Mobile Tech & Gadgets

It’s about whether a company can change its mission

by

Elon Musk and Sam Altman They have stood before a court in Oakland to settle the future of OpenAIwith a lawsuit claiming more than $130 billion and calling for the removal of Sam Altman as CEO. The hearing started this Tuesday with opening statements that have revealed the real dimension of the case: it is not just a fight between two billionaires, but a very basic question that still does not have a clear answer. Why is it important. The underlying question is not whether Musk, as it is colloquially said, ‘was messed up’. It is whether an organization founded as an NGO can pivot towards profit after having attracted donations, talent and credibility under another model. If the answer is ‘no’ (or if it can at least be judicially challenged), there are a few technology companies in a similar situation: Mozilla, Anthropic or Wikipedia / Wikimedia Foundation live in similar realities. The precedent that this trial sets may be a blow to other groups. The context: OpenAI was born in 2015 with a mission: to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, as a wise man said“non-profit”. Musk contributed about $38 million in his first years. In 2019, the company launched a for-profit subsidiary to raise capital at scale. In 2023, it signed a 10 billion agreement with Microsoft that, according to the accusation, was the point of no return: from then on, OpenAI no longer operated for humanity but for its shareholders. Today, the lucrative subsidiary is valued at $852 billion and could go public before the end of 2026, although There are some cracks in that plan.. Between the lines. Musk’s legal thesis depends on proving that there was fraud at the time of the donation, not simply that he doesn’t like where the company has gone. According to Sam Brunson, professor of nonprofit law at Loyola University in Chicago, cited by Fortunethe general principle of law is that whoever donates to an organization has given that money and has no recourse if they later do not like its decisions. The only way out is to prove that there was fraud, that they lied to you at the time of donating. And that proof is very difficult to obtain. What comes closest to that proof are the private notes of Greg Brockman, co-founder of OpenAI. In September 2017, Brockman wrote that this was “the only opportunity to get out from under Elon” and that accepting his conditions would destroy his decision-making capacity and his economic side. After a meeting in November of that year in which Musk was assured that OpenAI would remain an NGO, Brockman noted that if they converted the company to a for-profit entity three months later, “it would have been a lie.” The judge who sent the case to trial cited these notes directly in his January ruling. Yes, but. The fact that there are compromising notes does not mean that Musk’s legal theory is solid. The original NGO still exists. Its technology was licensed to the for-profit subsidiary, but the nonprofit foundation maintains nominal control of the company and retains the economic appreciation of that subsidiary. NGOs can generate profits, they simply cannot distribute them among shareholders. If OpenAI did not make an explicit and documented promise to never create a for-profit subsidiary, the fraud argument has very little meaning. Most of the experts consulted by the Anglo-Saxon press these days believe that Musk has little chance of winning in the responsibility phase. Marking agenda. On Sunday, less than 48 hours before the trial began, OpenAI published its new framework of five principles for AGI: democratization, empowerment, universal prosperity, resilience and adaptability. The 2018 document mentioned AGI twelve times. The new one, only two. He timing It is no coincidence: Altman publishes a manifesto that portrays him as the guardian responsible for the development of AI just when a court is going to judge whether he betrayed the company’s original mission or not. The big question. The trial will last, in principle, about three weeks. But the question it raises goes beyond the verdict: can a company that started as a non-profit organization (attracting donations, talent and legitimacy under that banner) freely pivot towards profit without anyone having the right to complain? If the answer ends up being ‘yes’, without much nuance, there will be something wrong. Not because Musk is right about everything, but because the underlying argument makes sense: if you benefit from tax favors and an altruistic reputation to boot, then you can’t pivot just like that without distorting competition. The question does not have an easy answer. That a jury in Oakland is answering it says a lot about how much the law lacks to keep up with the speed with which the technology industry moves. In Xataka | OpenAI is already worth $852 billion: never has a company been so valuable while burning so much money Featured image | Xataka

Someone has calculated which countries in the world have increased their military spending the most and there is a surprise: Spain is in the lead

by

With the beating of war drums in the background, the invasion of Ukraine encystedthe tension climbing in the Middle East and Donald Trump feinting with removing the US from NATO at the same time required more investment military to its partners, in 2025 the world has chosen a clear path: spend more money on defense. Quite a bit more. SIPRI calculations show that global military spending increased by 2.9% last year to almost 2.9 trillion dollars. This increase is largely explained by the effort made in Asia, Russia and Europe, where an unexpected protagonist stands out: Spain. Despite the differences With the leadership of NATO and the loud friction with Trump, the reality is that Spain is one of the countries that has increased its investment most clearly and is already in the “Top 15” in volume of war spending. What has happened? Which the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) has just published a study on military spending in 2025. It is a valuable tool because it helps us understand two things: how much the planet is investing in strengthening its war capacity and, more importantly, how that flow of money is distributed geographically. Reading it is particularly interesting in Spain for another reason: it shows that, despite the friction that Madrid has had with the White House and the address of NATO on account of military spending, Spain has made a notable investment effort. In fact, on the SIPRI list it stands out as one of the countries that has increased its defense spending the most, surpassing other European partners. Click on the image to go to the tweet. How much does Spain invest? If we base ourselves on the SIPRI data, 34,256 million of euros. The figure is important because of its scope, but above all because of the trend it shows: it shows that last year military spending increased by 50% in Spain. If we look back even further, to 2016, the increase is 122%. It is also the first time Since the mid-90s, the allocation for weapons exceeds 2% of GDP. If these data were not sufficient in themselves, they stand out even more when compared with the rest of the countries analyzed. Although the US, China and Russia lead the investment effort in terms of spending volume, when we look at the increase in spending there is only one nation that exceeds 50% of Spain. Which? Belgium, with an increase of 59%, although its level of spending is much lower than that of Spain (14.5 billion dollars). In fact, the increase in investment has allowed our country to position itself in the global “TOP 15”, behind Poland or South Korea and ahead of Canada. How is it possible? That jump is largely due to Industrial and Technological Plan for Security and Defense approved a year ago and that, according to the ministrycontemplated an initial investment of 10,471 million already in 2025. However, the SIPRI tables reflect that Spain continues to dedicate much fewer resources to defense than other EU (and NATO) partners, such as Germany, France, Italy or Poland, which in the last decade has skyrocketed its spending. Why is it important? For what we mentioned before: 2025 will be remembered for many debates, but there was one in particular that grabbed headlines for months and made Spain stand out worldwide. Despite Trump’s pressure for NATO partners to increase their defense spending from 2% to 5% of GDP, Madrid claimed that it could meet its commitments with an investment of ‘only’ 2.1%. His position was not liked in the White House, but it ended up leading to a pact with those responsible for the Atlantic Alliance. How much does the rest spend? That is another of the readings that leaves the study of SIPRI. In general, its technicians estimate that military spending increased by 2.9% worldwide in 2025, to around $2.9 million. It is the eleventh consecutive year in which the amount of resources that the planet allocates to the war machine has increased and explains that today the “global military burden” (its weight with respect to GDP) reaches 2.5%, marking its highest level since 2009. Are there differences? Yes. That increase was not distributed equally throughout the world. While in the US military spending suffered an annual contraction of 7.5%, in Europe military spending grew by 14% to reach 864,000 million of dollars. The same trend continued in Russia (+5.9%) and Ukraine (+20%), immersed in a war since 2022, or China (+7.4%) and Japan (+9.7%). That the US distances itself from this trend is something purely circumstantial. If its war expenditure decreased in 2025, it was due to the change in policy regarding the military support offered by Ukraine. In fact, SIPRI recalls that the US Congress has already given the green light to a considerable increase in military spending for this year and it is not unreasonable that something similar could happen in 2027. Image | Ministry of Defense In Xataka | Nobody saw it coming: Ukraine’s scariest drone doesn’t move, just waits for a Russian soldier to appear

the 170 million plan to revive Lemóniz

by

Seagulls and wild vegetation have been the only tenants of the immense iron and concrete skeleton built in the Biscayan cove of Basordas for decades. As detailed in a report the BBCit is a gloomy image composed of eight million cubic meters of cement and a thousand tons of iron; a giant that cannot be demolished that, more than forty years after its abandonment, finally has a destiny. But the monster designed for atomic fission will not produce megawatts, but fish. The historical turn. The Basque Government and the Atitlan business group will transform the old nuclear power plant in a macro fish farm. The Lehendakari himself, Imanol Pradales, presented the project, defining the ruins as “an uncomfortable and very complex inheritance” and “the scar of dark times”, as collected RTVE. Now, this industrial ghost is called to give birth, in the words of the Basque president, the first soles made in Euskadi. The magnitude of the project. The project has been named ‘Aquacría Basordas’. As detailed Deiawill require a public-private investment of 170 million euros over the next decade. The future aquaculture park will occupy an area of ​​46,600 square meters, will generate around 200 highly qualified direct jobs and, at full capacity, will reach a production capacity of 3,000 tons of fish per year. Forecasts indicate that the main works will start in 2027 and that the first soles will reach the market around 2030 or 2031. But why choose such an atypical environment? Already existing infrastructure and direct access to deep sea water have been key to identifying the failed plant as an “optimal” location for industrial aquaculture. However, Pradales warned that this will be “much more than a simple fish farm,” just as pointed out The Mail. The facility will have the scientific muscle of the Azti technology center, integrating artificial intelligence and advanced water recirculation systems (RAS) that will allow up to 97% of water resources to be reused. The business octopus. To understand the real dimension of the project, you have to look at both the offices of today and the trenches of yesterday. The one who will put the fish in Lemóniz is Sea Eight, the aquaculture subsidiary of the Valencian investment group Atitlan. How to uncover The Jumpthe president of Atitlan is Roberto Centeno, son-in-law of the owner of Mercadona, Juan Roig. In fact, Sea Eight is already a prominent supplier of sole for the supermarket chain. The advance of this business giant has been made, according to media reports such as The Economistignoring the local councils of Mungialdea and Uribe Kosta, which demanded a participatory process to decide the future of this very symbolic enclave. The million dollar question: isn’t it dangerous? The first reaction when combining the concepts “nuclear” and “power” is usually one of alarm, but we must be clear: there is no risk of radiation. As remembers the BBCLemóniz never received uranium or came into operation. However, the environmental controversy is served by other fronts. The NGO Greenpeace has demanded immediate withdrawal of the project. They argue that industrial aquaculture aggravates the pressure on the Cantabrian coast due to pollution by organic matter, use of antibiotics and eutrophication of the sea. In addition, they point out a biological paradox: the sole is a carnivorous species, which requires fishing for other wild fish to make its feed, pushing the oceans “towards collapse.” On the other hand, The Jump raises a worrying warning from FACUA Euskadi, which warned that the waters in the area have heavy metals “above the recommended thresholds”, coming from the sediment of the Urbieta reservoir and an old nearby landfill. Added to this is another complaint of Greenpeace: When the Basque Government assumed ownership of the land in 2018, it exempted Iberdrola (formerly Iberduero) from its legal obligation to return the cove to its original state, “saving” the electricity company about 17 million euros. The neighbors also have something to say. The concrete skeleton remains a thorny issue. As pointed out by BBC Through the testimony of locals like Valentín Elórtegui, the plant is “a taboo, something that no one wants to look at.” At street level, the scars of the families that were expropriated coexist with the irreverence of the young surfers who today catch waves in front of the atomic ghost at a point they call, precisely, “La Central.” And the weight of that taboo is measured in blood. Lemóniz’s abandonment was not an accident, but the result of an unprecedented social shock. As he relates RTVEthe works begun in the midst of Franco’s regime (1972) collided with incipient environmentalism and massive protests. ETA took advantage of the conflict and unleashed a campaign of terror, murdering five workers, including chief engineers José María Ryan and Ángel Pascual. The brutal tension in the streets—which also claimed the life of activist Gladys del Estal at the hands of the Civil Guard—forced the workers to flee, paralyzing the works until the government of Felipe González issued the definitive nuclear moratorium in 1984. The true mutation of Basordas. Pop culture has taught us to view the waters near atomic plants with suspicion. It is inevitable to remember Winksthe iconic three-eyed orange fish that Mr. Burns couldn’t eat in The Simpsons and that he tried to sell to the citizens of Springfield as an evolutionary miracle of his nuclear plant. However, in the rough waters of the Cantabrian Sea there will be no radiation or three-eyed fish; The Lemóniz sole will have the usual two. The true mutation in Basordas Creek is not genetic, but macroeconomic and historical. It is the transformation of a failed atomic megaproject promoted by a dictatorship, paralyzed by the blood of terrorism and environmental fury, which now ends up being resurrected as a lucrative and aseptic link in the immense supply chain of the supermarkets of our century. Image | Dummy Xataka | The most fascinating map you will see today: the entire electrical infrastructure of the planet, in an interactive infographic

The key was not in the stars, but in his birth

by

If there is something more difficult than putting doors in the field, it is possibly finding the edge of our galaxy. Or any other, really. They are not perfectly well-defined spacesbut rather a kind of cloud with fuzzy edges. Even so, science has been trying to find the limits of our own galaxy for many years: the milky way. Until now it had been impossible, but an international team of scientists, led by the University of Malta, has discovered that we were defining the borders in the wrong way. Almost 40,000 light years. According to this new researchthe closest thing to an edge of the galaxy would be the place where stars stop forming. This, based on their calculations, is located approximately at a point between 36,800 and 39,600 light years from the center. That would be the radius. There are stars further away. Until now, the error was in considering that the edges of the Milky Way are those that house the most distant stars. This concept of edge is constantly being redefined. The better the tools for detecting stars, the farther away they are. However, these scientists observed that there are stars that move after their formation. Especially when a supernova explosion occurs nearby. Therefore, they could not help us define something like a border. In fact, there are stars up to 10,000 light years away. further of what these researchers have defined as a possible limit. In this case, the radius is measured in kiloparsecs, which are equivalent to 3,262 light years each. This is how stars are born in a galaxy. The first stars are born in the centers of galaxies, where there is a greater density of gas and dust. Then, as gravity allows small pockets of condensed gas to form, they can form further and further away as well. Therefore, the oldest stars are those in the center and the most distant ones are the newest. That’s not counting those that disperse and move to other points in the galaxy. Precisely the ones that had made it so difficult to find those supposed galactic borders. In search of stable orbits. The authors of the recently published study focused on analyzing stable orbits. Those whose stars have barely migrated beyond their point of origin. Thus, they have found the limit of stellar birth. Telescopes can look further. The materials are there, but something is missing. Beyond these borders there is still gas and dust. However, it has not condensed enough to guarantee star birth. Possibly, it is due to the absence of sufficiently intense gravitational processes. In any case, despite having found something resembling a diffuse edge for the first time, it is important to insist that doors cannot be placed on the Milky Way, like the field. And much less borders. Image | Freepik | University of Malta In Xataka | James Webb has found a galaxy from when the universe was 330 million years old. Hides a whole enigma

The current that warms Europe will weaken by 51% before the end of the century. And Spain, according to experts, is already beginning to notice

by

“The 5% chance just became 50%.” This quote from Stefan Rahmstorf, the world’s leading expert on the collapse of the AMOC, describes the change it introduces the study just published by the University of BordeauxIt’s this April 15th. But the story goes beyond the number: it is the latest installment of the great climate debate of the decade. A debate that, whoever wins, we are all losing. What exactly is AMOC and why do we care? The Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation is the North Atlantic branch of the thermohaline circulation. Since the sun does not heat the sea equally everywhere and freshwater flows reach the ocean at very specific points, this is the basic mechanism by which the oceans balance differences in temperature and salinity. The AMOC is a good example of this regulation. After all, as explained from AEMETit is an “Atlantic basin-scale north-south ocean flow that begins with cold sea water sinking to the bottom off Greenland, subsequently flowing south, and being replaced by warmer water flowing at the surface from the south, transferring heat from the tropics to the east coast of North America and the west coast of Europe.” Therefore, it is a key mechanism and if it stops, as studies began to say a decade ago, the problems for Europe would be enormous. Huge? “Without it, Western Europe and eastern North America would cool significantly, with a host of potential adverse effects,” said Sánchez Laulhé. We talk about a “widespread cooling throughout the North Atlantic and northern hemisphere in general” that would collapse the temperature in Europe would drop several degrees and cause a “strengthening of winter storms, with more and more powerful explosive cyclogenesis” and a “greater proportion of precipitation falling in the form of snow throughout Europe.” However, scientists do not fully agree. In 2021, the IPCC said the AMOC was “unlikely” to collapse. In 2023, the Ditlevsens not only said that it was a probable scenario, but that they set the first date for the collapse. In 2024, 44 signatories They asked to take the problem seriously. But in January 2025 Terhaar, Vogt and Foukal said which, in short, had not weakened since 1063. Now, the University of Bordeaux states that the AMOC will weaken by around 51% by the end of the century with a confidence level of 90%, under the intermediate emissions scenario. What can already be seen. French researchers they are right in which the most recognizable observational signal of the weakening of the AMOC is the “cold spot” of the subpolar Atlantic south of Greenland. In the midst of climate change, “the only point on the planet that has cooled in the last century.” However, we are also not clear what that really means. And there is the key. So will Europe freeze? Probably, but that’s not what’s interesting. Throughout the history of the Atlantic it has been passed many times. The question is whether it will be soon, if it will be our fault, if we can avoid it and what consequences it will have. Be that as it may, Spain will not be the most affected, but it will be. It is being. Stefan Rahmstorf, for example, said last year at the Autonomous University of Madrid that “the slowdown of the AMOC is already having impacts in Spain.” You just have to know how to read the signs. Image | Xataka In Xataka | We have been fearing the fading of the AMOC current for years. We have good news

A “floating gas station” in the middle of the ocean is making a fool of the US

by

In the satellite images of certain points in Southeast Asia there are days in which dozens of oil tankers appear completely stopped in the open sea, forming a kind of improvised parking lot in the middle of one of the busiest shipping routes of the world. Some stay there for hours, others for days, with no apparent direction, as if waiting for something that never comes… or that happens when no one is watching. An invisible map in the middle of the ocean. I told the story this week CNN through data by MarineTraffic reviewed by the media. For years, the Iranian oil trade has followed a logic that barely left a trace in official records, with ships disappearing and reappearing in tracking systems and shipments whose origin changes depending on the document consulted. This dynamic, it seems, has allowed us to sustain a constant flow towards China even under sanctions, relying on a network of intermediaries, opaque routes and an aging fleet that operates on the margins of the international system, similar to the “Russian model”. It happens that what seemed like a succession of dispersed maneuvers begins to draw a much more defined pattern: a floating infrastructure that works away from the spotlight. The “floating gas station”. They explained in the exclusive that, in waters near Malaysia, in the area known as Eastern Outer Port Limitsa key point has been consolidated where dozens or even hundreds of ships remain waiting, exchanging oil in ship-to-ship operations that completely transform crude oil traceability. This enclave acts as a authentic service station intermediate where Iranian oil changes hands, identity and destination before continuing its journey towards Asia, becoming a central gear which allows Tehran to maintain stable exports despite international pressure. Its location, close to critical maritime routes and outside effective control, makes it the ideal place for this type of operations. SAR satellite images show vessels within the outer boundary of the Eastern Harbor off the coast of Malaysia on April 18, 2026 How the shortcut to China works. The system follows a precise and repeated logic: one where large oil tankers load crude oil at Iranian facilities, cross the Indian Ocean and reach this area. where they transfer their cargo to other ships, which in turn transport it to Chinese refineries. In this process, oil change label and appears as originating from countries such as Malaysia or Indonesia, hiding its real origin in official data. This mechanism allows China to continue receiving large volumes of crude oil at reduced prices, while Iran ensures constant income that sustains its economy in a context of sanctions. MarineTraffic data shows the multiple trips the MT Tifani made between the Persian Gulf and the EOPL from April 2025 until its capture by US forces in April 2026 “Ghost” fleet that does not stop. Behind the system are hundreds of vessels that change flag, name and owner frequently, making them difficult to track and reducing their exposure to sanctions. Many operate without identification active for long periods, activating and deactivating its location systems as appropriate, which further complicates any control attempt. The magnitude of the activity is growingwith hundreds of annual transfers that, in practice, turn this maritime space into one of the most active (and least transparent) points of global energy trade. The fight with Washington reaches another board. In the background, a story that remembered the wall street journal the weekend. Recent oil tanker seizures like MT Tifani They reflect a change in strategy on the part of the United States, which has decided to extend its pressure beyond the Middle East and act directly on these distant routes. These interventions they seek to interrupt a system that has operated for years with relative impunity, although they also show the difficulty of stopping such a distributed and adaptable network. Each intercepted ship is a signal, although the total volume of traffic suggests that the mechanism remains fully operational. Floating reserves and economic war. Beyond the immediate exchangethis network also works as a strategic reserve on the high seas, one with millions of barrels stored on oil tankers waiting to be delivered when conditions permit. There is no doubt, this capability offers Iran a mattress facing blockages or interruptions, bringing oil closer to their final buyers and reducing its dependence on vulnerable routes like right now in the Strait of Hormuz. In short, the system represents much more than an evasion of sanctions, approaching an entire logistics architecture designed to keep open a critical avenue of income in the midst of conflict. Image | Department of Defense, MarineTraffic, Sentinel 1/European Space Agency In Xataka | Ukraine taught how to use drones. Iran has gone one step further: turning them into a crusher for US radars and bases In Xataka | If the war resumes again, the US runs a risk unprecedented in the history of war: that the only one with missiles will be Iran.

The war in Iran has destroyed another critical supply chain for consumer technology: PCBs

by

While the war in Iran is leaving us with a global energy crisis unprecedented, it is also hitting the technology industry squarely in one of its most critical components: printed circuit boards (PCB). These boards are found in basically any device, and in the last month their price has skyrocketed by up to 40%, according to they count from Goldman Sachs. The reason: an attack on a critical plant for the manufacture of PCBs that puts the global supply of these boards in check. Stroke. ANDIn the first days of April, Iranian forces attacked the Jubail petrochemical complex in Saudi Arabia. SABIC (Saudi Basic Industries Corporation) operates in this complex, a company that produces approximately 70% of the world’s supply of high-purity polyphenylene ether (PPE) resin, an essential material for manufacturing the laminates with which PCBs are built. According to they count From Reuters, since the attack, SABIC has been unable to resume production. And that is a problem on a global scale. Raw material at stake. It is not just about the direct attack on Jubail. The conflict has also generated serious disruption in maritime traffic in the Persian Gulf, one of the most critical logistics routes connecting Middle Eastern chemical producers with Asian electronics manufacturers. Added to this is the pressure on copper, which represents around 60% of the total cost of raw materials in PCB manufacturing, according to they count from Victory Giant Technology, one of the largest Chinese suppliers in the sector with clients such as Nvidia. The company warned this month that the conflict could make key materials such as resin and copper even more expensive. According to Reuters, the price of sheet copper has risen up to 30% since the beginning of the year. Qproduction ties. From Daeduck Electronics, a major South Korean PCB manufacturer that supplies Samsung, SK Hynix and AMD, among others, confirmed Reuters that the company has started talks with its customers to pass on the price increases. The company pointed out that the waiting period for materials such as epoxy resin has gone from three weeks to fifteen. A market that was already stressed. PCB prices had already been rising for months due to the skyrocketing demand for AI servers. According to Reutersdemand has accelerated sharply since March, with manufacturers trying to secure supplies before the situation worsens. Goldman Sachs points out that large cloud service providers are willing to take on further increases because they expect demand to outstrip supply for years. On the other hand, research firm Prismark projects that the global PCB sector will grow 12.5% ​​in 2026, reaching $95.8 billion. And PCBs aren’t the only thing affected. The technology supply chain is taking hits from all sides. According to inform The Elec Korea, large Japanese manufacturers of photoresist (a key chemical in chip production) have begun to notify clients such as Samsung and SK Hynix of problems in the supply of gasoline, a raw material that these suppliers obtain more than 40% from the Middle East. Besides, the price of helium (essential gas in the manufacture of semiconductors) has almost doubled after the Iranian attacks on Ras Laffan, in Qatar, which provides about a third of the global supply, according to Fitch Ratings. What does this mean for the consumer. The impact will end up reaching the final price of the products. PCBs are in absolutely everything that has electronics inside, and a 40% increase in their cost is difficult to absorb without the increase being passed on to the user. Manufacturers are already negotiating price transfers with their customers, and these, in turn, will transfer them downstream. The worst thing is the timing, since we are also in the middle of a RAM and storage crisis and the pressure around the markets only increases. Cover image | Random Thinking In Xataka | There is a company that has grown 3,000% in the stock market, even beating the performance of Nvidia: Sandisk

OpenAI expects an 80% drop in its flagship revenue. The low-cost “ChatGPT Go” is your escape forward

by

OpenAI is in trouble. More than beforeeven. In The Information indicate that internal projections for subscribers in 2026 are worrying. The users of ChatGPT Plustheir $20 a month plan, will fall from 44 million in 2025 to just 9 million this year. That represents a drop of 80%, and they want to compensate for it with their affordable subscription. It’s not clear that plan can work. ChatGPT Go as a lifesaver. What OpenAI is going to lose with ChatGPT Plus according to these internal forecasts, they want to counteract with an extraordinary increase in subscriptions to ChatGPT Gothe ad-supported plan that costs between $5 and $8. The company’s objective is for this plan to go from having the current 3 million subscribers to 112 million, an increase of 3,600% in twelve months. A terrible quarter. While The Information showed these forecasts, in The Wall Street Journal they informed OpenAI does not have the accounts in this first quarter of 2026. The company has not achieved the expected income, and has not achieved the user acquisition figure that it had projected. OpenAI CFO Sarah Frier has warned that the company may not be able to pay for its future computing contracts if revenue doesn’t start growing immediately. The accounts do not come out. OpenAI has contracted close to $600 billion in spending on future data centers, an astronomical figure that was built with all the announcements that Sam Altman and the company made in 2025. The company expects to spend $25 billion but plans to enter $30,000, a narrow margin even if everything goes well. But according to WSJ it is not doing so, and Anthropic’s popularity has eroded its position in the market. They wanted to reach 1 billion weekly active users by the end of 2025 and they didn’t achieve it, and the decision to bet on ChatGPT Go seems like a desperate response to their revenue problem… and their IPO. No one has ever grown so much. ChatGPT Go’s growth goal poses a colossal challenge. Achieving 109 million paying subscribers in twelve months is unprecedented. It took Facebook four years to get 100 million free users, and although ChatGPT achieved the same thing in two months and set a prodigious precedent, for this to be repeated for a paid subscription even extending the time frame to 12 months would be unusual. But not even for those. Analyst Ed Zitron point Because even if OpenAI achieved 112 million subscribers at $5/month on average, it would earn $560 million per month. That figure is a far cry from the $880 million per month generated by the 44 million Plus subscribers at $20/month. The difference should be covered with advertisingbut that doesn’t seem to be going as well as they expected either. Until have activated pay per click adssomething that already caused the credibility of SEO to be greatly damaged. We go public, yes or no? According to WSJ, Sarah Friar and Sam Altman disagree about whether it is advisable to go public this year given this change in the situation. Altman wants to speed it up, but Friar doesn’t think the company is ready to meet the data reporting obligations that public companies have. The problems accumulate because the financing round closed in March made OpenAI’s valuation amounted to 852,000 million dollars. If investors had known the situation of OpenAI’s first quarter, perhaps they would not have entered that round, or they would not have done so in such a notable way. The challenge of charging $20 for AI. OpenAI’s forecast is worrying. That a company that managed to popularize generative AI can only get 9 million people around the world to pay $20 a month is disturbing and says a lot about the state of the market. On the one hand, maybe people just don’t see that $20 worth it, which is bad for the entire industry. But perhaps what people don’t see is that those 20 dollars are not worth it if they spend them on ChatGPT and they do on competitors like Claude. That is even more worrying. It is clear that there is a segment of users willing to pay such a price, but today that segment is smaller than the expectation created suggested. The Pro plan will remain a rarity. OpenAI also has the Pro plan for $200 per month, and expects its subscribers there to also double in 2026. However, that will still not be almost anecdotal because less than 1% of the total number of users—the truly intensive ones—will opt for this alternative. It is evident that this will not be the core of OpenAI’s business at the moment, and the company seems to be clear about this. They prefer to leave the middle segment in the background, have a small premium segment and bet on massive volume at a low price with advertising. We’ve seen this before… with Netflix. OpenAI’s strategy reminds us of the one Netflix launched with its advertising plan. Which many criticized when it was announced has become in a overwhelming success. The company has returned us to square one: we want to pay to see adssomething surprising but it works. And OpenAI seems to want to apply the same story. In Xataka | The surprise with the new GPT 5.5 from OpenAI is not that it is good: it is that Claude looks like GPT and GPT looks like Claude

We already know what happens to the GPU hourly price when OpenAI or Anthropic launch a new model: it doubles

by

This week, an analyst named Tomasz Tunguz published in X two revealing graphs. They show the evolution of what it costs AI startups to access cloud computing, and there is bad news. The cost of renting the NVIDIA B200 GPUs with Blackwell architecture has gone from $2.31 per hour in early March to $4.95 per hour this week. It is an increase of 114% in just six weeks and it has a clear cause: the arrival of new models from Anthropic and OpenAI. What the graphs show clearly. Those charts focus on the price index of Ornna cloud computing trading marketplace. The first of them covers the price of renting the B200 chips from the end of 2025 until today, and there are vertical lines showing each release of the latest models from OpenAI and Anthropic. The correlation is almost perfect: GPT-5 Codex, Claude 4.5, GPT-5.3 Codex, Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-5.5 coincide with a jump in price indices. Every time these companies announce a new version of their frontier models, demand skyrockets, and so does the cost. If you want the best, pay (much more). The second graph shows the price difference between renting the previous generation of chips, H200 with Hopper architecture, and the new B200. The historical average of that “spread” is $1.06, but now it stands at $2.09, practically double. That means buyers—startups and AI companies—are paying a record premium for the extra memory and superior computing power of Blackwell architecture chips. Accessing the latest of the latest was already expensive. Now it is even more so. This also makes the H200 in a second class option for the most demanding models of 2026. Action and reaction. There is overwhelming logic here. When OpenAI or Anthropic release a new model, there is an explosion in inference. Developers and companies want to test them as soon as possible and integrate these models into their products (or compete with them). To do this, they need computing quickly, and a simultaneous demand is caused that unbalances the available inventory in the market for renting AI chips by the hour. The problem is that the supply of B200 does not grow at the same rate. Some companies have wanted to anticipate, and we have the perfect example in Google. He has bought all the B200s he can, and that has made these GPUs around now the 500,000 dollars on the secondary market according to analyst Jack Minor. The irony of efficiency. The curious thing is that the more efficient these chips are – and the B200s are – the more companies want to rent them at the same time to take advantage of those efficiency advantages that should lead to cost savings. What actually happens is that the scarcity of these advanced chips cancels out any theoretical savings. Long term contracts. Startups and companies that think in the short term are especially harmed in this area, because they face price jumps that are increasingly difficult to assume. Companies that signed computer rental contracts at the price then can now operate at less than half the cost of their competitors. Thinking in the medium or long term seems reasonable, although once again those who win are the hyperscalers and those companies that have managed to get hold of many B200s. And who wins even more is of course NVIDIA, which cannot cope. Few alternatives. In other markets such as energy or metals there is usually room for maneuver, Tunguz points out, but the same is not happening at the moment in the AI ​​segment. In the oil market, for example, if the price rises 114% in six weeks, companies can buy futures, options or fixed-price supply contracts to protect their margins. In cloud computing rental, those options are much more limited. And the result is a much more volatile segment. This will go further. We are probably facing a peak in demand that will be followed by a correction: the new batch of B200 chips that arrive in the second half of 2026 are expected to cause a drop in current prices. However, that $4.95 is now the new floor, not a peak, because demand for AI computing will continue to grow faster than TSMC’s production capacity. In the absence of the supply of AI chips growing significantly – and there are certainly movements that are trying to achieve this, such as those of Google with its TPUsAmazon with its Trainium or Huawei with its Ascend—, the problem will still be there. In Xataka | Europe is taking its technological independence so seriously that it is aiming for the most ambitious goal: NVIDIA

science explains what happens to your body (and your brain) depending on the time you choose

by

In social circles, the truth is that there are sometimes very interesting debates about common customs, such as whether it is better to shower first thing in the morning or just before getting into bed. Here, while there is a group of people who defend tooth and nail the revitalizing power of water in the morning to “start” the day, others say that there is nothing like hot water at night to conclude sleep. And here science has something to say. It makes us sleep better. If you have trouble falling asleep, the science here suggests that a nighttime shower may be a good idea, and explained in a meta-analysis published in 2019 in the magazine Sleep Medicine which analyzed 17 different studies. Here it was concluded that bathing or showering with hot water between one and two hours before going to bed reduces the time to fall asleep by approximately 36%. Because? Here hot water is our main ally, since it warms the skin and, therefore, increases blood flow to the extremities such as the hands and feet. From here, when you get out of the shower, that heat dissipates quickly, causing a drop in the body’s core temperature. And this is the key, because this thermal drop mimics the natural cooling that our body experiences before sleeping, which sends an unequivocal signal to the brain to release melatonin, which is the sleep hormone, and reduce levels of cortisol, which is related to stress. It depends on the time. From a psychological point of view, morning and night showers fulfill completely opposite functions and it depends precisely on the time at which we take them. In the case of the morning showerthe goal is increase performance with the activation of the sympathetic system by stimulating muscle tone and, above all, preparing us for the stress of the day. In the case of the night shower, as we have said before, an attempt is made to activate the parasympathetic system with a longer and more leisurely duration of the shower with the aim of reducing the accumulated physical and mental tension, fulfilling the function of an authentic ritual of transition and disconnection. According to psychology. Here we enter territory that is not so clear, but which indicates, for example, that people who prefer a shower at night do so because they have a lower tolerance for dirt, which is why they prefer to remove all the sweat of the day before going to bed. But it is also noted that people who prefer solitude tend to prefer nighttime showers, precisely because, after a day full of stimuli, the bathroom becomes a capsule of sensory disconnection. In the end, it is a way to relax from everything that has happened throughout the day. Images | freepik In Xataka | Cooling down is the forgotten step in our exercise routines. And that affects how we shower

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.