3,000 years ago there were no notaries, so in Sweden agreements and marriages were closed with footprints carved in rock

In Atapuerca there are animals, in Irulegi there is a hand and in Lake Mälaren, in central-eastern Sweden, there are feet. Thousands of footprints carved into rock that are between 2,500 and 3,700 years old. To date, archeology thought that they were a sample of symbolic or religious art, but a recent study proposes something much more practical and not at all ornamental: they were contracts engraved in stone. Take off your shoes and sign here. Fredrik Fahlander, an archaeologist at Stockholm University, has examined hundreds of footprints carved into rock surfaces along the southern coasts of the Scandinavian peninsula and has found that these petroglyphs are not placed at random nor do they belong to the same person, like when you mess around with fresh cement. So that it lasts, exactly like the contracts. In fact, that is their hypothesis: when two people wanted to seal an agreement, a friendship or a marriage, they engraved their footprints together on the rock. Faced with the oral promise, the stone made it permanent. Map of southern Scandinavia where carved footprints have been found. Fredrik Fahlander Why is it important. Because they offer a different vision than what we know about how prehistoric societies worked. Historically we have assumed that formal pacts were typical of cultures with writing, but this study shows that peoples without writing could also formalize commitments using the physical landscape as support. On the other hand, as important as knowing what those footprints mean is knowing what they were not: in the Scandinavian Bronze Age, the sacred and the symbolic was engraved in bronze and deposited in tombs and the foot prints are not in either of those two places. They appear only and exclusively on rock exposed to water. It is no coincidence: it reveals that these traces did not belong to the world of the dead or to that of symbology, but to that of the living and their agreements. Context. The Nordic Bronze Age lasted from approximately 1700 to 500 BC. During that period, Scandinavian people left tens of thousands of rock carvings with various common motifs, such as ships, animals, human figures or circles. The category of footprints is rare within this set: they are very careful, carved to life size and with so much detail that they even show the straps of the sandals. The main site studied is the Mälaren region, which during the Bronze Age was a bay of the Baltic Sea. The uplift of the land after the last ice age has made it possible to chronologically date the engravings: those located at higher altitudes are older. In detail. In the Mälaren region, 627 carved footprints have been documented in 140 sites, although it is not an isolated phenomenon: they are present throughout the province of Småland and on the Bjäre peninsula. They are deliberately arranged around water sources and shallow depressions where rainwater collected and flowed, as well as near natural crevices and mineral areas. In addition, there are certain patterns: most sites have a single footprint or an odd number. When there are two, they are almost always different in size and shape, suggesting that they belong to different people. In some cases, the second print was added some time after the first. Fahlander interprets this as an accepted invitation: the first print proposes the link, the second confirms it. If both were recorded at the same time, the commitment was sealed simultaneously by both parties. Yes, but. The study hypothesis is coherent and well-supported, but it remains a hypothesis. In fact, as Fahlander himself explains, these footprints probably had more than one meaning or purpose. However, there are no written sources from the time that confirm it simply because they do not exist. In Xataka | When they opened a remote tomb in Poland, archaeologists discovered something strange: two women embracing In Xataka | Archaeologists have found a puzzle in a Neolithic tomb: where the hell are the heads of its 77 skeletons? Cover | Fahlander, F. (2026). “A Step in Stone. Ontologies of Podomorphic Petroglyphs in Southern Scandinavian Bronze Age”

has left 45% of collective agreements out of play

The objective of collective agreements is to regulate the rules of the game of certain sectors or large companies by establishing the salaries they will receive employees in that sector. However, in 2026, almost half of these agreements are encountering a serious problem: they are obsolete. The interprofessional minimum wage (SMI) has been rising non-stop for eight years. It has gone from 735 euros per month in 2018 to 1,221 current euros In 14 payments, a cumulative increase of 66%. Many of these sectoral agreements, negotiated for months, have been stillborn, becoming obsolete due to estimating the lowest salaries below the legal minimum, as is how I collected The Economist. Almost one out of every two agreements, below the SMI. The data is clear. According to a UGT analysisthe SMI exceeds the agreed salary for the lowest categories in 45% of the 2026 sectoral agreements that were registered during the first quarter of 2026, with minimums that are already below of the new SMI. The measure affects, for example, agreements such as the gardenerwhich in January 2026 was approved with a salary of 1,184 euros for laborers and apprentices, that is, adjusted to the 2025 SMI, but does not include the new amount for 2026. In company agreements the proportion of outdated agreements drops slightly, but the problem persists. Of the 25 agreements published in that same period, 9 (36%) also had salary tables below the legal minimum. They are agreements signed after months of negotiation that, in the end, need an extra complement to comply with the law. What the law says. No agreement can set salaries below the SMI in annual calculation. The Supreme Court clarified it in 2025: what counts is the annual total, adding all the concepts. Not just the base salary. If between the base salary and the bonuses it reaches 17,094 euros per year that establishes the SMI of 2026the company would be complying with the legislation. If not, it is obliged to make up the difference through an additional salary supplement. This is the formula that many companies use to comply with the increase in the SMI when, as happened in 2026, this increase is approved with the year already begun, and even when the agreement they apply has come into force that same year. This increase is not always an extra cost for the company (if they already paid more than that SMI with bonuses included). But it is a sign that many of these agreements are governed by remuneration so adjusted to the legal minimum that the minimum correction leaves them outside the regulations. The problem of overlap between categories. Moving in this area of ​​minimum wages leaves a collateral effect that worries unions. When the SMI rises faster than the agreements, the lowest salary categories end up receiving salaries very close to those of the higher ones. A laborer and a first-class officer, with very different tasks and knowledge, can end up with very close salaries at the end of the month due to the compression effect that occurs from below. That is, companies raise the lowest salaries only to comply with the regulations, but not the ranges immediately above in the same proportion. UGT calls it “overlapping” and has been asking for a new agreement to be negotiated for some time. Agreement for Employment and Collective Bargaining (AENC) with the representatives of the employers’ association to organize these scales. Some agreements already have clauses to avoid this. He consulting and technology agreementfor example, sets a margin of 80 euros of minimum difference between each level affected by the SMI and the next. That is, if the lower salary ranges rise to comply with the SMI, that increase is transferred upwards proportionally to the rest of the categories. Who wins and who notices it more. The rise in the SMI has improved purchasing power of workers with lower incomes. Between 2018 and 2026, minimum wages have grown by 66% compared to an accumulated inflation of 25%which has made it possible to cushion the loss of purchasing power of those with the lowest salaries. However, if companies do not compensate for the differences between the lowest salaries and the following categories, there is a risk of discourage promotion of employees, who see that the increase in responsibilities is not compensated with a large difference in salary at the end of the month. In Xataka | Finding a job had always been a good way to escape poverty: in Spain it is no longer true Image | Unsplash (Ivan Henao)

OpenAI has signed countless billion-dollar agreements with other companies. We are discovering that they are made of paper

OpenAI has announced that will abandon development of Soraits AI video generator, just six months after the launch of its standalone app. Disney, which had announced a $1 billion investment in OpenAI in exchange for licensing its characters for Sora, has confirmed that the deal will not go ahead. The money never changed handsand joins others in recent weeks that send a worrying message. One that calls into question the real strength of the most valued company in the AI ​​sector. Paper agreements. In recent months, OpenAi has been the protagonist of a frenetic string of announcements that have shaken the stock markets and sent prices skyrocketing. Analysts like Ed Zitron have documented in detail how these agreements are for now more smoke than anything else: all of them were “letters of intent”, conditional commitments that now seem increasingly difficult to come true. There are examples everywhere. The NVIDIA case: the one hundred billion that did not exist. In September 2025 NVIDIA announced a “strategic partnership” with OpenAI to invest “up to 100 billion dollars” and build 10 GW of data centers. Four months later, the company led by Jensen Huang considerably reduced that investment to 30 billion dollars. Jensen Huang recently stated that this will “probably” be the last round he will enter into OpenAI and clarified that the statement made it clear that this was a “letter of intent”, not a contract. Months later in NVIDIA’s quarterly results, the agreement is described as “an opportunity to invest in OpenAI.” Not a single dollar has been sent to him, and it is not certain that he will. The AMD case: 34% rise in the stock market. In October, another mega-deal. amd announced a “definitive” agreement with openAI to deploy 6 GW of data centers. The company indicated that would potentially generate “tens of billions in revenue,” and AMD shares rose 34% in one day. Four months later, in quarterly results from the company, zero mentions of OpenIA. IN November 2025, in AMD’s 10-Q filing, AMD’s outstanding obligations on contracts with a duration greater than one year were 279 million dollars. There were practically no mentions of OpenAI. Many promises, no reality. The Broadcom case: a confusing order. Broadcom too was going to deploy 10 GW of “AI accelerators designed by OpenAI” at the end of 2029, but at the moment there is still no evidence that chip sales have occurred and there are no clues in OpenAI’s latest quarterly results, which do not mention this agreement anywhere or its impact. Broadcom CEO he did tell investors that they expected to deploy 1 GW of computing in the form of XPUs in 2027, but did not give details of how they planned to reach 10 GW in 2029. And also revealed that “we do not expect much in 2026” from the contract with OpenAI, because the return will focus on 2027, 2028 and 2029. The Disney case: a very bad sign. The agreement with Disney announced in Decemberincluded the company taking a $1 billion stake and will license more than 200 characters from Disney, Marvel, Pixar and Star Wars for use on Sora. It was the type of agreement that validates a company before the general public, especially since Disney does not sign agreements with just anyone. However, the agreement was entirely built on stock warrants, not cash, they point out in Deadline. By abandoning Sora, Disney has withdrawn without consequences and without having transferred a dollar. Another paper agreement. The SKHynix case: where are we going to get so much memory from?. SK Hynix and Samsung intended to provide 900,000 RAM wafers per month for OpenAI’s Stargate project, but the result of these intentions has been null. That agreement would have consumed 40% of world production of DRAM in the midst of the crisis of this type of components. The mysterious Norwegian data center case. OpenAI promised in July 2025 that would boost construction of an AI data center belonging to the Stargate project but which would be in Norway. It was then expected that this center would have 100,000 NVIDIA chips by the end of 2026, and that it would expand “significantly” from that figure. There has been no news of this development since then. Nobody asks questions. Zitron complained in your reflection how financial analysts seemed not to ask the necessary questions when faced with these announcements. He explains that OpenAI had committed about $300 billion in different agreements to create new data centers, but its real income is around $4.5 billion a year and it is expected that it will have losses of about $14 billion in 2026. Despite everything, Zitron criticizes, the stream of advertisements continues to work because it generates increases in the stock market and positive headlines. The difference between contracts and letters of intent was buried in the fine print of the advertisements that almost no one reads. And the examples continue. In fact, the advertisements do not stop coming despite everything and everyone. OpenAI announced in February an investment of 110 billion dollars by SoftBank (30 billion), NVIDIA (30 billion) and Amazon (50 billion). SoftBank itself is “testing its lending limits” with that bet, which we will see if he can complete. Amazon’s 50 billion are divided in two phases: a first of 15,000 million that should be executed on March 31, and another of 35,000 million dollars whose deadlines depend on several events. Too many agreements that must demonstrate something critical: that they are not made of paper. In Xataka | Problems are multiplying for OpenAI in the race for AI. Your solution: go from 4,500 to 8,000 workers

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.