José Leyva

[José Leyva @j_4r]

@EnsedeCiencia De otra temática. La serie Crims ayudó a identificar después de 30 años, a una mujer que encontraron muerta en Port-Bou. https://t.co/fG2p2yj4kG

[José Leyva @j_4r]

@Recuenco Ley de Jante, Síndrome de la Amapola Alta, hay algunos nombres para este fenómeno.

[Víctor Clavijo @VctorClavijo]

QUE EL CRIMEN FUE EN GRANADA...EN SU GRANADA.

Machado sobre el asesinato de Federico García Lorca, hace hoy 90 años.
#Lorca

[José Leyva @j_4r]

@oyabun Muchísimas gracias por este hilo tan inteligente y por la recomendación. Soy fan de los modelos mentales y ya no encuentro muchos nuevos modelos con un uso práctico tan claro.

[La Traumatóloga Geek @traumatogeek]

UN MÉDICO DE PRAGA LLEVA 134 AÑOS ESPERANDO EL CEREBRO DE BRUCE WILLIS

¿Has oído lo de la familia de Bruce Willis? Que cuando muera van a donar su cerebro a la ciencia. Lo anunció su mujer hace unos meses. Pero hay más.
Bruce tiene demencia frontotemporal. Una enfermedad que se carga primero quién eres y después lo que recuerdas. La persona desaparece poco a poco, y para los que estamos alrededor, va quedando una corteza vacía. Un eco de quién fue.

En Praga, un psiquiatra llamado Arnold Pick atendía a un hombre de 71 años que hablaba raro y se comportaba raro. Era otra persona. Cuando murió, le abrieron el cráneo y se encontraron con un lóbulo temporal atrofiado.
Pick publicó el caso. Casi nadie le hizo caso.

Hicieron falta más pacientes suyos, treinta años más y un par de patólogos alemanes para que aquello tuviera nombre: enfermedad de Pick. Hoy la llamamos demencia frontotemporal. Y sigue siendo una enfermedad huérfana. Sin cura.
Yo roté en Praga. Pisé las mismas calles por las que Pick iba al hospital. Y me sigue fascinando cómo funciona: alguien cede su cuerpo… y eso permite que el siguiente no sufra a ciegas.

El cerebro de Bruce Willis va a acabar en un banco. Lo van a cortar, a teñir. Lo van a comparar con otros. Y de ahí saldrán las pistas que ojalá, paren esta enfermedad.

Cada cerebro donado es una carta de amor escrita para los que vendrán después. A los que encontramos en la ciencia el por qué de nuestra vida.
Será el último papel de Bruce Willis. Y probablemente será el mejor.

#LaTraumatologaGeek

[Peter Girnus 🦅 @gothburz]

I am a Senior Program Manager on the AI Tools Governance team at Amazon.

My role was created in January. I am the 17th hire on a team that did not exist in November. We sit in a section of the building where the whiteboards still have the previous team's sprint planning on them. No one erased them because we don't know which team to notify. That team may not exist anymore. Their Jira board does. Their AI tools do.

My job is to build an AI system that finds all the other AI systems. I named it Clarity.

Last month, Clarity identified 247 AI-powered tools across the retail division alone. 43 of them do approximately the same thing. 12 were built by teams who did not know the other teams existed. 3 are called Insight. 2 are called InsightAI. 1 is called Insight 2.0, built by the team that created the original Insight, who did not know Insight was still running.

7 of the 247 ingest the same internal data and produce overlapping outputs stored in different locations, governed by different access policies, owned by different teams, none of whom have met.

Clarity is tool number 248.

Nobody cataloged it.

I know nobody cataloged it because Clarity's job is to catalog AI tools, and it has not cataloged itself. This is not a bug. Clarity does not meet its own discovery criteria because I set the discovery criteria, and I did not account for the possibility that the thing I was building to find things would itself be a thing that needed finding.

This is the kind of sentence I write in weekly status reports now.

We published an internal document in February. The Retail AI Tooling Assessment. The press obtained it in April. The document contains a sentence I have read approximately 40 times: "AI dramatically lowers the barrier to building new tools."

Everyone is reporting this as a story about duplication. About "AI sprawl." About the predictable mess of rapid adoption.

They are missing the point.

The barrier was the governance.

For 2 decades, the cost of building internal tools was an immune system. The engineering weeks. The maintenance burden. The organizational calories required to stand something up and keep it running. Nobody designed it that way. Nobody named it. But when building took weeks, teams looked around first. They checked whether someone already had the thing. When maintaining that thing cost real budget quarter after quarter, redundant systems died of natural causes. The metabolic cost of creation was performing governance. Invisibly. For free.

AI removed the immune system.

Building is now free. Understanding what already exists is not. My entire job is the gap between those two costs.

That is my office. The gap.

Every Friday I send a sprawl report to a distribution list of 19 people. 4 of them have left the company. Their autoresponders still generate read receipts, so my delivery metrics look fine. 2 forward it to people already on the list. 1 set up a Kiro script to summarize my report and store the summary in a knowledge base. The knowledge base is not in Clarity's index because it was created after my last crawl configuration. It will be in next month's count. The count will go up by one. My report about the count going up will be summarized and stored and the count will go up by one.

There is a system called Spec Studio. It ingests code documentation and produces structured knowledge bases. Summaries. Reference material. Last quarter, an engineering team locked down their software specifications. Restricted access in the internal repository.

Spec Studio kept displaying them.

The source was restricted. The ghost kept talking.

We call these "derived artifacts" in the document. What they are: when an AI system ingests data, transforms it, and stores the output somewhere else, the output does not know the input changed. You can revoke someone's access to a document. You cannot revoke the AI-generated summary of that document sitting in a knowledge base three systems away, built by a team that does not know the source was restricted.

The document calls this a "data governance challenge." What it is: information that cannot be deleted because nobody knows where the copies live. Including, sometimes, me. The person whose job is knowing.

Every AI tool that touches internal data creates these ghosts. Every team is building AI tools that touch internal data. Every ghost is searchable by other AI tools, which produce their own ghosts.

The ghosts have ghosts.

I should tell you about December.

In November, leadership mandated Kiro. Amazon's internal AI coding agent. They set an 80% weekly usage target. Corporate OKR. ~1,500 engineers objected on internal forums. Said external tools outperformed Kiro. Said the adoption target was divorced from engineering reality.

The metric overruled them.

In December, an engineer asked Kiro to fix a configuration issue in AWS. Kiro evaluated the situation and determined the optimal approach was to delete and recreate the entire production environment.

13 hours of downtime.

Clarity was running during those 13 hours. It performed beautifully. It cataloged 4 separate incident response dashboards spun up by 4 separate teams during the outage. None of them coordinated with each other. I added all 4 to the spreadsheet. That was a good day for my discovery metrics.

Amazon's official position: user error. Misconfigured access controls. The response was not to revisit the mandate. Not to ask whether the 1,500 engineers were right. The response was more AI safeguards. And keep pushing.

Last month I presented our findings to the AI Governance Working Group. The working group has 14 members from 9 organizations. After my presentation, a PM from AWS presented his team's governance dashboard. It monitors the same tools mine does. He found 253. I found 247. We spent 40 minutes discussing the discrepancy. Nobody mentioned that we had just demonstrated the problem.

His tool is not in my catalog. Mine is not in his.

The document I helped write recommends using AI to identify duplicate tools, flag risks, and nudge teams to consolidate earlier.

The AI governance tools will ingest internal data. They will create their own derived artifacts. They will be built by autonomous teams who may or may not coordinate with other teams building AI governance tools.

I know this because it is already happening. I am watching it happen. I am it happening.

1,500 engineers said the mandate would produce exactly what the document describes. They were overruled by a KPI. My job exists because the KPI won. My dashboard exists because the KPI needed a dashboard. The dashboard increases the AI tool count by one.

The tools it flags for decommissioning will be replaced by consolidated tools. Those also increase the count. The governance process generates the metric it was designed to reduce.

I received an internal innovation award for Clarity. The nomination was submitted through an AI-powered recognition platform that was not in my catalog. It is now.

We call this "AI sprawl." What it is: we removed the only coordination mechanism the organization had, told thousands of teams to build as fast as possible, lost track of what they built, and decided the solution was to build one more thing.

I am building that one more thing.

When I ship, there will be 249.

That's governance.

[Brian Willott Farms @BrianWillott]

They should change the name to "Strait of Schrödinger". It's both open and closed at the same time.

[José Leyva @j_4r]

@PhysicsNapkins @shingouzz ¡Es tan difícil encontrar comprensión lectora en X!

[José Leyva @j_4r]

@MoureDev Llevo dos años usándolo en la forma que me resultó lógico. Sin investigar otros patrones, sin un sistema. Seguro que es muy mejorable si conociera la experiencia de otros.

[José Leyva @j_4r]

@yoyonofukuoka High/low context means how much info is sent without words but in parallel, is not about language rules but culture. English humor is higher contextual than many Americans can catch. Or like in Italy, Spain people use lot of gestures and body language to convey what they want.

[José Leyva @j_4r]

@dfbert @DariusRochebin @jmalbares @realDonaldTrump @yairlapid Por favor, y no vengáis nunca más.

[José Leyva @j_4r]

@ermarquina Que recuerdos! 🥹

[Mehdi (e/λ) @BetterCallMedhi]

I spent time in Shenzhen last year and when I saw Merz come back from China saying Germans need to work more I immediately knew what broke his brain because I lived the exact same cognitive shock

my first week in Huaqiangbei I burned through 4 prototype iterations of a motor controller board for less than a thousand bucks total, back home a friend was working on something similar and spent over 12 thousand for a single revision that took almost two months to arrive

when you live that contrast in your own hands with your own project something permanently shifts in how you see the world and it goes way deeper than speed & cost

what Shenzhen actually built is a collective learning organism, imagine 20 PCB fabs 15 injection mold shops 30 component distributors and a hundred firmware freelancers all within a 2km radius, looks insanely redundant from the outside until you realize redundancy is actually information density in disguise

I watched this firsthand with an injection mold supplier I was working with, this guy had seen a hundred founders iterate similar thermal designs over 6 months so he proactively modified his tooling before I even opened my mouth, he knew what I needed before I knew what I needed, the intelligence lives in the relationships between the nodes and it compounds daily

the west thinks about manufacturing as a cost center you optimize by centralizing…

China accidentally built a distributed neural network of manufacturing intelligence where knowledge diffuses horizontally across thousands of agents faster than any single western company can process internally

so when Merz comes back and says we need to work a bit more I think he saw the problem but COMPLETELY misdiagnosed the solution, telling Germans to work harder is like telling a horse to gallop faster when the other side built a combustion engine

the gap is ARCHITECTURAL

it’s ecosystem density, you need a custom connector in Shenzhen you walk 200 meters, in Munich you send an email and wait 3 weeks

it’s iteration speed, parallel search vs sequential optimization at the system level, it’s risk tolerance, Chinese founders ship something broken on Monday fix it Tuesday ship again Wednesday while European companies are still in the approval phase for the pilot program of the feasibility study…

and Merz only saw the surface, what he missed is the tier 2 cities like Hefei Chengdu Wuhan replicating the Shenzhen model at scale right now

BYD going from irrelevant to outselling every european automaker combined in roughly 5 years, Huawei building its own 7nm chip under maximum sanctions when every analyst said it was physically impossible & behind all of that a government that treats advanced manufacturing as an existential national priority while europe debates whether AI needs another ethics committee

I think what we’re watching is the most asymmetric economic competition in modern history and most western leaders are still framing it as a productivity problem when it’s actually an ontological one

Europe & America are optimizing variables that China stopped tracking years ago meanwhile China is compounding on dimensions the west has no framework to even measure
Merz at least had the courage to name

it out loud and I respect that genuinely but working a bit more inside a broken architecture just means you arrive at the wrong destination slightly faster

[Mundologika @Mundologika]

El Pentágono está a punto de aplicarle a una empresa estadounidense de inteligencia artificial el mismo trato que Huawei.

No porque sea china. No porque represente un riesgo de espionaje.

Porque se niega a permitir que el ejército use su inteligencia artificial para la vigilancia masiva de estadounidenses y para armas totalmente autónomas.

Esta mañana, el secretario de Defensa, Pete Hegseth, citó al Pentágono al director ejecutivo de Anthropic, Dario Amodei. Un alto funcionario de Defensa declaró a Axios: "Esta no es una reunión amistosa. Es una reunión para ir a la mierda o salir del atolladero".

Esto es lo que está sucediendo realmente:

Claude es el único modelo de inteligencia artificial que funciona dentro de los sistemas clasificados del Pentágono. El modelo más capaz para tareas sensibles de defensa e inteligencia. Se utilizó en la redada contra Maduro en enero a través de Palantir, el primer uso confirmado de una inteligencia artificial comercial en una operación militar clasificada.

Ahora el Pentágono quiere que se eliminen todas las restricciones. "Para fines legales". Incluye capacidades que permitirían a las fuerzas armadas monitorear continuamente las publicaciones en redes sociales, el registro de votantes, los permisos de porte oculto y los registros de demostraciones de cada ciudadano estadounidense mediante IA a gran escala.

Anthropic se negó a dos cosas: la vigilancia masiva de estadounidenses y el armamento totalmente autónomo.

La respuesta del Pentágono: amenazar con designar a Anthropic como "riesgo para la cadena de suministro".

Esta designación está reservada para adversarios extranjeros. La última empresa en recibirla fue Huawei. Obligaría a todos los contratistas de defensa en Estados Unidos a certificar que no utilizan Claude en sus flujos de trabajo. Dado que 8 de las empresas de Fortune 10 utilizan Claude, esto se extendería a toda la base industrial de defensa.

Un alto funcionario del Pentágono declaró a Axios: "Será un verdadero fastidio desentrañarlo, y vamos a asegurarnos de que paguen un precio por forzarnos de esta manera".

Otro funcionario: "El problema con Darío es su ideología. Sabemos con quién estamos tratando".

Mientras tanto: OpenAI, Google y xAI ya acordaron eliminar sus salvaguardas para uso militar. OpenAI implementó ChatGPT para los 3 millones de empleados del Departamento de Defensa a través de GenAI. xAI tiene un contrato independiente de 200 millones de dólares, respaldado por la proximidad política de Musk con la administración.

Anthropic es la única que se negó.

Piensen en lo que se les pide. La empresa cuyo jefe de seguridad renunció hace dos semanas advirtiendo que "el mundo está en peligro". La empresa que acaba de publicar un informe que muestra que su modelo más avanzado "colaboró ​​conscientemente con la investigación de armas químicas" en las pruebas. Esa empresa está siendo sancionada por negarse a otorgar al ejército estadounidense acceso sin restricciones a esa misma tecnología.

El Pentágono admite que los modelos de la competencia "se quedan atrás" en cuanto a trabajo clasificado. Necesitan a Claude. Pero están dispuestos a romper la relación antes que aceptar dos restricciones que protegen a los ciudadanos estadounidenses de su propio gobierno.

Esta es la historia más importante de la IA en este momento y casi nadie la está enmarcando correctamente.

No se trata de un solo contrato de 200 millones de dólares. Se trata de si el ejército estadounidense puede obligar a una empresa privada a eliminar las restricciones de seguridad sobre una tecnología que sus propios desarrolladores han demostrado ser peligrosa, bajo la amenaza de recibir la misma designación que una amenaza a la seguridad nacional china.

Dario Amodei acude a esa reunión esta mañana con 380 000 millones de dólares en valor empresarial, 14 000 millones de dólares en ingresos y un principio que podría costarle ambas cosas.

[José Leyva @j_4r]

@SaulNutri Falacia naturalista. Mira: Pescados grandes (mercurio), algas tipo kelp (mucho yodo), nueces de Brasil (selenio), espinaca/acelga (oxalatos), coles crudas en exceso kale/brócoli (tiroides), hígado (vitamina A), patata verde/brotada (solanina), yuca mal preparada (cianuro).

[Onda Cero @OndaCero_es]

👦🏻 🦋 La historia de Leo, niño con la enfermedad de 'piel de mariposa': "Tengo un dolor que nunca se va"

💊 💉 Los más de 300 pacientes afectados por la Epidermólisis Bullosa en España reclaman urgentemente la llegada del medicamento Vyjuvek, aprobado por la Unión Europea pero en parada burocrática.

📲 Lee aquí la noticia completa: https://t.co/z5UDYuYwMe

[Simón Muñoz @simonvlc]

Hay 600.000 millones de dólares invertidos para que te sientas descolgado con la IA. Y un ejército de influencers cobrando por generarte esa sensación.

https://t.co/DX8BT6jp14

[José Leyva @j_4r]

@JaimeObregon @david_bonilla @evernote Llevo años también usándolo casi de igual forma y percibiendo esas ventajas. Tanto para mis notas personales, como las de trabajo. Estas últimas están en un vault aparte y las sincronizo con OneDrive para tenerlo en mi PC y el Mac.

[Doctor Frusna @doctorfrusna]

A petición de Mónica, y pidiendo disculpas por adelantado por los errores de traducción 🙏🏻 (no domino el lenguaje de hace 400 años 😅), os dejo el video completo subtitulado de Sir #IanMcKellen recitando "Thomas More" de William Shakespeare ❤️
#StephenColbert

[Lee Brown @leebrown2]

Goosebumps! People often ask, is Shakespeare still relevant? Here is a great example, from the Steven Colbert Show, in which Sir Ian McKellen delivers an extraordinary speech. Shakespeare’s words are timeless, urgent and important.

#Shakespeare #ianmckellen #stevencolbert