Graduado en economía e iterando hacia la ciencia de datos. Me gustan los neoclásicos y la economia conductual. También me encanta el boxeo y la relojería.
Reus/Barcelona
Joined January 2022
- Tweets19.4K
- Following3K
- Followers474
- Likes44.4K
Luis Fernando retweeted
Cuando menos plano seas, mejor futuro tendrás.
A nivel profesional, pero también a nivel personal.
Luis Fernando retweeted
En el fondo, abordar la complejidad y los desafíos de las intervenciones en sistemas requiere de una profunda modestia, así como de la asunción de que, a pesar de nuestros mejores esfuerzos, no siempre podemos prever todos los posibles resultados. Adoptar un enfoque cauteloso, informado y adaptable es esencial para afrontar desafíos y fomentar intervenciones responsables y efectivas. En otras palabras: si el objetivo de la primera Ilustración era alcanzar la claridad y precisión, la nueva Ilustración debe navegar a través de lo que es vasto, impreciso e incierto.
Mientras que la primera Ilustración se centró en el poder de la razón y el conocimiento para mejorar de manera lineal y predecible la sociedad, la segunda Ilustración se enfrenta a la paradoja de que el aumento de conocimiento y conectividad puede llevar a resultados menos predecibles y no siempre positivos. Esto no implica que el valor del conocimiento o la razón haya disminuido, sino que la aplicación de estos principios requiere una nueva comprensión de la complejidad y la interdependencia en el mundo moderno. El conocimiento ya no se acumula de manera ordenada, sino que origina confusión; los intereses no se suman, sino que se anulan entre sí; el aumento de la información no conlleva una mayor claridad, sino una mayor dificultad para ver el panorama completo; y las decisiones, aunque racionales individualmente, pueden desencadenar consecuencias desastrosas.
Para hacer frente a estos nuevos problemas hipercomplejos, precisamos de la ciencia de la complejidad, que aporta valiosas teorías que pueden ayudar a explicar fenómenos como las transiciones críticas, donde pequeños cambios pueden llevar a consecuencias drásticas a gran escala.[192] Además, la idea de dependencia de la trayectoria (path dependence) enfatiza cómo las decisiones pasadas condicionan las opciones futuras, encerrando sistemas en caminos de difícil reversión.[193] El investigador Carl Folke y sus colegas también explican cómo los sistemas fluctúan entre equilibrios hasta que un impulso los lleva a un punto de quiebre, esencial para comprender cómo los sistemas pueden colapsar o transformarse.[194]
Por otro lado, la ciencia de redes ilumina la estructura de la conectividad entre los componentes de sistemas globales, mostrando cómo la robustez o la fragilidad de una red puede influir en la estabilidad general del sistema.
Luis Fernando retweeted
Soy al único al que cada vez le motivan menos los nuevos modelos?
No veo en qué va a mejorar lo que puedo ir consiguiendo ya.
Fable 5.5 is coming today, as per sources.
Anthropic is reportedly about to launch Claude Fable 5.5, the follow up to Fable 5.1.
- It's said to be better at reasoning and intuition than current Claude models
- The focus is on understanding users more naturally, even when they don't explain everything perfectly
- Basically, you won't need long, detailed prompts. Even half-baked ones should be enough for it to figure out your intent
The signs have been here for all to see:
- On Oct 13, claude-fable-5-5 appeared in Azure's model catalog marked "Generally Available"
- Partners reportedly already have access
- New codenames "Onigiri" and "Verrine" surfaced in the Devin CLI
- Both previous Fable launches dropped on a Tuesday.
Today is Tuesday
It would also complete the 5.5 lineup after Opus, Sonnet and Haiku.
This direction isn't new either. Anthropic's Fable 5 prompting guide already says a short statement of intent can steer most of the model's behavior, and that overly detailed old-style prompts can hurt output.
I think we're moving into a phase where prompt engineering matters less for everyday tasks. You just describe what you want and the model figures out the rest.
The first Titan model is getting closer
Luis Fernando retweeted
I have never been a "rug merchant". Outside finance, the only physical merchandise I have ever sold was condoms in industrial quantities shipped to the bordello where his mother used to work --which, I admit, may not have been perfect.
Luis Fernando retweeted
En cualquier democracia, el que da explicaciones es el que lleva ocho años en el poder. Si la campaña va a consistir en exigirle cuentas a la oposición, que paren esto, que me bajo.
Luis Fernando retweeted
En un descuento de flujos a diez años, más de la mitad del valor suele estar en el valor terminal. Y el valor terminal depende de dos números que nadie puede estimar: crecimiento perpetuo y tasa de descuento.
El modelo es largo. La apuesta es corta.
Luis Fernando retweeted
🇨🇭 El Banco Nacional Suizo cotiza en bolsa. Tiene accionistas privados que no pueden mandar en él y cobran un dividendo limitado por ley.
Un banco central con forma de sociedad anónima y alma de institución pública. Comprar sus acciones es comprar casi solo la curiosidad.
#Suiza #finanzas #bancacentral
Luis Fernando retweeted
Dice el ministro de Defensa de Italia que los jóvenes se comunican usando el móvil y lo notifica como un gran descubrimiento
NEW: Italy’s Defence Minister Guido Crosetto said the recent riots in Milan and other parts of Italy were the result of what he called a hybrid war being waged against Western countries through unconventional tools such as TikTok, social media and YouTube.
Crosetto said that three in ten young people had participated in the demonstrations and six in ten supported them, arguing that young people had been subjected to a counter-education outside their families and schools that shaped their values, ambitions and worldview in ways that conflict with democratic rules.
Luis Fernando retweeted
⚡ 𝗚𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆'𝘀 𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗻𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗹𝘆 𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟬 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟱. 𝗢𝗳 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗲𝘅𝘁𝗿𝗮 𝗲𝘂𝗿𝗼, 𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝟰 𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝘄𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗘𝘂𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲.
🔹 From €25bn to €72bn a year.
🔹 Of the €47bn increase, German companies alone took 𝟳𝟭%, and German firms with foreign partners 19%.
🔹 Non-European firms: 6%. The rest of Europe: 𝟯.𝟲%.
This is not Germany's fault. A government spending its own money wants the highest return at home. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺 𝗶𝘀 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗘𝘂𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗮 𝗘𝘂𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗻 𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱: 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝗲𝘆.
More in my article for @EUobs, link in comments 👇
Luis Fernando retweeted
Estoy de acuerdo. El debería dejar de odiarnos a los que le pagamos el sueldo para pagar la guardería de su bebé. Yo solo deseo que no vuelva a ser ministro y que pongan a uno que nos arregle los trenes de una vez
El amor es el poder más poderoso que existe.
El amor está detrás de las decisiones que benefician a la mayoría y a los más débiles.
¡Viva el AMOR y viva el PSOE!
@oscar_puente_
#LaFuerzaDeLaGente
Luis Fernando retweeted
Igual es que no fluye por Ormuz
El petróleo desafía toda lógica económica con su precio: el crudo fluye a raudales por Ormuz pero el barril sube hasta los 111 dólares
eleconomista.es/mercados-cot…
Luis Fernando retweeted
Alemania está perdiendo competitividad industrial y España tiene una oportunidad histórica.
Tenemos costes laborales y energéticos más bajos, pero nos falta red eléctrica y nos sobra burocracia. No podemos permitirnos perder esta oportunidad.
Luis Fernando retweeted
𝗗𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲: 𝗘𝘂𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲 𝗯𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗹𝘆 𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗿𝗼𝘄𝘀 𝘁𝗼𝗴𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗯𝘂𝘆𝘀 𝗮𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗲
I write today in EUobserver on how Europe finances and buys its defence.
💶 𝗟𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗼𝗻 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝗲𝘆
🔹 Of the €800bn announced under ReArm Europe, €650bn is not common money. It is the estimated room under the national escape clause to spend up to 1.5% of GDP more for four years. Each country pays.
🔹 And it is temporary: keeping higher spending after 2028 could require 0.25 to 0.4 pp of GDP of extra annual adjustment from 2029.
🔹 The other €150bn, SAFE, is 𝗹𝗼𝗮𝗻𝘀, 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗴𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁𝘀. Grants are small: €1.5bn from EDIP plus the European Defence Fund.
🗺️ 𝗨𝗻𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝘂𝘀𝗲
🔹 The Netherlands and Sweden have used neither. Like Germany (only the clause), they borrow at least as cheaply as the EU, so SAFE gets them nothing. France has taken SAFE but not the clause, to protect the credibility of its budget plans.
🔹 SAFE matters on the eastern flank: Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia can borrow 5% to 8% of their GDP, Poland almost 5%.
🔹 Private money: the EIB and EIF are trying, but defence is almost a monopsony. Without a clear flow of public orders, it will be hard to come by.
🛒 𝗔𝗻𝗱 𝗘𝘂𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲 𝗯𝘂𝘆𝘀 𝗮𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗲
🔹 In 2007, governments agreed to spend 35% of equipment budgets on joint projects. In 2025: 𝟭𝟭% (EDA).
🔹 SAFE barely changes this: two buyers are enough, and until end-May 2026 one could even buy alone.
🔹 Buying alone is expensive: bigger orders, lower unit costs. That is why Europe has long bought American: 58% of arms imported by Europe's NATO members in 2021-2025, as in 2016-2020 (SIPRI).
🔹 New orders are changing. In Germany, the non-European share fell from 42% in 2022 to 4% in 2025. But German firms alone won 58%, with foreign partners another 36%, and 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗘𝘂𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲 𝟮.𝟰%.
🔹 France asks for strict "buy European" rules, yet FCAS has failed over Dassault's demand to lead.
📉 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲
🔹 German defence shares rose fourteenfold to an October 2025 peak and have since lost 45%. The rest of Europe's rose sixfold and is only 11% below its peak.
🔹 When Berlin cancelled the F126 frigate, Rheinmetall fell 18.7% that day. A European order book would spread that risk.
✅ 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗘𝘂𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲 𝗱𝗼?
✅ Tie common money to common buying: any new SAFE round and the defence part of the Competitiveness Fund only for purchases by at least three countries. In a NextGenerationEU 2.0, defence should be a priority.
✅ Write "Made in Europe" rules for Europe, not for one country's industry.
✅ Joint orders over several years: companies build factories when they see a decade of orders, not a loan facility.
✅ Let companies merge, keeping the door open to new entrants. The Airbus, Thales and Leonardo space merger will test EU competition policy.
Unless this changes, Europe will spend more without the scale or shared capabilities the money should buy.
Link in comments 👇
Luis Fernando retweeted
Nuevo paper sobre las consecuencias económicas de la inmigración en los nativos, con el caso de España
Va más allá del típico análisis fiscal, estudiando cómo interactúa con el mercado laboral. Ojo, es el típico paper muy ambicioso donde un pequeño detalle cambia mucho las cosas
Luis Fernando retweeted
Everyone talks about what AI will do. But almost nobody asks who will pay for the machines. Taking advantage of AI will require an extraordinary amount of capital, from data centers to new power plants. Will that capital be around?
I try to address that question in the first draft of my new paper “Saving for the Machines.”
To show how important capital is to fuel the transition to an AI-based economy, I document how the same technology path that generates 11.7% annual growth when households choose their saving rate optimally delivers only 2.2% when the saving rate remains fixed. In other words, if we experience slow growth over the next few years despite fast improvements in AI, this slow growth may reflect too little capital accumulation instead of a technological bottleneck.
The key to this result is that AI raises the capital share by moving tasks from labor to machines, which requires that those machines are built. In comparison, ordinary technical progress makes labor and existing machines better at the tasks they already perform.
To inspect the mechanism, I start from an accounting identity: the saving rate is the capital share times the ratio of investment to capital income. If I take the evolution of the capital share as given, I can ask how much the latter ratio moves in response to that evolution. Crucially, with an optimizing household, this ratio barely moves. As machines take over tasks and the return to capital rises, the household responds by letting consumption grow faster, by the intertemporal elasticity of substitution times the rise in the return. To pay for that faster consumption, capital must also grow faster by the same amount. So, the household keeps investing about the same fraction of what the machines earn. And since machines earn a larger share of output, the saving rate also goes up. With a fixed saving rate, the same accounting identity tells me the opposite: the ratio falls in proportion as the capital share rises.
Will the U.S. and other advanced economies then generate enough capital? For many reasons, I doubt it. We might end up in a situation where many of the opportunities offered by AI are left on the table. This is particularly important for all who think that AI might get us out of many problems, such as fiscal troubles (like in France) or ultra-low fertility. We need to save for the machines, and it is not clear we can do that.
Anyway, this paper has been long in the making (many months of hard work), but I have learned much from it. In particular, working through the model changed my mind about many issues related to AI. Again and again, my intuition said X, but the math said Y. And math always won in the end. That is why we write formal models.
A nice example is Proposition 5, whose proof is the one I like the most in the paper. With improving machines and strong task complementarity, there is no fixed balanced growth path because the target itself keeps moving. The nice part of the proof is to realize that, after the right normalization, the moving target becomes a fixed point, and the saddle gets steeper as machines improve. So instead of falling behind, the economy tracks the moving BGP more and more closely. A fair amount of ODE work to get there, but a very simple economic idea underneath it once you get it.
The paper is here:
sas.upenn.edu/~jesusfv/Savin…
and the slides are here:
sas.upenn.edu/~jesusfv/Slide…
Luis Fernando retweeted
En Francia el sector público representa aproximadamente un 57% del PIB. Ni con esas el Estado ha sido capaz de acometer la que es su principal labor: defender y proteger a sus ciudadanos y sus propiedades.
Hay que mandar de una vez por todas a la socialdemocracia al basurero de la historia.
Luis Fernando retweeted
Hay una pena arrastrada que no se puede resolver con una sonrisa. Tampoco se puede verbalizar mucho o nada. Tratad bien a la gente, por defecto. La vida ya es lo suficiente hostil. Solo os puedo recomendar sol, agua, charlar, ejercicio y poca red social. Ánimo 🌞🤍
Luis Fernando retweeted
La mayoría de hombres viven bajo un régimen de depresión silenciosa. Fingen estar bien, son funcionales pero hay un dolor oculto. Os mando un abrazo largo, sea lo que sea que te esté ocurriendo (a veces ni se sabe).
Luis Fernando retweeted
Lo más gracioso, por decir algo, del esquema Ponzi al que estamos sometidos en las cotizaciones para las pensiones, es que la estafa piramidal que supone (no consigo verlo de otro modo) se va a terminar justo cuando nos toque cobrar a nosotros. Por si no era ya suficiente estafa.
