PPCC: Pisitófilos Creditófagos. Veranito 2025

[tomasjos]

Es la primera vez que llamamos a consultas al embajador en Tel Aviv?
España llama a consultas a su embajadora en Tel Aviv tras las acusaciones de Israel de "corrupción" y "antisemitismo" | Vozpópuli https://share.google/FjQAUFWCDwtboeqMo

[Benzino Napaloni]

Y dale con que la abuela fuma...


Que no. Que Europa tiene de todo. No es la primera en todo, ni falta que hace, y sí lo es en muchas cosas.




Y luego la métrica: es aquí donde tenemos (los curritos) 30 días de vacaciones, y donde se vive más y mejor. Punto. No nos gana nadie a nada. Metéoslo en la cabeza. La competición la ha ganado Europa de calle.

-----
De verdad que no os entiendo.

Hombre, Sudden. En lo que es la parte de la tecnología, al menos ahí no digas que no hablo con conocimiento de causa.

Compro sin problemas, porque es verdad, que aquí en los trabajos no se echan tantas horas como en EEUU o en otros países fuera de aquí. Pero en general en lo que son las tecnológicas europeas, y he currado en varias, estoy aburrido de ver poca inversión, mucho inmovilismo, y mucha burocracia.

¿Quieres un ejemplo concreto? Tener que hacer poco menos que un cónclave con un equipo de Project Managers para decidir si cambiar un simple flag lógico en una llamada a un servidor. Un valor 'verdadero' o 'falso', para entendernos. Por tener todas las plataformas "alineadas". Web, iPhone, Android, etc.

Y que encima se enfaden si tomamos los ingenieros la decisión lógica y coherente que se ventila en minutos.

No todas las empresas americanas (o asiáticas) le dan más poder a los ingenieros y menos a los engominaos y las gafapastas, pero la tendencia que conozco en mis carnes es ésa.

¿Que en Europa tenemos 30 días de vacaciones, cosa que no tiene nadie? Eso está muy bien mientras haya dinerito en la caja. El día que no lo haya, ¿qué pasará?

Y por eso varios como Pollo y yo nos tiramos de los pelos por las cosas que hemos visto, y vemos. Por poner un ejemplo fácil de entender, las 15 champions del Real Madrid o las 5 del Barça no son ningún escudo para estar en Primera División de por vida. Creo recordar que sólo una vez, allá por los 30-40, el Barça tuvo que jugar una promoción de permanencia en Primera. Si la Segunda ni la huelen es porque incluso en malos años tienen fuerza de sobra para evitar descender. ¿Estamos seguros de que Europa está en la misma situación?

Porque sí, se puede bajar a Segunda el mismo año que se juega Champions. Si no recuerdo mal, en Vigo y San Sebastián saben bien de esto.

[Benzino Napaloni]

Es la primera vez que llamamos a consultas al embajador en Tel Aviv?
España llama a consultas a su embajadora en Tel Aviv tras las acusaciones de Israel de "corrupción" y "antisemitismo" | Vozpópuli https://share.google/FjQAUFWCDwtboeqMo

Hombre. Falconetti podrá caer mejor o peor. Podrá ser más corrupto o ser más ruido de la derecha para hacerle otro GAL al PSOE y volver al poder por las malas.

Podrá ser o dejar de ser lo que se quiera.

Pero lo que Israel, como Estado, lo que su gobierno está haciendo se llama genocidio. Y en eso hay que ser muy firme. ¿A que en Alemania se tiene cuidado con el gesto con el que llamas a un taxi o pides parar al autobús? ¿A que la figura del pintor frustrado de acuarelas sólo se menciona -o debería mencionar- como recordatorio de lo que no se debe repetir nunca más?

Hay una definición de genocidio legalmente aceptada. Y resulta que encaja con los sucesos de Gaza. Suficiente para que se denuncie en voz alta.

[sudden and sharp]

Y dale con que la abuela fuma...


Que no. Que Europa tiene de todo. No es la primera en todo, ni falta que hace, y sí lo es en muchas cosas.




Y luego la métrica: es aquí donde tenemos (los curritos) 30 días de vacaciones, y donde se vive más y mejor. Punto. No nos gana nadie a nada. Metéoslo en la cabeza. La competición la ha ganado Europa de calle.

-----
De verdad que no os entiendo.

Hombre, Sudden. En lo que es la parte de la tecnología, al menos ahí no digas que no hablo con conocimiento de causa.

Compro sin problemas, porque es verdad, que aquí en los trabajos no se echan tantas horas como en EEUU o en otros países fuera de aquí. Pero en general en lo que son las tecnológicas europeas, y he currado en varias, estoy aburrido de ver poca inversión, mucho inmovilismo, y mucha burocracia.

¿Quieres un ejemplo concreto? Tener que hacer poco menos que un cónclave con un equipo de Project Managers para decidir si cambiar un simple flag lógico en una llamada a un servidor. Un valor 'verdadero' o 'falso', para entendernos. Por tener todas las plataformas "alineadas". Web, iPhone, Android, etc.

Y que encima se enfaden si tomamos los ingenieros la decisión lógica y coherente que se ventila en minutos.

No todas las empresas americanas (o asiáticas) le dan más poder a los ingenieros y menos a los engominaos y las gafapastas, pero la tendencia que conozco en mis carnes es ésa.

¿Que en Europa tenemos 30 días de vacaciones, cosa que no tiene nadie? Eso está muy bien mientras haya dinerito en la caja. El día que no lo haya, ¿qué pasará?

Y por eso varios como Pollo y yo nos tiramos de los pelos por las cosas que hemos visto, y vemos. Por poner un ejemplo fácil de entender, las 15 champions del Real Madrid o las 5 del Barça no son ningún escudo para estar en Primera División de por vida. Creo recordar que sólo una vez, allá por los 30-40, el Barça tuvo que jugar una promoción de permanencia en Primera. Si la Segunda ni la huelen es porque incluso en malos años tienen fuerza de sobra para evitar descender. ¿Estamos seguros de que Europa está en la misma situación?

Porque sí, se puede bajar a Segunda el mismo año que se juega Champions. Si no recuerdo mal, en Vigo y San Sebastián saben bien de esto.

Sí que lo digo. Y digo más... Tecnología NO es tu campo. No sé a quién se le ocurrió la tontería pero vaya, tecnología es cualquier campo de ingeniería para empezar.  Tecnología de lis Alimentos existe con ese nombre de hace tiempo, etc.





Pero yendo a tu campo... sólo tenemos, los europeos, que seguir con risc-v... y Debian. Al principio serán menos potentes, los chips. No pada nada, vamos de sobra en cuanto a potencia. Por cierto, la máquina que lis fabrica es holandesa. Y cuando queramos, nos hacemos una internet propia. Esto no es una necesidad, pero esos gigantes van a cumplir nuestras normas sí o sí. 

Ahí lo tienes. [Créeme, hay un un mundo de tecnología(s) ahí fuera que nada tiene que ver con Chat- GPTs, que por cierto no cubre ninguna necesidad.]

[Cadavre Exquis]

OpenAI Says Its Business Will Burn $115 Billion Through 2029
Posted by msmash on Monday September 08, 2025 @10:40AM from the all-the-money-in-the-world dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report:

OpenAI recently had both good news and bad news for shareholders. Revenue growth from ChatGPT is accelerating at a more rapid rate than the company projected half a year ago. The bad news? The computing costs to develop artificial intelligence that powers the chatbot, and other data center-related expenses, will rise even faster.

As a result, OpenAI projected its cash burn this year through 2029 will rise even higher than previously thought, to a total of $115 billion. That's about $80 billion higher than the company previously expected. The unprecedented projected cash burn, which would add to the roughly $2 billion it burned in the past two years, helps explain why the company is raising more capital than any private company in history.

Saludos.

[Benzino Napaloni]

OpenAI Says Its Business Will Burn $115 Billion Through 2029
Posted by msmash on Monday September 08, 2025 @10:40AM from the all-the-money-in-the-world dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report:

OpenAI recently had both good news and bad news for shareholders. Revenue growth from ChatGPT is accelerating at a more rapid rate than the company projected half a year ago. The bad news? The computing costs to develop artificial intelligence that powers the chatbot, and other data center-related expenses, will rise even faster.

As a result, OpenAI projected its cash burn this year through 2029 will rise even higher than previously thought, to a total of $115 billion. That's about $80 billion higher than the company previously expected. The unprecedented projected cash burn, which would add to the roughly $2 billion it burned in the past two years, helps explain why the company is raising more capital than any private company in history.

Saludos.

Se factura más, pero los costes crecen aún más rápido.

Si no fuese porque los himbersores siguen echando pasta... No sé, creo que el Conde Drácula de Barrio Sésamo me enseñó que esto es ir directo a la quiebra.

[Derby]

https://x.com/DeItaone/status/1965023111654392007

[Derby]

https://www.ft.com/content/7122b003-71c8-41e1-a968-1cc81f736939

French government collapses as PM François Bayrou loses confidence vote

President Emmanuel Macron will look for a replacement who can break the budget impasse

[AbiertoPorDemolicion]

OpenAI Says Its Business Will Burn $115 Billion Through 2029
Posted by msmash on Monday September 08, 2025 @10:40AM from the all-the-money-in-the-world dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report:

OpenAI recently had both good news and bad news for shareholders. Revenue growth from ChatGPT is accelerating at a more rapid rate than the company projected half a year ago. The bad news? The computing costs to develop artificial intelligence that powers the chatbot, and other data center-related expenses, will rise even faster.

As a result, OpenAI projected its cash burn this year through 2029 will rise even higher than previously thought, to a total of $115 billion. That's about $80 billion higher than the company previously expected. The unprecedented projected cash burn, which would add to the roughly $2 billion it burned in the past two years, helps explain why the company is raising more capital than any private company in history.

Saludos.

Aunque parezcan una animalada esas cifras de cash burn para los centros de datos de IA, tienen su razón de ser. Y si se hacen números de verdad, se puede llegar a comprender.

Los IA Data centers son tan mastodónticos, tan colosales, que el nombre se queda corto y deberían llamarse IA Supercomputers; no son meros almacenamiento de datos, como por ejemplo los Data Centers que tienen Youtube o Netflix.

Los IA supercomputers, como los que están construyendo Meta y Google, son granjas de CPUs todas funcionando a la vez y de forma coordinada. Y todo lo que sea computación, consume mucha electricidad.

Para que se hagan una idea, una GPU NVIDIA Blackwell puede llegar a consumir 1000 watios. Y estamos hablando de solo una tarjeta. Los IA supercomputers van a tener decenas de miles, o incluso llegar a las 100.000 de esas tarjetas funcionando al mismo tiempo. Hagan cuentas. Por eso Meta, Google y AWS se están planteando construir centrales nucleares solo para sus IA supercomputers; y eso es muy cash burn .

¿Exagerado? Para nada. Esto se va a hacer; de hecho, ya se está haciendo.

[Cadavre Exquis]

Mapped: Europe’s Projected Population Crash by 2100
Pallavi Rao / Graphics/Design: Amy Kuo · 2025.03.25

Visualizing Europe’s Projected Population Crash by 2100

This map shows Europe’s projected population change for every European country between now and the year 2100.

Only sovereign countries are included on this map. Ukraine figures include Crimea.

Data is sourced from the UN World Population Prospects 2024, using their medium variant estimates (*)

Eastern and Southern Europeans are Moving West and North

Due to declining fertility rates, every European country will see deaths outnumber births by 2100.

However, Eastern and Southern Europe will see the largest declines relative to their current population.

This group is led by Ukraine; the UN projects it will lose 61% of its population in the next 75 years.

Note: Figures rounded.

Aside from falling births, there is also a pattern of migration out of the entire region.

This migration—usually west, or out of Europe altogether—is not new. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, Europeans have been leaving former Soviet-era countries.

A lack of jobs and opportunities to increase income and wealth make many of them economic migrants.

Meanwhile, some Western European countries (UK, France) may see single-digit population growth, due to immigration.

Is This a Problem For Europe?

These figures come at a time within the larger context of immigrants in Europe.

In the last decade Europe has seen an upsurge in anti-immigrant sentiment. However, economically, these immigrants could be a key to Europe’s future.

According to this Guardian investigation, immigrants are currently the stopgap between Europe’s gradual population fall and a rapid decline. A quick crash leads to shrinking workforces, which place higher burdens on social security nets, in turn leading to higher taxes.

The tax-to-GDP ratios for several European countries have already climbed in the last two decades—and top the rest of the world.

Then, falling consumer demand could lead to fewer jobs and higher unemployment. This could make higher tax burdens untenable, affecting social cohesion.

In the absence of significant technological changes, the continent’s reputation for a high standard of living could deteriorate rapidly.
_____________
(*) The medium variant is the most-likely outcome, after the UN takes into account birth and death rates, and migration patterns.

Saludos.

[Derby]

https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/shortage-homebuyers-forces-sellers-lower-prices-walk-sales-125355244

Homebuyer shortage forces many sellers to lower prices, walk away as slump drags on

The housing market is becoming more buyer-friendly after years of sharply rising prices

[sudden and sharp]

 

[pollo]

OpenAI Says Its Business Will Burn $115 Billion Through 2029
Posted by msmash on Monday September 08, 2025 @10:40AM from the all-the-money-in-the-world dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report:

OpenAI recently had both good news and bad news for shareholders. Revenue growth from ChatGPT is accelerating at a more rapid rate than the company projected half a year ago. The bad news? The computing costs to develop artificial intelligence that powers the chatbot, and other data center-related expenses, will rise even faster.

As a result, OpenAI projected its cash burn this year through 2029 will rise even higher than previously thought, to a total of $115 billion. That's about $80 billion higher than the company previously expected. The unprecedented projected cash burn, which would add to the roughly $2 billion it burned in the past two years, helps explain why the company is raising more capital than any private company in history.

Saludos.

Aunque parezcan una animalada esas cifras de cash burn para los centros de datos de IA, tienen su razón de ser. Y si se hacen números de verdad, se puede llegar a comprender.

Los IA Data centers son tan mastodónticos, tan colosales, que el nombre se queda corto y deberían llamarse IA Supercomputers; no son meros almacenamiento de datos, como por ejemplo los Data Centers que tienen Youtube o Netflix.

Los IA supercomputers, como los que están construyendo Meta y Google, son granjas de CPUs todas funcionando a la vez y de forma coordinada. Y todo lo que sea computación, consume mucha electricidad.

Para que se hagan una idea, una GPU NVIDIA Blackwell puede llegar a consumir 1000 watios. Y estamos hablando de solo una tarjeta. Los IA supercomputers van a tener decenas de miles, o incluso llegar a las 100.000 de esas tarjetas funcionando al mismo tiempo. Hagan cuentas. Por eso Meta, Google y AWS se están planteando construir centrales nucleares solo para sus IA supercomputers; y eso es muy cash burn .

¿Exagerado? Para nada. Esto se va a hacer; de hecho, ya se está haciendo.

Se está haciendo el gilipollas, más concretamente.

Al menos va a haber capacidad a precio de pedo para usarse en algo útil cuando se hunda la tontería.

[Cadavre Exquis]

https://x.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1965141842854641779

Saludos.

[Derby]

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2025/09/stablecoins-could-crash-our-economy.html

Stablecoins Could Crash Our Economy

By Richard Murphy, Professor of Accounting Practice at Sheffield University Management School and a director of the Corporate Accountability Network. Originally published at Funding the Future

Stablecoins are being sold as safe, secure cryptocurrencies. In reality, they are shadow banking in disguise – with the same risks that nearly destroyed the global economy in 2008. Nobel Prize–winning economist Jean Tirole is worried, and so am I. If these private tokens collapse, the public will pick up the bill. It’s time to call stablecoins what they are: a threat to financial stability and democracy.

Stablecoins could crash our economy.

Now, admittedly, they will probably crash the US economy before they crash the UK economy, but once one economy crashes, most follow on. And stablecoins are a fundamental threat to our financial stability at present.

Let’s be clear what stablecoins are.  They are simply a form of cryptocurrency that are supposedly asset-backed. In other words, if you buy a stablecoin, and $280 billion has been invested in these things at this moment, then you buy an asset that is supposedly backed by US government bonds, and therefore, they are secure.

The emptiness of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies is avoided, supposedly, as a consequence, but as Nobel Prize-winning economist  Jean Tirole said recently*, he is very, very worried by stablecoins. And he’s right to be so, because although people talk about them as if they are money, they are not.

They carry no guarantee from any government. And worse still, they’re not subject to any real supervision.

The danger is simple. When they collapse, and they may well do so, taxpayers are very likely to be forced to pick up the bill.

Tirole issued his warning in an interview with the Financial Times when he said that there is insufficient supervision of stablecoins. It’s a point I’ve made on this channel before now, and I’m glad to see somebody like him joining in, because what he’s saying is that  the whole multi-billion-dollar stablecoin market is at risk of failing, and that could create a future financial crisis,  and I really do not think he is over-egging his claim.

If depositors, whether retail or institutional, believe that they’re holding safe deposits, and that is the impression that they are given, then, when everything goes wrong, they will demand a government rescue. And governments fearing contagion and public anger will, at that time, probably have no choice but to intervene.

Now, what are the parallels?

Stablecoin recreates the dangers of shadow banking that we saw before the 2008 financial crash.

They pretend to be fully backed assets, just as the bonds that were marketed at that time claimed to be. But the risk is that the US Treasury bonds, that stablecoin funds are supposedly invested in, provide too low a yield in real terms to provide the backing for those who promote these funds, and they will therefore abandon this form of asset backing and instead go for riskier assets with higher returns. At that point,  the very idea of stability, which is implicit in the name stablecoin, will disappear, and one shock could collapse the whole system.

I’m already aware of the risk to US financial markets from the overvaluation of tech companies as a consequence of AI.  The S&P 500 is massively overvalued, as is the FTSE 100 in the UK. But stablecoins exaggerate this risk and elevate it to a different plane.

And that’s particularly the case because of the political involvement in stablecoins. Let’s be clear.  The US administration from Donald Trump onwards is heavily invested in stablecoins. In fact, in many cases, much of their personal wealth will be dependent upon the success of the stablecoin market.

As a consequence, they are likely to understate the need for effective regulation. Weak regulation is already a problem, but it’s going to get worse with cronyism, corruption and inevitable disaster, potentially following.

And the scale of the problem is big. I’ve already mentioned  $280 billion is now held in so-called stablecoins, and that’s not trivial.  It is a systemically significant sum equivalent to the size of a major bank failure. And when we know that major bank failures were the cause of the 2008 financial crisis, the world could not  afford Lehman to go, as happened, then we can see that this is something that could unravel and could unravel fast, creating the pressure for a taxpayer-funded bailout.

Stablecoins, however, do something even worse than bank failures did.  They actually link themselves to the US dollar. But at the same time, they are not dollars. They are not money, but they undermine, by the way in which they’re issued, the ability of the government and central banks to control money.

Effectively, they’re creating a parallel private currency, and they shift control over money creation to private speculators and crypto-oligarchs as a consequence. That means democratic states could lose the ability to run their own economic policies.

And when we look at who is behind these currencies, we might believe that this is deliberate because, remember, the far-right and some crypto enthusiasts in the USA are closely related. And the far-right has no love for the US state or the state in any other country , or the power that it has over economies.

So is the risk another 2008?

Could we have a repeat of the financial breakdown of that year when shadow banking nearly destroyed the global financial system?

The answer is, of course, that is possible.

Private actors now chasing high returns, just as they did in 2008, when regulators looked the other way,  could exploit the current situation when regulators are going to be doing exactly the same thing under pressure from the Trump administration.

When the bubble burst, governments bailed out the system in 2008. The risk is that the same might happen now.

This risk is something that we have to understand. Finance loves to dress old risks in new language and call them innovation. Stablecoins are just another form of unregulated deposit-taking, in fact. They aren’t innovative. There is nothing genuinely new about them, or in pretending that private tokens are as safe as state-backed money.  All the gains go to speculators. The losses will be dumped on the public.

And stablecoins aren’t just a technical issue. That risk of failure also makes them a democratic one. If private money creation replaces public authority, accountability disappears. The economic policy risk that could flow from this, as a consequence of the greed of oligarchs and their political patrons, is to the whole idea of elected government.

Stablecoins erode democratic sovereignty and hand control to unaccountable elites.  So, regulators must stop pretending that stablecoins are harmless experiments. They must recognise them for what they are: systemic risks in the making. And governments should not allow the private minting of tokens that mimic safe deposits.

Every single stablecoin must come with the most prominent government-issued economic health warning because they really do require them.

The fact is, money is and must remain a public good managed under democratic authority. And that is the role of democracy. The debate is not about financial stability. It is about political power.

Who controls money creation, governments or private speculators?  Stablecoin has tilted power away from democracy, at the time being, towards oligarchs and political insiders. Now we have to be honest. There is a fight on our hands as to who is to run our economies and in whose interests.

Jean Tirole is right in that sense to be very, very worried, as he said he was to the Financial Times.  But you don’t need to be a Nobel laureate to be so.

Stablecoins are shadow banking with new branding, cronyism, plus systemic risk, in other words.

The path that they set us on is one to bailouts, lost sovereignty, and weakened democracy.

If we value stability and democracy, governments must act now to shut them down, whatever those who are making a supposed fortune at present from those who are depositing funds, which are put at risk as a consequence, will say.

The technocrats, the oligarchs, and those who are exploiting the weaknesses of regulation have to be prevented from destroying a great deal that is of value in our societies.

*https://www.ft.com/content/445e7fb6-1ec8-47f3-b74d-87f7960e85d6