These are the five best offers from MediaMarkt’s VAT-Free Day

Today, the 16th, we have a new Day without VAT from MediaMarkt. As usual, We have a little less than 24 hours to take advantage of very good discounts in technology and we have everything: from mobile phones to tablets, through televisions, appliances and even on this occasion, also consoles. The price could vary. We earn commission from these links There is a lot to choose from, but we have made a selection of five offers that we find especially interesting: nintendo switch 2 by 399 eurosa discount for the Nintendo hybrid that will increase in price in just a few weeks. LG OLED C5 by 896.69 eurosone of the best quality-price OLED televisions. Galaxy S26 Ultra by 1,156.19 eurosminimum price for the Samsung flagship. Xiaomi Electric Scooter 6 by 338.01 eurosa discount for one of the most popular electric scooters. OPPO Find X9 Pro by 1,073.55 eurosa high-end mobile phone with great autonomy and a very good photographic system. nintendo switch 2 One of the most notable offers of MediaMarkt’s VAT-Free Day (although it does not specifically indicate it on its page) is the nintendo switch 2. The hybrid from the Japanese company represents an important leap with respect to the first Switch, since it now has the power to move games to 4K when we use it connected to a TV. In addition, it already has several top exclusives such as ‘Pokémon Pokopia‘ either ‘Donkey Kong Bananza‘. comes out for 399 eurosa very interesting price if we take into account that the console will rise to 499.99 euros in September. The price could vary. We earn commission from these links LG OLED C5 OLED TVs aren’t cheap, but this one LG OLED C5 It is one of those that offer the best quality-price (and more, costing 896.69 euros). It is a TV with outstanding image quality thanks to this panel technology, which offers a pure black color and infinite contrast. In addition, it is compatible with Dolby Vision, its refresh rate can be taken up to 144 Hz and it has HDMI 2.1 ports, so it is perfect for playing. 55″ OLED TV – LG OLED55C55LA, 4K OLED, α9 AI Processor 4K Gen8, Smart TV, DVB-T2 (H.265), Black The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Galaxy S26 Ultra He Galaxy S26 Ultra is one of the best phones so far this year. It is a device whose main novelty is privacy screenbut obviously this is not the only notable thing about the mobile. It remains an option with outstanding performance thanks to the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 and with a camera system that offers very good results in almost any scenario. In addition, it has seven years of guaranteed updates. It’s coming out right now 1,156.19 euros. Mobile – Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra, Violet, 256 GB, 12 GB RAM, 6.9″ QHD+, Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, 5000 mAh, Android 16 The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Xiaomi Electric Scooter 6 If you are looking for a solution to get around the city without depending on the car or public transport, this Xiaomi Electric Scooter 6 It could be great for you: it’s out right now 338.01 euros. It has a maximum power of 800 W and is capable of reaching 25 km/h. In addition, it has about 45 kilometers of autonomy, so we will not have to charge it all the time. Supports up to 120 kg load. Electric Scooter – Xiaomi Electric Scooter 6, Type 1 / VPL, Nominal Power 400 W, Max. Load 120 kg, 10000 mAh, 25 km/h, Black The price could vary. We earn commission from these links OPPO Find X9 Pro Finally, another very interesting high-end mobile phone, the OPPO Find X9 Pro. It arrived at the end of 2025, but it is still one of the best options if you are looking for an Android mobile. It stands out for a high-level camera system and for having a gigantic 7,500 mAh battery, although we cannot ignore its 6.78-inch screen with a very high peak brightness level. It costs right now 1,073.55 eurosits historical minimum. Mobile – OPPO Find X9 Pro, Titanium Charcoal, 512 GB, 16 GB RAM, 6.78″ AMOLED ProXDR Gorilla Glass 120 Hz, MediaTek 9500, 7500 mAh The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Some of the links in this article are affiliated and may provide a benefit to Xataka. In case of non-availability, offers may vary. Images | Xataka, Nintendo, LG, Samsung, Xiaomi, OPPO In Xataka | Best mobile phones in quality price. Which one to buy based on use and nine recommended models In Xataka | The best TVs to play and get the most out of your PS5 or Xbox Series

the risk of death from cancer does not decrease

Over the last few years, the electronic cigarette or ‘vaper‘has been positioned in the collective imagination as ‘the lesser sea’ that has been sold as a transition tool, supposedly cleanerfor those smokers who were looking to get away from tobacco. However, science has been narrowing the gap on the long-term effects of electronic cigarettes for some time. A new study. Here the last blow has been dealt by a study published in Nature that It is considered the largest made to dateand which concludes that the use of electronic cigarettes after giving up traditional tobacco does not have any type of benefit when it comes to reducing the chances of having lung cancer. Unprecedented. To understand the magnitude of the finding, you have to look at the scale, since historically, one of the big problems when investigating vaping has been the lack of temporal perspective due to not having been on the market for too long and, above all, the size of the study population. This has been resolved with this new study that has analyzed data from between 4.3 and 4.5 million people in South Korea, with exhaustive follow-up until December 2021. Many of these might think that changing smoke for steam neutralized the oncological risk, but in the end it is quite the opposite. Your results. When analyzing incidence and mortality rates, researchers found that former smokers who switched to vaping had worse prognoses than those who quit smoking completely. Specifically, the relative risk of suffering from lung cancer increases by 56% compared to those who abandon any type of inhaled product. In addition, the probability of death from lung cancer is double when giving up tobacco and taking an electronic cigarette instead of giving up any type of inhaled consumption. Regarding time. Ex-smokers who had only been smoking for five years and switched to vaping instead of quitting had a 23% higher incidence of cancer and a 71% higher risk of death. But if we talk about established ex-smokers who spent more than five years smoking, their risk of death becomes 2.7 times higher. In the case of ex-smokers who had been smoking for 20 years or more, switching to vaping led to a 65% increase in incidence and multiplied the risk of mortality by 4.5 times. Because. These epidemiological data are not an isolated case, but rather confirm what toxicology has been warning for years in laboratories, since although vaping eliminates the tar and direct combustion of tobacco, the aerosols are far from being harmless. A study published in 2026 pointed out that electronic cigarettes with nicotine are, with a high probability, carcinogenic to humans. And the answer is in the carcinogenic substances such as nitrosnornicotine, heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and aldehydes such as formaldehyde. In Xataka | It’s never too late to quit smoking: the lungs have an incredible capacity to regenerate

Nothing’s CEO explains why your next phone is going to be more expensive

At this point I don’t think it will catch you by surprise, but if so, to summarize: we are living a DRAM memory crisis unprecedented and that, together with the active war conflicts and the situation with AI and data centersare factors that are turning the smartphone industry into a really complicated scenario. The most expensive component of a mobile. Carl Pei, co-founder and CEO of Nothing, has been warning about this for months, and his latest words summarize very well how the situation currently stands. And just as affirms In one of his latest tweets, “memory is now the most expensive component of a smartphone. More than the processor, more than the screen, and can represent more than 50% of the total hardware cost.” pei ya I had anticipated this situation Last January, a few months after we began to see how some manufacturers were modifying the prices of their memory offering, rising up to 300% in some segments. Data center hunger. The large data centers of Microsoft, Amazon, Google and Meta need the same type of memory that phones have (DRAM and NAND Flash) to power their artificial intelligence models. The difference is that hyperscalers (basically Big Tech) pay more, they buy more and reserve production capacity years in advance. According to IDCthe three largest memory manufacturers in the world (Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron) have redirected their production capacity towards the high-performance memory (HBM) demanded by Nvidia GPUs, leaving less supply available for mobile phones. And as the technology analysis firm points out, each wafer destined for an HBM stack for an AI chip is a wafer that will not go to an LPDDR5X module for a mid-range smartphone. By the end of 2025, SK Hynix was already directing 30% of its wafers to HBM; Micron went further and last December said goodbye to Cruciala brand aimed at the final consumer, redirecting all its production to the business market. What the numbers say. The shortage has a direct reflection on prices. Gartner calculate that the combined cost of DRAM and SSD will rise by 130% before the end of 2026, making smartphones 13% more expensive on average compared to 2025. TrendForce situates Global phone production around 1,135 million units this year, a 10% drop compared to 2025. IDC comes to estimate a decline of almost 13% in global smartphone shipments, which would be the largest in more than a decade. And if that were not enough, the average price of a smartphone has already reached $550 in 2026, a hundred dollars more than the previous year, according to share from Memeburn. Who pays the price? Omdia esteem that phones under $100 will drop 31% in sales this year. The entry and mid-range segments, where brands such as Xiaomi, Oppo and others usually operate, they are the hardest hitbecause their margins are very narrow and they cannot absorb cost increases without passing them on to the consumer. Nabila Popal, research director at IDC, claimed that “the era of the ultra-cheap smartphone is over.” The Nothing case as a thermometer. Pei illustrates it with your own product. The memory costs of the Nothing Phone (4a) doubled between the time the company decided to manufacture it and the day it went on sale. And they have doubled again since then. In the life cycle of a single product, the cost of memory has multiplied by four, and it is an example that more brands are living in silence. What changes for the buyer. Pei warns that this year’s sales season, like Black Friday, will not have the discounts to which the consumer was accustomed. Since February, new phones have been on the market with prices up to $100 more expensive than their predecessors. In fact, according to Pei, in India, models above 30,000 rupees (about 272 euros at the exchange rate) have risen more than 7,000 rupees compared to the previous generation. And the forecast is that prices will continue to rise, at least until 2027. For Nothing, it is an opportunity. Pei has been defending for years that design and user experience matter more than specifications on paper, and now the market is proving them right the hard way. “2026 is the year the spec race ends,” he said in January. It is a delicate topic, because if we think about it coldly, we get less for the same price or more than what we already paid, so it can be very easily interpreted as a way of making the user not take into account the technical specifications sheet and let themselves be carried away by what the brand puts in front of their eyes. And now what. The relief in prices will not come until manufacturers have greater production capacity, something that analysts They don’t wait before 2028. Until then, we have two options: either buy now, before prices rise further, or hold on with the device we have. And it seems that update cycles are going to lengthen, and in that context, the second-hand and reconditioned market may gain appeal. In Xataka | The great novelty of Siri is to use the iPhone without touching it. I’ve been doing the same thing on my Android for months.

For decades we climbed this New York skyscraper without knowing that the screws that held it in place could not hold.

The situation was more or less like this. For two decades, hundreds of thousands of people entered and left the doors of one of the largest skyscraper in New York City. These people, many of them workers, went up and down in the elevator completely unaware of the critical failure that the building had, terrifying in architectural terms, and that no one took into account. Rarely in the history of urban planning in large cities has there been a similar situation. The story dates back to the beginning of the 20th centurywhen the Lutheran church of Saint Peter was located on land of 53rd Streetbetween Lexington Avenue and Third Avenue, in Midtown Manhattan. By 1960, the church community was experiencing serious financial problems, which led the city council to sell the land. The negotiations were not easy and lasted years. Mainly, because the church demanded the creation of a new building separate from the apartment block in which it could continue its activities. In the end the project was given the green light. The developer accepted the conditions, and Citi Bank commissioned Hugh Stubbins & Associates to design the skyscraper. William LeMessurier was in charge of engineering. The final project consisted of a skyscraper, a church, a public space below street level and landscaping. The most important element was, of course, the skyscraper. The plan marked 46 floors that were to be distinguished from the rest of the city by the polished and anodized aluminum of the façade. In addition, between the panels there were rows of windows. It didn’t really look complicated, at least not like the roof and base of the building. The happy roof Thus, in 1977 the skyscraper was completed. By then it had grown larger, with 59 floors and a total height of 279 meters. An architectural work that dazzled at first glance on the city skyline, a colossal tower where its 45-degree inclined top stood out. The top of the roof resembles an isosceles triangle. The original plan was to build terraces and apartments, but over time the architects decided to install huge solar panels. LeMessurier, a professor and graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, carried out a series of tests to verify their efficiency. It turned out that the energy converted by the installation was insufficient. Eventually, the idea of ​​a small solar plant was abandoned. However, nothing like the base on which the building stood. Some “stilts,” as LeMessurier himself described, among which the then seventh largest skyscraper on the planet seemed to float. We are referring, of course, to those four gigantic pillars (34 meters each) that are located in the center of each side (rather than in the corners) of the base. It also had a single column in the center, in this case narrower, which housed the building’s elevator banks and provided additional strength to the frames. This design made room for the church under the northwest corner of the building, and gave the giant structure a brutal effectalmost as if he were levitating. In fact, it was exceptionally “light”, of only 25,000 tons (for reference, the Empire State Building was 60,000). The famous pillars The base became an architectural icon, as it made the space in the corners empty. LeMessurier had the weight of the skyscraper distributed to the exterior skeleton. Specifically, in a grid of triangular-shaped frames hidden under the façade. Interestingly, this structure was visible from the inside. The elements were not completely welded, but only fixed with bolted joints. Apparently, the steel frame designed in this way was intended to withstand perpendicular winds. According to the engineers, other types of wind should not pose a threat. Furthermore, municipal regulations did not require other air gusts to be taken into account in the design. The truth is that the architecture hid an important mechanism on the upper floors. The Citigroup Center had one of the first tuned mass dampers (TDM). It is a 360-ton concrete sphere embedded in oil. When vibrations from the ground or wind moved the building, the mechanism would oscillate in the opposite direction to the tilt of the building. The problems begin This swing was in turn balanced by hydraulic arms that support the sphere. With this solution, the skyscraper was able to “maintain balance.” As LeMessurier explained at the time, this piece was key, since its function was to cut the sway of the building in half by converting the kinetic energy of sway into friction. Once completed, the building was praised, but also the first doubts arrived. New York is not a major hurricane state, but it does have them from time to time. What would happen if, once every 50 years, the winds blew over 100 km/h? These winds can blow from different directions. The Citigroup Center opened in 1977 under the name Citicorp Center (which changed to Citigroup Center in 1998 following the merger of Citicorp and Travelers Group). But only a year after its inauguration it became clear that it could have a very serious defect structural. A year later, LeMessurier receives the call that no architect expects in life. It was Diane Hartleyan architecture student at the prestigious Princeton University who had studied the construction of the skyscraper for her thesis. The first of the calls was to ask him several technical questions about the design. Hartley’s professor had expressed doubts to him regarding the strength of a tilted skyscraper where the supporting columns were not at the corners. Hartley did some calculations of the building’s wind load. He then compared them with LeMessurier’s calculations and discovered that the construction engineers’ figures were incorrect. The student asked to be sent exact load calculations for different types of wind. Only received data related to perpendicular winds and guarantees on the solidity of the structure. What’s more, LeMessurier told him that the professor had no idea and that everything was in order. The geometry of the building’s frame worked perfectly with the pillars in such positions, … Read more

This is the reason for its meteoric entry into the stock market

SpaceX has gone public with a Public Offering of Sale (IPO) of 75,000 million dollarsequivalent to a valuation of $1.75 trillion. Basically, the highest in history. According to financial analysts at Wolfe Research, the stock’s price target should be $175 and rising. Basically, it has started its journey on the stock market in style. But why? It is clear that Elon Musk’s company makes a lot of money, but it also spends huge amounts. Still, the gains are clear and, according to experts, lie mainly in two issues. The role of reuse. If there is something for which is known SpaceX is undoubtedly for its pioneering role in rocket reuse. The company’s first large reusable vehicle was the Falcon 9. However, this one had a problem: only the first stage is reused. The second is lost with each launch, so it must be remade and therefore money needs to be invested in it again. This problem is solved with the Starship, since its two stages are prepared to be reusable. On flight number 11, in 2025, the entire ship was recovered for the first time. For economic purposes, this is one of the great advantages of SpaceX. And, according to point out from Investinga Falcon 9 launch for more than 100 tons of payload can cost about $14 million, while the same flight would only cost $3 to $5 million for Starship. The Starlink case. For financial analysts, Starlink It is another of the keys to the economic success of SpaceX. In 2024, for the first time, the result of its EBITDA less capex was positive. The first term refers to the operating profit of a company without taking into account investments. On the other hand, capex is the money that is invested. Therefore, the subtraction of both must be positive for there to be an economic return. Once the first positive figure is obtained, the difference can grow, as is expected to happen with SpaceX. In fact, it is estimated that by 2030 it could reach $90 billion in EBITDA. Very fast. This balance has been reached even before reaching the great growth phase derived from the increase in subscribers, so it is a very good sign for the company. Analysts disagree. Despite all of SpaceX’s initial success, most analysts agree that the claims of Elon Musk’s aerospace company are too high. The shares have come out with a selling price of $135, but other financial research groups, like Morningstarbelieve that they should not cost more than $63. This is because it is true that there are benefits to Starlink and that reuse will further increase the profit margin. However, SpaceX is still a company that loses a lot of money. The price of $135 per share would mean valuing the company at 92 times its last 12-month sales, a figure much higher than that of other companies. As an example, with Apple shares the company is valued at about 11 times its annual earnings. The differences are more than clear. Image | MagnificentHeisenberg Media In Xataka | Elon Musk knows that TSMC is overwhelmed: Terafab is his idea to completely change the global chip industry

“If a person over 70 years of age walks 20–30 minutes five days a week, benefits are already obtained”

In 1965, a Japanese company launched a pedometer on the market called Manpo-Kei. That is, a “10,000 step meter.” That is the first time in history that the idea of ​​10,000 steps appears and, for years, many have wondered where that figure came from. The answer is, according to Japanese researchersfrom nowhere: they chose that number because in Japanese (万) is similar to a man who walks. That is, the most repeated advice about walking was born in a marketing meeting and not in a laboratory. Therefore, it is essentially a lie. Especially if you are over 70 years old. 70 years? What happens to those over 70 years of age? Not only has it dismantled the myth of 10,000 steps, it has shown that older people are capable of “capturing” the benefits with many fewer steps (around 6,000). Hence some coaches, as Rafael Hidalgoensure that it is enough to walk half an hour five days a week to obtain the cardiovascular, mobility and well-being bonus. and it’s true: at these ages there is a non-linear dose-response. Walking more does not bring more benefits. It is also true that, after 70, walking is not enough. The trend we fight against. Sedentary lifestyle in Spain is greater the older the person is. If we look the National and European Health Surveys (1987-2020) The highest prevalence of this sedentary lifestyle occurs among those over 65 years of age. In fact, if we analyze the data in detail we see that, even in those people who do not have limiting pathologies, there are high rates of sedentary lifestyle and overweight that lead to a poor perception of health. The bottom line is that it is something relatively easy to solve. Beyond accumulating steps. After 70, the goal cannot be adding steps. Or not only that. Any training or physical activity plan must optimize one thing: remain functional. That’s why, The WHO asks those over 65 years of age several linked activities: balance exercises, strength exercises at moderate intensity three times a week and 150 minutes a week of aerobic activity. Combine these types of exercises reduces the risk of falls by up to 23% (which are one of the main problems as we age). Additionally, as far as we know, it has positive impacts on mobility, mood, and sleep quality. Image | Age Cymru In Xataka | The trap of walking for the sake of walking: “Japanese walks” are much more effective than your daily hour-long walk

AI is not a product, it is a weapon. And Europe has none

A few days ago the Government of Spain showed its chest announcing that the EU AI Regulatory Sandbox project had been a success. It is difficult to understand why, but while these efforts to regulate require notable investments (in this particular project, 4.3 million euros), there is a stark and forceful reality: Spain and the EU are light years ahead of the US and China in terms of innovation in AI. And in this situation, how will the EU survive? Chronology of events. That was already a problem before, but each new advance of the US or Chinese frontier models makes that hole seem bigger and bigger. We have seen it with what happened to Claude Fable 5which has been vetoed following the order of the US Government. The recent chronology allows us to explain what happened: April 8, 2026: Anthropic releases Claude Mythos Previewa model that according to them is so powerful in terms of cybersecurity that they avoid releasing it publicly. Your capacity is being confirmed by companies like Mozilla, which is one of the privileged to be able to use it. June 10, 2026: Anthropic launches Claude Fable 5a kind of layered version of Claude Mythos Preview. According to the benchmarks, the model is a qualitative leap, but it has several security measures to avoid being used maliciously. Its availability was initially public in the different plans (free and paid) of Claude.ai. As of June 22, it would only be possible to access it through the API. That was the plan, at least. June 12, 2026: The US Government forces Anthropic to turn off the tap and not allow anyone who is not a US citizen to access Fable 5. Anthropic then decides cut off access to absolutely everyone to this model. AI is already a weapon. All this development of events, still in full effervescencedemonstrates something important: AI has stopped being just a tool and has become a technological weapon. It is the confirmation of that Oppenheimer moment which we already alluded to in the past. Oppenheimer Moment. What happened with the atomic bomb – a technology that the US Government ended up appropriating – is partly happening now with models like Fable 5: it is the state that ends up having the power, whether we like it or not, so that the world can use it. Its creators, Anthropic, have practically no say even though they have already tried to defend their position. with the scandal of the Pentagon and the Department of Defense. I’ll see who I let use the AI. The US decision to cut off access to a commercial AI model is unprecedented. Hiding behind the protection of National Security, the Government of this country has decided that Fable 5 was simply too dangerous for other countries to use. He has exerted absolute control over a disturbing technology, and he has done it without anyone being able to do anything. That access to AI can be vetoed overnight due to government imposition once again makes it clear that those who invest in these models have a strategic advantage that can be definitive. China takes another stance. In fact, China is currently proposing a radically opposite strategy: open weight AI models are the norm among its large companies and its startups. DeepSeek, Qwen, Kimi or Xiaomi Mimo are some of the clear examples of how it is possible to develop advanced AI models with another approach. At the moment China has not vetoed any of these models, and all of them have become a great resource for companies around the world to improve and use. Even North American companies do it: Cursor’s Composer 2.5 model It is nothing more than a derived version of Kimi 2.5. AI as a commercial weapon. What we are seeing is another episode of the great trade war that both the US and China are maintaining at a technological level. Both play with their resources to put pressure on the other party—or the entire world. But before, the pressure was exerted with things like advanced AI chips or rare earths. Now the US has also decided that the AI ​​software itself (the models) can be used in the same way. And the companies that develop them don’t seem to be able to do much about it. Spain boasts about what it shouldn’t. But as we said, in Spain what we have are announcements of regulatory efforts. It is true that the intention is surely good and that the idea is reasonable (to develop the technology responsibly), but that focus has proven to be a problem: while Spain boasts of being a pioneer in the application of AI regulation in Europe, our country barely has its own tools in this area. ALIAthe model focused on co-official languages, remains in a surprising background, and what is We have an agency, AESIAwhich once again demonstrates that ambition to regulate while neglecting the other part: that of innovating. Europe is not much better. What is happening in Spain is almost a reflection of what we are seeing in Europe. Only the French company Mistral is trying to advance with its own AI models, but for now its developments They are very far from the frontier models of the US or China. In Spain we have Magnificbut this startup is not so much a developer of its own models as an aggregator of those already existing in the creative field. Atomic bombs on one hand, forks on the other. It is probably an exaggeration to compare Fable 5 with the atomic bomb, but one thing is clear: the US has AI models that are effectively far above any European development. It is in a sense as if they had a bomb and Europe was trying to compete with a fork. What experts have been saying for almost three years is that the path chosen by the EU is a mistake. What is needed is investment in innovation, and not with government projects, … Read more

Airbus has just completed a test that brings its most anticipated moment closer

He SIRTAP It is not a new name in the Spanish defense. Airbus and the Ministry of Defense have been presenting it for some time as a program called to strengthen tactical capabilities, industrial development and greater sovereignty in defense capabilities, but this entire journey has a milestone that weighs more than any calendar: seeing it take off for the first time. That image has not yet been produced. What we have now is a prior advance, important precisely because it places the program closer to that moment and forces us to sort out the underlying question: what exactly is SIRTAP and why Spain has been pushing it for years. The ground test: The progress communicated by Airbus Defense It occurred on the runway of the Getafe Air Base, right next to the company’s facilities. There, the Airbus U850 SIRTAP completed its first taxi under full control from the ground control station. The test served to verify very specific elements: braking, steering, navigation sensors and commands sent from the station itself. In other words, the objective was to verify that the system begins to behave as an integrated aircraft, not as a sum of separately tested parts. It’s not just any drone: The SIRTAP is, in simple terms, an unmanned military aircraft controlled from the ground and designed to look further, for longer and in more demanding conditions than a conventional short-range system. Airbus presents it as a high-performance tactical UAS, with more than 20 hours of autonomy, range of more than 2,000 km and capacity for ISR missions, that is, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. Its design also includes day and night operations, maritime surveillance and the simultaneous use of two payloads, such as electro-optical sensors and radar. The lesson from Ukraine: The importance of SIRTAP is best understood if we look at the role that unmanned systems have gained in recent conflicts. A CSIS Analysis on the lessons from Ukraine summarizes a clear idea: UAVs have extended operational range, reduced soldier exposure, and become common tools for reconnaissance, target acquisition, and precision strikes. This reading does not make the Spanish program a direct consequence of that war, but it does place it within an evident trend. Industrial dimension. The Ministry of Defense acquired nine SIRTAP systems, a formula that does not translate into nine aircraft, but in 27 unmanned aircraft and nine ground control stations, because each system is made up of three devices and one station. Added to this are two simulators to train Spanish operators. According to Defenseall aircraft will be manufactured and assembled at the Airbus Defense and Space plant in Getafe, with Airbus as the driving company and with the participation of Spanish companies. The Ministry itself has defined it as the first Class II/III military aeronautical system developed entirely in Spain. The calendar: The temporal nuance is important because the first flight does not now appear as a pending surprise, but as a milestone that was already on the roadmap. Airbus placed it in 2025 when he announced the contract with Defense in November 2023and the Ministry again indicated that same year as a reference in January 2025. Later, in June 2025Airbus explained that the prototype was ready to begin ground testing and that the inaugural flight was scheduled for the end of that year. With the new progress communicated by Airbus, the conclusion is clear: the program is moving, but the forecast for the first flight in 2025 is already behind us. Next step. SIRTAP is no longer just a promise on paper and is already beginning to pass real checks on the runway, but Airbus still has new test phases ahead before the flight campaign. The important thing is not to confuse one thing with the other: moving on the ground is not equivalent to taking off. It does confirm, however, that the project is approaching the moment that has marked its narrative for years. The next big leap will not be symbolic: it will be seen in the air. Images | Airbus In Xataka | The European fighter may have died, but there is a plan B to avoid the F-35. One with Spain, Germany and an unexpected guest

Meta spent at least $14 billion to win the AI ​​race. It’s been a year and it’s still exactly where it was.

In Silicon Valley, and in technology in general, being huge does not guarantee being prepared to win every race. You can have money, talent, data centers, billions of users and machinery capable of integrating anything new into products we use every day. Still, when the board changes, so does the question. Meta has been trying for years to demonstrate that it can not only distribute artificial intelligence at scale, but rather compete at the center of the conversation. The problem is, when we think about chatbots, it still doesn’t seem to be the first name that comes to mind. 14.3 billion dollars. Ea is the figure that Reuters put on the table for a very specific operation. On June 13, 2025, the agency reported that Meta would take a 49% stake in Scale AI for that amount, in a deal that valued the startup at about $29 billion. Scale itself spoke of a significant new investment from Metaalthough he did not publish the exact amount of the investment. We are not talking, therefore, about everything that the company has allocated to AI, but rather about an identifiable bet within a much broader bill. What Meta saw in Scale AI. It was surely not one of those companies that we had on our radar when we were talking about artificial intelligence. It did not have the public shine of ChatGPT nor the showcase of Geminibut it did occupy an important place in the machinery that makes it possible to train and evaluate models. His work revolves around data that allows training, evaluating and improving AI systems, including labeled or curated data for training. The name behind the operation. Meta was not only betting on Scale AI, it was also incorporating Alexandr Wang into its new stage in artificial intelligence. The agency noted that the main driver of the move was to secure Scale’s founder to lead Meta’s superintelligence efforts. Scale itself confirmed that Wang would join Meta to work on its AI projects. So the investment should not be read solely as an entry into the capital of a data company, but as a way to accelerate leadership and talent. Context. The investment came at a time when Meta needed to strengthen its position in the advanced AI race. It occurred in a context marked by the poor reception of Call 4its latest large family of open models, and due to competitive pressure against companies like Google, OpenAI and DeepSeek. It was not just a matter of having more resources or adding a new piece to the organizational chart. What was at stake was to regain momentum in a field where other names were marking a good part of the technical, business and public conversation. The visible part. The most recognizable result of this new stage is Muse Sparkpresented by Meta as the first model of a new family created by Meta Superintelligence Labs. The company assures that it already powers Meta AI in its app and on the web, and that it is being deployed in WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook, Messenger and its AI glasses. Here, precisely, there is an important point: Meta does not need to convince the user to install another application from scratch: it already has the channels. But converting presence within their own platforms into public relevance within generative AI is another battle. The limit. Just because the model is within WhatsApp or Instagram does not mean that people use it for many tasks. Muse Spark does not seem to be occupying the place that the GPT or Gemini models do, to name a few examples. Despite this, according to ReutersMuse Spark has performed well in languages ​​and visual compression, although it has lagged behind in coding and abstract reasoning. Meta has managed to be present, but has not yet demonstrated that this presence is enough to change habits. Strategic turn. Muse Spark does not follow the path that had given Llama so much visibility: The Wall Street Journal described it as a closed model. The company itself speaks of an API in private preview for selected partners, not open and general access for any developer. That is to say, Meta has put a new model into circulation, but it has done so in a more controlled way, more integrated into its products and less open than the strategy with which it had tried to differentiate itself in AI. The crack. Meta can integrate AI into gigantic products, but the generative AI race is also played in another field: that of the names that the user recognizes when they need a chatbot. And there Zuckerberg’s company does not seem to occupy the same place as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude or Grok. The economic doubt has not disappeared either. And, a no small detail, advertising continues to be the engine of Meta’s income. Images | Mark Zuckerberg In Xataka | There is a company proving that AI can be the perfect interviewer for companies. His name is Orbio and he is from Madrid

We don’t know if AI is going to take our jobs. The problem is that whoever is developing the AI ​​doesn’t know it either.

The arrival of AI has sown the seed of uncertainty in many sectors putting on the table a question for which, today, no one has a clear answer: Is AI going to take our jobs or not? The most curious thing is that not even those who are developing those models that would replace millions of employees they have a clear answer. Sam Altman and Dario Amodei, heads of OpenAI and Anthropic, have been offering two completely opposite visions for the same issue. After predicting a almost apocalyptic scenarioAltman now says everything will be fine. Amodei, for his part, warns of a very hard blow to employment. The data also does not shed light on the future employment of those who now must choose a career professional. Altman says he was wrong (for the better). Sam Altman, the head of OpenAI, has greatly softened the defeatist speech he had been holding. A while ago I talked about entire job categories that were going to disappear. Now he says something else, although perhaps he does so more conditioned by the IPO of your company than for the certainty of a future with more jobs. According to collected ReutersAltman is “I’m glad I was wrong about this; I thought the elimination of entry-level administrative jobs would have already had a bigger impact than it actually has.” This is a pretty big script twist coming from someone who has been setting the pace for the sector for years. Amodei and Anthropic do not let up. At the other end of the narrative is Anthropic. Its co-founder, Chris Olah, repeated at a conference on ethics and AI in the vatican the same idea as his boss, Dario Amodei, has been defending for a long time. There is a real possibility that AI will replace human work on a large scale. It does not speak of a smooth change or an easy transition. Talk about a serious, and sudden, impact. However, although both talk about the same type of technology and with similar data on the table, their interpretations of what is to come are clearly opposite. Employees were an expense, but AI doesn’t come free. As leaders at major AI companies debate the future of the millions of employees they will replace with AI, companies are beginning to realize that AI It’s not going to be much cheaper either. than an employee. The companies that have opted the most for workforce cuts and increased use of AI are receiving your first billsand they scare. So they have put a stop to the so-called “tokenmaxxing“: pay without limit to use models without measuring the return well. According to collected Business InsiderUber’s chief operating officer said AI costs are increasingly difficult to justify, just after its chief technology officer burned the annual AI budget early. According what was published by The VergeMicrosoft, also began reducing Claude Code licenses among its employees, a cut that Fortune linked to the high cost of massive use of these models. More jobs for programmers and security teams. However, the implementation of AI in companies, far from eliminating jobs, is increasing the demand for certain profiles. According to data from the hiring platform Indeed collected by Axiosvacancies for software engineering positions have grown by 18% in the last year, while total employment falls by 4.3% in the same period. Why is this happening? More code written with AI means more code that someone has to check. Companies continue hiring security analystsauditors and people who validate what the models generate. Automation detects failures at high speed, but prioritizing and fixing them still depends on human judgment. For now, that criterion remains scarceand expensive. Generation Z is not trusting. Without a doubt, those most affected by all this uncertainty are the generation that has just entered the labor market. Without enough experience enough to face the new demands, but too advanced in their professional career to choose another career path. Given all this uncertainty and closed doorsGeneration Z no longer sees AI as an opportunity. He increasingly sees her as a direct threat to his first job, so he has chosen to fight it. A survey According to Gallup, enthusiasm for AI among young people fell 14 points in just one year, and anger towards the technology rose to 31%. And they don’t stop complaining. a survey of Writer together with Workplace Intelligence, pointed out that 44% of Generation Z employees admit to actively sabotaging their company’s AI implementation plans, compared to 29% of the entire workforce. With all this on the table, the only thing clear is that no one has the complete picture about the future of AI in the labor market. Neither those who sell the technology, nor those who use it, nor those who are about to look for their first job. Probably the answer is neither disaster nor total calm, but a little of each, distributed very unevenly depending on the sector and the country. In Xataka | Technology workers have better salaries and an important “but”: more than half fear being replaced by AI Image | Flickr (World Economic Forum/Pascal Bitz, Sandra Blaser), Unsplash (syful islam)

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.