Month: January 2026

who puts the most data centers into orbit

by

He map of world data centers It shows that there is no decentralized internet and that they are proliferating like mushrooms. In fact, planet Earth has fallen short and big tech companies already have their eyes set on the sky to plant a data center in space due to issues such as energy demand, environmental impact and, why not say it, to avoid regulation. The “panacea” of space. Faced with the threat of energy consumption similar to that of Japan in 2030according to data from the International Energy Agency or the brutal density of Data center Alley in Loudonin northern Virginia, with nearly 250 operational facilities, space envisions the possibilities of having satellites equipped with solar panels that capture energy directly from the sun, thermal dissipation in space and the absence of terrain limitations. There’s less left. For it to be viable, it takes at least a decade, as esteem University of Central Florida research professor and former NASA member Phil Metzger. However, it is one thing for the bills to work out economically and another for technologically having to wait so long. According to Josep Jornetprofessor of computer and electrical engineering at Northeastern University and satellite researcher, in just a couple of years we will begin to see evidence. And he is clear: space is the next frontier to conquer: “There was a gold rush in the West. Now there is a space race and everyone wants to place their technology in space.” Money galore. The Catalan scientist is clear that companies have incentives to move quickly and invest to get ahead to dominate the AI ​​race in general and space in particular: “Everyone wants to say they have the first platform to reach this milestone (…)So companies are spending money like there is no tomorrow.” However, Google, SpaceX and Blue Origin they are already working in developing technologies for this purpose and they are not the only ones: SpaceX. At the end of the year the Wall Street Journal uncovered Elon Musk’s company’s plan to realize data centers in space. Its CEO explained in a tweet how he would do it: “It will be enough to scale the Starlink V3 satellites, which have high-speed laser links.” More specifically, they are working on modifying and improving their rockets to make them capable of hosting computing loads for AI. Blue Origin. The American media also put on the table Jeff Bezos’ project, which at the time revealed at the Italian Tech Week that it’s a matter of time before we see “giant training clusters” of AI in orbit in the next 10 to 20 years. The company has a team dedicated to developing the technology required for centers in space. Google. Last November the Mountain View company speak of their experimental project Project Suncatcher: in 2027 and with the collaboration of Planet Labs they will launch two test satellites with their own AI processing chips. Others. There are other smaller corporations working in this area. The most notable is StarCloud, a startup backed by NVIDIA that a few weeks ago launched a satellite with an NVDIA H100. This GPU is used to run a version GemmaGoogle’s open language model. You need energy (and knowing how to use it). Although the foundations have already been laid, the road is not exactly downhill. Jornet details that one of the big obstacles will be having enough energy for these orbital data centers to function: “The Sun can be a great source of energy, but to properly harness it, orbiting data centers would need huge solar panels kilometers long or a constellation of smaller panels that could number in the tens of thousands.” Life in space is hard. There are more melons to open, such as how AI chips will withstand harmful space radiation, as well as heat dissipation and cooling. On Earth thousands of liters of water are used. In space there is no such option and although temperatures are low, there is no air to cool the chips naturally. The bill to the Earth. Even ignoring the environmental impact in space, it also leaves its mark on Earth. At least, in the short term: rocket launches not only consume fossil fuels, but also damage ecosystems and animals in the environment, as happens at Cape Canaveralwhich now hosts about 80 launches a year. In Xataka | The real reason why Musk, Bezos and Pichai want to build data centers in space: bypass regulation In Xataka | The problem with data centers is not that they are running out of water or energy: it is that they are running out of copper Cover | Pixabay

In 1976 Boston built its most amazing skyscraper. Until its windows became lethal guillotines

by

The John Hancock Tower It was conceived in the late 1960s as the great coup of authority of modern Boston: a minimalist, elegant and almost “invisible” skyscraper, designed to reflect the sky with enormous panels of lightly tinted blue glass, with reduced mullions to a minimum and without elements that would break its purity, topped by a plant that visually sharpened the corners and a vertical slit that further stylized the mass. But there was a mistake fat. The modernist dream of a glass needle. The skyscraper was the type of building I wanted seem inevitableas if it had always been there, and at the same time had to demonstrate that “corporate architecture” could be a piece of urban art. In other words, a clear aesthetic ambition was sought, but it implied an enormous risk: betting everything on glass and geometric precision, where any failure ceases to be a defect and becomes a dangerous spectacle. The first shock of reality. From the beginning, the project lived under the spotlight because it in the Back Bay neighborhood and very close of Trinity Churcha historical milestone that already had a symbolic and emotional weight in the city, and that threatened to be dominated by the shadow and presence of the new colossus. Was protests and design adjustmentsbut the real conflict soon arrived below ground: the excavation and temporary retaining walls were deformed and gave way before the mud and clay fills characteristic of the area, damaging sidewalks, services and even nearby buildings. Trinity Church ended up claiming and won a million-dollar compensationand the skyscraper, before it even existed, was already seen as a work that was too ambitious for the terrain that supported it. The glass scandal. The episode that turned the tower into a black legend of architecture occurred when it was still unfinished: with the Boston winds, the panels began to crack and fall awayand the glass fragments began to fall to the street like some kind of lethal rain. The authorities even cordoned off areas and closed streets when the wind rose, and the image of the “brilliant” building was replaced by another. much more humiliating: windows covered with plywood sheetsa partially bandaged tower in the center, which earned nicknames like “Plywood Palace” and jokes like “the tallest wooden building in the world.” In a skyscraper that was intended to represent absolute control, the failure was not only technical: it was a reputational blow direct, one where the symbol of its modernity (glass) had become a meme and a threat… Why it failed. At first you knowsuspected the wind as the main actor, of the suction and channeling effect around the building, and tests were reviewed in wind tunnels with models of the environment, but the core of the problem was in the window itself. Apparently the system it was too rigid: the reflective layer and its connection to the metal frame did not allow bending, and in a structure subjected to vibrations, oscillations and continuous thermal cycles, this lack of “play” became the breaking mechanism. The stresses were transmitted to the glass instead of being absorbed, the cracks propagated, and the result was inevitable: enormous and very heavy panels, weighing hundreds of kilos, failing repeatedly until the unthinkable was assumed in a newborn corporate icon: it was necessary to replace them all. The tower at the time the windows that had fallen out were replaced with plywood The expensive remedy. The solution It was shocking.: remove and replace the entire glazing with a more robust, tempered and heat-treated glass, in an operation that cost several million and that prolonged the ordeal for years. The project, announced with grandeur and reasonable budgets, ended up becoming a spiral of delays: the inauguration was postponed, the numbers skyrocketed and the tower went from promise to public embarrassment. Even so, mass glass replacement was the only way outbecause it was not about fixing a few defective pieces, but about correcting a façade idea that had been born with a structural fragility incompatible with the climate and real loads of Boston. The building today The final twist. And when it seemed like the worst had already happened, came the most disturbing blow: Later calculations suggested that, under certain wind patterns, the building could have a stability problem more serious than assumed, with unforeseen twists and dangerous behavior on its narrower sides. The tower also moved enough to cause dizziness to occupants in tall plants. The city discovered that the beauty of minimalism had a physical price. The answer it was double: on the one hand, install a huge damping system with tuned masses, two gigantic weights mounted with springs and shock absorbers to oppose the swaying and “return” the building to its center. On the other hand, reinforce with tons of bracing steel diagonal. It was, in essence, reengineer an icon already built so that it would continue standing with the dignity that had been promised from the first render. The paradox: from shame to object of desire. The most fascinating thing is that, after such a disastrous start, the tower ended up establishing itself as an admired piece and recognized, until receiving prestigious awards and becoming an inseparable element of the Boston skyline. As they counted then architectural experts, it was the kind of redemption that only happens when a building survives to his own crisis: the public ends up remembering its silhouette and its reflection, not the panic of the closed streets or the wooden planks covering the absent glass. The Hancock went from being a historical lesson for modern architecture (a reminder that aesthetics does not negotiate with physics) to be, precisely because it has overcome this technical hell, a work with a certain aura of resistance, almost a monument to the obsession with fixing the irreparable. One more thing. Over time, the tower maintained its place as the tallest skyscraper of New England, but its story continued to move in the practical terrain of money, tenants and identity: … Read more

For the first time in history the possibility of a Mediterranean without wine is beginning to appear on the horizon

by

The same week we found out that Nabimia is flooding Europe of grapes grown in the middle of the desert, a map goes viral that says that the continent’s wine-growing areas have been moving north for decades. What’s the point of all this? Is it even possible? Let’s see it. Let’s start with the map. In recent days, the map is by Sebastian Gräff for The European Correspondent and shows how, in Europe, the “wine-growing areas” have been shifting for 60 years due to the effect of climate change. Not only has it gone viral, it has also become very controversial. Just look at the map to see that historical areas full of vineyards (such as the Jerez countryside) do not appear on it. And it is not a specific failure: there are ‘gaps’ of this type in practically all of the countries that come out. And yet, this isn’t exactly a problem. How is that not a problem? Because what the map represents is the Huglin index: one of the many indices that tries to determine the areas with optimal conditions for growing vines. It is based on a viticultural principle: that each grape variety needs a certain amount of heat to be grown successfully. The Huglin index tries to make an estimate, but (due to the nature of meteorological data) it is not useful for concrete detail. The best-known example is the slopes: having one orientation or another can change the average daily temperature of the area by more than two degrees. It is rather a tool to classify areas, predict ripening and plan the cultivation of certain varieties. But a tool that only makes sense in its context. And the map is not its context. I mean, it’s not what it’s intended for, but that doesn’t mean it’s not interesting. At the end of the day, climate change is one of the most important “game changers” in the world of vines: we must not forget that, in 2024, the harvest took place earliest of the Marco de Jerez since there are records and experts fear that, if the trend continues like this, there will come a time when it will not be viable to grow grapes. In the same way, there are huge regions of the world that they are about to be able grow vines: UK wine production has doubled in a very short time and indeed the area planted with vines has increased 75% in the last five years. They are not yet large amounts, but the harvests are getting better and the sector is moving more and more money. And the expectation is that it will go further, of course. Bad omens. All this outlines something that researchers are beginning to take very seriously: the first time, in historical times, the Mediterranean run out of useful vines for wine production. In this sense, the Jumilla disaster of 2024 serves as a warning to navigators. Wine is entering unknown territory and we are going to bear the worst part. Image | Sebastian Graff In Xataka | The oldest wine in the world is “Andalusian” and has been resting for 2,000 years. If it’s good or not, no one wants to know.

We believed that the US was facing a major energy shortage problem for AI. The data says the opposite

by

To win the AI ​​race you need several things, but two are very important. The first, have the best technology and the best chips. The second, having enough energy to power those chips. The US has the first, but everything pointed to it having a major energy bottleneck. That is no longer so clear. China has plenty of energy. The China’s strategic visionwhich once again has been investing in the energy field for decades, is bearing fruit and the country has considerable room for maneuver in terms of energy supply. That is a factor that seems to tip the balance in its favor: Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA, already warned that China can win the AI ​​race. According to him, China has more flexible regulation and its companies have government subsidies for the energy their data centers need. But the US has another philosophy. A deep study from the startup Epoch AI—responsible for FrontierMath AI benchmark— serves as a counterpoint to these pessimistic theories. In recent months we have seen how the US seems to have a real problem with the energy needed for AI data centers. China has not stopped increasing its energy generation capacity, but the US has not for a simple reason: until now it did not need it. Source: Epoch AI. However, Epoch AI explains that it is not that the US is not capable of creating more energy capacity: it simply has not needed it until now. While China has prepared for the future—even if that future does not come—the US has maintained a more conservative attitude: as long as there was no demand, it would not make any move. The immediate question, of course, is whether you can move it now or is it too late? And no, it doesn’t seem like it is. Forecast of necessary energy capacity for data centers in the US until 2030 according to different scenarios. In the worst of all of them (pink color), almost 80 GW of capacity will be needed. Source: Epoch AI. The demand is going to be huge. There is a reality: those ambitious plans to create more and more data centers throughout the US —with Project Stargate at the forefront—will cause data centers in the country to need between 30 and 80 GW of energy capacity in 2030. For those responsible for the study, it is perfectly possible that the US “gets its act together” – pun intended – and manages to increase its energy capacity. As? Various options. The US has room for maneuver. In order to supply all that energy that all those data centers will theoretically need, there are several clear alternatives according to the Epoch AI study: Natural gas: is relatively cheap and plants can be built quickly. There are three large companies that can cover this demand: GE Verona, Mitsubishi Heavy and Siemens. The plans of all of them point to a production of more than 200 GW in 2030. Even if they are not met, this supply (without being totally dedicated to AI) would already be an important part of the solution. Solar energy: the other big part of the solution, especially because its costs have fallen drastically and because it is very, very scalable. We have already seen how the US has the capacity to install 1,200 GW solar for IA thanks to its deserts, but at the moment Big Tech does not dare to use them. Once again, estimates point to around 200 GW of installed capacity in 2030, but even if these expectations are not met, this infrastructure will also be a clear part of the solution. Energy flexibility. The report also talks about a dynamic supply philosophy. Most of the time the US power grid is oversized for one simple reason: It is built to be able to supply power at peak peaks—like when everyone turns on the air conditioning—but most of the time there is plenty of power even to give to large AI data centers. This future infrastructure must be created with that same idea: oversized, but flexible. And there are other alternatives. The country is turning to energy solutions that it thought were buried to power data centers. Among them are the fossil plants that were theoretically going to close but that are returning to operation due to the astonishing increase in demand. There is also talk of going to military solutions and even more unusual alternatives, such as energy under volcanoes. Not to mention, of course, the nuclear power plants and the small nuclear reactors (SMR) that are already being used by some of the Big Tech for your data centers. Be careful with your electricity bill. The reality is that in the North American country data centers are growing faster than electrical infrastructure, and these facilities They are draining the country’s electricity. The situation is even causing electricity grid operators to ask be able to shut down data centers in times of high demand. And then there’s the other big side effect: AI data centers they are skyrocketing the electricity bill. When starting up an AI data center, power costs a tenth of what chips cost. Source: Epoch AI. There doesn’t seem to be a problem. Even with all those obstacles, Epoch AI’s conclusion is clear: “we doubt these challenges are significant enough to impede the scaling of AI.” In fact, they remember that what is actually expensive are the chips, not the energy, which represents a tenth of the investment in chips. The report concludes that China having an advantage is not necessarily true, and that the hypothetical US energy bottleneck “is much weaker than many people have indicated.” Image | Andrey Metelev In Xataka | Artificial intelligence has already reached nuclear power plants. And it’s going to change them forever

Germany is experiencing a new “industrial miracle” that it already experienced 90 years ago: that of weapons

by

Germany has been living a transformation silent but very deep. The country that saw the birth of the industrial miracle of the automobile is seeing something similar again, but from a perspective completely different: rearmament, which until recently was a political taboo and a social discomfort, has become a great industrial and labor accelerator. War as a driving force. The country, pushed by the russian invasion of Ukraine and the feeling that the American umbrella is already It’s not so automatic As before, it has been shifting its center of gravity towards defense with a mix of strategic urgency and productive ambition. And that mutation is measured in something very specific: employment, factories, supply chains and a demand that is no longer described as temporary, but as a new normal that promises to last for years, with orders that come in like a wave and companies that prepare to produce at scale, with war economy rhythms without the need to call it that. Mass hiring. German defense contractors have entered into a veritable hiring feverincreasing its workforce by nearly a third in just four years. The data provided by a representative group of large companies and start-ups shows a jump from around 63,000 workers in 2021 to almost 83,000 today Within its defense-focused divisions, a 30% growth which reflects the extent to which the industry is expanding at real speed. I remembered the financial times that, although these figures do not cover the entire sector and there are large companies that did not participate, the portrait is enough to understand the direction of the country: Germany not only buys more weapons, but is rearming its industrial muscle to manufacture, sustain and modernize them, with a labor market that is beginning to reorganize itself around this new priority. Rheinmetall Panther KF51 The budget turn. The great fuel for this expansion is public money converted into contracts. Since 2022, the German Ministry of Defense has signed arms deals worth of 207,000 million eurosand last year alone it concentrated 83,000 million, a figure that contrasts with the 23,000 million in 2021 and that summarizes the break with the previous stage. The most significant thing is that the trend does not aim to stop: Chancellor Merz, in office since May, has relaxed the strict debt rules to allow the level of spending needed in defense, a message that, beyond politics, works as an industrial signal: there will be stable demand, continuity and visibility, just what companies need to invest, expand capacity, hire and plan for the long term without fear that everything will freeze with the next electoral cycle. The real size of the sector. Even with this boom, the German defense industry remains a relatively modest player in terms of employment when compared to the country’s historical giant: the automobile. The Ministry of Economy itself cited around 105,000 jobs direct in defense in 2022, and although the figure will have risen since then, it remains far from the approximately 700,000 workers in the automotive sector, today hit by layoffscompetitive pressure and technological transition. This comparison is important because it cuts to the root a repeated idea: that rearmament can “replace” the car as a great work cushion. Defense can grow a lot, even draw on industry and attract talent, but due to volume it does not seem capable of absorbing the size in the short term. of the engine crisisat least not quickly or massively. Airbus and Reinmetall. Within the employment map, Airbus stands out as the largest employer, with around 38,000 people working in defense worldwide and just over half in Germany, manufacturing key pieces of European military architecture such as the Eurofighter Typhoon and the transport plane A400M. right behind Rheinmetall appearswhich has become the most visible symbol of the boom: the producer of tanks, artillery and ammunition has grown from about 15,400 employees in 2021 at 23,500 todaythe greatest absolute leap among the companies analyzed, and its CEO, Armin Papperger, has even projected a target of 70,000 employees in three years. In parallel, Rheinmetall has begun to experience something that in Germany is a cultural indicator: social attractiveness. He speaks of hundreds of thousands of applications in a single year, as if defense had stopped being a dark or secondary sector to suddenly become a bet for the future for engineers, technicians and industrial profiles. Military startups. The big relative surprise is in the new scene of military start-upsyoung companies focused on surveillance systems or weapons not always publicly detailed, that are raising hundreds of millions in financing and growing at a rate almost unthinkable a decade ago. The most striking case It’s Helsing.which makes armed drones and whose workforce has grown 18-fold in four years after evolving from an artificial intelligence software approach to hardware productiona leap that involves going from selling algorithms to build real objects with parts, assembly lines, logistics and maintenance. This movement is, in itself, a statement: European defense no longer wants to depend only on digital innovation, it wants to convert innovation in physical and deployable systemsand for that you need companies capable of manufacturing and scaling, not just programming. The State accelerates. From within the sector, the discourse is one of sustained takeoff. The BDSV employers’ association, in the voice of Hans Christoph Atzpodien, insists that growth will accelerate because Germany has streamlined processes purchase and has given more visibility on future demand, which allows capacity planning with less uncertainty. The phrase is almost industrially literal: now everything is placed so that large orders “arrive at the doors” of manufacturers. If you want and how do we countthe scenario describes a change of era: for years Europe talked about spending more on defense, but it did so with administrative slowness, political doubts and eternal programs; now the feeling is that the system is being reconfigured to buy and produce urgently, because the threat is perceived to be close and the margin for improvisation has been exhausted. The great temptation: “steal” the car. … Read more

AI has already destroyed the world of programmers as we knew it. Now it’s the turn of the translators

by

On November 8, 1519, an extraordinary meeting took place: Hernán Cortés met with Emperor Moctezuma II. Of course, neither one nor the other understood anything of what their interlocutor was saying: Hernán Cortés spoke Spanish and Moctezuma spoke Nahuatl, but that problem was solved thanks to two chain translators: Malinche translated from Nahuatl to Mayan, and Jerónimo de Aguilar went from Mayan to Spanish, and vice versa. History is full of legendary translations like that one, and in all of them, human beings depended on human translators to understand the other party. That has been changing with various technologies, but the one that is really about to change everything is AI. With AI we have found (and translated) In fact, translation technology has run parallel to technological evolution itself. From the translation based on rules of the second half of the 20th century we moved in the 90s to the automatic statistical translations which, for example, ended up using Google Translate. These systems looked for the “most likely” translation, not the “most correct” one. These statistical models improved with the phrase-based translationbut The final leap was made by DeepLwhich appeared in 2017 to change everything with the use of neural networks and neural machine translation. Google had also started to adopt that system in 2016, and it was clear what the path was. With the arrival of generative AI we have found ourselves with another potential leap in this field. There are, however, differences: these systems are based on large language models (LLM) that are then trained and tuned specifically for translationwhich a priori gives them an advantage when it comes to achieving more natural and versatile translations. The application of AI models to the field of translation seems to be following in the footsteps of what we have seen with programming. Developers have embraced this revolution and many of us have realized it thanks to the vibe coding that it is possible to program without knowing how to program. The same clearly occurs with these systems that enable us to know how to speak languages ​​that we don’t actually know how to speak. Machines do it for us, and they do it better and more immediately. The real-time translation is very fashionable and both Google and Meta—which has been warning for a long time— they are integrating it into their current or future glasses augmented reality. Apple, which does not usually launch things that are not mature, has just integrated it on your AirPods. The user experience may not perfect at the momentbut it is clear that this type of function is going to become more and more common, a commodity technological more. The transition And this transition that wants to turn access to quality translations into something “trivial” has been made evident these days with the launch of two platforms. The first, the ChatGPT Translatorwhich is surprising not because it is an obvious and simple use case for AI, but because it is a logical indiscriminate copy of the services that already work, Google Translate and DeepL. Being able to do the same with AI shows that that problem seems solved. The translation of Gemma 3 27B was already good. TranslateGemma’s is even better, even with smaller models and challenging language pairs. And if it didn’t seem like it enough, Google has just presented its new generative AI models specifically aimed at translation. It is about TranslateGemmaa family with versions 4B, 12B and 27B (the latter, logically, the most capable) that allow these tasks to be carried out locally, privately and without connection to the cloud. They support 55 language pairs and of course they are prepared for the most popular ones (English, Spanish, Chinese, French, Hindi), but their creators already indicate that they are training them with 500 additional language pairs for the future. We are therefore facing a moment in which learning a language will probably end up becoming something more vocational or aspirational than something that we really need on a daily basis. Human translators, like human programmers, will still have valuebut once again what is clear is that AI is going to make this type of capability more accessible than ever. In Xataka | Some of the emails you read may not say exactly what was written. A forgotten Gmail setting is to blame

repeating tasks until boredom

by

Despite the great achievements that They have been harvesting some humanoid robots In recent years, in terms of the naturalness of their movements and household chores, they are still green enough to be put on sale to the mass public. Firstly because of the price, and secondly because what they say they do, they still do little effectively. teaching. In China they have already realized that, in order for them to be as effective as we hope, we have to teach them how to do things. In this sense, the country has already launched a network of more than 40 public training centers where human workers, equipped with virtual reality headsets and motion sensors, repeat everyday actions hundreds of times a day such as opening a microwave, folding clothes or tightening screws. The objective is none other than to generate the movement data that humanoid robots need to learn to perform these tasks autonomously. National priority. The Chinese government has identified embodied artificial intelligence, which is AI in physical form, as a national priority, which has sparked a wave of investment in robotics. The country is already home to more than 150 companies dedicated to humanoid robots and seeks to position itself as a world power in a sector that Goldman Sachs esteem could reach $38 billion in 2035. Why do they need so much human data. Unlike large language models, which are trained with texts available on the Internet, robots require much more complex data sets: visual information, joint movements, rotations and adaptations to unpredictable environments. And, just as they explain Since Rest of World, this information cannot be easily extracted from the web. Chinese local governments are addressing this shortage with state-funded facilities, typically built by public administrations and operated by robotics companies. How training works. The middle highlights the case of Kim, a 20-year-old computer science student who works as a trainer at a startup in Shanghai. “We call ourselves cyber workers. It’s a decent job, if a little boring,” according to account to the middle. In the country’s largest training center, located in the Shijingshan district of Beijing and developed in collaboration with the Leju company, they work with 1.66 meter high “Kuafu” robots. Just like explains In the middle, each robot is assigned two human trainers who, using motion capture devices, record between 200 daily action sequences. An example: Teaching a robot to place a frying pan on a stove required 1,250 repetitions, according to details People’s Daily Online. The spaces where robots “study”. The most complete installations replicate real-world scenarios on a full scale. These can range from automobile assembly lines and logistics warehouses to domestic kitchens and bedrooms. The Beijing center occupies more than 10,000 square meters and offers 16 specific scenarios, including environments simulating automobile factories, smart homes and nursing homes, as exposes the middle. At another facility in Hubei province, nearly 100 human-controlled humanoid robots practice movements such as ironing or wiping tables hundreds of times a day. “It’s like teaching children to walk with a lot of practice,” counted a spokesperson for the project spoke to the media. It is not the most efficient method. Several robotics researchers still debate whether recording human movements, a laborious and slow process, is really the best way to create fully intelligent robots. Ken Goldberg, a robotics researcher at the University of California at Berkeley, declared to Rest of World that this is “a noble effort and there is a lot of hope right now that this will work, but it is slow. Even if you have hundreds of people working, it will take a long time to get enough data.” Yesovercapacity. China’s National Development and Reform Commission issued a warning in November about the risks of a bubble in the humanoid robotics industry. Marco Wang, analyst at Interact Analysis, account told Rest of World that “there are some potential bubbles” because the model may generate overcapacity. While mass commercial use still seems distant, some of the largest orders come from the public sector, such as the case of the company UBTech Robotics, which sold humanoid robots worth $80 million to three data collection centers in China, according to account the middle. The first “graduated” robots are already working. Robots trained at these centers have acquired more than 20 operational skills, with success rates greater than 95%, according to they count from People’s Daily Online. Some are already deployed, handling materials at factories for state-owned automaker China FAW Group, working as couriers for Shenzhen Capital Group or carrying out inspections at electrical facilities. Images | Shijingshan Robotic Center In Xataka | China is winning the humanoid robot race. The problem is that this race doesn’t really exist.

how the industry sold us empty calories in exchange for destroying our satiety

by

There was a time when buying whole milk or “full fat” yogurt was considered nutritionally reckless. Dietary guidelines, obsessed with reducing saturated fat, for decades pushed consumers toward pale, liquid, skimmed versions of what was once a staple food. Eating “light” became synonymous with eating well. However, the narrative starts to crack. The story of María Branyas, the woman who lived to be 117 years old and who consumed several full-fat yogurts a day, is just the tip of the iceberg of a deeper change of outlook. The researchers who studied his case warn that yogurt alone does not explain his longevity – genetics, lifestyle and environment come into the equation – but it could play a relevant role in the balance of his intestinal microbiota. The focus, today, is no longer just on the calories we subtract, but on how much processing we add along the way. The processing error. For more than half a century, health authorities encouraged limiting red meat and fatty dairy products, warning that its saturated fats They raised LDL cholesterol and, therefore, the risk of heart disease. This premise fueled a massive industry of “light” and “0%” products. However, the problem was not the cow. As Dr. Montse Prados Pérez explainsmember of the Spanish Society of Endocrinology and Nutrition (SEEN), when natural fat is removed from a food, its texture, flavor and nutritional profile are altered. To compensate for this loss of flavor, many manufacturers turn to sugars, starches, sweeteners or additives. The result is a product with less fat, yes, but also more processed, less satiating and potentially harmful to the intestinal microbiota and appetite regulation mechanisms. Added to this phenomenon is a possible metabolic rebound effect. Nutritionist Laura Isabel Arranz warns that Sweeteners, common in low-fat yogurts, send a sweet signal to the brain without providing real energy. This discordance can confuse the metabolism and favor a more “saving” response, preparing the body to more efficiently store the energy that arrives later. Why doesn’t whole fat act the same? There is a technical irony in the dairy aisle: we take the skimmed jar to maintain the line, but we forget that for the body to use it, it needs precisely the fat that has just been removed. Vitamins such as A or D They are fat soluble; Without that natural fatty vehicle, absorption is a chimera. In the end, trying to enrich a 0% yogurt is like trying to make a car run by pouring gasoline into it. The industry adds the nutrient, but has removed the mechanism to make it work. All this is explained by the “dairy matrix”. Unlike other fats, milk fat occurs naturally wrapped in a complex structure. known as dairy fat globule membrane (MFGM), rich in phospholipids and bioactive proteins. This biological “envelope” is essential because it appears to positively modulate the way our body processes cholesterol. In fact, recent research published in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition have observed that the consumption of yogurt and cheese maintains a neutral—and even potentially beneficial— relationship with cardiovascular health, unlike what would be expected if only their saturated fat content were analyzed in isolation. Whole yogurt and metabolic risk. The evidence is also beginning to materialize in clinical trials. a study published in 2025 compared the consumption of full-fat yogurt (3.25% fat) versus skimmed yogurt in adults with prediabetes. After three weeks, those who consumed full-fat yogurt showed a significant reduction in blood triglycerides compared to the group that consumed nonfat yogurt. Although it is a short-term study and in a specific population, its results add to an increasingly consistent scientific literature. Along these lines, cardiologist Dariush Mozaffarian, director of the Food Is Medicine Institute at Tufts University, maintains that dairy fats are not intrinsically harmful and that there is “ample evidence” of the benefits of fermented dairy products. For its part, natural yogurt and kefir provide satiety, promote intestinal health and help avoid the subsequent consumption of empty calories. Back to real food. The conclusion for the consumer begins to be clear: the fear should not be in natural fat, but in artificial processing. The new dietary guidelines in the United States already reflect this paradigm shift by insisting, for the first time explicitly, on the need to prioritize real foods and avoid ultra-processed foods loaded with sugars, sodium and additives. This does not mean that full-fat dairy products should be consumed without limit or that they are suitable for all profiles. Institutions like Harvard remember that dairy fat It is still mostly saturated and that moderation continues to be key, especially in people with cardiovascular disease or familial hypercholesterolemia. But outside of those clinical contexts, as Dr. Prados Pérez summarizesfull-fat natural yogurt makes sense again: it is more satiating, preserves its original matrix and requires less industrial intervention. In the end, perhaps the secret was not in reformulating foods in a laboratory, but in something much simpler: opening a natural yogurt and eating it as it always was. Image | freepik Xataka | The woman who lived to be 117 had a favorite yogurt: a yogurt that thousands of people are now searching for

In 1925, procrastination was already a problem and someone found the definitive solution: the isolation helmet.

by

Hundreds of thousands of years of evolution They have turned modern humans into perfect machines in one thing: distracting us. No matter where, when or how you are, if you are accompanied or alone, if you are waiting in line at the butcher shop or have a book in front of you, chances are that your attention ends up dispersing for any nonsense. Maybe the flight of a fly. Maybe that sound you just heard in the next room or a stain on the wall. It happens today and it happened a century ago, when a science fiction-loving inventor designed the ultimate machine to end distractions. His patent dates back to 1925, but it addresses a hot topic: procrastination. The war of wars. Since man has been a man, he has done two things, both wonderfully: he is distracted and he procrastinates. Almost 2,000 years ago Seneca warned us about the risks of wasting our time and we know, for example, that distractions were one of the big concerns of the monks of the Middle Ages. Some even thought that if our minds disperse it is due to the influence of devils. In 2026 things are not very different. A quick Google search comes up to find a wide (very wide) list of guides and videos with tips on how to focus and stop putting off tasks. And it is understandable. After all, cell phones, social networks and other inventions of modern technology make our lives easier, but they have been filing our ability to focus. Even science has confirmed that we are losing the ability to focus among so many stimuli. And how do we solve it? We humans have not only been distracted for centuries and centuries. We have also spent some time looking for ways to avoid that annoying wandering of thoughts. Of all the solutions that have been given to the problem, perhaps the most astonishing (and bizarre) is the one proposed just a century ago by Hugo Gernsbachan imaginative Luxembourgish-American inventor. His name may sound familiar to you because, in addition to register patents of inventions and working in the electronics industry, Gernsback excelled in another field: publishing. Throughout his life he promoted several magazines focused on technology (RadioNews), but he also shone in science fiction. We owe him Amazon Storiesa milestone of the genre. His contribution in the field was so important that he is considered one of the parents of science fiction (with permission from Verne and HG Wells) and every year he is honored through the Hugo Awards. Adding facets. A century ago Gernsback combined this double facet, his technical ingenuity and overflowing imagination, to launch a proposal through the pages of Science and Inventiona magazine specialized in technology. In its July 1925 issue, the inventor, editor and novelist presented a creation which he named ‘The Isolator’. The name is striking in itself, but it pales in comparison to the photographs that illustrate the report. They show Gernsback working in his office with his head in a gigantic diving suit, an elongated helmet with two small openings for the eyes and a tube that connects it to an oxygen cylinder. Its purpose: to immerse the wearer in absolute isolation, an ideal state for centering. When silence does not come. Gernsback came to a conclusion very simple: sometimes it is not enough to lock yourself in a room without noise to concentrate. Even so, we risk our mind getting carried away by the flight of a fly or starting to wander after seeing a stain on the table. The way to avoid it, he concluded, was to eliminate all those influences “in one fell swoop.” As? With a helmet prepared to suppress unnecessary noises and visual stimuli. For the first thing, the noises, Gernsback decided to go for a robust multi-layer helmet. Its first prototype was made of solid wood with an internal and external layer of cork and a felt trim. For the second (view) he added three small pieces of glass. The design was completed with a device at mouth height that allowed the user to breathe without noise creeping in. The result, says the inventorit was a helm with an efficiency of “about 75%”. It isolated from external noises, but not completely. There was room for improvement. And how did you improve it? Perfecting the design. Gernsback rethought the material and added an air chamber so that the efficiency of ‘The Isolator’ rose to 90 or 95%, “eliminating practically all noise.” So that vision was not a problem either, the helmet’s glass peepholes located in front of the eyes were painted black, leaving only a narrow transparent strip. “When the two white lines on the glass open, the field through which the view can move is relatively small,” points out the inventor. “It is almost impossible to see anything but a sheet of paper in front of the user. There is no distraction.” Concentrating… and breathing. It is one thing that ‘Isolator’ lived up to its name by isolating the user in a bubble of responsible concentration and another, very different, that it was comfortable or even bearable. The author explains that after 15 minutes with it on the user “experienced some drowsiness”, so he decided to improve the breathing system, connecting it to a small oxygen tank. This improved breathing and “revitalized the subject.” In his article Gernsback added detailed plans of ‘The Isolator’ and even a sketch of an office with a complete distraction-proof installation, which included a ‘noise-proof’ door and an adequate ventilation system. “With this provision you can contemplate an important task in a short time,” boasted. “Building ‘The Isolator’ will be a huge investment.” The power of paper. If humanity has also learned something (including Gernsback) it is that paper supports ideas that are not supported in reality. His helmet may have been eye-catching, it may have even worked, but it didn’t work. We don’t know to what extent its inventor really expected it … Read more

Science has something to say to all those who drink coffee as soon as they wake up

by

Having a coffee for many is something that It is essential to start the day. It is something that in our country has become a cultural habit, but it is also a very relevant pharmacological event. Since although many people’s day doesn’t start until this coffee, our body already has its own “start-up” system built in as standard that we could be affecting. A good debate. Recently has arisen an idea that has set a precedent: Ingesting caffeine immediately after waking up interferes with the body’s natural biology. Specifically, with cortisolwhich is the stress hormone that allows us to wake up in the morning and sustain us throughout the day. Given this, It is recommended to wait between 60 and 90 minutes to drink your first cup of coffee.. Although… How much truth does this have? If we analyze the most recent clinical literature and population studies, we discover that Coffee in the morning is, in fact, a powerful ally for cardiovascular healthbut its maximum effectiveness depends on fine synchronization with our hormones. Natural injection of energy. To understand the effect of coffee on our body, we must first understand what happens when you don’t drink it. When you open your eyes, your brain doesn’t turn on like a switch, but instead starts a chemical cascade known as Cortisol Awakening Response (CAR). This is essential, since upon waking up, cortisol begins to increase and reaches its maximum peak approximately 30 to 60 minutes after opening the eyes. A hormone that is essential to activate us, and that is released in large quantities, for example when we are stressed or there is danger. A limbo of signals. In this way, if we introduce caffeine right into the body when cortisol is rising, we may be generating unnecessary overstimulation, increasing nervousness or so-called jitters. Furthermore, caffeine (despite the fact that it hurts for some) does not provide real energy to our body, but what it does is block the adenosine receptors, which is responsible for making us feel tired. In this way, when we wake up, there is still some of this signal in the body and if we block it suddenly and too soon, when the effect of the coffee wears off, this accumulated adenosine suddenly binds to its receptors and causes the famous mid-afternoon fatigue. What science knows. To date, there are no controlled clinical trials that compare the long-term cognitive performance of a group of people who drink coffee immediately versus another who waits 90 minutes. But what we do know is that there is a tolerance effect. A study published in PMC points out that in regular coffee consumers, the cortisol response to caffeine is significantly attenuated. That is, your body has already gotten used to that morning “hit” and the hormonal interference is much less than in an occasional consumer. In this way, when we remove the morning coffee, it may be much more difficult for a person to properly start their body as they lack that ‘drive’ to which their body has become accustomed. The night battle. Where the science is clear is in the use of caffeine late in the day. A study in Science Translational Medicine showed that a double espresso three hours before bed delays the circadian clock by about 40 minutes, seriously affecting sleep quality. Is it worth waiting? If you are one of those who feel intense anxiety after the first coffee or if you experience an unbearable drop in energy at two in the afternoon, the recommendation to wait 90 minutes has physiological plausibility and can be a valuable personal experiment. By delaying caffeine, you allow cortisol to do its job and residual adenosine to be cleared more naturally so you don’t have that unpleasant mid-afternoon tiredness. However, for the healthy general population accustomed to coffeethere is no evidence that taking it as soon as you wake up is harmful. We are only left with that effect of dependence on coffee that interferes with the internal ‘caffeine’ of awakening that our body produces. This is why the 90-minute rule is more advice based on clinical observation and biological logic than on robust studies. In Xataka | We knew that coffee was good for our health, but now we have discovered that it is a great ally of our microbiota

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.