replacing parts, which requires the construction of strategic space bases. We are going in parts, breaking down this authentic black hole of pasta. The initial transport. Transporting 40 million tons of construction material to space is logistically complex and expensive. With an extremely optimistic price of 10,000 euros per ton, the initial cost would be around 400 billion euros. In the long term, the cost could be reduced to about 200 euros per kilo, equivalent to about 8 billion euros. If we talk about current technologies (that is, no teleportation or similar), the realistic cost for this volume would be around 40 billion euros. What the material costs. The construction of the Star Destroyer would likely use high-strength, low-alloy steels, the cost of which is estimated at around €90 billion. More advanced systems such as propulsion, weapons and other high-performance components would require more expensive special alloys, adding at least an additional 110 billion euros. Altogether, conservative estimated costs for materials would be around €200 billion in total. To ride. The Star Destroyer is significantly more expensive to manufacture than mere materials, as labor and countless tests can cost five to fifteen times as much. The construction cost is estimated at around 2 billion euros. Furthermore, adding the costs of research, testing, infrastructure and development, especially in new energy and propulsion systems, could conservatively add another 5 billion euros to the total budget. The invoice. In short, these gentlemen will have to go and digest: the total expense to build and maintain the imperial Star Destroyer is estimated at around 15.2 billion euros, assuming transportation costs. Without including development expenses, the cost would be around 14 billion euros. But we can go up: if additional elements such as technical reserves, energy systems, lifetime maintenance and scrapping are considered, the joke can approach 40 billion euros. To put it in perspective, the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier cost around 12 billion euros, so a Star Destroyer would cost almost four thousand times that amount.​ In Xataka | Adam Driver launched a Star Wars movie project about Kylo Ren. Disney rejected it because they didn’t understand it.

First it was the automotive industry, now Europe is going to lose another of its star industries to China

by

The lights at the LyondellBasell plant in the port of Rotterdam went out for the last time on a September afternoon. The factory, which produced propylene oxide — an essential raw material for foams, mattresses and auto parts — had just been dismantled. A silent symbol of a fading era. The plant, barely 22 years old, became another victim of a storm that is hitting the European industrial heart: expensive energy, Asian competition and disinvestment. Europe, once a world chemical power, has lost its industrial pulse to China. The perfect storm. The sequence began with the war in Ukraine. The Russian gas cutoff energy prices skyrocketed in Europe and exposed a fatal dependence. “Gas costs in the Netherlands were between 15% and 66% higher than in other European countries,” economist Edse Dantuma explained to NRC. However, the decisive blow came from further east. From that same period, an avalanche of Chinese chemicals began to flood the European market. “During the pandemic, China completed all stages of its chemical value chain without us realizing it,” Manon Bloemer explained.director of the Dutch association VNCI. “Later, with domestic demand stagnant, they began to export their surpluses,” he added. Europe was paying the most expensive energy in the world and, at the same time, facing the lowest prices in history. In the UK, Ineos—Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s petrochemical giant— was forced to lay off staff due to “very cheap” imports from China, made with coal and with CO₂ emissions up to eight times higher. The same symptoms are repeated in Germany. According to ICISGerman chemical production (excluding pharmaceuticals) will fall by at least 2% this year. Economist Christiane Kellermann, from the VCI, warned that “Capacity utilization remains low, even with plants closed. More production shutdowns are coming.” The end of a European era. For decades, Europe was the world’s laboratory. The petrochemical complexes of Rotterdam, Ludwigshafen and Antwerp symbolized the industrial modernity of the continent. But now, warns the joint study by Cefic and Advancythe European sector “faces a historic turning point: structurally higher costs, regulatory overload and investment flight threaten its survival.” According to this report, Europe has lost 30% of its chemical production in the last decade and new investments have been reduced to historic lows. In Germany, Strategy&PwC estimates that chemical investments They have fallen by 90% since seven years ago and profits have been reduced by 12%. Incoming orders are at their lowest level in ten years. “Deindustrialization is no longer a risk, it is a reality,” this research warns. “Neither Europe nor Germany benefit from global growth anymore. Investment decisions are made on other continents.” China, the new epicenter. Meanwhile, the Asian giant is investing on an unprecedented scale. According to Global Datathe country will account for more than 60% of the world’s new petrochemical projects until 2030, with more than 500 plants underway. Analyst Bhargavi Gandham explains that this boom responds to “a deliberate policy of self-sufficiency, supported by cheap financing, state planning and domestic demand.” From Roland Berger point out in a recent report: “China not only produces more; it has become the global price setter in multiple value chains.” The consulting firm identifies unprecedented levels of overcapacity: with such a surplus, China could supply the entire Western market and still retain idle capacity. China’s dominance in petrochemicals reinforces its strategic influence over critical industries—from batteries to fertilizers—a lever of industrial power that Europe no longer controls. Beijing is aware of the problem. According to Bloombergthe Ministry of Industry plans to convert or close obsolete plants more than 20 years old and promote the transition towards advanced chemicals, used in semiconductors, batteries or biomedicine. AND, as detailed by Reutersthe Chinese Government itself called this October to the main producers of plastics and fibers to stop internal “destructive competition” in products such as PTA or PET. But the result, for now, is that the Chinese excess puts pressure on global prices. And Europe, caught between its energy costs and its climate goals, cannot compete. The old continent without defenses. “The system is like a Jenga tower,” Ronald van Klaveren told NRC. “Take away one piece and it holds. Take away three and it collapses.” Every closure in Europe endangers an entire ecosystem of factories connected by pipelines of steam, heat and raw materials. In Rotterdam, Chemelot or the Ruhr, the closure of a plant affects dozens of suppliers. In the industrial regions of the Rhine or Limburg, each blackout translates into hundreds of lost jobs and entire communities in decline, evoking the reconversions of the 1980s. Meanwhile, the political framework moves slowly. In the summer the European Commission presented its “Chemical Industry Action Plan“, that, according to Dutch industrialists“has good intentions but few concrete measures.” The industry is asking for three things: affordable energy, equivalent rules for imports and a competitive tax framework. In Germany, the Helaba bank warns of a “Chinese shock 2.0”: After China joined the WTO in 2001, its exports focused on toys and textiles; Today it competes in machinery, automotive and high-tech chemistry. “The result is enormous pressure on prices,” said economist Adrian Keppler. And in the UK, Ineos Acetyls director David Brooks was more direct for The Guardian: “The UK and Europe are sleepwalking towards deindustrialisation. If governments do not act now on energy, carbon and trade, we will continue to lose factories, talent and jobs.” What’s coming now? Europe wants to reinvent its chemistry, but it does not have the conditions to do so. The Cefic and Advancy report warns that 40% of European plants could close before 2040 if the transition to low-carbon materials and high-value products is not accelerated. To comply with the Green Deal, more than 2 trillion euros in investment would be needed until 2050, according to Consultancy. The problem is that no one wants to invest where energy costs more, the rules change every year and permits take months or even years. Some experts, as Alexander Baumgartner by Roland Bergerbelieve that the way out is to “abandon … Read more

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.