Month: November 2025

Udio closed fronts with Universal. The creators were then left unable to download their own AI songs

by

Generative music applications have achieved something that seemed unthinkable a few years ago: allowing anyone, with just two prompts, to can produce complete songs with vocals, arrangements and structures that can sound surprisingly real to most who hear them. This experience, which is presented as magical and accessible, has a much less visible side, linked to how these models have been trained and their legal implications. Many of these platforms have turned to large volumes of content available on the weboften copyrighted, to build their systems. The user enjoys the result, creates and shares, until a legal change, an agreement or a lawsuit transforms the tool and the experience is no longer the same. Until just a few weeks ago, udio It was one of the services that best represented that promise of instant creativity. It had managed to attract both curious people and experienced musicians thanks to its simple system, the tools to extend, mix or remake songs and, above all, the possibility of downloading songs for use outside the platform. There was nothing to suggest that this model was about to change. The first indication came when the company began to talk about a “transition phase” linked to new agreements with record companies. It did not yet detail what was going to happen, but it made it clear that the platform was entering a different stage. The day the download button disappeared. Confirmation came when Udio announced thatas part of its transition, audio, video and stem downloads would be disabled for several months. It was a feature that many considered essential, but now they could only play their creations in Udio and share them using links from udio.com. In exchange, the company reported an increase in credits and more generation capacity, although that did not compensate for the feeling of loss. The message was clear: the songs still existed, but they no longer left the walled garden. Warner and Universal chose a different path than the judicial confrontation: turning Udio and Suno into partners rather than adversaries. Universal signed agreements for the next version of Udio to be based on licensed music and offer artists new avenues of income, while Warner did the same with Suno and also sold the Songkick platform to incorporate it into that new ecosystem. Record companies went from denouncing to collaborating, with a clear condition: at least in the case of Warner and Udio, artists and composers would have the possibility of deciding whether their voice, their image or their style could be part of the creations generated by AI. From defendants to partners. Once the content is within the legal space, what is relevant is not only that agreements have been signed, but how the industry’s priorities have changed. A year ago the goal was to put AI platforms on the bench for using protected music to train their models. Today, a growing part of the sector has understood that it may be more profitable to integrate them than to stop them. The move does not eliminate legal conflicts, but it opens the door to a model in which record labels oversee, license and participate in revenue, rather than reacting only through lawsuits. It is a change of focus that signals where the music business is moving. What nobody sees: scraping as the foundation of musical AI. For years, the actual functioning of many generative music models was far from transparent. Some startups, like Suno, admitted to having trained their systems with “virtually every quality music file available on the web,” trusting that such use would be protected by the fair use. However, when record companies began to examine that process, the conflict ceased to be technical and became legal. Images | Universal Music | udio | Unsplash In Xataka | AI has become the best example that if you don’t pay for the product, you are the product

There are people making all kinds of theories to know the price of the Steam Machine. And no one is very optimistic

by

The Valve’s Steam Machine has been received as a manna for the somewhat disastrous hardware landscape of the industry, with Switch 2 turned into a completely isolated system and aimed at its circle of consumers and Sony and Microsoft giving the impression of being somewhat lost in a scenario that is little or nothing exciting. In these comes Valve, which has already turned the concept of the portable PC upside down with its Steam Deckand now proposes a consolidated PC, completely oriented to work with Steam and ready to steal space from traditional consoles. Of course, there is a question that no one dares to answer completely: and the price? There are more and more theories. Not at losses. Valve has discarded compete in price with traditional consoles. The company confirmed that its new Steam Machine, scheduled for early 2026, will not follow the subsidized pricing model that characterizes PlayStation and Xbox. This means, as explained by one of the engineers responsible for the design of the machine, Pierre-Loup Griffais, that the device will align with “what would be expected from the current PC market”, explicitly rejecting the idea of ​​selling at a loss to expand market share and be more attractive to the general public. Frustrated expectations. The gaming community did its calculations: one of the most widespread bets said that Valve would take advantage of its 30% commission for each game sold on Steam to offer affordable hardware. These illusions have had to be qualified: youtuber Linus Sebastian revealed on his WAN Show that when he was in a meeting with Valve itself and suggested a price of $500, “no one confirmed anything, but the energy in the room completely changed.” That is, the youtuber thinks that Valve’s intentions point to a higher price. The current projections They place the Steam Machine between $750 and $900, very far from the $549 for the standard PlayStation 5 or the $599 for the Xbox Series X. Even the base model, cheaper and with 512GB, could exceed $600. Disappointing precedents. The original Steam Machines, launched in November 2015 after two years of delay, They barely reached 400,000 units sold throughout its commercial existence. The concept shipwrecked for multiple reasons: SteamOS ran on Linux, drastically limiting the catalog of compatible games; the product lacked a defined identity (it was, at the same time, too rigid for PC users and excessively complex for console consumers); and the proliferation of manufacturers led to a chaotic range of prices, from $499 to $1,500. In 2018, Valve quietly deleted any mention of the product from its store. How the subsidized price works… Yes, Valve has already said that it will not apply. But an approach is useful to understand what options Valve has on the table. The console industry traditionally operates through a model of hardware sold at a loss, which is recovered through the console business ecosystem. For exampleMicrosoft sold the Xbox 360 with a deficit of $125 per unit, while Sony absorbed losses of $240 to $300 with each PlayStation 3. The economic recovery It is obtained later, from commissions usually of 30% on each game sold, from subscription services and from official accessories. Microsoft publicly acknowledged in 2021 that each Xbox was still trading at a loss. The component crisis. But there is another reason to expect a high price for the Steam Machine, and that is that the rise of artificial intelligence has unleashed an unprecedented crisis in the memory market. There is data which speak of year-on-year increases of 171.8% in DRAM prices. Samsung and SK Hynix satisfy only 70% of orders, prioritizing HBM memories for AI data centers. AND are predicted serious shortfalls in DRAM, NAND Flash and hard drives during 2026, in a crisis which can last until 2029. The conspiracy of prices. The combination of unsubsidized hardware and expensive components puts the Steam Machine in an ambiguous position. Valve now has unthinkable advantages in 2015yes: in-house manufacturing, SteamOS refined thanks to the commercial success of Steam Deck, and a much broader compatible library. However, some analysts They warn that success will depend largely on the final price. Without the possibility of competing economically with traditional consoles, the device could remain half-hearted in commercial terms.

China does not want to give up ground as the world’s factory. Their plan involves deploying a legion of industrial robots with AI

by

For years, looking at the label of any device, garment or charger has been almost a formality. The answer used to be the same: “Made in China“. That phrase became silent proof that the Asian giant had managed to establish itself as the factory of the world. From American brand mobile phones to small components of European appliances, much of what we use every day has come from Chinese production lines. But that reality is beginning to change. China’s industrial leadership is no longer sustained solely by abundant labor and low costs, and the model that dominated the last decades needs to be transformed. The shift is not only economic, but also social. Fewer and fewer young Chinese want to work in factoriesa phenomenon that in the United States follows similar patterns: physical jobs, long hours and little professional projection. In both cases, the industry is no longer synonymous with progress for many and is perceived more as a destiny from which one tries to escape. Even so, both China and the United States consider that manufacturing remains strategic, either to maintain global influence or to reduce dependence on foreign countries. Everything indicates that none of them are trying to recover the model of the past, but rather to build a new one based on automation and artificial intelligence. Robots and factories to avoid losing “Made in China” When the Chinese Vice Minister of Industry, Zhang Yunming, said that Adopting artificial intelligence is a necessary and not optional task, I was not speaking only in technological terms. He was referring to protecting one of the country’s great assets: its manufacturing industry, which represents around 25% of the national economy, well above the world average. China remains the world’s largest producer, but it can no longer rely solely on volume or labor. The challenge now is to maintain that leadership by manufacturing with fewer people and more artificial intelligence. In this context, China is responding decisively. The pace at which it is deploying industrial robots is unmatched. Last year alone it installed 295,000 units, almost nine times more than the United States and more than the rest of the world combined. according to the International Federation of Robotics. In some facilities there is already talk of “dark factories”, operations so automated that the plants can operate with minimal human intervention. The Wall Street Journal mentions the Baosteel caseone of the largest steel plants in the country, where workers only intervene every half hour, when before they did so every three minutes. Automation no longer consists only of mechanical arms that repeat movements, but of connected plants, capable of making decisions. The aforementioned newspaper points out how Midea uses an AI system that coordinates robots, sensors and virtual agents to detect failures, assign tasks and adjust processes without human intervention. In the textile industry, Bosideng uses AI models developed with Zhejiang University to conceptualize and design garments, reduce development times and cut costs. This type of solutions not only speeds up production, it also generates a competitive advantage over Western manufacturers that implement changes more slowly. Where China’s industrial ambition is also clearly seen is in the ports. In Tianjin, a fleet of autonomous trucks moves containers without visible human presencewhile artificial intelligence optimizes variables such as ship arrival times and crane capacity. The system, called OptVerse AI Solver, has compressed planning tasks that previously took 24 hours to about ten minutes. PortGPT, a system developed together with Huawei to analyze images and monitor security operations, has also been deployed. The American discourse is based on the idea of ​​sovereignty: manufacturing more within the country to depend less on the outside. The Trump administration has raised that strategy through tariffs on China, Vietnam and other Asian economieswith the aim of attract factories and rebuild supply chains. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick maintains that automation is not incompatible with employmentbut it can generate better-paid technical professions. In an interview he stated that “it is time to train people for the jobs of the future, not for those of the past,” and defended that these factories could support families for several generations. One of the differences between the two models is clearly seen in the ports. While China has deployed autonomous trucks, AI-based planning systems, and tools like PortGPT without significant union opposition, in the United States automation is subject to collective bargaining. The International Longshoremen’s Association and port operators they agreed to veto new automated terminals until the end of 2030, also limiting the use of artificial intelligence in administrative tasks. For unions, automation means losing jobs and bargaining power. For China, it is a national strategy. China wants to continue being the world’s factory, but not exactly the same. It is no longer about cheap labor, but about factories capable of producing more with fewer people and with more artificial intelligence. The United States seeks its own path, with more work conditions and a different rhythmbut with the same objective of not depending on the outside. What is at stake is not just where it is manufactured, but how. And it is possible that, in a few years, the label we find will not only be “Made in China”, but a different form of manufacturing where robots will no longer be accessories, but protagonists. Images | Homa Appliances | Xataka with Gemini 3 In Xataka | Nexperia China has been trying to contact the Dutch headquarters for days. The only response has been absolute silence

Boeing wanted to get back on track with Starliner after its most difficult year. The contract with NASA just changed in a key point

by

For years, Starliner was presented as Boeing’s opportunity to aspire to a leading role in American manned flights, in a scenario in which SpaceX I moved faster with Dragon. The contract signed with NASA in 2014 It represented that opportunity: six manned flights and an open door to a new cycle of missions. Eleven years later, the situation is different. That agreement has been adjusted and the next mission has become an exam without people on board. That agreement placed Starliner within the program with which the US space agency sought to guarantee two different US vehicles to the International Space Station. The idea was clear: have more than one capsule capable of transporting astronauts, long-term planning and autonomy in low orbit. That document established that, once the ship was certified, Boeing would operate six manned flights for regular rotations. All this with an eye on the station’s deadline, scheduled for 2030. A shortened contract, by mutual agreement. NASA and Boeing have decided to modify the conditions of the original agreement and reduce the number of guaranteed flights. Instead of the six manned missions planned after certification, the new scenario includes a mission without astronauts, intended to validate the system, and up to three crew rotations. In addition, there are two optional flights that NASA can activate depending on its mission needs. This review also reduces the value of the contract, which goes from $4.5 billion to $3.732 million, after deducting $768 million. Starliner-1 changes roles. This mission without astronauts has a name: Starliner-1, and it has become a key piece of the system validation plan. NASA will use it to send cargo to the International Space Station and verify, in real conditions, that the changes introduced after the manned flight in 2024 offer sufficient guarantees. The target date remains no earlier than April 2026, provided the spacecraft successfully completes testing, certification and pre-launch preparation. A history of setbacks: The first warning came with flight OFT-1 in December 2019, when some problems prevented for Starliner to complete the planned profile and approach the International Space Station. The mission had to be terminated early. In 2022, the OFT-2 flight managed to reach the station, but problems appeared in several thrusters. Two years later, during the first manned flight, several thrusters failed again on approachwhich led NASA to order the return of the ship without the astronauts. NASA and Boeing engineers inspect the Starliner spacecraft after landing in White Sands, New Mexico, during the OFT-2 orbital test in May 2022 When NASA decided that Starliner would not bring Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams back, they both extended their stay on the International Space Station much longer than planned. In total it was nine months, until the agency scheduled a Dragon flight with two fewer astronauts than usual to have enough space. That landing, in March 2025, allowed the return to be completed and confirmed that the evaluation process on Starliner was still open after the 2024 manned flight. Meanwhile, Dragon. In parallel, Dragon began operating with astronauts in 2020 and was progressively incorporated into NASA’s regular planning. Since then, the SpaceX capsule has covered the planned rotations within the Commercial Crew Program, becoming the vehicle regularly used to access the International Space Station. In August 2025, the Crew-11 mission was completed, and Crew-12 is scheduled for February 2026. NASA has booked additional flights with Dragon until the station’s operational end, scheduled for 2030. Less flights, less income, more pressure. The contract modification also means a change in Boeing’s position within the program. The reduction of the total value to 3,732 million dollars implies 768 million dollars less compared to the original figure, with fewer guaranteed flights and a greater weight of optional missions. According to Reutersthe company has invested more than $2 billion since 2016 in this development, which adds relevance to Starliner’s performance in upcoming flights. Despite this, Boeing says it remains committed to the program. Redundancy against the clock. For NASA, Starliner remains relevant because the agency wants two independent systems that can transport astronauts to the International Space Station. Steve Stich, head of the Commercial Crew Program, summed it up by pointing out that the plan involves certifying the ship in 2026, scheduling its first manned rotation when it is ready and coordinating future flights according to the operational needs of the station, which will remain active until 2030. Maintaining this double capacity is key so that the agency does not depend exclusively on a single vehicle. What happens from now on will depend on the outcome of the next flights. If the system manages to be certified in 2026, Starliner can still participate in up to three crewed rotations, with two additional options subject to NASA decision. Boeing maintains its commitment and suggests that the ship could have a place in commercial projects after the end of the International Space Station, although these scenarios are yet to be defined. The opportunity has not disappeared, but it no longer looks as much like the one signed in 2014. Images | NASA (1, 2) | Boeing In Xataka | Starship’s great hope has gotten off to a bad start: a new and painful explosion

The question is not whether Tim Cook will soon stop being CEO of Apple, but who will succeed him: Crossover 1×30

by

The end of an era is approaching, they say. Or maybe not. The rumors about Tim Cook’s potential “retirement” are contradictory, and if a few days ago the Financial Times spoke about He would retire early next year.yesterday new data they threw down that possibility. But here it happens that when the river sounds, it carries water, and this conversation does not come from now, but from months ago…or years. The current CEO of Apple came to this position in 2011, after the death of Steve Jobs, and since then he has turned the company into an absolute money-making machine. One that, yes, has disappointed with (theoretical) projects like Project Titan, with a Vision Pro that for the moment is still not taking off or with the surprising irrelevance in the AI ​​segment. That’s not the problem, of course. Although Apple has consolidated itself among the three companies with the largest market capitalization in the world in recent years, what it lacks is spark and the ability to innovate. Today Apple continues to depend heavily on the iPhone, although it is true that in recent years the services have given it a lot of joy. That makes it especially interesting to set up a pool with the main candidates to succeed Tim Cook, and that is what we have done in this new installment of Crossover, in which we debate Cook’s career, but also about who can take that baton. And many variables come into play here. From that operational strategy—will the new Apple be more innovative, or will it continue to focus on making money?—to the geopolitical implications of choosing a new CEO. Because let’s face it: This position is not just technologicalbut also political and diplomatic. There is a lot to cut through here, and it will certainly be interesting to see how the next few months go. On YouTube | Crossover In Xataka | Tim Cook has admitted that Apple is “very open” to acquisitions in AI. These are our candidates

They depend on road transport and there is a lack of 3.6 million truck drivers

by

Today almost everything you buy, from supermarket food to the latest mobile phone, has traveled by truck before reaching your hands, and in Europe three out of every four tons of goods move by road. 75% of the goods are transported by road and 85% of the transportation of perishable products is done in fleets of trucks that, currently, do not have enough drivers. The International Road Transport Organization (IRU) calculate that in 36 countries that add up to around 70% of the world’s GDP there are 3.6 million truck driver vacancies, which represents around 7% of the total existing positions. With the progressive aging of the templates, the problem it’s not going to get better in the coming years. One million truck drivers by 2026. For Europe, the IRU predicts that in 2026 there will be a shortage of around one million professional truck drivers. Meanwhile the rise of online commerce demand has skyrocketed of road transport and, according to calculations presented by IRU, the volume transported in Europe will grow by approximately 11% until 2030, which aggravates the tension between the supply of drivers and the real needs of the market. The data provided by IRU show that the driver shortage is a structural problem that affects America, Asia and Europe equally and is not limited to a specific crisis in the road transport sector. Sector sources warn that, if decisive action is not taken, the number of vacancies could exceed seven million drivers by 2028, with 4.9 million unfilled positions in China, about 745,000 in Europe and around 200,000 in Turkey. “If concerted and continuous measures are not taken, this demographic time bomb will explode, seriously affecting economic growth and competitiveness around the world,” said Umberto de Pretto, secretary general of the IRU in his report. Spain needs 30,000 drivers. This lack of professional drivers It is already visible in Spain, where it is estimated that there are around 30,000 unfilled truck driver positions and around 4,700 additional vacancies in bus transportation to meet the growing demand. The IRU and national carrier associations warn that, if the trend continues, the combination of more cargo to move and fewer available drivers could translate into uncovered routes, delays in deliveries and strong pressure on transportation costs. An aging sector with little relief. One of the underlying problems is the age of those who are already working behind the wheel of a truck. In Europe, the average age of drivers is around 47 years old, while in Spain the average is over 50 years old. 50% of Spanish truck drivers are over 55 years old. IRU points out that some 3.4 million truck drivers on the continent will retire in the coming years, which means that millions of professionals will leave the sector in a relatively short period, further aggravating the shortage of labor for the transport of goods. Without quarry. At the same time, the freight transport sector does not have a enough generational change. Less than 12% of professional truck drivers are under 25 years of age on a global scale and in Europe that percentage falls to around 5%, with countries such as Spain or Poland where those under 25 years of age barely represent around 3% of the workforce. To attract new drivers, some governments have begun to make moves, although for now in a limited way. In Spain aid has been approved up to 3,000 euros per person to get a truck permit or class C and D bus. Job improvements. Faced with a scenario of labor shortage, professional drivers’ associations they regret the few proposals aimed at improving the working conditions of professionals. According to a study by the transportation sector employment platform TDRJobs, salary increases (24.3%) and improved working conditions (22.1%) are among the main reasons for driver turnover. In Xataka | That Japan has 100,000 people over 100 years old explains a problem: they are literally running out of drivers. Image | Unsplash (Konstantin Kitsenuik)

stuck on a dead end track

by

In September, the future European fighter in which Spain participates began to disfigure publicly. Already in November, in a new twist of script, the European fighter began to point to something else. The latest? The Future Combat Air System project, FCAShas ceased to be solely an industrial and technological program to become an uncomfortable mirror of Europe’s ambition (and limitations). The plane is literally at a dead end. A symbol that wobbles. Those ambitions have was staged these days in the figure of Emmanuel Macron and Friedrich Merz, and the Europe they aspire to. Both leaders have spent weeks redoubling a speech that insists on strategic autonomy, digital sovereignty and its own military capacity, a message that is amplified in a continent shaken by uncertainty about the American commitment and by the aggressiveness of a Kremlin that has returned conventional war to the heart of Europe. In this context, the FCAS had been conceived as the emblem of a continent capable of compete with the F-35 American, to secure replacements for the Rafale and Eurofighter that are beginning to approach their operational end, and to demonstrate that Europe can still lead technological revolutions in defense. Reality blow. But the rindustrial and political reality surrounding the program contradicts official rhetoric. Eight years after its presentation, FCAS is accumulating delays, internal disputes and an atmosphere of mistrust that turns each negotiation into a slow erosion of expectations, forcing us to wonder if this plane of 100,000 million of euros has not become a failed test before even taking off. The blockages that show the seams. Behind the common façade, France and Germany carry structural rivalries that become especially visible when they must cooperate in a field as sensitive as combat aviation. Dassault and Airbus, the giants called to work side by side, have been exchanging reproaches. Eric Trappier, head of Dassault, has never hidden his refusal to give up leadership in design, nor has he hidden his disdain for German technical capacity in areas considered critical. From the other side, Airbus accuses Dassault of protect historical privileges incompatible with a modern multinational project. The international success of the Rafale, unexpectedly converted into a symbol of independence compared to the F-35, has further strengthened the French position and has strained the distribution of burdens and responsibilities. None of these frictions are new, but they are have become more corrosive at a time when cooperation is no longer just desirable, but necessary. What should have been an alliance between equals has led to what analysts describe as a marriage of convenience full of suspicions, in which every tactile decision on intellectual property, industrial distribution or technological transfer becomes a clash of corporate cultures. The political factor. Added to the industrial complexity is the political vulnerability of its promoters. Macron, cornered by an internal budget crisis and by the prospect of a 2027 that could hand power to the far right, has lost the ability to impose rhythms or guarantees in long-term projects. Merz, for his part, deals with a economy that seeks to reinvent itself and with a rise of the far right which forces careful internal calibrations, but unlike France, Germany yes it has resources: Its defense budget is heading towards a doubling that transforms Berlin into the dominant partner in financial terms. This asymmetry introduces a power imbalance that irritates both Paris and the industrial partners involved. Believe or not believe. This being the case, cooperation fundamentally requires trust, but that trust is precisely the resource that is most scarce. Without clear leadership, without a sustained common vision and without an architecture that credibly distributes risks and benefits, FCAS has become a hidden battle for influence rather than a joint project. What no one says, but everyone thinks. They remembered on Bloomberg that, as delays increase, hypotheses begin to emerge that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago. It we comment a few weeks ago, one way is to transform FCAS into an umbrella digital interoperability that allows each country to build its own plane, all connected by a common data system. This path would allow Dassault to follow a sovereign path, while Airbus would concentrate its efforts on mission systems, companion drones and data fusion. But there is more. Another alternative, more ambitious and politically riskier, would be to abandon the national distribution of work, which assigns tasks by flag, and move to a distribution by industrial skillsrewarding whoever can make each piece better and faster. This last option is what specialists have been asking for for years, but it is also the one that clashes head-on with the electoral incentives of each government. European defense remains organized to maximize benefits at the national levelnot common efficiency, and as long as this does not change, they will repeat the same blocking patterns. Without deep reform, FCAS risks becoming another example of ambition being suffocated by domestic politics. Consequences of failure. He FCAS failure It would be more than the collapse of an industrial project. It would represent a devastating message for a continent seeking to demonstrate that it can guarantee its security without completely depending on the United States. While the F-35 changes balances in the Middle East and while Europe watches, almost daily, how Russian drones penetrate western airspacethe world is moving towards a technologically different war. The countries that lead this transition (from autonomous swarms to sixth generation platforms) will determine the correlation of power of the 21st century. Giving up on FCAS would mean accepting that Europe is late, that it is not prepared for the industrial leaps that modern conflict requires and that, despite the rhetoric of strategic autonomy, it continues to depend from external suppliers for their critical capabilities. This dependence is the same one that Macron and Merz say they want to overcome, although the failure to fulfill their own projects pushes them, step by step, towards it. Between two waters. If you will, the outcome from FCAS It will be a … Read more

Something is moving in the north and the polar vortex is weaker than ever

by

Something is happening in the north and we’ve been saying it for days. Forecasts pointed to a huge sudden stratospheric warming during the last week of November. I said ‘huge’ and it is not a rhetorical device: it is normally very difficult to know what consequences such a warming will have; but being so big, meteorologists they already speculate with a complete destabilization of the polar vortex. And the strange thing about all this is not that there is such a big “sudden stratospheric warming.” That’s relatively normal. The strange thing is that we are facing a very precocious one. Surely, before the earliest of the entire record. And that has set off all the alarms. What is the polar vortex? But let’s start at the beginning: the ‘polar vortex’ is a stream of strong winds (west → east) that revolves around the large reserves of cold air found above the planet’s poles. It is formed in the stratosphere; that is, at about 16-48 kilometers high. On a metaphorical (or ‘journalistic’ if you push me) level, the polar vortex is what the cold contains at the pole. Logic tells us that, in summer, the vortex is reduced to a minimum and, although it is true that we have never seen it disappear, it becomes so weak that it loses any influence over the time of the hemisphere. But in winter the situation changes and it does so radically. Very often, during the winter the vortex grows and, although “usually a solitary creature“and harmless, it is common for it to overflow and end up affecting the rest of the hemisphere. That is what it seems we are going to see these weeks. And what is sudden stratospheric warming?? To understand this process well, it is good to remember that the atmosphere is a “lasagna of air layers” and each of them follows its own logic. That is, they function quite differently and independently; but never completely independent. This is what happens between the air circulation in the troposphere (the one closest to the surface) and the circulation in the stratosphere (the layer directly above): they are related, yes; but, in substance, each one goes their own way. During the “sudden stratospheric warming“, a part of the troposphere warms rapidly and, as a consequence, invades the stratosphere, causing a profound alteration of the circulation at high altitude. That is, for a few days, everything turns upside down. Okay, so what’s going to happen? The data begins to indicate that the countdown has already been activated. As they pointed out from Meteored“a record has been recorded in the speed of the zonal wind of the polar vortex, this would be weaker than ever on those dates.” That is to say, we have just found the first sign that warming is already underway. The problem is that, as Víctor González pointed out“the ease of predicting sudden stratospheric warming in the medium term contrasts greatly with the difficulty of anticipating its consequences.” Hence, we already know with almost absolute certainty that something is going to happen in the stratosphere of the north pole, but it is not clear what is going to happen. And we know nothing of its consequences? Not for now. What’s more, it seems likely that the consequences would not be seen until mid-December. For now, the experts will have “monitor the alteration of the stratospheric polar vortex and then monitor its propagation to lower levels, finally observing how the tropospheric circulation and the polar jet may behave.” This is very meticulous work, but very necessary. We already know that this type of event is related to historic cold waves and, in that case, we better be prepared. Image | Severe Weather In Xataka | The last hope of winter in Spain is desperate, but increasingly possible: the breaking of the polar vortex

a new and painful explosion

by

The great hope for the next generation of Starship flights has gotten off to a bad start. SpaceX has suffered a new setback at Starbase, and only its rapid ability to iterate can save the furniture. An ephemeral life. The Super Heavy Booster 18, the first booster of the new version 3 of Starship, burst during the early hours of November 21 while SpaceX engineers validated their structural improvements. The prototype, which was due to launch during flight 12 in early 2026, lasted just 14 days after its assembly was completed. 48 hours after being moved to the Masseys test bench at Starbase, a pressure test of the gas system caused the liquid oxygen tank to burst. Redesigned systems. SpaceX’s objective was to test the rocket propellant systemswhich were redesigned for version 3. Fortunately, Booster 18 did not contain methane or liquid oxygen, which would have caused a large explosion like the one that Masseys destroyed in a fuel load from Starship 36 last June. With the area cleared and the Raptor engines not yet installed, Booster 18 has only caused one victim: its own structure, which has been rendered useless. The usual suspect. Although an official investigation is underway, the analysis of NASASpaceFlight points to the same component that caused the Starship 36 explosion: the rupture of one of the COPV tanks that store high-pressure nitrogen or oxygen gas in the rocket. These tanks are responsible for operating the valves and engine starting systems. The explosion of one of them could have caused a chain reaction in the adjacent COPVs strong enough to burst the wall of the rocket. And now what. The loss of Booster 18 is painful not only for being the first version 3 booster, but for being the prototype assigned to test the new Pad 2 launch pad at Starbase. Without a physical rocket to place at the base, SpaceX will not yet be able to fully test ground systems, such as the new platform’s tanks. As if it wasn’t already aggressive enough, SpaceX’s schedule is becoming even more tense. And the company maintains flight 12 scheduled during the first quarter of 2026. SpaceX has very ambitious goals in the short term, including the in-orbit fuel transfer tests that it will need to take astronauts to the Moon with Artemis III. a mission in which he now competes with Blue Origin and Lockheed Martin. Image | SpaceX In Xataka | A genius named Tom Mueller designed the engines for the Falcon 9. And now that genius wants to beat SpaceX on its own turf

Einstein is the biggest rock star of the 20th century

by

Every now and then a news story is published where this or that scientist claims to have achieved something surprising: deny or confirm a theory put forward by Albert Einstein more than a hundred years ago. The unusual interest that the physicist arouses today is only the result of a process that already occurred while he was still alive: his status as a “star”, his status as celebrity. How is it possible that a theoretical physicist has achieved such fame and recognition? At Xataka we believe we have the answer: remove Adele and Taylor Swift because, behind Einstein’s casual hair, hides the biggest pop-rock star of the 20th century. Einstein’s story has everything to succeed, a story that could be called “the gravitational physics equation that made Spielberg cry”: that of a young Jewish man, shy, somewhat clumsy and with speech problems who fails his exams and, as he finishes his degree, cannot find a job. in yourshas to get to work in a gray patent office. That young man will take three years to revolutionize the world of physics and, by extension, the world in general. The tours Einstein spent much of the 1920s and 1930s on tour. Precisely, he was outside Germany when the Nazis took power and that, taking into account the desire they had for himsurely saved his life. He visited many places and there are hilarious anecdotes. Of course he was also in Spain. And the media and society at the time went a little crazy. Julio Camba wrote in El Sol that “the public that filled the classroom of the Faculty of Sciences. Mr. Einstein was welcomed with a great round of applause. Undoubtedly, all of us gathered there admired him a lot; but if someone asks us why we admired him, they will put us in quite a serious situation.” Cartoons like this image of Bagaria that we attach below filled the front pages of the newspapers in Madrid, Zaragoza and Barcelona. After all, he was already a Nobel Prize winner (the diamond disk of science). Thanks to that it became popular even among the popular classes, such as says historian Thomas Glickwalking down the street, a chestnut seller recognized him on the street and shouted to him “Long live the inventor of the automobile!“How long live it!” The groupies and the haters There is no rock star without groupies. That’s how it is. Fans sneaking into the singer’s house to steal a souvenir are a classic in the world of music. It also happened to Einstein. In late May or early June 1978, Michel Aron (newly named editor of New Jersey Monthly) approached a 27-year-old editor named Steven Levy and said, “I want you to find Einstein’s brain.” Rumors had been circulating for years about the brain in question. Steven Levy scoured the entire United States to find the coroner who performed the physicist’s autopsy. When he found Thomas S. Harvey He confessed that he had stolen the organ without the family’s permission and had been taking it around the United States for more than 30 years. Undoubtedly, Einstein also took the fan phenomenon to another level. Einstein some strong smear campaigns. It is logical, taking into account that among his detractors were some of the greatest experts on haterism in history. “100 scientists against Einstein“was perhaps the most aggressive campaign. But he resolved it with a phrase: “One hundred? Why so many? If I were wrong, only one would be enough…”. For the rest, the truth is that it must be recognized that he quickly became an endearing, distracted and somewhat crazy being. Einstein for a while They say that at a social gathering, Marilyn Monroe crossed paths with Albert Einstein, they started talking and, at some point, she said to him: “Professor, we should get married and have a child together. Can you imagine a baby with my beauty and intelligence?” Einstein very seriously responded: “Unfortunately I fear that the experiment will go the other way and we will end up with a son with my beauty and intelligence.” The anecdote, which is almost certainly lieshows the social and cultural stature of that Jew from Ulm called Albert Einstein. A carving that has generated countless cultural products. Some tremendously good. Become a symbol of peace, creativity and the use of science to help humanity, any excuse is good to celebrate it publicly. For our part, we just need to finish with what is perhaps the most important quote that Einstein said in his life. “Rest and be relatively good.” In Xataka | Einstein’s first violin had passed unnoticed. Until an auction house put it up for sale. In Xataka | What is a light year and why it is impossible to travel it in less than a year, according to Einstein’s relativity In Xataka | More than 100 years ago Einstein predicted gravitational lensing. Thanks to this we have discovered a “dark matter bridge” Image | Collab Media

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.