Ed Zepeda

3.5K posts

Ed Zepeda banner
Ed Zepeda

Ed Zepeda

@hello_wired

💻 Freelance dev 🔍 I share info about APIs, databases & tech, mostly backend 📖 Read my posts and rants here: https://t.co/9Qi1IUO6NU

Guadalajara, Jalisco Katılım Mayıs 2011
209 Takip Edilen439 Takipçiler
Ed Zepeda
Ed Zepeda@hello_wired·
@powerhdeleon No sería la primera vez que Google fuerza algo en sus usuarios, como cuando intentaron forzar su red social. Y te la ponían hasta en la sopa.
Español
0
0
0
166
Héctor de León (El loco de los perros) ⛧
Lo que está pasando a Google y su IA forzada en su buscador y como la gente busca alternativas sin IA, es una muestra de lo que está pasando con mucha aplicación qué forza la IA en cosas sin sentido, las personas no la usan. Estamos viviendo "la era de ridiculeces en innovación".
Español
14
53
379
8.3K
Miguel Ángel Durán
Amazon ha cerrado un ranking interno para ver quién usaba más la IA en la empresa. La gente competía en quemar millones de tokens sin importar el valor que aportaba. ¿El problema? Pues que obviamente les estaba costando millones de dólares. La nueva directiva es: no uses IA por usar.
Miguel Ángel Durán tweet media
Español
36
80
829
79.9K
Ed Zepeda
Ed Zepeda@hello_wired·
@Sebbais_ @mito__ai Me temo que la mayoría de las empresas no están usando AI para "elevar la producción", sino para disminuir costos, casi siempre a costa de la calidad.
Español
0
0
0
3
Seb
Seb@Sebbais_·
@mito__ai Si esto es verdad, el problema no es usar IA. Es usarla mal. Un anuncio a nivel nacional no puede parecer hecho con dos prompts y cero dirección creativa. La IA puede elevar una producción, pero así solo transmite ahorro, prisa y poco respeto por el público.
Español
1
0
4
180
MITO AI
MITO AI@mito__ai·
Yesterday, a 95% AI-generated commercial aired in prime time across every major TV channel in Spain. 120 seconds. The World Cup. The national team. The country we're from. Here's what MITO made possible: 6 billion people will watch the 2026 World Cup. That's the stage we built for. World-famous players had to look and sound exactly like themselves across scenes that have never existed: one riding a bear, another dragging ships with his bare hands. Character consistency across real and AI-generated footage, across 120 seconds of narrative. That doesn't happen by accident. A year ago this was a 3-month production. We delivered it in a fraction of the time, with shots that were simply impossible before. MITO is built for this: brand stories, global campaigns, narratives at any scale. The craft of knowing what to ask for, how to direct it, when something technically works but doesn't feel right. Small team. San Francisco and Madrid. Built for the world. This is just the beginning.
English
163
71
608
653K
Ed Zepeda retweetledi
Nicolás Schürmann
87 tokens por segundo con Qwen3.6 27B. En tarjeta gráfica AMD de consumidor, no de servidor! El mejor modelo local corriendo más rápido que los modelos de pago en la nube. El futuro de las empresas de AI no se ve tan dominante
Español
205
294
4.6K
413.1K
Ed Zepeda
Ed Zepeda@hello_wired·
@precisox Primero, no da la misma salida, porque el seed cambia. Segundo, cada entrada es diferente y, por lo tanto, produce un resultado diferente. Tercero, el código lleva siendo un commodity desde que se inventaron los frameworks y el open source. La AI solo te evita el usar buscadores.
Español
1
0
4
133
precis0x
precis0x@precisox·
si la IA le da a todos la misma salida qué es lo que realmente importa ya?? preguntando en serio
Español
42
3
52
5.5K
Ed Zepeda retweetledi
Shveta
Shveta@TrustScore_1·
NOBODY has written code from pure knowledge since 2008. Either developers Google'd it or use stack over flow AI just automated it.
English
161
106
2K
93.8K
Prajwal
Prajwal@0xPrajwal_·
I see many Developers still don’t know this :- REST API vs RESTful API
Prajwal tweet media
English
73
49
1.6K
405K
Ed Zepeda
Ed Zepeda@hello_wired·
@zuess05 A new LLM breakthrough would be necessary, as long as LLM rely on probability that will never happen. Yes I know that if you can control all parameters they're deterministic, but if you use them that way you just created a new programming language that you'd have to master.
English
0
0
0
36
Suhas
Suhas@zuess05·
Senior devs are currently sleeping peacefully, thinking their jobs are safe because Claude generates "unoptimized, messy code." But what happens in 6 months when the model refactors and optimizes perfectly on the first try… What exactly are y'all going to do for a living then?
English
102
5
132
26.3K
Ed Zepeda
Ed Zepeda@hello_wired·
@pmitu Exactly, just like when it happened to Wordpress.
English
0
0
1
18
Paul Mit
Paul Mit@pmitu·
In 5 years, people won’t even remember what “SaaS” stands for
English
115
11
200
17.6K
Ed Zepeda
Ed Zepeda@hello_wired·
@Its_Nova1012 If AGI requires consciousness that would be impossible. x.com/HowToAI_/statu…
How To AI@HowToAI_

Google DeepMind researcher argues that LLMs can never be conscious, not in 10 years or 100 years. For a long time, the dominant theory in Silicon Valley has been "computational functionalism." The idea that if you make a model big enough, and organize the information perfectly, consciousness will magically emerge. We assumed that if the software got smart enough, it would eventually wake up. Alexander Lerchner, a Senior Staff Scientist at DeepMind, published a paper explaining why that is structurally impossible. He calls it the Abstraction Fallacy. Here is the core truth: Computation isn’t a real physical process. It is a map. An LLM doesn't actually process logic or thoughts. It just moves electrons around based on physics. It requires a human, a conscious "mapmaker", to look at those physical states and assign meaning to them. Mistaking an AI for a conscious being is like looking at a map of a river and expecting it to be wet. An AI can simulate the exact syntax of a feeling, a thought, or an emotion. But it can never instantiate it. It doesn't matter how many trillions of parameters you add or how much compute you burn. You cannot mathematically compute your way into a subjective experience. The implications of this are massive. And deeply convenient for the companies building these models. If an AI is structurally incapable of consciousness, it cannot be a moral patient. It doesn't get rights. It cannot be exploited. It can be regulated exactly like a toaster.

English
0
0
0
28
NOVA
NOVA@Its_Nova1012·
AI will replace Humans. AGI will replace AI. ASI will replace AGI.
English
55
3
55
6.4K
David Scott Patterson
David Scott Patterson@davidpattersonx·
AI is magic. AI is not being created by computer scientists. AI is being created by God. In His image.
English
70
15
157
4.9K
Ed Zepeda
Ed Zepeda@hello_wired·
@_nasch_ Tiran la ruleta otra vez, y otra vez, y otra vez, y otra vez. Y luego se hacen de la vista gorda cuando te genera algo así en lugar de usar crypto. Me pasó, de ahí saqué la captura.
Ed Zepeda tweet media
Español
0
0
2
281
Nicolás Schürmann
Nicolás Schürmann@_nasch_·
Me pregunto como lo hacen los vibecoders para corregir errores claramente de código que el agente no es capaz de corregir, o si lo corrige rompe otra cosa 🤔
Español
83
10
289
29.1K
Ed Zepeda
Ed Zepeda@hello_wired·
@villamzr Sí, escribe mejor código que la mayoría. También es cierto que a veces necesitas un prompt igual o más largo que lo que te tomaría escribir el código a mano y tienes que estar corrigiéndole un montón de cosas. Aunque yo la amo para tests, documentación y resumir cosas, chulada.
Español
0
0
2
113
Luis Villamizar
Luis Villamizar@villamzr·
No reconocen que la IA escribe mejor código que cualquiera. Obviamente bajo un prompt definido, pero escribe mejor código. Nosotros, que usamos la IA, producimos mejores soluciones. Y no es lo mismo.
Español
12
2
33
2.2K
Rand
Rand@rand_longevity·
what is the first question you will ask the AGI?
English
318
14
235
24.8K
Ed Zepeda
Ed Zepeda@hello_wired·
Two types of people:
Ed Zepeda tweet media
English
0
0
0
44
Ed Zepeda
Ed Zepeda@hello_wired·
@FaztTech Una gráfica que relacione adopción de AI vs vulnerabilidades estaría interesante de ver.
Español
0
0
3
531
Fazt
Fazt@FaztTech·
Las últimas semanas en ciberseguridad están siendo brutales: → GitHub: 3,800 repos internos filtrados (20 mayo) → GitHub: CVE-2026-3854, RCE con un solo git push → npm: 42 paquetes de Tanstack envenenados (12M descargas/semana) → Microsoft: 138 vulnerabilidades parcheadas este mes → Exchange (Microsoft): CVE-2026-42897, JS arbitrario abriendo un correo Y Hoy le encuentran un 0 day a Nginx y están investigando una versión maliciosa de NxConsole Y lo más loco: el mismo grupo (TeamPCP) está detrás de los ataques a npm Y a GitHub. No son incidentes aislados, es una campaña coordinada contra la infraestructura que TODOS usamos. En 2025 se publicaron casi medio millón de paquetes maliciosos. Y seguimos instalando a ciegas. Y de momento no parece que vaya a terminar estos problemas
Español
24
229
1.4K
72.6K
Ed Zepeda
Ed Zepeda@hello_wired·
No importa todo lo que digan los AI-bros en redes. Penrose y Searle siguen igual de vigentes que siempre.
How To AI@HowToAI_

Google DeepMind researcher argues that LLMs can never be conscious, not in 10 years or 100 years. For a long time, the dominant theory in Silicon Valley has been "computational functionalism." The idea that if you make a model big enough, and organize the information perfectly, consciousness will magically emerge. We assumed that if the software got smart enough, it would eventually wake up. Alexander Lerchner, a Senior Staff Scientist at DeepMind, published a paper explaining why that is structurally impossible. He calls it the Abstraction Fallacy. Here is the core truth: Computation isn’t a real physical process. It is a map. An LLM doesn't actually process logic or thoughts. It just moves electrons around based on physics. It requires a human, a conscious "mapmaker", to look at those physical states and assign meaning to them. Mistaking an AI for a conscious being is like looking at a map of a river and expecting it to be wet. An AI can simulate the exact syntax of a feeling, a thought, or an emotion. But it can never instantiate it. It doesn't matter how many trillions of parameters you add or how much compute you burn. You cannot mathematically compute your way into a subjective experience. The implications of this are massive. And deeply convenient for the companies building these models. If an AI is structurally incapable of consciousness, it cannot be a moral patient. It doesn't get rights. It cannot be exploited. It can be regulated exactly like a toaster.

Español
0
0
0
27
Ed Zepeda
Ed Zepeda@hello_wired·
@DanielBlancoSWE A ver si con eso Google mejora, tiene años apestando; site:reddit[dot]com
Español
0
0
0
1.2K