Mobile Tech & Gadgets

The minimum wage in Mexico has risen in January. This increase is not reaching everyone and is creating confusion

by

Spain is not the only one considering annual increases in your minimum wage. Starting January 1, the Mexican workers who earn the least will see their salaries increased with a new increase in minimum wage. However, some are beginning to notice that that increase is not reflected on your payroll and is generating some confusion. The trick is that the increase in the minimum wage which has been applied in Januarydoes not imply a general salary increase for all workers, but rather a minimum legal ceiling for salaries. What is the minimum wage and what is it for? As its name indicates, the minimum wage is the legal minimum amount that any company must pay its workers. In the case of Mexico, this minimum wage is established by Conasami (National Minimum Wage Commission) a decentralized body of the Mexican government that is responsible for updating it every year with the intention of protecting those who earn the least. However, the salary increase imposed by this body does not represent a percentage that must be applied to all salaries, but rather the minimum daily amount that employees must receive per day. According to the salary table prepared by Conasami, by 2026 the minimum wage will rise to 315.04 pesos per day in most of the country and 440.87 pesos per day in the Northern Border Free Zone. That implies an increase of 13% for the majority of the country, and 5% in the border area with the United States. Why doesn’t the increase reach everyone? The point of confusion among Mexican workers centers on the erroneous interpretation that this 13% and 5% increase is for salaries, when in reality it would only affect the lowest salaries that are within the legal minimums established in the Federal Labor Law. That is, if in January 2026, a worker continues to receive a salary of 278.80 pesos (419.88 pesos for the ZLFN), which was the minimum wage in 2025, his employer would be violating labor legislation. However, if an employee already earned more than 316 pesos, his or her salary does not have to have increased, since it exceeds (even if only slightly) the minimum limit established by the Federal Labor Law for 2026. Who should see their salary increased. There are three clear groups in which there is a legal obligation to increase the salary when the minimum increases. The first and most obvious, those employees who earn less than what is established by the new minimum wage. The second assumption is for those who were already earning exactly the minimum wage in 2025, since with the update they would be out of legality in 2026. Finally, there is a third group of employees to whom, due to the type of profession they practice, a different scale is applied and, therefore, their salaries must increase even when they already exceed the minimum wage. Specifically they are 60 professional categories that Conasami estimates that, due to their characteristics, they must have a minimum wage higher than that generally applied to other workers. When the salary is “higher” but does depend on the minimum. In Mexico, the minimum wage can also be applied as a reference indicator in contracts. That is, instead of indicating a specific salary, the employment contract indicates that the salary will be, for example, three times the current minimum wage or 350% of that minimum limit. In that case, since it is a reference variable, when the minimum wage rises, those wages will also rise in the same proportion according to what is stated in those contracts. Minimum wage vs. contractual salary. An important factor is to differentiate the minimum wage from the contractual wage. That is, the one that employees agree with the companies at the time of hiring. The first guarantees that no one will be able to charge less than the official figure established each year by the Commission. If an employment contract concluded a few years ago recognizes a salary that is currently below the minimum wage imposed in 2026, the minimum wage will prevail, since its objective is for employees to update their purchasing power. The salary that appears in the employment contract loses its validity. In that case, the salary increase is not a benefit that the company grants to the employee, but rather a legal obligation. On the other hand, if the salary indicated in the employment contract still remains above the minimum wage, the employer does not have to increase it, unless individual or collective increases are agreed upon with the workers. In that case, the increases are the result of voluntary negotiation by the company to improve the working conditions of its staff. In Xataka | Airbnb and digital nomads brought dollars to Mexico City: they have also brought the biggest housing crisis in years Image | Unsplash (Jesus Herrera, Arron Choi)

Deepfakes are much more than a bad joke. Now the Government wants them to be a violation of the right to honor

by

The year started with X filling up with photos of women in bikinis. Everything was normal, except that it was other users who “undressed” them using Grok, Elon Musk’s AI. In the midst of the revived debate about deepfakes, the Government has announced a new draft law with which they seek to combat them. Against deepfakes. The text It is a modification of the organic law of civil protection of the right to honor, personal and family privacy and one’s own image. According to the Minister of Inclusion, Elma Saiz, “it is a more protectionist text, adapted to new technologies.” The “ultra-impersonations carried out with artificial intelligence” or deepfakes They will be a crime when the affected person does not give their consent and the objective is to undermine their moral integrity, generating sexual or humiliating content. In these cases there may be a prison sentence of up to 2 years. The draft also raises the age of consent for image transfer to 16 years (currently it is 14 years). However, the text continues to consider use to damage the reputation of the affected person to be illegitimate, even if they have given their consent. After death. The main novelty of this reform is that it contemplates the protection of the image or voice even after the death of the person, as long as it has been specified in the will. As they point out in The Countrythis could directly affect some true-crime content in which it is used AI to recreate the image or voice of murder victims. Another case that is considered is when the perpetrator of a crime tells details of the crime in podcasts, interviews or other media. If your story reopens the victim’s wound, it will be considered an unlawful interference with their rights. Let us remember the case of book by José Bretón. The exceptions. Those that already existed in the old law are maintained, such as recordings authorized by a judge or the publication of private conversations, as long as their content is news of general interest. The novelty is that specific AI exceptions are included. The image or voice of a public figure may be used if it is in a creative or humorous context. Of course, they must clearly specify that AI has been used in its creation. Was it necessary? This is the question that some lawyers like Borja Adsuara in his X profile. His argument is that the current law already protects the right to honor in all areas, so it was not necessary to mention new technologies such as social networks, AI or deepfakes. However, it must be taken into account, as they point out in Reutersthat the European Union is requiring member countries to regulate deepfakes, especially those with non-consensual sexual content, by 2027. Previous cases. The Grok case has reignited the debate about deepfakes by the volume of images generatedbut it is not the first time that this type of practice occurs. In 2023 there was the first massive case in Spain when some teenagers generated fake nude images of several minors. Recently we also learned about the first fine from the Spanish Data Protection Agency for a minor who used an app to “undress” a classmate. Image | Unsplash (edited) In Xataka | The United Kingdom is tired of people bypassing porn blocking: their new idea is to block it on iOS and Android

four years later it is experiencing the biggest audience crisis in its history

by

Telecinco has lost its way. Since the disappearance of Sálvame from his grill and the definitive closure of the Vasile era, the chain seems to have been left in no man’s land. The initial idea in summer 2023 was clear: Ana Rosa would take over the afternoons of that audience that was orphaned without Jorge Javier’s farmhouse. On the other hand, that was the first setback and what led to the fact that, faced with more than discreet audiencesthe presenter returned to her comfort zone, recovering the morning space. From then on, the situation did not rather than getting worse. With Joaquín Prat becoming the currency of the chain, the commitment to new contests and a weekend that, despite a rebranding constant (‘Viva la Vida’, ‘Ya es Verano’, ‘Fiesta’…) belongs for life to Emma García, the data remains unrecorded; In fact, the new stage of its news programs led by someone very established in that space within TVE has not even worked, as is Carlos Franganillo. The numbers show how little benefit the change of direction and this replacement of the Mediaset leadership is. And it is not only the new CEOs who have been unable to turn it around to the situation, but, paradoxically, the only thing that holds the chain is the Vasile inheritance. The audiences are clear: Telecinco finds it difficult to exceed 10% of the daily share and has been in decline for four years, with a historical monthly low 8% in August 2025. What is happening? Vasile continues to keep Mediaset afloat If we review what Mediaset has defined through its flagships, we can get an idea of ​​the type of programming that the audience wants and expects from the network, in addition to its editorial approach. During Valerio Lazarov’s era the ‘Mama Chicho’ led; Maurizio Carlotti will be remembered for promoting series such as ‘Family Doctor’ or iconic formats such as ‘Martian Chronicles’; and in the Vasile stage we remember that essence ‘Save me’. However, what stood out in its content management was the firm commitment to reality television and circular content, a move that was undoubtedly key to the chain’s success. The contestants of the latest edition of GH. ‘Big Brother’, ‘Hotel Glam’, ‘The Farm’, ‘Survivors’… The choice of this type of format may have seemed at the time a risky maneuver to boost the audience, but the truth is that the active participation of the public, its involvement in the personal plots of the contestants and the enormous amount of associated content that did nothing more than regurgitate the realities (debates, gatherings, 24-hour connections…) managed to keep an audience tremendously dedicated to reality television hooked and in suspense. Maybe the concept reality It was moving away from the classic contest format, but its essence remained intact and it was consolidated for years as the driving force of the network. ‘Women and Men and Vice Versa’ or ‘Sálvame’ were still, deep down, a 2.0 version of reality television. To understand and stay up to date with the cameos, the cross accusations and the melodramatic plots, it was essential to follow the different spaces spread throughout the grid, where the contestants, journalists and collaborators were part of the same network, which ended up building an extraordinarily loyal audience. Now we are in the middle of 2025 and after the debacle in hearings and the futile attempts to overcome the sharewhile the new management intends to more than shelve the Vasile stage, the only thing that it seems to still work as a claim to the public it is ‘Temptation Island’. A format that is still the natural evolution of Telecinco’s original reality television, more current and oriented towards young audiences, although keeping intact the philosophy of entertainment and controversy that defined the Vasile era. And this is not an isolated case: the other space that maintains acceptable figures in the chain is ‘Friday’a show that wants to appear whiter and more moderate in tone but is still another variant of the heartfelt programs that historically always triumphed on Telecinco during the reign of Paolo Vasile, such as Salsa Rosa or Sálvame Deluxe. Was this the revolution? Therefore, everything seems to indicate that the more they want to clean the slate, the more they need to resort to the ghosts of the past. As a way forward they wanted to rely on a format like ‘Big Brother‘ but this only highlighted the key deficiency: we have a Mediaset without a soul. There is no longer a synergy of programs with the same zeitgeist which in its day provided, for example, ‘Sálvame’. Without that transversal ecosystem that was nourished by that reality television, it is very difficult for a format like Big Brother to once again have the success of yesteryear. The contents appear too dispersed, without a clear common thread and, thus, the grid lacks cohesion. It seems that the solution and innovation proposed by the new management is based on decisions that go from bad to worse. When the debate on ‘Temptation Island’ (remember: its star program with three (!) weekly broadcasts), is relegated to the ‘Mediaset Infinity’ platform and on the contrary, they insist on broadcasting the debate of a program that gave his last blows like ‘Big Brother’ mean that the viewer was not surprised by that “sudden” cancellation of the format with an express final. The combination of a worn-out program, increasingly stronger competition, changes in consumer habits, the questionable selection of anonymous contestants and a fragmented programming has sentenced an edition of Big Brother with data that do not reach 10% of shareand confirming that the reality emblematic no longer connects with the audience like before; also entering into direct contrast with the wonderful data of ‘Temptation Island’; a fresher, viral and intense format that challenges the viewer. Only ‘Temptation Island’ saves the furniture. Mediaset only has to analyze how it is possible that a format like ‘The House of Twins’ has eaten the toast of his GH edition; … Read more

Spotify has had to remove 75 million songs made with AI. Bandcamp has decided not to have that problem

by

The Bandcamp music streaming and sales platform has announced that will completely ban music generated “in whole or in substantial part” by artificial intelligence, becoming the first major music distribution service to establish such a restrictive barrier against synthetic content. Bandcamp thus draws a very clear red line in the debate about where the use of creative tools ends and where total automation that dispenses with human authorship begins. What does the statement say? Bandcamp’s statement presents two fundamental prohibitions. On the one hand, any musical content generated entirely or substantially through artificial intelligence, a formulation that avoids defining exact percentages but establishes that there is a threshold regarding the weight of AI in the creative process. On the other hand, it extends the prohibition to the use of algorithmic tools to replicate styles or voices of real artists, connecting this restriction with the platform’s pre-existing policies against identity theft and intellectual property infringement. Citizen collaboration. The advertisement includes a complaint mechanism For users: users can report suspicious material using the platform’s reporting tools, which will be reviewed by a moderation team. The company explicitly reserves the right to remove music suspected of having synthetic origin, without the need for conclusive evidence, a clause that gives wide freedom to moderators but could also generate false positives. The company acknowledged that the policy may require updates as the generative AI landscape evolves, referring to how quickly these technologies are being developed. The conceptual debate. This decision is part of the debate about AI and creativity that is going through the world of culture: using algorithms as instruments as opposed to delegating the creative act to them. The United States Copyright Office established in January 2025 that work generated by AI can be registered when it “incorporates significant human authorship,” but that content produced solely through promptswithout additional creative intervention, falls into the public domain for lack of a recognizable author. Nuances and tools. And it is difficult to determine the limits. The spectrum ranges from musicians who use AI to clean up audio or get inspired by melodies to those who simply write text instructions and let the model generate entire tracks. There are conceptual artists who go to the opposite extreme of artificial intervention: composer Holly Herndon turned her voice into the project Holly+ into a “digital instrument” that is publicly accessible and that other musicians can play. The debate is endless: MIT Technology Review raised in April that tools like Suno and Udio produce “creators” who are not conventional musicians but “prompters“. The result is works that cannot be attributed to a composer or singer, dissolving the usual definitions of authorship. The flood. The figures reveal an exponential escalation in the appearance of music created with AI on platforms. Deezer spoke in November 2025 of more than 50,000 tracks completely generated by AI each day, 34% of its daily volume, and an increase of 400% compared to January, when the figure was 10,000 songs per day. A study by Deezer itself said that 97% of listeners do not know how to distinguish between human and synthetic music after a blind test for the participants in the study in which they were shown two tracks, one with AI and one real. The Spotify drama. While, Spotify revealed in September 2025 which had removed 75 million “spam tracks” in the previous twelve months, an amount that rivals the platform’s entire catalog of 100 million songs. The emblematic case of the fictional indie band The Velvet Sundown illustrates the dimension of the phenomenon: this group completely generated by AI It reached 1.5 million monthly listeners on Spotify during the summer of 2025 before its creators admitted its synthetic nature, under pressure from listeners. Follow the money. The case of Xania Monet is another side of the problem. This fully synthetic R&B artist generated over $42,800 in less than two months with over 17 million streams totals, which led to the signing of a multimillion-dollar record contract after a bidding war where a record company allegedly offered $3 million. At the same time, country was the first genre to be marked as a big loser in this war between real and synthetic artists: in December 2025, the number of country songs generated by AI outsold completely human jobs. There is a clear motive for these maneuvers: money. Tools like Suno and Udio produce for free and a user can generate hundreds of short tracks that can generate profits. Let’s multiply it exponentially: massive uploads to platforms, bot farms that generate songs and upload songs without rest, automation of payments… We are not looking for isolated successes, but to add millions of reproductions, against which a real artist cannot compete. Percentages. And that’s why Bandcamp and Spotify are so different. Bandcamp is a marketplace straight where artists charge an average of 82% of each sale, with the platform keeping 15% on digital items and 10% on physical items, with additional payment processing commissions of 4-7%. bandcamp has paid more than 1,640,000 million dollars directly to artists and labels since its founding in 2008, with 19 million transferred in 2025 alone thanks to “Bandcamp Fridays”, days in which the company completely waives its commission. This structure makes AI-generated music counterproductive for the platform: no one buys synthetic albums produced by AI. prompts. Spotify, meanwhile, operates on a subscription basis, distributing roughly two-thirds of its total revenue in royalties. The platform paid 10 billion dollars to the music industry in 2024but the average payment for stream ranges between 0.003 and 0.005 dollars. Besides,Spotify implemented a threshold of 1,000 annual streams in 2024 for a track to generate royalties. This structure creates perverse incentives to “cheat”: virtually free AI production, mass uploading of tracks, use of bot farms to inflate the number of views… The pay-per-play system stream It allows tiny fractions of a cent to turn into million-dollar amounts if there is enough volume. The reaction. The Bandcamp movement has some protection of its image, … Read more

Uber Eats abandons autonomous riders after the fight with Work

by

Uber Eats had been moving for some time within the perimeter of a rule that the Government promoted to redefine the labor market fit for home delivery in Spain. That standard, known as ‘Rider Law‘, put the focus on a crack that had been at the center of the debate for years, the figure of the “false self-employed“, and has been pushing the sector towards employee models or towards schemes in which the employment relationship is channeled through third parties. In this context, the fact that the platform now announces its intention to stop working with self-employed delivery drivers is not only an operational adjustment, it is a movement that contributes to reordering one of the great debates of the delivery. The announcement that finalizes the turn. Uber Eats has communicated that it will stop working with self-employed delivery drivers in Spain and links it to its adaptation to the current labor framework after several years of changes in its operations. The company explains that delivery drivers who still use the application as self-employed will be able to continue delivering as employees through collaborating fleets. “Uber Eats reaffirms its commitment to compliance with the Rider Law. After four years in which we have accumulated extensive experience working with expert logistics companies, and with the aim of promoting a long-term sustainable model, we have made the decision to stop collaborating with autonomous delivery drivers.” What happened on the way. To understand the scope of the movement you have to look back. Uber Eats does not reach this point from a fixed position, but after several changes of course from the approval of the ‘Rider Law’. In 2021, the platform stopped operating with freelancers and moved to a labor model based on subcontractors. One year later, in August 2022, opened the door to self-employment again and adopted a hybrid scheme in which salaried fleet delivery drivers and self-employed workers coexisted, in a context in which Glovo persisted in that model. On paper, the solution proposed by Uber Eats is clear. Delivery drivers who still use their application as freelancers will be able to continue delivering, but no longer as self-employed workers, but as employees of one of the collaborating fleets with which the platform operates. In practice, the transition from self-employed to salaried usually involves changes in the organization of work and conditions, although Uber Eats has not detailed how it will be applied in each case or deadlines for this transition. Not all delivery drivers could automatically fit into this traffic, nor is it clear how many real positions the fleets can absorb, which leaves open the possibility that some of these self-employed workers will be left out of the system. The threat of ‘the full weight of the law’. The background of this movement refers to a clash that came from behind. In October 2025, the Ministry of Labor raised the tone and waived the possibility of resorting to criminal proceedings if Uber Eats did not rectify its hiring model. The vice president and minister, Yolanda Díaz, was explicit in warning that “Uber (Eats) is not going to fool the Government of Spain, and I can already tell you that the weight of the law will fall on this company,” in reference to the use of false self-employed workers. A mirror in the sector. The Uber Eats movement does not occur in a vacuum. Glovo announced its change of model in Spain in December 2024 and operates fully with salaried delivery drivers from mid-2025while the criminal process continues against its top leader, accused of a crime against workers’ rights. Just Eat, for its part, stayed the course and persisted in its employee model. In this context, Uber Eats had remained the great exception, with a hybrid scheme that continued to combine fleets and freelancers. From now on, the focus shifts from the announcement to its actual landing. Uber Eats says it wants to put an end to pending litigation and facilitate a “fair process for everyone,” but it will be practical execution that will determine the extent of the turnaround. It remains to be seen how the transition from the self-employed to the fleets is articulated, how many delivery drivers manage to fit into that step and if the new scheme manages to dissipate the conflicts that have accompanied the sector in recent years. Images | Robert Anasch | appshunter.io In Xataka | The “absent recipient” trick: why delivery people mark your package as undelivered even if you were at home

Apple promised they would be happy by sweeping the iPhone in China. Until Huawei made things clear

by

For years, the iPhone was the best-selling mobile phone in China despite the efforts of Asian manufacturers. Xiaomi, Huawei, OPPO and Vivo were fighting to create a product at their level (or even superior in some key aspects, such as the camera), achieving privileged positions in a ranking in which Apple used to dominate. It’s not like that anymore. Again, king. Huawei has been in first place in shipments within its country for more than two years. This past 2025, despite having lost 1.9% in annual growth, it is still slightly above the iPhone company. Specifically, 16.4% market share compared to Apple’s 16.2%. Apple grows 4% year-on-year, an increase motivated by the great commercial reception of the new family iPhone 17. In fact, Apple has already surpassed Samsung and has become the first manufacturer worldwide, despite being the second in China. Yes, but. Although Huawei is reigning with an iron fistthe data is not enough to assert that this will continue to be the case next 2026. There has never been such a fierce fight between the main Chinese manufacturers. Huawei: 16.4% market share. Apple: 16.2% market share. Vivo: 16.2% market share. Xiaomi: 15.4% market share. OPPO: 15.2% market share. Minimal differences in quota that will translate into a constant dance of positions during 2026. There is a clear message here: Huawei has not been able to be stopped in its native country. The Huawei case. Vivo, Xiaomi and OPPO maintain a close relationship with Qualcomm, the giant in charge of providing the best high-end Android devices with the most powerful chips on the market. Meanwhile, Huawei has had to adapt to playing with more restrictions than the rest: has had to develop together with SMIC their own processors He had to create a software ecosystem completely independent of Android Almost completely redesign your supply chain Make an even more ambitious bet on your domestic market, where life without Google is the norm The surprise. For years, we have seen Chinese mobile phones as great high-end proposals, but with some important disadvantages compared to Western rivals (fewer years of support, mediocre video recording, “crazy” specs without any sense of assembly…). This has been changing for a while now.. Today (saving the subjectivity of which software we like more or less), Chinese mobile phones are the most ambitious hardware proposal overall. They have the best batteries on the market, by far. On a photographic level, they are beginning to move dangerously far from Apple, Google and Samsung. The hardware set usually far exceeds what we see in the rest of its rivals. Chinese brands are very focused on their expansion throughout Europe, and it shows. not so fast. The Asian market is a great mirror in which to see how the fight between large technology companies progresses, but its particularities are still there. On a global level, at least currently, Apple and Samsung seem practically unreachable. Only Xiaomi, with a 13% share worldwide (compared to Apple’s 20% and Samsung’s 19%), plays in the double-digit league. Vivo and OPPO, with a share of 8%, have not moved their position since 2023. By 2026, consultancies like Counterpoint expect a year of moderation and a poor growth forecast. The global price crisis in DRAM/NAND memories will force an imminent price increase. Whoever manages to contain the dam will win this year. Image | Xataka In Xataka | Chinese mobile phones conquered the market by dividing into a thousand different brands. Now they are doing just the opposite.

Carrying your ID on your cell phone is very easy. You just have to take advantage of your next visit to the police station

by

Just a year ago it hit the app stores MyDNIthe official app of the Government of Spain for carry your ID on your cell phone. Honestly, carrying the ID was the only reason I still carried the wallet in my pocket. I already have a driver’s license thanks to MiDGT and I haven’t used a coin or bill to pay in years, so the only thing left was the DNI. And why am I telling you all this? Because since my license was expiring in a few days, I made an appointment to renew it this morning. And since I was at the police station, I took the opportunity to do that step that, to date, has prevented me from using MiDNI: in-person activation. Visiting the police station. Unlike MiDGT, to use MiDNI it is necessary to register in advance in the system. Basically, we have to associate the phone number with our identity, and we can only do that in three ways: On the National Police website using the physical DNI and a DNI reader, a device that I do not have. At a Documentation Update Point (PAD) that you will find, in fact, in police stations and documentation units of the Police. In person at said documentation units. Electronic DNI Update Point at the Villanueva de la Cañada Local Police headquarters | Image: Villanueva de la Cañada City Council The easiest? What I have done: use the PAD. It is a kind of ATM like the one in the photo above. You insert the ID with the chip facing up and follow the steps, which consist of entering your email, your phone number and a password. Once the process is completed, you just have to verify the account by entering the code that they will send us and that’s it. Here I am forced to slap the National Police on the wrist for a usability issue. If you show a digital keyboard on the screen and the number 2 shows the @ above, what the user, who is used to using a mobile phone or tablet, will understand is that they must press and hold 2 to select the @. At no time will it assume that you have to press “Caps Lock” first to be able to enter the symbols. The simplest solution would be to put a button dedicated to @. And why the PAD? Because you don’t need an appointment. If you are going to renew the DNIyou can take advantage of the fact that you are there with your brand new license and its five-ten years of validity (depending on your age), and register it in the system. If you don’t have to renew it, but you pass by a police station, you can take the leap and do it in just a few minutes, especially now that you know how to put the @. Don’t keep your physical ID far away. Although carrying your ID on your cell phone sounds outrageous, the truth is that it will still be necessary to continue having your physical ID on hand. As the National Police points out, the physical DNI and MiDNI are “complementary”, there are use cases in which the physical DNI will continue to be necessary: If your cell phone runs out of battery, is offline, or breaks, you will have to use your physical ID. You cannot use MiDNI as a travel document to cross borders or in other countries. Nor can you use it for online operations or telematic procedures that require authentication or electronic signature. These continue to depend on Cl@ve, digital certificate, etc. And if this were not enough, until April 1, 2026 it is not mandatory that public and private entities accept your digital DNI. But hey, at least it’s a step. Cover image | Xataka In Xataka | How to share your ID online safely to avoid dangers

They live glued to an app looking at the sky as if it were 1939

by

Greenland had been installed for decades in a feeling of security, as if its geography and distance protected it from everything, and that certainty was has suddenly broken: in a matter of days the population has gone from joking that “nothing ever happens there” to talking seriously about evacuation, preventive flight to Denmark, or what will happen to their children if one day they wake up being “Americans”. Live in fear. counted on an extensive report the Guardian that these days on the island we are grappling with a question: how do we survive psychologically when a military threat stops being a movie and becomes a concrete possibility. The impact is not only political: insomnia, anxiety, daily nervousness, questions that are not answered with speeches but with emergency plansand the feeling that no one is prepared for something they have never experienced, because Greenland has no historical memory of modern invasions and its public life was built precisely on the idea that the world was far away. Look at the sky like in 1939. The British media recalled the parallelism. The most powerful image of this moment is civil surveillance become routine: inhabitants of Nuuk following flights on applications, observing the port and the sky as if waiting for a storm that has not yet struck, interpreting every movement as an omen, getting scared by a plane transport that takes off from a nearby base and fearing that it is the beginning of “the inevitable.” That wait has something from 1939 not because of the exact military comparison, but because of the emotional climate: the certainty that we are entering a dangerous time, the impression that prior guarantees They are no longer useful, and the feeling that the coup (if it comes) will not be diplomatic. In this tension, the telephone becomes a domestic radar and life becomes tiny. The threat of “necessity”. The key to fear is not just that there is strategic interests in the Arctic, but the language coming from Washington sounds like appropriation and force: the idea that Greenland is “necessary” for American security, even if it is part of the kingdom of Denmark, shifts the debate from the political to the existential. When a power speaks like this, the smaller population automatically feels powerless, and that feeling repeats. At that point, even the hope that everything remains rhetoric no longer calms its inhabitants, because the recent precedent of harsh interventions feeds the idea that the unthinkable is no longer impossible, just a matter of time. The Thule base in the United States Diplomacy to the limit. The encounters that youtook place in Washington They offer momentary relief because they suggest dialogue, but what remains is a cold feeling: the fundamental disagreement and, at its core, the American position have not been resolved. hasn’t changed. The presence of top-level figures adds gravity and uncertainty, because it is not perceived as an exchange between allies, but as an asymmetric negotiation where one party feels they can “afford” to impose conditions. Even when the tone first becomes somewhat conciliatory (Trump vaguely promising that “something will come out”), the underlying message remains disturbing: options are not ruled out, Denmark’s inability to deal with Russia or China is insisted on, and the idea that American control would be the solution is maintained, which for Greenlanders sounds less like protection and more to substitution. The European military turn. The great visible change has come in the last few hours, when Europe has begun to put troops in Greenland: France, Sweden, Germany and Norway have announced sending military personnel on a reconnaissance mission in Nuuk, and Denmark frames it as part of an effort to explore security options in an Arctic increasingly disputed by Russia and China. It is a movement that, by itself, is already historic in terms of atmosphere: Greenland goes from being a remote territory with a discreet military presence to becoming a Allied deployment scenario and a narrative of “reinforcement” that is normally associated with “hot” borders, not with an ice capital where public life breathed calm. People notice the change in the most basic: more flights, more ships, more uniforms, more signs that something is moving beneath the surface. The exceptional within NATO/EU. What is striking is not only the shipping itself, but what it represents: the idea of ​​deploying European forces in a territory linked to NATO and the EU sphere as a preventive response to a political crisis with the United States is something that break the script usual of the alliance, where military reinforcement is intended against external threats, not to manage the risk of an internal struggle. Although it is presented as recognition and training before Russia and China, the social perception is another: This happens because there is a specific threat and because time seems to speed up. In other words, the deployment suggests that Europe is trying to convert the symbology in deterrence: demonstrate presence, unity and material reality on the ground so that the discussion stops being just a game of statements. Fear of another colonization. Furthermore, beneath geopolitics lies a deeper wound: the memory of Danish colonization and the fear of repeating the pattern with another “owner.” For part of the Inuit population, the idea of ​​“another colonization” is not a metaphor, it is rather a real ghostand that is why fear is not expressed only in terms of sovereignty or resources, but also human: what will happen to studies, rights or daily life or identity. The crisis, paradoxically, also activates a reinforcement indigenous identitya more marked cultural separation with respect to Denmark and a visceral rejection to be treated as an interchangeable object in a global conversation where Greenland appears as a “prize” mineral and strategic position. A disturbing conclusion. Deep down, what emerges is an uncomfortable truth that the population perceive clearly: in a world where we are seeing invasions, wars and border changes, “international legality” not enough as an emotional shield, and that is why … Read more

Spanish pigs are at their limit

by

On November 25, a wild boar appeared dead very close to the campus of the Autonomous University of Barcelona. Three days later, the Central Veterinary Laboratory of Algete (Madrid) confirmed the worst: African swine fever was back. Today there are more than 60 positives, a state of permanent psychosis and a drop in pork prices (and margins) like no one remembered. And no farm has tested positive. But we already knew it wasn’t necessary. It was only enough for one region to suffer an outbreak for numerous export contracts to be blocked. That is what has brought down prices: the Union of Farmers and Ranchers Unions estimates losses of 153 million euros and there is already talk of a 40% drop in the margin. These are figures from the producers, of course. However, it fits with the public ones: Mercolleida, the live pig has reached a price of around €1/kg. a month ago, after the worst price drop in 30 years, the price was 1.20. The worst thing, however, is that (at the consumer level) the price of meat it has barely gone down. What do we do now? Because let’s not fool ourselves, the pressure does not come only from the “health risk” (a very small one); It comes from the systemic problem: restricted zones, logistical costs, certificates and exports suspended in limbo. Going down from one euro to the kilo is (above all) something symbolic: the symptom that we have not managed to weather the storm and the imbalances in one of our star sectors are accumulating. The moment of truth of the Spanish pig. In recent months, we have seen how the agricultural sector is experiencing one crisis after another: when they are not the problems linked to the confinement of birds due to bird flu, are the problems in the pasture either lack of water. Today, Spain is the undisputed leader in European pork, the third largest producer worldwide. A giant who, as we usually repeathas feet of clay. We can see it by focusing only on one of its main problems: generational change. Thousands of farms are on the brink of disappearance simply because no one wants to take charge of them every time the owner retires. This crisis comes at its worst moment. Image | Benjamin Lehman In Xataka | In a country with almost as many pigs as people, the worst that can happen is that investment funds take over

features, price, technical sheet, photos

by

Raspberry Pi has announced the launch of its new AI HAT+ 2 accessory, a complementary board for the Raspberry Pi 5 which promises to expand its capabilities for uses that involve generative artificial intelligence systems for a modest price. The board incorporates the Hailo-10H neural accelerator and 8 GB of dedicated RAM, features that according to the company will allow large language models (LLMs) to be run directly on the device without the need for an internet connection. Below these lines we tell you all the details. Raspberry AI HAT+ 2, technical sheet Raspberry AI HAT+ 2 processor Hailo-10H AI (40 TOPS inference performance at INT4) memory 8GB RAM workload Computer vision inference and generative AI models Software integration Full integration with Raspberry Pi camera stack Compatibility Compatible with Raspberry Pi 5 facility Includes 16 mm stackable header, spacers and screws (optional heatsink) price 130 dollars Raspberry Pi AI HAT+ 2, 8 GB RAM (add-on board to Raspberry Pi 5) The price could vary. We earn commission from these links A plate for local models The AI ​​HAT+ 2 represents a leap compared to its predecessor, launched just over a year ago. While the original AI HAT+ focused exclusively on computer vision tasks, such as object detection, pose estimation or scene segmentation, this new model seeks to cover an increasingly growing interest in run language models locally and without needing to be connected to the internet. According to Raspberry Pi, the board offers 40 TOPS of inference performance (at INT4) thanks to the Hailo-10H chip. The incorporation of 8 GB of LPDDR4X RAM on the board itself is the most notable novelty, as it frees up the Raspberry Pi 5’s processor and RAM for other tasks while the neural accelerator takes care of AI processing. Several language models with between 1 and 1.5 billion parameters will be available at launch, including DeepSeek-R1-Distill, Llama 3.2, and different versions of Qwen. The company assures that they will soon add larger models and that users will be able to adjust these models to specific use cases using techniques such as LoRA (Low-Rank Adaptation). Beyond paper Along with the benefits that the complementary board promises, it is good to know that the Hailo 10H chip that it incorporates is limited to a power of 3W, which means that, although it translates into better energy efficiency if we compare it with the chip that includes the Raspberry Pi 5 itself, this power limitation makes it The add-on board offers lower raw performance than the Raspberry Pi 5 itself. Additionally, while the extra 8GB of RAM is tremendously useful, it’s worth noting that the 16GB version of the Raspberry Pi 5 board itself also outperforms the add-on board in this regard. We must keep in mind that many medium-sized and quantized language models usually use more than 10 GB of RAM, so the AI ​​HAT+ 2 would be limited to smaller models. However, this is a very interesting solution to have the Raspberry Pi 5 use the performance of the add-on board to run models while using the resources of the main board for any other task. Who is it intended for? The AI ​​HAT+ 2 maintains the computer vision capabilities of its predecessor and, according to the Raspberry Pi, can simultaneously run vision and language models. The board could find its niche in power-constrained applications that need to combine vision processing and language model inference, such as industrial automation systems or IoT devices. It may also be useful as a development kit for companies planning to integrate the Hailo-10H chip into their own products. For users simply looking to run language models locally on a Raspberry Pi, the most practical option is still to purchase a Raspberry Pi 5 with 16GB of RAM. Price and availability The Raspberry Pi AI HAT+ 2 now It is available for $130.although to buy it in Spain it will depend on the price of the official distributors. Furthermore, in the Hailo GitHub repository and in his Developer Zone You can find examples, tutorials and documentation to get the most out of the board. Raspberry Pi AI HAT+ 2, 8 GB RAM (add-on board to Raspberry Pi 5) The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Images | Raspberry Pi In Xataka | Someone has used a Raspberry Pi worth less than 10 euros for a great project: creating their own original Macintosh

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.