surrendering Archives

Meta was building its AI chips to not be dependent on NVIDIA. Has ended up surrendering to the evidence

March 3, 2026 by usatoday24

Meta faces a crucial year. While its competitors were laying the foundations for AI, Meta was burning money in the metaverse. That, along with a totally different approach to what Google or OpenAI were doing with AI, caused Zuckerberg’s company to pass a few years in the gutter. After reorganizing the house and sign the AI A-TeamMeta was preparing so much a great model as new own chips for training. The thing… hasn’t turned out as expected. MTIA. Within the different Meta teams focused on artificial intelligence, there is one known as MTIA. It comes from ‘Meta Training and Inference Accelerator’ and its objective was research and design own chips training for artificial intelligence. Having your own chip makes all the sense in the world, since it is designed based on the needs you have. They have another advantage: you are not dependent on anyone else. If NVIDIA doesn’t have enough chips, it doesn’t matter because you have yours and can continue scaling data center systems (and those of Meta are immense) to continue the training and inference tasks. Meta was not going to be in charge of manufacturing, something that the highly reputable TSMCbut the program got off to a bad start. This is very difficult. Reuters He already mentioned it last year. After testing his first in-house developed training chip, Meta realized that things were not going well. It was underperforming what they expected, and it was also worse than the competition. They did not throw away the chips, but instead referred them to other systems (such as those for recommending Facebook and Instagram based on algorithms). The problem is that the performance of the training chip, the one really important for the AI career, was not enough. Strategy change. In The Information They echo a statement from Meta stating that the company remains committed “to investing in different silicon options to meet our needs, which includes the advancement of our MTIA division” and they urge us to remain attentive to news that will be shared throughout this year. However, in the same medium it is noted that Meta has greatly lowered its expectations with its chips. The idea was to have two chips. On the one hand, Iris, a single instruction training chip that is easy to design, but from which it is difficult to extract all the juice in these training tasks. artificial intelligence training. On the other hand, Olympus, a chip that would be completed towards the end of this year and that would be the central part of Meta’s training clusters. According to The Information, there were many internal doubts about the stability of Olympus, its intricate design and profitability, so they have left it in the drawer to focus on more “simpler” chips. The evidence. In the end, if you can’t beat your “enemy”, join him. The sources consulted by The Information point out that, in addition to other complications, the training software was not as stable as what alternatives such as those from NVIDIA offer. And all of this has ended up causing two multimillion-dollar agreements. In a period of just a few days, Meta signed agreements with both AMD and NVIDIA so that both can supply them with chips to train the AI. It’s a win-win for everyone because Meta receives what he needs, NVIDIA has another client on a list it dominates and AMD continues to make a name for itself in the sector thanks to agreements like this one or the one they signed last year with OpenAI. In addition, Meta secures several sources so as not to depend only on one company. In fact, it is also estimated that they have signed an agreement to rent TPU units from Google. The competition. Meta’s objective, therefore, is to diversify its portfolio of AI chip suppliers as much as possible while continuing to investigate its own chips of which, supposedly, we will learn details later. They may continue investigating Olympus or a variant or decide on another approach. Because what is clear is that they must develop something ‘own’. NVIDIA and AMD are suppliers, not competitors as such. The real competition is OpenAI, X and Google, and the last two have their factories at full capacity. Google with its TPUsprocessors designed exclusively for AI, and xAI with its own chips that they abandoned and picked up more recently. Objective: dethrone NVIDIA. And all this occurs in a world in which everyone is ‘friends’, but enemies at the same time. I already say that NVIDIA is a hardware supplier, but they practically control the AI computing market and are moving both in hardware and software. It is logical that other companies are investigating alternatives to boost their own AI. Added to the list is an Amazon that is also manufacturing some chips called Trainium3 UltraServer and OpenAI with its agreement with Broadcom to manufacture chips. It is, as I say, a curious scenario: everyone needs each other, and there is the “circular economy” of AI, but at the same time everyone wants to be independent. The problem is that NVIDIA has a huge advantage in this and has both the technology and the contracts with memory companies… and the contacts with which it ends up manufacturing the best chips: TSMC. In Xataka | Trump ordered the Pentagon to stop using Claude for being a “Woke AI.” Right after he bombed Iran using Claude

is that we are surrendering to it

February 25, 2026 by usatoday24

As artificial intelligence becomes integrated into our lives, there is one question that is becoming more relevant. Is AI making us dumb? Maybe stupid is not the right word, but rather lazy, or at least that is the direction in which it points a recent study from the University of Pennsylvania. Cognitive surrender. It is what they have called the phenomenon that arises when we use AI “with minimal scrutiny, overriding intuition and deliberation.” The researchers carried out three experiments in which the participants had to answer cognitive reflection tests, in which the intuitive answer tends to be wrong and the deliberate one is correct (trick questions, wow). One group could only use their brains and the other had access to ChatGPT, although it was rigged to fail on purpose half of the time. The result was that when the AI gave an incorrect answer, people copied it 80% of the time. And what’s worse: the security of the participants who had access to the AI was superior despite accumulating incorrect answers. In other words, the participants endorsed the great confidence with which the AI formulated its answers and stopped checking whether they were correct. A new system . The study takes as its starting point the system 1 and system 2 theory by Daniel Kahnemanin which system 1 is fast thinking or intuition and system 2 is slow thinking or deliberation. The problem with this theory, especially at the current time, is that it ignores the fact that we are increasingly delegating the cognitive process to generative AI. Therefore, the researchers propose adding a third system, which they have called “artificial cognition” and which refers to the thinking or reasoning that occurs outside our mind, that is, in AI. Give up or delegate. The study makes a distinction between cognitive surrender and cognitive download, that is, simply accepting what AI tells us is not the same as using it as a help tool. The first thing would be to use system 3 with a little of system 1 (intuition), while its use as a tool also implies the use of system 2 (deliberation or reasoning). Using AI to delegate certain tasks is comparable to using a calculator or searching for something on Google. In the experiment, 73% accepted the wrong answers (gave up) and 17% corrected her (delegated to her, but without blindly accepting what she said). Researchers warn that cognitive surrender can erode critical thinking and cause us to lose the habit of distrusting and checking things for ourselves. Cognitive debt. In June 2025 it went viral an MIT study called “Your Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulating Cognitive Debt by Using an AI Assistant When Writing an Essay.” In the experiment, they monitored the participants using encephalography while they performed the task. The results were that the group that used ChatGPT gave the worst results in brain activity and became lazier as the test progressed. AI doesn’t make us stupid. Over the years there have emerged many studies who sought to verify if the technology is diminishing our capabilitiesbut there are also others who they point to the complete opposite. Going back to the MIT study, it makes sense that there would be less brain activity if we are using a supportive tool (and one as powerful as AI). There will also be less activity if we use a calculator than if we do the operations by hand, but it does not necessarily mean that we are worse at mathematics. Of course, if we need the calculator to add 2+2, we have a problem there. The key is not whether using AI makes us stupid, but whether how we use itif we surrender to it or if we delegate to it. Image | Andrea Piacquadio, Pexels In Xataka | The US is obsessed with achieving General Artificial Intelligence before China. China couldn’t care less

There was a time when Japan was the king of TVs. All its giants have ended up surrendering to the evidence

February 24, 2026 by usatoday24

Not so many years ago, talking about Japanese televisions was talking about the kings of the market. Not so much for volume but for quality. The Sony Trinitron were (and still are) to play retro video games) legendary, but there were the technologies of Sharp, Toshiba or the plasma from Panasonic. However, first South Korea and now China have run over Japanese brands. And Panasonic is the latest “victim.” And it may be for the best. The Panasonic case. Bluntly: Panasonic, which was once on the podium of the great Japanese manufacturers, has just announce that the Chinese company skyworth From now on, it will be in charge of producing and selling its televisions. At the catalog presentation event for this year, representatives of the Japanese brand they commented that the new partner “will lead sales, marketing and logistics while Panasonic provides expertise and quality assurance.” Speaking to FlatpanelsHD, Panasonic said Skyworth will take care of everything, but the resulting product will still be one that will have the “Panasonic” name. Turn towards China. The company had been outsourcing the production and functions of its models for years. mid-range and entrybut now that loss of identity is complete. With the move, the firm hopes to once again become one of the largest in both Europe and the United States, and the curious thing is that this announcement comes just a few weeks after Sony will outsource the production of its televisions to TCL. It is a symbolic turn because the Japan that previously led the technological conversation was gradually eclipsed by South Korea, Taiwan and, now, China. Both TCL and Skyworth are Chinese companies and, although TCL is much better known, Skyworth is not exactly small. Headquartered in Shenzhen, it has intermittently strained in the conversation of the main television manufacturers Android TV. It makes… sense. In statements to FlatpanelsHD, both companies will jointly develop the high-end OLED TVsand the movement has a very clear reading: it is a win-win for both companies, but as in the case of Sony-TCL, one wins -much- more than the other. Chinese companies have made a very strong investment in recent years in plants capable of producing an enormous quantity of large-inch panels. Televisions are manufactured from what is known as “mother glass”plates that, the larger the size, the more derived large-inch televisions will be produced. And if more televisions can be produced at a time, they can be sold at a lower price. TCL has state-of-the-art factories focused on that large-inch production, which helps explain why they sell 65- and 75-inch models at ridiculous prices. Therefore, with these associations, the Japanese hope that the muscle of the Chinese will help them achieve greater penetration. But, of course, it is undeniable that the names ‘Sony Bravia’ and ‘Panasonic’ are much more powerful than those of any Chinese brand, and now it is TCL and Skyworth that can exploit it in the market. Tears in the rain. In the end, as they say, of those muds, these muds. Panasonic, which was once one of the spearheads in terms of television technology thanks to plasma, had not made much of a splash for years in a conversation dominated by LG, Samsung and, by leaps and bounds, the Chinese. They were, along with Sony, the stronghold of a Japanese industry that had already seen how giants like Sharp, Pioneer or Toshiba they stayed in the gutter to be, in some cases, rescued by… Chinese companies (Toshiba by Hisense) or Taiwanese (Sharp by Foxconn). As they say, ‘mistakes were made’ and Panasonic held on for too many years to a plasma technology which was impressive, but also very expensive to produce and a huge ship that could not correct course when better LCD and OLED panels began to come out. As we say, we have to wait to see what this translates into in terms of market share, but in Japan it is a blow. Only with the joint venture of Sony and TCL, esteem that 50% of the Japanese market will be controlled by Chinese capital. The last pride they could hold on to was Panasonic. In Xataka |

Log In

Sign In

Forgot password?

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections