@juan_miqueo Cómo usáis la conexión con WhatsApp? Es para comunicación con los clientes finales o con los vuestros? Estoy investigando el API y formas de usarla para ver si encuentro algún caso de uso interesante
@xurxodev Gracias por compartir, qué bueno ver que hay challenge sobre la mejora de performance usando IA, sin duda una herramienta increíble pero sobre la que hay demasiadas expectativas
@javivelasco acabo de ver tu charla de la última jsconf de @midudev consideras que todo el código que se commitea tiene que ser revisado por el humano? Creo que hay vibecoding que no se revisa suficiente
Microservices are not a technical decision. They're an organizational one.
If you have:
- 5 developers
- 1 product
- Shared codebase ownership
- Daily standups where everyone knows everything
You don't need microservices. You need focus.
Microservices solve organizational problems, not performance problems. Stop using Netflix's playbook when you're not Netflix's size.
Your monolith isn't the problem. Your process is.
La jueza argentina María Romilda Servini abrió una causa para juzgar los crímenes del franquismo pese a que la ley de amnistía española de 1977 los declaró prescritos.
No solo nadie en la izquierda española se opuso, sino que parlamentos autonómicos como los del País Vasco, Cataluña y Andalucía apoyaron la medida. Recuerdo perfectamente cómo políticos de izquierda españoles se declaraban públicamente avergonzados porque era una jueza extranjera la que venía a poner orden en el desaguisado español. Para ellos, la jurisdicción universal estaba fuera de toda duda.
Hoy, con Maduro, nada es igual. Al parecer, alguien puede cometer tropelías a mansalva que, si lo hace dentro de sus fronteras, es intocable. ¡Lo dice el derecho internacional!
Maduro no es "jefe de Estado" legítimo: es un dictador usurpador que robó elecciones, masacró a su pueblo con hambre y represión, y convirtió Venezuela en narcoestado. La inmunidad de jefes de Estado es para presidentes elegidos democráticamente, no para delincuentes internacionales buscados por narcoterrorismo, corrupción y crímenes de lesa humanidad.
¿Precedente peligroso? El único precedente clave que se crea hoy es que los tiranos ya no tienen impunidad eterna: si destruís tu país y te alías con carteles y terroristas, tarde o temprano la justicia libre te alcanza. Eso vale para Maduro, para Ortega, para los Castro y para todos los zurdos que se creen intocables.
El Consejo de Seguridad debería estar celebrando la liberación de Venezuela, no lloriqueando por la "inmunidad" de un criminal que dejó millones de muertos en vida.
¡No hay inmunidad para los que cometen genocidio económico contra su propio pueblo!
DID THE U.S. VIOLATE THE NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY OF VENEZUELA? A REFLECTION AND SOME QUESTIONS FOR TEAM SOVEREIGNTY
I'm hearing a lot of people saying there is no basis in international law for a foreign nation to detain the head of state of another country. It is argued that each nation is "sovereign" or immune from coercive interference by foreign nations. This is used to argue against the American detention of illegally elected dictator Nicolás Maduro.
I have no principled objection to the idea of national sovereignty, and I think it is a valuable principle in international law. And I am certainly open to the argument that Trump's incursions in Venezuela may have troubling repercussions for international order, or perhaps should have been supported by a broader coalition of nations. I share people's worries about what a U.S-led "transition" might look like in practice, especially under a narcissistic figure like Trump, who seems to think he is invincible.
But I do have some honest questions for people who are appealing specifically to Venezuela's sovereignty as an argument against Trump's military incursion into Venezuela:
1. First, if you are going to appeal to national sovereignty in a situation in which the acting head of State has lost legitimacy both domestically and internationally, having engaged in well documented, systematic human rights violations including torture and imprisonment and murder of his political opponents, and having effectively created an "alternative assembly" to do his bidding when the parliament was not on his side, then you should address the question: is there any limit to the principle of national sovereignty? For example, do you believe a genocidal regime wiping out part of its population on ethnic grounds enjoys legal immunity from military intervention by external powers?
2. Second, what exactly is the philosophical rationale for the principle of national sovereignty?
Is the idea that you should respect the "self-determination" of a "people"? That hardly applies in the case of a brutal tyrant who has stolen the election and refused to produce a shred of evidence of his victory, while his opponents provide credible evidence to international authorities that they won decisively.
Or is the idea that you should respect the legitimate government of a nation? Again, even if Venezuela was a formal aristocracy, its government has forfeited all legitimacy by illegally expropriating countless citizens and businesses, and torturing and imprisoning those who question its policies.
Or is it the idea that you should respect the "integrity" of any existing political regime that has some sort of state apparatus? In that case, a Nazi regime exterminating its Jewish population, or a Mafioso regime inflicting terror on political dissenters, with some mock paraphernalia of a state ("courts," "independent police," "parliament" etc.), should enjoy special immunity from international military interventions, which hardly seems plausible.
If defenders of the national sovereignty of Venezuela can point to me a coherent doctrine of sovereignty that (a) is indifferent to the democratic will of the people of the nation in question; (b) preserves regime immunity against the background of gross and systematic human rights abuses within the nation in question, and (c) continues to insist on legal immunity even when the national government has turned democratic institutions into instruments of despotism and made a mockery of rule of law within its borders, then let's have an honest conversation about Venezuela.
Si el Derecho internacional no puede evitar que yo sea torturado en una celda del Helicoide, pero sí protege a Maduro para que pueda seguir torturándome en el Helicoide, el Derecho internacional no sólo no me sirve de nada, sino que me está jodiendo.
@Sasialejandre Los colectivos armados están controlando a la gente, revisando móviles y atemorizando a los ciudadanos. La plaza de Oriente se llenaba para saludar a Franco, era entonces Franco el legítimo jefe del estado?
@anitaok88@andres20ad@aldamu_jo Ni soy machista ni soy feminista. Pues sal a celebrar con los venezolanos que el dictador que ha estado persiguiéndolos y matándolos ya no existe, y presiona a tu país para que sea Edmundo quien dirija la transición, no apoye marchas en Venezuela a favor de un dictador
@anitaok88@andres20ad@aldamu_jo Mira imágenes de las pocas manifestaciones que hay pro maduro en Venezuela, y mira los colectivos que van por detrás con armas, pregunta a ver qué les pasa a los que no van. Es de primero de dictadura, y nosotros deberíamos saber lo que es