@JesusFerna7026@Jongonzlz No digo que os hagáis políticos. Digo que generéis proactivamente un movimiento alternativo.
Hay gente válida y con experiencia del comienzo de Ciudadanos, UPyD o Podemos que podría sumarse. Personas que creyeron en algo y se alejaron cuando esos proyectos se corrompieron
@PabloGrueso El problema es que los socios están actuando por su cuenta, sin seguir las reglas.
Se que hablar de reglas a estos niveles el naif. Pero también que es probable que el objetivo final no sea la seguridad (algo que la OTAN apoyaría), sino el petroleo.
Following the ongoing situation in Iran, I am convening a special Security College on Monday.
For regional security and stability, it is of the utmost importance that there is no further escalation through Iran’s unjustified attacks on partners in the region.
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
Cómo es posible que solo @vox_es hable de los problemas del sistema de pensiones?
Además de hacer el problema mas grave por no abordarlo (todo lo contrario), les estais dando votos.
Despertad pollaviejas @PSOE@ppopular
Los últimos meses están siendo una locura. Muchos de mis compañeros aun dicen que no… otros por supuesto lo tienen claro y están apretando.
Tu eliges, pero como dice Def Con Dos: ya ha empezado la cacería
we're making @blocks smaller today. here's my note to the company.
####
today we're making one of the hardest decisions in the history of our company: we're reducing our organization by nearly half, from over 10,000 people to just under 6,000. that means over 4,000 of you are being asked to leave or entering into consultation. i'll be straight about what's happening, why, and what it means for everyone.
first off, if you're one of the people affected, you'll receive your salary for 20 weeks + 1 week per year of tenure, equity vested through the end of may, 6 months of health care, your corporate devices, and $5,000 to put toward whatever you need to help you in this transition (if you’re outside the U.S. you’ll receive similar support but exact details are going to vary based on local requirements). i want you to know that before anything else. everyone will be notified today, whether you're being asked to leave, entering consultation, or asked to stay.
we're not making this decision because we're in trouble. our business is strong. gross profit continues to grow, we continue to serve more and more customers, and profitability is improving. but something has changed. we're already seeing that the intelligence tools we’re creating and using, paired with smaller and flatter teams, are enabling a new way of working which fundamentally changes what it means to build and run a company. and that's accelerating rapidly.
i had two options: cut gradually over months or years as this shift plays out, or be honest about where we are and act on it now. i chose the latter. repeated rounds of cuts are destructive to morale, to focus, and to the trust that customers and shareholders place in our ability to lead. i'd rather take a hard, clear action now and build from a position we believe in than manage a slow reduction of people toward the same outcome. a smaller company also gives us the space to grow our business the right way, on our own terms, instead of constantly reacting to market pressures.
a decision at this scale carries risk. but so does standing still. we've done a full review to determine the roles and people we require to reliably grow the business from here, and we've pressure-tested those decisions from multiple angles. i accept that we may have gotten some of them wrong, and we've built in flexibility to account for that, and do the right thing for our customers.
we're not going to just disappear people from slack and email and pretend they were never here. communication channels will stay open through thursday evening (pacific) so everyone can say goodbye properly, and share whatever you wish. i'll also be hosting a live video session to thank everyone at 3:35pm pacific. i know doing it this way might feel awkward. i'd rather it feel awkward and human than efficient and cold.
to those of you leaving…i’m grateful for you, and i’m sorry to put you through this. you built what this company is today. that's a fact that i'll honor forever. this decision is not a reflection of what you contributed. you will be a great contributor to any organization going forward.
to those staying…i made this decision, and i'll own it. what i'm asking of you is to build with me. we're going to build this company with intelligence at the core of everything we do. how we work, how we create, how we serve our customers. our customers will feel this shift too, and we're going to help them navigate it: towards a future where they can build their own features directly, composed of our capabilities and served through our interfaces. that's what i'm focused on now. expect a note from me tomorrow.
jack
@alrocar Great post! There has always been a clear diff between knowing “about the forest” and truly understanding it, that’s what separates good developers from the rest. That isn't changing and the first ones are capable of making/using 'smarter' agents
Hola Samuel. No me toca a mí decidirlo, pero si yo fuera un VC esa sería la primera pregunta: ¿es el SD36 realmente un drug o no lo es? Y si no lo fuera: ¿podemos hacer que lo sea? (p. ej. con un programa de optimización química de la molécula).
Pongamos por caso que puede ser un drug sin ningún tipo de optimización adicional. Y asumamos que voy a simplificar mucho la explicación porque twitter.
La propuesta terapéutica del artículo del Dr. Barbacid consiste en la combinación de SD36 con otros 2 fármacos: afatinib y daraxonrasib. Y aquí entramos en otra cuestión fundamental a responder para cualquier VC en el sector biotech, la propiedad intelectual. Es decir: ¿puedo explotar comercialmente la combinación de estos 3 fármacos o hay terceros que me lo podrían impedir legítimamente?
Porque una cosa es que yo descubra, antes que nadie, que la combinación de estos 3 fármacos tiene un efecto inesperado y pueda patentar dicha combinación. Hasta ahí todo bien. Pero tener una patente sobre una invención y poder explotar comercialmente dicha invención son dos cosas distintas (“patentability” vs. “freedom-to-operate”). ¿Por qué?
Porque en este caso concreto, (y según una búsqueda rápida nada exhaustiva), afatinib parece ser propiedad de Boehringer Ingelheim mediante una patente del año ~ 2015 (protección hasta el 2035) y daraxonrasib parece ser propiedad de Revolution Medicines mediante una patente del año ~ 2019 (protección hasta el 2039). Dichas empresas hicieron el esfuerzo ($$, tiempo y riesgo) de “descubrir” y diseñar dichos fármacos con propiedades que anticipaban podrían ser útiles para el tratamiento del cáncer.
Si yo quiero explotarlos comercialmente como parte de un combo terapéutico, necesitaré obtener el permiso de dichas empresas para ello, generalmente mediante una licencia sobre dichas patentes. Si no consigo dicha licencia y decido explotar comercialmente dicha aproximación terapéutica (no pasará porque ningún inversor en un sano juicio financiará un proyecto sin tener cierta seguridad sobre el “freedom-to-operate”), estaré infringiendo propiedad intelectual legítima de terceros.
Todo esto sin haber mirado el SD36, que probablemente también estará patentado por un tercero…
Es un artículo brillante que abre un nuevo camino a explorar para el tratamiento del cáncer de páncreas. Pero haríamos bien de contextualizar el descubrimiento, porque artículos científicos que abren nuevos caminos terapéuticos en base a estudios en ratones hay *miles* al año.
Que la prensa hable de revolución contra el cáncer o de que el tratamiento que curará el cáncer de páncreas está a la vuelta de la esquina es una barbaridad.
Por cerrar: Kymera Therapeutics estaba desarrollando un fármaco con el mismo mecanismo de acción que SD36 (degradador de STAT3) y habían hasta ejecutado un ensayo clínico Fase 1/2 en pacientes. Creo que es de hecho el STAT3 degrader que ha llegado más lejos. En Octubre de 2024 decidieron despriorizar el fármaco de su pipeline: https://t.co/WxOy4oKUv3