usatoday24

We believed that hantavirus did not jump between humans. Until someone went to a birthday party in Argentina

May 8, 2026 by usatoday24

In recent weeks, the term ‘hantavirus‘ is on the lips of many people, and it is no wonder to the big outbreak that has emerged in the middle of the ocean on a luxury cruise ship. As time goes by, there is more and more data that we have on the table, since we have gone from having the idea of being faced with a virus no possibility of transmission between humans to a scenario in which this is possible and has already occurred. What we knew. When we think about hantavirus, epidemiology usually leads us to a very specific scenario, such as rural areas with infected rodents and humans who become ill by inhaling particles of their excrement. The cycle usually ends there, in an evolutionary dead end that goes no further. However, there is an exception, which is the Andes variant of this hantavirus, which has a high lethality and circulates mainly in South America, being the only one that can be transmitted from person to person. It is not a new phenomenon, but its propagation mechanism, strongly linked to social events and the so-called “superspreaders“, makes it a pathogen of special surveillance, as has been demonstrated by the recent large outbreaks in Argentina and its impact now on an international cruise ship with people who are not currently under control due to its long incubation period. His past. To understand the magnitude of the problem, you have to travel back in time and more specifically to the mid-90s where the medical community believed that hantaviruses were strictly zoonotic pathogens, that is, they were transmitted from animals to humans. But in 1996, an outbreak in southern Argentina changed virology textbooks. Here the publications of the time They made it clear that the 1996 outbreak was happening directly between humans thanks to molecular analyzes that determined that the viruses that were infecting patients were quite similar. A birthday. In a simple meeting between several people in November 2018 in Epuyén, it was clearly confirmed that something was happening with this virus. Here are three symptomatic people who attended a birthdaya funeral and a doctor’s office caused the contagion of 34 people, of whom eleven ended up dying due to the clinic that presents this very aggressive virus. This case set a great precedent, being the clearest example we have to see that the Andes hantavirus can spread in social environments without there being close and continuous contact as was thought until relatively recently. But the most interesting thing is the possibility that there are ‘super-contagators’, who are people who can more easily infect those around them and which right now may be the most plausible theory that explains this contagion on the cruise. Similar. Abdirahman KHALIF Mohamud, spokesperson for the World Health Organization, was the one who shown the similarities that may exist between this birthday in Argentina in 2018 and the case of the cruise because in both cases there was a concentration of people in a closed space. The tranquility. In the cases that are documented right now, which are not many, it could be seen that at the moment in which the authorities isolated the confirmed cases, the transmissibility began to decrease. But in addition, it is also known that when a virus is transmitted three times, there is no more contagion from it, so its capacity to spread is lower, which is good news. The problem is that there is still a lot of information that is emerging in this regard, and although there are experts who point out that we are not going to be facing a major pandemic like Covid, fear is still quite present. In Xataka | The hantavirus was going to reach Europe sooner or later and, as always, it caught us offside

from useless grass to the birth of fascinating life

May 8, 2026 by usatoday24

In 1995, several scientists who They studied ancient craters left by World War II bombs in Europe discovered something unexpected: Decades after the war, many of those holes filled with water had become small natural refuges where amphibians, insects and birds that barely found safe spaces elsewhere in the landscape thrived. A hole in the ground that ended up changing an ecosystem. In many gardens, the corners where water accumulates after rain are often seen as a problem: uncomfortable mud, grass that is impossible to maintain or small puddles that sooner or later someone ends up draining. However, in the midst of the global crisis that amphibians go throughthose spaces are beginning to look different. In fact, they had a few days ago in Economics a story that occurred on a small plot of land near a fish farm that demonstrates the extent to which something seemingly insignificant can be transformed into an unexpected refuge for wildlife. The idea of building a pond that would disappear. Apparently, the owner decided to dig a shallow depression, barely about 60 centimetersright in an area where thaw and rain already accumulated water naturally before ending up being lost in a ditch. The key to the project was precisely that it was not a permanent pond. It was designed as a “vernal pool”a seasonal pond intended to fill during winter and spring and gradually dry out in summer. This detail is essential because it prevents the presence of fish, one of the greatest dangers for eggs and tadpoles. Shallow water also warms faster and accelerates the development of larvae before the pond disappears, something essential for species that live against the clock. The frogs are coming. The most surprising it was the speed with which nature responded. Just weeks after filling with rain and meltwater, five gelatinous masses of wood frog eggs appeared attached to submerged branches near the shore. Although at first glance they seemed like small isolated groups, each of these masses could contain hundreds or even thousands of eggs. The pond still had very little vegetation and just a few logs, leaves and accumulated mud, but that was enough for the amphibians to immediately identify the place as a safe breeding point. A corner of grass with no apparent use had just become a natural nursery for one of the most endangered species on the planet. The mud also attracted other species. The frogs weren’t the only ones to take advantage of the change. Part of the shore was deliberately left bare and muddy to favor swallows, which need wet mud to build and reinforce their nests. The previous year several had inspected the dwelling without remaining definitively, possibly due to lack of suitable materials nearby. Now the garden offered just what they needed. Plus: to that was added a bat box placed next to the pond, creating a small ecosystem where insects, amphibians, birds and mammals began to interact around the water. What was once a uniform surface of grass and pine trees began to transform into a much more vivid and diverse mosaic. The silent amphibian crisis. As they remembered in the middleall this occurs at a particularly delicate time for amphibians. Near of 40% of the species on the planet are threatened with extinction due to habitat loss, disease and climate change that alter the rains and dry out entire breeding areas. In this context, small temporary ponds like this one are beginning to acquire enormous importance because they offer just the conditions that many species need to survive. The problem is that, being small and seasonal spaces, there are often outside the protections traditional legal systems and go unnoticed in the face of much larger wetlands. The idea that is changing many gardens. He experimentFurthermore, it leaves a powerful conclusion: a simple shallow hole can become a useful piece within a much larger network of refuges for amphibians and other species. Obviously, a single pond will not change on its own the global crisis of biodiversity, but thousands of small interventions distributed among gardens, farms, parks or schools can begin to create safe corridors for increasingly pressured animals. And perhaps the most striking thing is that a good part of these spaces already exist: they are precisely those corners of the garden where every spring a puddle appears that someone usually tries to eliminate as soon as possible. Image | Pexels In Xataka | Searching for dinosaurs in Argentina they have found a treasure that is 161 million years old. The oldest tadpole on the planet In Xataka | This frog screeches in ultrasound. We don’t really know why, but we just found out.

Vevo was all over the internet in the 2000s. Today is just another forgotten episode of the old music industry

May 8, 2026 by usatoday24

In December 2009, two of the biggest record labels on the planet organized a party in New York with Bono as the guest of honor to celebrate the launch of something that, according to them, was going to give them back control of the music business on the Internet, which, as we will now see, was not going through its best moment. It was called Vevo, an acronym for “Video Evolution.” The (r)evolution lasted less than a decade: the fundamental changes in the business and the arrival of a different way of understanding music videos relegated it to the secondary level of nostalgia for millennials which is today. Bad times. In the late 2000s, The music industry was collapsing.. Income from record sales had been falling for years due to the combined effect of piracy and chaotic digitalization, unbeknownst to the labels, and which was very far from the orderly and official moment that it is experiencing today thanks to streaming platforms. For example: YouTube (which had already been bought by Google in 2006) accumulated hundreds of millions of video clip views without the labels seeing a single euro in compensation. Attempts were made to renegotiate the terms of that relationship, without success: Warner Music was the first to withdraw their entire catalog from YouTube in 2008. Ideaca. Doug Morris, then CEO of Universal Music Group and a central figure in the creation of Vevo, envisioned a way to enter the internet and video clip business when he saw his grandson consuming online video clips with advertising, which led him to ask how much money Universal was generating with those reproductions… The answer was obvious: zero. From that point on, Morris pressured companies like Yahoo and MTV to compensate him for playing his videos. He did end up reaching an agreement with Google. Q: Are We Not Men? A: We Are Vevo! Vevo officially launched on December 8, 2009 following an agreement between Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment and EMI, with Warner Music Group joining years later, in August 2016. Vevo would provide the official catalog in high definition, YouTube would serve as a mass distribution platform, and both parties would sell advertising on that inventory. In October 2009, the Abu Dhabi Media Company already had invested about 300 million dollars to operate in the United States and Canada. Immediate result? Spectacular. In its first month it was already the most visited music site in the United States, surpassing Myspace Music. The economic impact was also rapid: according to Vevo’s CEO at the time, the average CPM of an online music video went from $3 before launch to more than $30 in 2013. In 2012, Vevo accumulated 41 billion views annually across its network, with a catalog of around 75,000 videos. By August 2013, Vevo had surpassed MTV in terms of digital viewership: 609 million video views versus MTV’s 261 million that month. Vevo Certified for artists who surpassed 100 million streams became an indicator of cultural relevance comparable to a number one on sales charts. Issues. However, Vevo’s structural problem was not the audience, but your delivery model. Although the company had a turnover of $250 million in 2013, more than 90% of that income was shared between labels, Google and music publishers. Universal and Sony captured 55% of the total and Vevo operated at a loss. It was, in practice, an advertising inventory manager without its own capital: it generated value for its shareholders, the labels and Google, but not for itself as an independent operating entity. In 2014, the company hired Goldman Sachs and The Raine Group to find a buyer willing to pay nearly $1 billion for the company. None appeared. Vevo ruled out the sale and announced that it would seek profitability through its own means. Change of course. In April 2015, Erik Huggers (creator of the famous BBC iPlayer) arrived as the new CEO. Vevo then wanted build your own applications for mobile and connected TV, reduce its dependence on YouTube and eventually launch a paid subscription service. They began developing apps for iOS, Android and connected TV platforms, but it was short-lived: the paid subscription project was canceled in February 2017, and Huggers left the position. Sizes and layoffs took place and the commitment to technological autonomy ended. Coup de grace. In January 2018, YouTube automatically migrated subscribers from Vevo-branded channels (such as “RihannaVEVO” or “JustinBieberVEVO”) to YouTube’s new Official Artist Channels. That same week, YouTube relaunched YouTube Music as a paid subscription service, directly competing where Vevo had tried to enter. Paradoxically, Vevo had broken even that year for the first time. But the proprietary model had never caught on, and without it, there was no reason to maintain the infrastructure. What’s left of Vevo. Vevo has not completely disappearedlike other projects of the time. The company pivoted to the connected television business and FAST channelsthe free shelves with advertising. Its library exceeds 900,000 video clips and generates approximately 25,000 million monthly views. The model is, ironically, the one that MTV never managed to make happen: a free music network supported by advertising, although in the case of Vevo, distributed over the Internet instead of cable. Vevo’s footprint is not entirely negative: it set the standard for the official high-definition music video on YouTube, created the monetization infrastructure that allowed video clips to become a business again, and demonstrated that the recording industry could negotiate on an equal footing with technology platforms. But the fact that the video clips have ended up becoming amateur choreographies on TikTok is something that, of course, the CEO of Universal could not foresee. In Xataka | MrBeast created an extreme survival challenge with the goal that no one could overcome it. Until ‘Juan the Mexican’ arrived

They dedicate four times more time to their children, but mothers are still on the brink of collapse

May 8, 2026 by usatoday24

Let’s imagine for a moment the classic picture of a living room in the 1950s. The father, fresh from work, barricades himself behind the newspaper or asks for silence to listen to the radio. His parenting figure is peripheral, an economic provider whose emotional absence is normalized. Let’s now jump to 2026. Today’s father kneads gluten-free pancakes on a Tuesday morning, manages the third grade WhatsApp group, reads positive discipline manuals and monitors every millimeter of his offspring’s cognitive development. If we traveled back in time, today’s fatherhood would be unrecognizable to a father from the “Silent Generation.” However, this revolution, which a priori should have created the most balanced generation in history, hides a deep structural trap. If today’s parents sin something, it is not that they are absent, but rather the opposite. And this hyperpresence – crossed by a fierce demand of class and gender – is triggering the anxiety of children and causing unprecedented exhaustion, especially in women, who continue to support the invisible scaffolding of the home. The sociological data is compelling. According to analyst Derek Thompson in your newsletterparents millennials in the United States spend approximately four times more time caring for their children than parents of the generation of the baby boom. The hours of male involvement have taken a historic leap. However, this phenomenon is deeply fragmented by socioeconomic status. The research of economists Guryan, Hurst and Kearney They already warned of an astonishing paradox: The higher the educational level and purchasing power, the more hours are invested in parenting. The famous study The Rug Rat Race (The Rat Race)created by Valerie and Garey Ramey, hits the nail on the head by explaining why. This hyper-involvement responds, to a large extent, to the anxiety to ensure the future success of minors in the face of a savage academic and labor market. It has become a status symbol; a frenetic competition where free time is sacrificed on the altar of extracurricular activities. In Spain, this desire for presence has been supported by the institutions. From Moncloa trace the evolution: we have gone from the ridiculous two days of paternity leave prior to 2007, to consolidating ourselves in 2025 as a European reference model with 19 paid and non-transferable weeks per parent (and 32 weeks for single-parent families). The father, by law and by cultural change, is at home. But what happens behind closed doors? In Spain, the dynamic is identical. Studies on time use like those of the sociologist Pablo Gracia confirm that Spanish parents with higher education dedicate significantly more time to the physical and interactive care of their children. A will to be present that has also been supported by the institutions. The Moncloa figures trace undeniable progress: we have gone from the ridiculous two days of paternity leave prior to 2007, to consolidating ourselves as a European benchmark with 19 paid and non-transferable weeks per parent (and 32 weeks for single-parent families). The father, by law and by cultural change, is at home. But what really happens behind closed doors? The mirage of the distribution Headlines celebrating the “new super dad” demand critical reading. Researcher Eve Rodsky, author of Fair Play, warns in the magazine Lounge of the trap of traditional surveys: they measure execution time, but ignore cognitive effort. Today’s men “help” more, yes. But the mental load—conceiving, planning, and continually anticipating family needs—continues to fall on them. Today’s mothers feel, in Rodsky’s words, “overwhelmed and bored” by having to act as directors of a project where their partners often act as kind subordinates waiting for instructions. The x-ray of this inequality in Spain reveals an exhausting panorama: Chronic overload: 78% of Spanish mothers declare themselves overloaded, assuming 64% of domestic tasks, regardless of whether they work outside the home. according to data from Make Mothers Matter. Class gap and vulnerability: The situation becomes dramatic for single-parent families and women with precarious jobs, who lack the network and resources to outsource care. Fear of penalty: A report of TELOS evidence that, when push comes to shove, more than 90% of mothers use up their entire birth leave, compared to 85% of fathers, still inhibited by the culture of corporate presenteeism. This systemic pressure to achieve everything invariably results in burnout or parental exhaustion. The psychologist Silvia Álava It is estimated that 7 out of every 10 Spanish parents They are exhausted by the effort to achieve perfection. Worse still, clinical research on this syndrome (such as the psychometric analyzes of Suárez, Núñez et al.) warn that extreme exhaustion ends up causing serious emotional distancing. It is the final paradox: parents try so hard to be present that they end up emotionally disconnecting from their own children for pure mental survival. The bill is paid by the minors We live in the era of “helicopter parents” and “lawnmower parents”: those who, as illustrated in the magazine International School Parentthey compulsively pave the way so that children do not even stumble. And the great irony of this intensive parenting, spurred by the suffocating showcase of social media, is that it is devastating those it seeks to protect. The great irony of this intensive breeding is that it is devastating those it is intended to protect. A Norwegian review of 38 studies has detailed that between 70% and 90% of research associates excessive parental control with profound mental distress in children. Avoiding frustration deprives them of the tools to be functional adults. A Norwegian review of 38 independent studies makes it clear: Between 70% and 90% of research associates excessive parental control with profound discomfort in children. Avoiding frustration deprives them of the basic tools to be functional adults. In fact, neurology confirms that taking constantly Decisions for children stunt the development of their prefrontal cortex, the area of the brain responsible for solving problems and regulating emotions. The brain literally needs to fall down to learn to get up. In Spain, the clinical alarms are ringing loudly: Psychiatric admissions: The magazine … Read more

Even if you are neither from Barça nor from Madrid, a Clásico is a Clásico. You can watch it without leaving home on Movistar Plus+

May 8, 2026 by usatoday24

Football has an impact all over the world, but not just any game. The Champions League always has a lot of pull, but if we talk about specific matches, there are few more attractive nowadays than a Clásico between Barcelona and Real Madrid. This weekend we have the last one of this season and we can see it on Movistar Plus+ for 9.99 euros per month. Remember: without permanence and whatever operator you are. Monthly subscription to Movistar Plus+ The price could vary. We earn commission from these links You also have the new Movistar Plus economic plan for less than five euros per month If you were waiting for something to arrive to try Movistar Plus+, there are few things better than a great game like El Clásico. The platform, as we say, does not have any type of permanence. This means that you can subscribe, try everything it offers and, if you are not convinced, unsubscribe whenever you want. What do you end up enchanted with? Well then you can switch to the annual plan with which you would save two months (costs 99.90 euros). The match between Barcelona and Real Madrid, which will take place next Sunday at 9:00 p.m., is not the only match that we will be able to see. Movistar Plus+ will also show the Alavés – Barcelona on May 13, as well as a match on matchdays 37 and 38 of LaLiga. In addition, it will also broadcast the Champions League final and the FA Cup finalanother great game between Chelsea and Manchester City. To all this we must add a catalog of series, movies and documentaries with very good options. From ‘Gladiator 2‘ which premieres today, to other award-winning films such as ‘Sundays‘ either ‘Sirat‘. Of course, there is also room for series like ‘I always sometimes‘or documentaries true crime by Carles Porta, among many other things. One thing remains to be added. If in your case you are not too interested in football, but you are interested in the rest of the Movistar Plus+ catalogue, then you have their new one available Free Plan. This, in essence, offers all the movies, series and documentaries on the platform (as well as more than 70 television channels) for only 4.99 euros per month. Also without permanence and, as with the other plan, you can share it with a friend without problems. 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 | Movistar Plus+ In Xataka | Movistar Plus+ activates its Free Plan with complete programs and a lot of content, regardless of which operator you are In Xataka | Less than five euros per month and without permanence: this is the new Movistar Plus+ plan that you can even share with a friend

There is only one correct way to place toilet paper. A patent ended the debate in 1891

May 8, 2026 by usatoday24

We have been fighting all kinds of battles for centuries, and in some cases the response passed between disputes between each other. Among these debates there is one that never seems to disappear because both sides are equally clear about it. We are referring to toilet paper and correct way to hang it. If it takes us decades to achieve a significant advance of the roll, it makes sense that the controversy has endured. The funny thing is that the answer was there from the beginning. A “war” of a century and a half. The eternal dispute about how it should be hung toilet paper (with the sheet “above” or “below” the roll) has generated conflicting opinions, family debates and even heated discussions. Those who prefer the “over” method give practical and hygienic reasons: it is easier to locate the end of the paper, it reduces the risk of contact with the wall (and therefore with germs) and it is visually tidier. However, on the other side, supporters of “under” appeal to a more discreet appearance and the fact that, for example, it makes it difficult for pets or children to stay at home. unroll the entire paper. An illustrated invention. However, all this controversy seems to have found an official answer in an unexpected place: a document from more than 130 years ago. In 2015, writer Owen Williams rescued an image history of Google Patents file which showed the patent registered in 1891 by Seth Wheeler, none other than the inventor of perforated toilet paper. In it, it is clearly illustrated how the paper should be hung: above the roll (image below). The patent, registered by the Albany Perforated Wrapping Paper Company, includes unambiguous diagrams in which the paper is unrolled from the front. Wheeler’s patent Wheeler’s reasons. The inventor not only patented the concept of perforated paper in 1871, but two decades later, he perfected the roll design, with the intention of minimizing waste and facilitating its use without the need for complicated roll holders. Your goal it was efficiencynot to fuel endless debates: “My improved roll can be used on the simplest supports”, wrote in the text of the patent. In its original conception, the paper should fall towards the front to facilitate individual tearing of the perforated sheets, thus avoiding accidental unrolling or unnecessary waste. Yes, Nokia made toilet paper before mobile phones Science to the rescue. There is more data that corroborates that the “pro-encima” are right. Science also supports this orientation for purely health reasons. According to explained doctor Christian Moroprofessor of health sciences at Bond University, hanging the paper with the sheet on top reduces the risk of users touching the back wall of the holder when reaching for the end of the roll, which can minimize that spread of bacteria. More remembered that among the potential contagion agents That can be found in bathrooms include streptococcus, staphylococcus, E. coli and common cold viruses, all capable of being transmitted through contact with contaminated surfaces. Preventing hands from coming into unnecessary contact with the wall or roll holder is therefore a simple but effective measure to reduce the risk of infection in shared spaces. An invention… to review? Beyond the debate about how it should be placed, in recent years others have appeared around the invention. The New York Times explained in a column that although its invention represented at the time a technical improvement over previous methods (which included, attention, leaves, seashells, sticks with sponges or even reusable ceramics), the persistence of its use reveals less a functional effectiveness than a cultural resistance to abandoning the familiar. Here the Covid-19 pandemic appears, when toilet paper acquired an unusual prominence: not for its medical usefulness, but as a symbol of control in the face of chaos. The mass hysteria led to emptying shelves, ignoring that neither the supply was threatened nor was paper the most hygienic solution. And despite this, experts agree that it is far from being the cleanest or healthiest option. The evidence. The Times explained that researchers in infectious diseases and colorectal health agree that the exclusive use of paper does not guarantee adequate cleaning and can, in fact, cause irritation and promote the transmission of diseases. Among the pathogenic agents that can survive in poorly eliminated fecal remains are those germs and bacteria that we mentioned before and that cause urinary infections. Traces of it were even detected coronavirus at the time in human feces. According to Dr. H. Randolph Bailey, a colorectal surgeon in Houston, many anal ailments he sees in his office come from excessive cleaning or with inappropriate products, such as wet wipes with perfumes and irritating chemicals. Water as a solution. Here a parallel debate opens, surely more bitter. The reason? The most hygienic method, according to many specialists, is rinsing with water, either using bidets or similar. In Japan, for example, smart toilets with warm water jets are the normwhile in the West adoption remains marginal. The reasons are not technical or economic (today there are compact and accessible solutions), but rather cultural. The rejection of the bidet has historically been associated with prejudice of modesty, licentiousness or even ridiculous misunderstandings like the one that occurred during World War IIwhen American soldiers learned about bidets in French brothels, which made them “suspicious” objects. The anecdote of a North American tourist who he mistook it for a bathtub for babies illustrates the extent to which discomfort in the face of the unknown has slowed its adoption, even in France, where it was originally common. Or wipes. In recent times, a “plan C” has emerged against the fundamentalists from the roll or water: wet wipes. The problem is that it has been accompanied by environmental consequences. Its accumulation in sewer networks, combined with grease and waste, has led to enormous blockages (known in the world Anglo as “fatbergs“) capable of collapsing urban sanitation systems. From that perspective, instead of improving the situation, wipes have added a … Read more

The EU said its AI Law was prodigious. It must not be so good when it is going to delay its application until 2028

May 8, 2026 by usatoday24

Brussels has agreed delay the toughest restrictions of your AI Law until December 2027, which in practice moves its real impact to 2028. Initially the calendar was much more ambitious and intended to prohibit and punish AI systems classified as “unacceptable risk”but all that now remains a dead letter. This makes it clear that community institutions are not prepared to supervise what they intended to regulate. Tell AESIA. A victory with risks. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has made Germany dictate the pace of Brussels. Mez has pushed until the last minute to get industrial AI applications virtually off the radar of the law. This will allow German business giants such as Siemens or Bosch not to have to comply with the regulations. Is according to Politico a political victory for Berlin—although other companies like ASML asked for the same— which protects its heavyweights, but poses a problem: if we let AI control factories and critical infrastructure, we risk its failures having an enormous impact, which is exactly what the AI Law proposed. What was considered high risk six months ago is no longer so. Brussels comes to its senses. MEPs have understood something that they had been refusing to admit for a long time: being the “sheriff” of the internet is of no use if you don’t have your own AI industry. While Europe regulated, the US and China they grew without brake. The agreement is the clear admission that regulating with a heavy hand a market that you do not dominate does not make sense. The EU now gives its companies some oxygen instead of forcing regulations that the rest of the world is simply ignoring. The “Brussels effect” has a ceiling, and this delay marks it. The AI Law does not give up completely. The EU, however, has included an express prohibition against AI systems capable of generating deepfakes of recognizable people. It is a direct response to the controversy generated by tools like those present in Xand a way to keep the protective spirit of the law somewhat alive. The obligation to identify AI-generated content also remains, but the grace period is stricter now, at three months compared to the previous six months. Even so, there is a clear surrender in what mattered most. Careful. If the EU has decided to delay its flagship AI law in the face of industrial pressure, what will prevent the DMA or the DSA from ending up suffering the same fate? The two regulations have been involved in complex industrial battles for some time: Apple and Meta they continue to resist to meet the requirements of interoperability and transparency, and the Commission has had to qualify its own requirements. The precedent of the is dangerous because it shows that political pressure works. Regulate so much for what. The EU has been wanting to lead technological regulation without leading (or even competing in many areas) in technological innovation. The GDPR served as a global standard because Europe was a large enough market to impose conditions for entry. The difference is that AI depends on something else very different, and here the feeling is that the only thing Europe is doing is putting doors on the field. Let your own AI Law end modifying first and later delaying is nothing more than a tacit recognition that the EU’s regulatory strategy and ambition has been a shot in the foot. One that has worsened the conditions to be able to compete with those of other countries. Image | World Economic Forum In Xataka | “What is allowed in China can never be allowed in Europe”: Spanish MEPs from the AI Special Commission speak

publishing matters more than research

May 8, 2026 by usatoday24

During last March ICML (International Conference on Machine Learning), the academic conference dedicated to machine learning (machine learning) oldest in the world, rejected 497 scientific articles at once after detecting that 506 reviewers had resorted to the artificial intelligence (AI) to write your evaluations. They had violated a rule which they themselves had agreed to respect. This conference is organized by the International Machine Learning Society (IMLS), a non-profit organization, and has been held annually since 1980. Every year, researchers working in the field of AI submit their scientific papers in late January or early February to ICML. Those papers They are reviewed by a committee made up of other researchers in this field with the purpose of evaluating them and publishing them if they finally pass a thorough review that normally lasts several months. Decisions to accept or reject articles are usually communicated to authors during the month of May, and the ICML conference is usually held in July. Publish in ICML, NeurIPS (Conference and Workshop on Neural Information Processing Systems) or ICLR (International Conference on Learning Representations) is equivalent to what in other disciplines it would be to publish in the scientific journals Nature or Science. But ICML has a serious problem: its authority is being questioned in r/MachineLearninga Reddit community specialized in machine learning which has more than 2.5 million subscribers. A perversion where reviewers don’t have time to review Before moving forward, it is worth stopping at a very important milestone: the number of scientific articles received by ICML is growing overwhelmingly year after year. In 2023 it received 6,538 papersand in 2024 no less than 9,653 articles, which represents a growth of 48%. The root of the problem lies in the fact that the number of qualified reviewers is not increasing with the same rhythm as the number of scientific articles that need to be evaluated. As I mentioned a few lines above, ICML rules establish that reviewers cannot lightly resort to AI to carry out their evaluations because this procedure can introduce bias. In fact, a study carried out on ICLR 2024 has revealed that scientific articles evaluated with AI models They tend to receive higher scores than those reviewed with the conventional procedure. This is the problem. For the 2026 edition, ICML offered evaluators to choose between two policies: one that prohibited the use of AI and another that allowed it, but with conditions. Only those who chose the first option and failed to comply were sanctioned. Of the 506 offenders, only 398 were reciprocal evaluators who had submitted a ‘paper’ However, there is one relevant fact that is worth not overlooking: the 497 scientific articles that were rejected in March of this year were reviewed by offending reciprocal evaluators. This simply means that they are researchers who simultaneously act as authors and reviewers, so their scientific article was penalized due to their violation of the ICML rules of conduct. Of the 506 offenders, only 398 were reciprocal evaluators who had submitted a paper. Interestingly, the detection system that ICML has used consists of hiding specific instructions within the PDFs of articles pending review. Those instructions are invisible to a human reader, but any AI model processing the document interprets them and includes specific, trackable phrases in the evaluation. ICML has not used generic AI detectors. Of course, each case detected was manually verified to verify that a violation had actually been committed when preparing the evaluation. What is happening reflects an unappealable reality: the review system has failed and needs to be rebuilt. The reviewers can’t cope. Neither those of ICML, nor those of NeurIPS, nor those of ICLR. The number of qualified reviewers should grow at the same rate that the number of scientific articles that need to be evaluated, and it is not happening. Furthermore, this scenario has introduced another problem: acceptance or rejection decisions have acquired a random aspect that threatens the consistency and reliability of the evaluations. It is still not entirely clear what path should be followed to resolve this problem beyond the need to increase the number of qualified evaluators. One option is to improve the transparency of the review process publishing all evaluations. Even those of rejected articles. The evaluation process could also be transformed into a two-way procedure in which authors also evaluate the quality of the reviews they receive. In this way, the evaluators will have a history that will prove their good work. We will see what strategy the conferences finally implement. In 2027 we will clear up doubts. Image | Charlesdeluvio (Unsplash) More information | ICML In Xataka | With DeepSeek V4, China has gained more than just an AI model: it has unlocked the potential of its domestic chips

Murcia has been paying the first “shadow toll” in Spain for 27 years. This year will end it

May 8, 2026 by usatoday24

It was 1997 when Murcia approved the Law 4/1997, of July 24, on Construction and Operation of Infrastructures of the Region of Murcia. It might seem like a regulation more related to the infrastructures of the autonomous community, but far from it. Two years later, taking advantage of this text, the Murcia Government gave approval to the construction of the Aunor Highway (the RM-15 highway), granting the concession to a company owned by Sacyr and OHL. In October 2001, the toll road was already in operation. But on this toll highway there are no barriers or personnel to collect the corresponding amount. But yes, the people of Murcia pay for it. It is what is known as a “shadow toll” road. And in 2026 it will end. Goodbye to the first “shadow toll” in Spain Just like explains Sacyr on its websitethis Murcian highway is considered the first shadow toll highway in Spain. A formula unprecedented until then in our country. Operation is simple. The concessionaire company builds and maintains the road for the stipulated period of time. During the years that it is active, the control means certify the number of vehicles that pass on the road but the driver does not stop to pay at any time. At the end of the period stipulated in the contract (in this case, each year), the Government to which the highway belongs pay a variable amountdepending on the number of cars that have circulated through it. That is to say, the cost of traveling on the road does not only affect the driver’s pocket, it is all citizens with their taxes who pay the concessionaire company the amount corresponding to the number of vehicles that circulate on it. In this case, the concession for the RM-15 was 25 years. Therefore, next September the concession period will end and the Government of Murcia will have the opportunity to extend or terminate it and, in that case, take charge of the maintenance and operation of the road itself or contracting the services to a third party. This last option will be the one that comes out ahead, they explain in the local media as The truth. The Government of the Region of Murcia has put out to tender a contract for the maintenance of this road, along with other conservation actions and operations on other roads in the Mula Sector. The amount is 20 million euros and 20 companies have participated in the competition. With the end of this shadow toll, an annual payment of between 10 and 13 million euros per year ends, according to the media. In total, it is estimated that once the contract is finalized, between 305 and 312 million euros will have been paid to the concessionaire company. In its day, the highway was seen as a relief for the residents of the Northwest and Río Mula regions. He explained The truth that the road allowed greater access to the towns in these areas but, above all, it was a much safer alternative than the previous national highway, which crossed municipalities and made it “the most dangerous road in the Region of Murcia.” Photo | Google Maps In Xataka | If the question is how to get rid of tolls, the European Union has a clear answer: being an electric truck

We are increasingly looking for human answers on Reddit. That is the reason why the Google search engine is now a Reddit in disguise

May 8, 2026 by usatoday24

Google has updated its search platform for the umpteenth time, but it has done so with an especially significant change. The user experience in its AI search engines (both AI Overviews and AI Mode) attempts to become more “human”. And to do this, in these searches Google will add more context to the links, such as extracts from internet forums and blogs. And if there is a beneficiary (or harmed) of that movement, it is Reddit. Google was already a gateway to Reddit. There is a behavior that Google has been seeing in its data for years and that for a long time it preferred not to publicly acknowledge: when someone wants a real answer to a real question, add “Reddit” to the end of the search. Not because Reddit is necessarily a reliable source, but because Reddit brings together real people who have experienced this issue, tried to solve it, and written about it without anyone paying them to do so. Google, with all its infrastructure and all its algorithms, had not managed to replicate that. So instead of trying it’s going to incorporate those answers directly. What exactly has changed. The search engine update will make in AI Overviews Fragments from forums, social networks and other “first-person sources” appear. When someone searches for something for which there is no single objective answer, Google’s AI will include perspectives and opinions found in all kinds of (supposedly) human sources online. Doing so will add the name of the creator of that content (or their avatar) and the origin from which said perspective comes. Google also promises to add more context about the origin of its AI-generated answers, similar to how ChatGPT or Claude include links supporting their answers. Tired of so much SEO. The reason is obvious: Google’s organic results for practical and subjective questions—”what vacuum cleaner should I buy”, “how do I cure my dog’s ear”, “what is the best neighborhood to live in in Valencia”— They are dominated by SEO and those techniques optimized to appear on Google. It is important to position, not answer the question well. That is precisely where Reddit, like other forums or personal blogs, has something that this content usually does not have: the real experience of someone who was in the same situation. Google sums it up in its own statement bluntly: “For many searches, people are increasingly looking to other people for advice.” The contradiction that Google has not resolved. There is a potential problem in this new way of conceiving these searches with AI. AI Overviews were designed to answer questions directly and thus save the user the work of clicking, reading and researching. Now they will include diverse and even contradictory perspectives from forums and social networks. So, will AI Overviews answer the question, or will it make us go back to the sources to find the answer? If it is the latter, it will not be very different from what I already did the traditional Google search engine. There is an interesting imbalance here between “we give you the answer” and “we give you context so you can find the answer.” In a sense, Google’s decision complicates searches. AI models are becoming less prone to failure. The famous cases of add glue to pizza are much less common now, and new models often boast a significant reduction in “hallucination” rates that they have. GPT-5.5 Instant, released this week, “produced 52.5% fewer hallucinations than GPT-5.3 Instant,” OpenAI indicated in its official announcement. The problem is that these hallucinations are increasingly difficult to detect because these chatbots hide these mistakes very well. That the system now includes unverified or validated content from networks like Reddit can be problematic: community votes do not always measure how truthful or useful a certain thread is. Using Reddit has its drawbacks. This platform has value precisely because it is not optimized for Google algorithms: It is chaotic and contradictory.. Sometimes there are brilliant responses from people, but other times there are completely wrong comments. When a user adds “Reddit” to their search and reads the results, they are automatically weighing which comments are useful and which are not. But that step disappears if Google extracts fragments of those discussions to include in an AI Overview. Eliminate that human filtering step and presents those answers with an authority that perhaps they should not have. Google will have much more difficulty than a human in distinguishing the comment of someone who has been working in plumbing for twenty years from that of someone who tinkers as a hobby. The shadow contract. This is not just an editorial or technological decision. In 2024 Google signed a deal worth $60 million a year with Reddit to access their data and train their models. You are not incorporating content from this social network as a public service: what you are doing is monetizing a commercial contract. Your message that you are highlighting those “original voices” is really saying that you have paid for that privileged access to Reddit content and now you are going to take advantage of that access and make it profitable. That revenue is interesting for Reddit, no doubt, but there is a problem: clicks. The Stack Overflow Precedent. There is no need to speculate much about what may happen because it has already happened. Stack Overflow is the largest technical Q&A community on the internet, but has lost most of its traffic in two years because AI companies They started collecting all those answers. to train your models and then serve them to your users directly. That caused users to stop visiting Stack Overflow and experts to stop answering questions. The quality of the new content on this network was clearly affected, and it became clear that if the AI already gave you the answer without having to enter Stack Overflow, why enter? The danger for Reddit is exactly the same. Google didn’t have many alternatives. ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity They have been capturing … Read more

Log In

Sign In

Forgot password?

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections