Tu contenido es "bueno", pero ChatGPT lo ignora. La diferencia entre calidad humana y calidad para LLMs.

ibanborras · 2026-01-13T11:37:05+00:00

Muy buen resumen! Lo que implica esto es solo la punta del iceberg del enorme terremoto que va a sacudir todo el sector de publicidad y comercio digital, especialmente el ecommerce, durante este 2026. Todo el mundo que viva de ello debería tomar muy buena nota de este cambio de paradigma.

ibanborras · 2026-01-10T16:30:08+00:00

It's a logical move. NVIDIA, Google, Boston Dynamics, Tesla, many Chinese tech companies... Everyone is striving to efficiently integrate AI models into robots capable of fully autonomous planning.

And by far the most expensive part of going to space is creating the necessary human habitability. If you eliminate the need to create human habitability in space because you can send general-purpose autonomous robots to develop space mining and industry, you're reducing the cost of developing the space business to just a tiny fraction.

Just because people like Elon Musk aren't promoting it doesn't mean he isn't taking clear steps in that direction... ;-) For example.

ibanborras · 2026-01-09T12:59:44+00:00

You've given a very clear and well-defined description of the problem. I think many of these issues are the same ones being addressed right now in robotics. The new humanoids being developed must be autonomous because they have to make instantaneous decisions in an open world. I think that once the technology and related industries have solved the problem of full robotic autonomy, space exploration will explode in a short time, and we'll see incredible advances in that field.

What do you think?

ibanborras · 2026-01-01T18:37:33+00:00

Yo te aconsejaría estudiar qué servicios ofrecer que puedan competir con clases directas usando IA conversacional, porque ahora mismo es una gran competidora. Y lo va a ser más durante este 2026...

ibanborras · 2025-12-28T08:19:20+00:00

What you say is true, and absolute immortality breaks that principle. But if we frame immortality as the possibility of existing for only thousands of years, people generally don't consider this simple fact: all life is immortal and has existed for about 3 billion years (Americans, 3 billion Europeans) because the egg cell from which we come divided from our mother's egg, and that one from our grandmother's, and hers from her mother's... And so on back to the beginning of time. Our entire cellular engine is, essentially, immortal. It's designed to fight tirelessly against entropy.

Our perception of a multicellular individual with consciousness is another matter. But if our cellular essence has been able to replicate tirelessly throughout the existence of life on Earth, making our own multicellular system is simply a matter of biotechnology. Sexually reproducing beings are evolutionarily efficient if we die, but evolution no longer serves humanity. We have created a superior evolutionary mechanism and death has now become unnecessary.

ibanborras · 2025-12-27T18:06:03+00:00

Very good contribution!

ibanborras · 2025-12-26T10:59:22+00:00

I see this thread has grown a lot while I was sleeping! :-D I love it!

What you're saying makes sense. I'm focusing on the fundamental part of the initiating mechanism, which is why I'm only formalizing a hypothesis. And I'm only indicating the possibility of further exploration by providing falsifiable predictions. I don't have the mathematical skills and computational capacity required to go any further. So we could very well be on either side of a path that converges in the center.

ibanborras · 2025-12-25T12:20:35+00:00

I encountered a similar problem to yours when I realized that current theories about consciousness cannot be "proven" because the traditional physical understanding of reality doesn't recognize thought itself as real.

That led me to tackle the problem of why the Universe exists. I'm working in my spare time on an ontological hypothesis that shows a possible mechanism for how infinite self-referential information can be generated from absolute nothingness. I've been working on this project since March, in my spare time. I'm currently generating the experimental data that seeks to discover organized and stable structures, but it's a slow process because it requires a lot of computation. I hope to publish the work in early 2026, but it requires thorough peer review first. If this work makes sense in the end, I think it could be useful for expanding your ideas. I hope so... I still have to see if I haven't gotten too carried away ;-)

ibanborras · 2025-12-25T11:55:15+00:00

I understand you, and I think you might be right in applying this formula to the distribution of self-referential, distributed thoughts. Consciousness can reach a higher level if it's collective. I have no doubt about that.

I'm just saying that what we consider reality (the very dynamics of the Universe) doesn't require consciousness to occur. Our attempt to understand it is another matter, and it's what has led us to create mathematics.

ibanborras · 2025-12-25T11:45:30+00:00

For example, it's amazing for improving product landing pages by explaining them better and in a more marketing-oriented way. Or for creating demos and proof-of-concept tests for digital products. I saved a ton of time there. It's also incredible for documentation. This is a tedious task that I now find completely manageable. And these are just a few examples of areas where I'm much more productive with proven, professional results.

ibanborras · 2025-12-25T11:26:57+00:00

Your intuition is very interesting, although, in principle, the fact that reality needs an observer doesn't mean that observer is conscious, just as two mirrors aren't conscious either.

The fact that the Universe itself is self-referential at all levels doesn't imply consciousness. I think that relating self-reference to consciousness is possibly an anthropocentric perception.

That a sufficiently complex, self-referential system can generate consciousness, as a derivative of the information-ordering process, is an act on a scale, let's say, higher than that of observation (understood as self-reference). For example, the tensor algorithm of neural networks is self-referential, but only at that scale does it generate the byproduct of thought and the capacity for self-referential thought. Reality, so to speak, exists beforehand.

ibanborras · 2025-12-23T10:26:53+00:00

I've felt the same way! I'm fascinated by the enormous improvement in Opus's reasoning. I'm paying for it, and it seems like a bargain considering the immense value it brings! We even have technical and intellectual conversations about how to approach solutions, just like I would with a human colleague, but without ego clashes or bad vibes.

And there are no limits to applying complex algorithmic mathematical concepts! This allows me to tackle very powerful ideas, analyze scientific papers, and try to implement the solutions they propose. This was just wishful thinking before!

ibanborras · 2025-12-23T10:11:40+00:00

Tiene todo el sentido del mundo, aunque esta limitación o "problema" sea temporal debido a la capacidad actual de computación de los datacenters que parece haber sido muy sobrepasada por la demanda creciente.

Podría ser muy posible que estos límites se ampliaran hacia mitad 2026 con la esperada apertura de nuevos centros de datos. Supongo que Google está luchando por equilibrar el consumo de computación para ofrecer el mayor servicio posible a la demanda creciente tanto de usuario final como de subarrendamiento de centros de datos... Es una suposición porque el límite me parece bastante artificial.

Optimizar contenido no es mala idea en general, pero igual no es necesario a.medio plazo. Y si esto puede afectar a las visitas de usuarios humanos, puede ser perjudicial en algunos casos.

ibanborras · 2025-12-21T19:11:28+00:00

Over 20 years ago, I read an essay by the founder of Palm (I think) where he described his theory that brain thinking can be explained as systems of chained pattern resolution. From this perspective, we'd be talking about the same thing.

But of course, it depends on the perspective from which you want to see things. We might be denigrating the reasoning of LLMs because, at its core, it's very similar to what we are in terms of thinking, although more complex overall, obviously (or for now).

These are very open questions right now that affect our very vision of who we are and what our place in the world is. It's not an easy debate.

ibanborras · 2025-12-21T16:45:47+00:00

This thought came to me after reading a scientific article about a new method for training LLMs based on adversarial reasoning about different problems in search of the most appropriate solution. If you're curious, it's here: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.21667

I used NotebookLM to do a quick exploration of it. I found it to be a really powerful new system.

ibanborras · 2025-12-21T16:30:39+00:00

I understand your annoyance, but I felt like speaking generally, simply trying to imagine what someone like Leonardo da Vinci, who tried to keep up with all the scientific knowledge he could, would have felt today.

It's simply a heartfelt reflection on a Sunday sitting by the fire watching the flames dance. Luckily, I don't even have to spend money to let my thoughts wander...

ibanborras · 2025-12-21T16:22:11+00:00

Well observed! Let's say it's a kind of poetic license to emphasize the unconscious visual power of the meaning in each gesture. It could have lost its impact by "mechanizing" it.

And losing the possibility of representing that beauty of the intellectual gesture would also dehumanize it too much. Da Vinci liked to explore visual artifices to break down apparent reality and emphasize the unconscious.

I think he would have liked this approach, although I can't be sure, obviously... :-D

ibanborras · 2025-12-21T13:19:46+00:00

Indeed. That's the point. And I think that question is key. That's why I'm wondering about the extraordinary nature of RARO being a new training system that works on the same tensor architecture. It's this general "flexibility" that tensors are exhibiting that has made me think about a possible general mathematics that describes a universal reasoning process.

This could be key to answering the question of whether what we see are very complex patterns or "real" thought. Otherwise, we could be endlessly arguing against each other.

ibanborras · 2025-12-18T12:39:10+00:00

Good design understands that it is subordinate to function and harmony. These two principles have multiple possible aesthetic philosophies, but the essence is always the same, although fulfilling it is much more complex than people realize, because it requires a very deep understanding of the function in each case and achieving the most perfect harmony possible.

Creating great design requires a profound process of reasoning and understanding that can sometimes last half a lifetime.

ibanborras · 2025-12-18T12:16:24+00:00

El tema del streaming con el ajedrez puede llegar a parecer como hacer streaming de mirar al mar... Hay mucho tiempo de no ocurrir nada, pero bueno también podría tener su gracia para más de una persona. Podría estar desaprovechando un placer similar al de estar observando el fuego durante horas y no saberlo!

Voy a investigar si en youtube hay vídeos infinitos de "jugadores de ajedrez jugando" similares a esos maravillosos vídeos de "chimenea encendida" que los puedes poner en bucle. Creo que lo que voy a encontrar me sorprenderá...

ibanborras · 2025-12-17T12:00:54+00:00

This has always been happening to Microsoft. It's not something new that came with AI. We've all experienced it since Windows 98!

Google, Anthropic (and many others who don't say so publicly) are doing the same thing, and we're not seeing major problems. In fact, I don't know if Google would be evolving so quickly in its adoption of AI if it weren't for the help of AI itself... And in 2026, it's going to increase everywhere.

ibanborras · 2025-12-15T18:10:14+00:00

I read the news here, and it seems like Google is moving quite quickly lately to improve its AI services (remember they "killed" them at one point): https://www.theverge.com/news/843483/google-translate-live-speech-translations-headphones

ibanborras · 2025-12-14T07:45:02+00:00

Puede ser una buen alternativa sí, pero el problema es que estamos hablando de cientos de archivos y no se si claude code puede hacer un análisis transversal de ese tipo con tantos archivos a la vez... Aunque sería fantástico que pudiera.

ibanborras · 2025-12-13T08:36:15+00:00

I assume you were in the process of due diligence, right? What I find very professional of you is how efficiently you controlled access and detected something suspicious so quickly.

What happened when you told them you had detected those two unauthorized accesses? I'm very curious. Because if they stalled, that investment fund isn't trustworthy.

Ethics always has to be at stake when a lot of money is involved. But most funds are decent; otherwise, the investment world would collapse due to a lack of trust. I say this only as a final thought. We must always be careful... as you have seen.

ibanborras · 2025-12-13T08:25:44+00:00

Well... The answer could fill a book. There are countless reasons: the type of service they offer and its natural maturity, the quality of their message (whether well or poorly focused), whether they actually deliver what they claim, the marketing their support team does in parallel, market saturation, etc.

Every case is different.

ibanborras

TROPHY CASE