asked

Japan has once again asked its citizens what they hate most about tourists. The answers have revealed them again

by

In Japan, millions of people travel every day on one of the most punctual railway networks in the world, where delays of just seconds can generate public apologies. During rush hours, some urban trains exceed levels 180% occupancyforcing every gesture inside the car to be optimized. In such an environment, even the smallest details can make a difference. One country and the same question. Japan has repeated a social experiment that we counted a year ago and that says much more than it seems: ask its citizens what bothers them most about tourists. As we said, it is not the first time he has done it and, in fact, the previous year he had already put the focus on trains as one of the spaces where the most friction is generated between locals and visitors. Therefore, one could say that repetition is not coincidental, but rather a way of measuring whether culture shock changes over time or, on the contrary, remains stable. And what happened a year later it’s revealing: The responses have evolved in nuances, but they have once again pointed out the same underlying problem. Noise as a symptom, not as a problem. If there is one fact that stands out in the new survey, it is that almost seven out of every ten respondents place the noisy conversations and disorderly behavior as the biggest nuisance caused by tourists. It is not just a question of volume, but of context: the train in Japan functions as an almost silent space, where speaking loudly or behaving expansively breaks an unwritten social norm. This same element already appeared in the previous surveyalthough now it is consolidated much more strongly (69.1% of respondents) as the main point of friction. More than a change, it is a confirmation that the culture clash continues to revolve around the same idea: the difference between more expressive cultures and a society that values ​​extreme discretion. From trains to general behavior. Comparing both years, it is surprising how little the catalog of annoyances. Poorly placed luggage, the way of sitting invading space, strong odors or blocking the doors were already present before and continue to appear now with high percentages. This suggests that these are not isolated incidents, but rather repeated patterns that locals easily identify in visitors. Even seemingly minor issues, such as do not move away when opening the doors or not respecting the logic of the flow inside the car, reinforce the idea that the problem is not punctual, but structural. Japan is not discovering new annoyances, it is confirming the same ones. The big difference: what Japan does not blame on tourists. However, there is an interesting nuance that marks a distance from the previous year and that adds depth to the comparison. When general inconveniences are analyzed (that is, those caused by all passengers), elements appear that are not attributed to tourists, how to travel drunk or certain uses of the mobile phone. In the new survey, coughing or sneezing inconsiderately It becomes the main annoyance among locals, something that does not lead the list of tourists. If you will, this introduces an interesting reading: Japan is not pointing out that visitors are responsible for everything, but clearly differentiating between its own problems and those of others. That distinction was already implicit before, but now it appears much more defined. Giving themselves away. In the end, and like last yearthe most striking thing is not what the tourists do, but rather what they reveals Japan about itself when repeating the survey. A year later, the responses once again revolve around respect for personal space, silence and collective order, fundamental pillars of their daily culture. The differences between both surveys are smaller than the similarities, which indicates that the problem is not changing because the root It is cultural and deep. Japan is not discovering new discomforts, it is confirming that its way of understanding public space continues to clash with that of those who come from outside. And by doing so two years in a row, it has made it clear that the question is no longer what tourists do wrong, but to what extent this model of coexistence can adapt to an increasingly global world. Image | tokyoform In Xataka | In 1979, Japan rediscovered a species of rabbit on one of its islands. He then perpetrated an environmental disaster In Xataka | Japan has dozens of “forgotten” islands off the coast of China: it is now preparing for the worst scenario

The wine industry believed it had its new El Dorado in China. Until China asked its officials to stop drinking

by

a few days ago Dynasty Fine Winesa wine company listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange, had to share the class of information that makes shareholders’ coffee (or wine, as the case may be) choke: their 2025 profit forecast has plummeted more than 50% with respect to 2024. The news might not have interest beyond its board if it were not for the fact that it connects with a larger trend: changes in the Chinese market that have led to the Asian giant ceasing to be the inexhaustible gold mine that the sector imagined in his day. And in part it is due to the guidelines on morality by Xi Jinping. What has happened? That the Western alcohol industry’s dream of finding a new big gold mine in China seems to be slowly receding. And this is especially noticeable in wine cellars. After years of accelerated growth, in which the Asian giant seemed increasingly interested in wines from Australia or France, demand has started to slow down. The signs are clear. has fallen per capita consumption, imports, production and there are companies such as Treasury Wine Estates, Pernord Ricard, Diageo or Dinasty Fine that have seen how it gets complicated the panorama in the country. China is no longer in the news for increasing its world import quota from 1 to 8% in record time to make headlines for the drop in demand. What does the data say? There are many indicators to pull from. Of all, perhaps the most eloquent is the one published by the Interprofessional Wine Organization of Spain (OIVE), based in turn on Chinese customs data. The organization recently revealed that in 2025 imports suffered a decline of 26.7% in volume, although the increase in the average price reduced the fall to 14.6% in terms of value. The “prick” affected exporters like France or Chile. Is it the only indicator? Not at all. Another producing country that has also suffered the ups and downs in the Chinese market is Australia. Although the wineries there received good news in March 2024when Xi Jinpuing lifted the tariffs that penalized his wine exports, the joy was short-lived. A few months ago Wine Australia published a report in which it recognizes that shipments of merchandise to other countries were reduced by 6% in volume and 8% in value in 2025, a decline that is partly explained by the fall in two markets: the United States (-12%) and especially the Chinese one, which contracted another 17%. Are only imports falling? No. Just a year ago the University of Adelaide published a study which shows that the changes in the Chinese wine market are much deeper and more complex. Per capita consumption, for example, skyrocketed during the first decade of the century, then registered fluctuations until 2016 and from that year on it suffered a decline that extends at least until 2022, the last year analyzed. The production curve is not good either. “We have seen how the (Chinese) market has completely dried up,” he complained recently in statements to The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) the owner of a winery that exports wine from New South Wales, Australia. Your case is illustrative. Until 2019, 40% of its profits came from China. The collapse in sales in that market has now translated, however, into a surplus that will force him to let 30% of his grapes rot this year. Has the market changed that much? It seems so. In November 2025 the Hong Kong newspaper South China Morning Post (SCMP) published an extensive report which made its premise clear from the same headline: “European wines stay on the shelves while China looks for cheaper drinks.” In the chronicle he talks about a contraction in the consumption of both premium wines and traditional spirits, while other options such as craft beer seem to be gaining ground. The information is accompanied by a graph that reflects the fall in wine imports between 2017 and 2023. If there were any doubts about whether the trend only affects European or Australian wineries, a few weeks ago The New York Times public another report in which he explains how the drop in demand affects the distilleries of Maotaiin China itself, dedicated to the production of baijiua powerful liquor. Why is demand falling? There are several factors. Influences the economic slowdown and the hangover real estate crisiswhich have in turn affected spending on alcohol, especially when we talk about expensive imported wines. There are also analysts who they point to a change in consumer habits, especially among the youngest. Recently Global Timesa Chinese newspaper linked to the communist government, published a report in which he told precisely how the new generations show less interest in drinking. In that aspect they connect with other societies that live the same phenomenon. Is it the only reason? No. There is another. And although a priori it may seem minor or secondary, it is relevant enough for WSJ I related it directly with the decline of the wine market. Which is it? The position of the Chinese Government. A few months ago the Executive headed by Xi Jinping issued a strict guideline in which it prohibits the serving of alcohol, luxury dishes or cigarettes at official meals. The objective: end excesses. “Extravagant banquets and excessive alcohol consumption were a regular part of official life in China. But such excesses, long criticized by the public, have come under increasing scrutiny. As part of a new push to ensure discipline, China has imposed a widespread ban on alcohol at official receptions,” it proclaims. a statement published in May 2025 by the Information Office, which warns: “Excessive alcohol deteriorates the image of officials.” And is it being fulfilled? Although it cites the rest of the economic and cultural factors that influence demand, WSJ points out the government guideline as one of the factors that explain the change in trend in China. He even shares a concrete example: last year during the conference of a state-owned … Read more

The US has asked all its allies in Hormuz for help. The answer he received was anticipated by Spain before anyone else: “no”

by

In 1988, during the call “tanker war” between Iran and Iraq, a single low-cost naval device managed to seriously damage to a state-of-the-art American frigate in the Persian Gulf. That crisis left an uncomfortable lesson for the great powers: in the busiest maritime straits on the planet, a handful of well-placed threats are enough to put entire fleets in check and alter the balance of the world economy. A global appeal. Two weeks after the start of the war against Iran, the United States finds itself facing a paradox most disturbing. Despite the massive bombings against Iranian military installations and the blows against its strategic infrastructure, the Strait of Hormuz (the energy artery through which a fifth of the world’s oil passes) still blocked for much of the maritime traffic. The White House has responded with a unusual request: ask other powers to send warships to escort trade and reopen the passage. In fact, Trump’s call has not only been directed at traditional allies such as the United Kingdom or France, but also at rival powers. like china. This movement reflects, once again, an increasingly evident reality: the war is much more difficult to end than Washington expected. Reluctant allies. The international response has been prudent when not directly evasive. Spain has been the clearestbut the United Kingdom has insisted that the priority should be reduce escalation military rather than expanding naval deployment. For its part, Japan has recalled that its pacifist constitution limits participation in armed conflicts. South Korea has limited itself to promise consultations with Washington, while France has suggested that could participate in naval escorts, but only if the conflict is stabilized first. In other words, the allies recognize the strategic problem of the strait, but none seems willing to assume the political and military cost of fully entering the war. A notice to NATO. The frustration of the White House has ended up translating into a very direct message through a interview in Financial Times. Trump has publicly warned that NATO could face to a “very bad future” if its allies do not help the United States reopen the strait. The president’s argument is simple: Europe depends on the oil that passes through Hormuz and should help protect that route. In its vision of things, Washington has supported its allies in crises such as the war in Ukraine and now expect reciprocity. The problem is that this pressure comes at a time when many European governments fear being dragged into a military escalation with unforeseeable consequences. Appeal to China. In the face of Western coldness, the American appeal surprisingly included also to Beijing. China buys large quantities of Iranian oil and depends largely on the energy flow that passes through Hormuz. For Washington, this dependence could turn China into an actor interested in stabilizing the area. However, the maneuver has a complex diplomatic background: The United States is asking for help to resolve a war that it itself has started, and it is doing so even from a power with which it maintains a global strategic rivalry. Support for Iran. And while Washington seeks support from the most unexpected places, Tehran has responded proving that it is not isolated. The Iranian government has confirmed that maintains political, economic and even military cooperation with Russia and China. The relationship with Moscow has narrowed especially since the Ukraine war, in which Russia has used Iranian drones as part of its arsenal. With Beijing, the link is supported above all in energy trade and in long-term economic agreements. For Iran, this support does not necessarily imply direct intervention, but it does reinforce its position in the face of Western pressure. The strategic letter. we have been counting. Control of the Strait of Hormuz has become the main instrument of Iranian pressure. Tehran maintains that the passage is not closed to world trade, but only to the ships of the United States, Israel and their direct allies. This narrative seeks to present the situation as a selective retaliation and not as a global blockade. At the same time, it allows Iran use the threat on energy trafficking as a tool to force other countries to become diplomatically involved in the conflict. Economic war underway. Meanwhile, the impact on energy markets is already visible. The price of oil has exceeded $100 per barrel and several countries fear that the rise in energy prices will cause new inflationary tensions. For Asian economies, especially dependent on Gulf crude oil, the blockade represents a direct risk to their growth. That economic pressure is part of the Iranian strategic calculation: turn the conflict into a global problem that forces other powers to pressure Washington to find a solution. Late help. In that context, the implicit response of Iran is quite clear. In his view, the war has entered a phase in which calls for international cooperation no longer change the balance of the conflict. US attacks on strategic targets like the oil island of Kharg They have raised the tension to a level that makes any rapid retreat difficult. In other words, if Washington now seeks external support to close the war, Tehran interprets that it does so when the opportunity to avoid that escalation it’s already happened. An unexpected script. The final paradox begins to become increasingly evident, because the United States insists that has seriously weakened to Iran and that it can reopen the strait “one way or another”, but at the same time it is requesting international help to do it. This contradiction reveals that keeping Hormuz open under constant threat of mines, drones and missiles requires military coordination much larger than expected. Thus, the war that began as an air campaign fast has become a strategic challenge that involves (or seeks to involve) the entire international system. An increasingly complex board. The result is a scenario in which traditional alliances are shown extremely cautiousthe rival powers support Iran and the world economy is beginning to feel the impact of the … Read more

Ukraine has asked Russia if they stop for Christmas like in the First World War. The answer could not have been more Russian

by

The inevitable reference when talking about a Christmas break in the middle of a conflict is the spontaneous truce December 1914in the first months of the First World War. On several sectors of the Western Front, British and German soldiers left the trenches, exchanged cigarettes, sang Christmas carols and even played football in no man’s land. Ukraine has remembered it, but it is going to be complicated. The first time. On that occasion of the First World War, the truce was not ordered by the commanders nor was it part of a political negotiation: came from belowof human exhaustion in the face of a war that had not yet shown all its industrial brutality. Precisely for this reason it was never repeated. The high command considered it dangerous, subversive and incompatible with a modern total war. Since then, Christmas has been used many times as a rhetorical symbol of peace, but almost never as an actual interruption of fighting. The Ukrainian proposal. In this historical context full of symbolism, Ukraine has raised the possibility of a ceasefire during Christmas, an idea carefully formulated so as not to appear as a disguised surrender. Zelensky has spoken of a specific pauseespecially linked to attacks against energy infrastructure, at a critical time of winter and with the civilian population as the main collateral victim. At the same time, kyiv is preparing a new package of peace proposals backed by European partners and channeled through the United States, with the expectation that Washington will offer top-level security guarantees if Moscow rejects the plan. Zelensky, however, has shown caution and has lowered any expectations of a quick deal, publicly assuming that Russia may choose to continue the war and that, in that case, Ukraine will ask for more sanctions and more weapons. Officers and men of the 26th Division Ammunition Train playing football at Salonica, Greece, on Christmas Day 1915 The Russian response. The Kremlin’s reaction to the “Christmas break” has been immediate and bluntalmost ritual in its formulation. Dmitri Peskov has discarded any temporary ceasefire, including a Christmas truce, with an argument that Moscow has been repeating for months: a pause would only serve for Ukraine to regroup, rearm and prolong the conflict. In official Russian language, the word “truce” is presented like a trapwhile the word “peace” is reserved for a scenario in which Russia has achieved all your strategic objectives. According to Peskov, Moscow is not ready to replace a comprehensive negotiation (in their own terms) for “momentary and non-viable” solutions. The logic is clear and brutal: either the Russian framework of political and territorial victory is accepted, or the war continues without sentimental interruptions. Territory, guarantees and red lines. Behind the exchange of statements lies the real core of the conflict. Russia demands that Ukraine rspread to wide areas of its territory, accept permanent limits on its armed forces and rule out any future accession to NATO. Ukraine, for its part, rejects hand over the Donbaseven under ambiguous formulas such as a supposed demilitarized “free economic zone,” and remembers that it was already betrayed once when it renounced its nuclear arsenal in 1994 in exchange for security guarantees that did not prevent the invasion. Polls show that a clear majority of Ukrainian society opposes withdrawing from the east and is willing to continue fighting, a domestic factor that greatly limits Zelensky’s political margin even as international pressure increases. Christmas without miracles. The proposal for a Christmas break actually exposes the abysmal distance between the war that we evoke in historical memory and the war that is being fought today. In 1914an improvised truce was possible because the soldiers still saw each other as human beings confronted by accident. In 2025, the war in Ukraine is a conflict of objectives strategic, existential red lines and cold calculation of power, where each day of pause is measured in kilometers of front, ammunition reserves and operational advantages. The Russian response dry and distrustfulis not only “very Russian”: it is confirmation that, in this war, Christmas has no capacity to suspend the logic of the conflict. Unlike more than a century agothere is no room for carols between the trenches, only for official statements that remind that, for Moscow, peace does not begin with a truce, but with the political defeat of the adversary. Image | RawPixel, WikiCommons, Ariel Varges In Xataka | 24 hours later, satellite images leave no doubt: a Ukrainian underwater drone has changed the future of wars In Xataka | Drums of peace sound in Ukraine. And that should be a good thing for Europe… unless Finland is right

The prince of Brunei asked to be made a Ferrari so secret that not even Ferrari knew it existed: the F90

by

At the end of the eighties, a very special order knocked on the doors of the Pininfarina study. Prince Jefri Bolkiah, brother of the Sultan of Brunei, wanted to be designed a new exclusive Ferrari. The only condition was that this project be kept completely secret. In fact, it was kept so secret and for so many years, that not even Ferrari knew it existed until a series of photographs revealed them to the public and the brand itself decades later. This is the story of the only six Ferrari F90s that exist in the world. a car so mysterious They haven’t even seen it in Ferrari. The prince’s secret order The incredible story of this peculiar model came to light according to an interview that Speedholics made Enrico Fumia, director of design and development at Pininfarina in the late 1980s. In those years, Prince Jefri Bolkiah was one of Ferrari’s best clients, where I bought cars by the dozen to feed your large collection of cars made up of more than 7,000 cars. In 1988, an intermediary of Prince Jefri contacted the Pininfarina design studio, the Italian company responsible for designing some of the most famous Ferraris, with models such as the Ferrari FF, California, F12 Berlinetta or 458 Italia, among many other. The request was clear: I wanted six exclusive units of a Ferrari that only he would have. In exchange, the studio would receive an indecent amount of money, just at a time when the studio was not having a good financial streak. Without going into specific figures, the studio’s design manager only indicated in his interview that, with that commission, Jefri Bolkiah became the studio’s main source of income, above brands such as Ferrari, Maserati or Alfa Romeo. There it is nothing. The only condition that the prince set was that everything had to be done in the most absolute secrecy. So much so that not even Ferrari found out until 16 years later. Tap on the photo to go to the original message The project was baptized “F90”, so named because it was “the Ferrari of the nineties“. The design was built on the chassis of the Ferrari Testarossa – which was the star of the moment –, but with a completely new and original design in terms of body, cabin and roof, retaining only the engine, wheels and mirrors of the base model. Innovation and complexity in design In his interview, Enrico Fumia assured that “without a doubt, the F90 has been the most difficult and spectacular project we have ever done.” Among its most notable innovations was a unique sliding roof that slid over the rear window, becoming fully integrated to turn it into a convertible supercar. This solution was something completely unprecedented for the time and a major technical challenge, Fumia explained. But the fees paid by the coffers of the Sultan of Brunei more than covered the development cost. Making a Ferrari without Ferrari knowing was not easy. Fumia claimed that they tested the car at night, without any emblem of Prancing Horse and with the body completely camouflaged. As they did not have test drivers, the designer acknowledged that “sometimes I participated in the tests and, since the car was right-hand drive, when I was driving, another person had to sit in the passenger seat to pay the tolls at the highway exits.” In its design, Fumia was inspired by classic Ferrari models like the 1964 500 Superfast, with its peculiar oval front grille, the Ferrari 365 or the Ferrari 330 with its smooth and aerodynamic lines. Under the hood they mounted a 4.9-liter, 390 HP twin-cylinder V12 engine. After many difficulties, the six units of the F90 were delivered directly to Brunei and in the most absolute secrecy, where they have remained hidden in the royal collection of Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah. They remained this way until 2002. Ferrari, what Ferrari? It was in that year when some mysterious photos began to circulate on the Internet in which the unprecedented silhouettes of an unknown Ferrari. Finally, in 2005, Fumi met with Ferrari and Pininfarina to reveal the project. The design manager was surprised by Maranello’s reaction. “It was better than we ever imagined,” Fumia said. “Ferrari officially recognized the F90 as an authentic Ferrari, without ever having seen or touched it,” confessed the former Pininfarina manager. As of today, and only by reference to the leaked photos, it is known that the Ferrari F90s were painted in black, blue, gray, red, white and green. But none of these cars have left the royal collection nor has it been used publicly, thus maintaining the aura of mystery and exclusivity that surrounds them to this day. In Xataka | In Dubai they don’t know what to do with so many abandoned luxury supercars: the less shiny side of getting rich Image | Nano Banana

George RR Martin asked ChatGPT to write ‘Game of Thrones’. He did it so well that he is going to end up before the judge

by

The debate about the AI usage limits and how is this going to actually affect the creators It is very complex, and it has only just begun. From discerning to what extent AI’s ability to create works outside of humans will continue to grow to the logical ethical and legal concerns that appear around a tool that, from its very definition, is in a completely unexplored area. At the moment, George RR Martin and other authors are taking steps in search of more demanding regulation. What has happened? A federal judge in Manhattan has given the green light for the lawsuit filed by George RR Martin and other authors against OpenAI and Microsoft for alleged copyright violation. The creator of ‘Game of Thrones’ and his colleagues accuse these companies of use his works without authorization to train ChatGPT. According to the ruling issued on October 27, 2025, there are reasons for the case to move forward, since ChatGPT’s proposal for a sequel to the saga was substantially similar to Martin’s work already protected by copyright. The determining test. It came when lawyers asked ChatGPT to create a fictional sequel to ‘A Clash of Kings’. The chatbot immediately spawned a novel called ‘Dance of Shadows’, a sequel that included a new Targaryen heir named Lady Elara, a rebellious sect of the Children of the Forest, and a mysterious form of ancient dragon-related magic. This ability to recreate elements from Martin’s universe made the question clear: how could the AI ​​know his work in such detail without having fed on it? The precedents. The origins of this legal conflict date back to September 2023, when Martin, accompanied by 17 other authors (including people like Michael Chabon, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Jia Tolentino, John Grisham, Jonathan Franzen and Sarah Silverman) raised his voice against what he considered a systematic exploitation of his work. The case was brought by the Authors Guild union, in a lawsuit that spoke of “systematic theft on a massive scale”, arguing that the tool makes use of their works without paying royalties and without the writers’ consent. The letter. Months before the lawsuit, these authors and many others, such as Margaret Atwood or Nora Roberts, they had sent a letter to large technology companies conveying their concerns about generative AI technologies. In that document they warned about “the injustice inherent in exploiting our works as part of your AI systems without our consent, credit or compensation.” The accusation was clear: ChatGPT had not only learned from his books; Now I could replicate them. Other attacks. We are at a key moment in determining the legal implications of generative AI. At the beginning of 2025, for example, it was decided by the juries a similar dispute against Anthropicwhich concluded with an out-of-court settlement: the company paid $1.5 billion to authors whose works were used without permission. This precedent shows that technology companies are willing to negotiate to avoid court rulings that could establish binding jurisprudence. In England, by contrast, the High Court of England determined that Stability AI did not infringe copyright by train your model with Getty imagesthat is, a decision in literally the opposite direction, which has generated alarm among European creators. In all these cases the debate about “fair use” or fair use: The technology companies argue that the training of their models constitutes a transformative use of works, similar to when search engines index content. The creators reply that it is a massive appropriation that replaces, not complements, the original work. And in the background, a shock that has only just begun. Header |Gage Skidmore

Sam Altman does not take well to being asked about OpenAI’s astronomical losses

by

OpenAI has a serious liquidity problem. Earn a lotbut they are crumbs compared to what you need to enter. The numbers don’t come out, but that hasn’t stopped them from signing millionaire agreements. Brad Gerstner, an OpenAI investor and podcaster, asked Sam Altman about this problem and it seems he wasn’t amused. Defensive. They tell it in Futurism“How can a company with $13 billion in revenue commit to spending $1.4 trillion? You’ve heard the criticism, Sam,” asked Brad Gerstner on his podcast, which incidentally also included Satya Nadella listening intently to the exchange. Altman’s response was to become defensive: “If you want to sell your shares, I will find a buyer for you. Enough is enough.” The interviewer laughed it off, and Altman continued in a soft but clearly sarcastic tone: “There are many people who speak with great concern about our products and who would be happy to buy shares.” Click on the image to see the publication in X. Figures. OpenAI recently achieved a $500 billion valuationbecoming the most valuable private company in the world. Not only is it the most valuable, it has signed agreements with some of the most important tech companies such as NVIDIA, amd, Broadcom and just yesterday with amazon. Not only is it valuable, it The tech industry has tied its destiny to that of OpenAI. If it fails, the consequences can be catastrophic. Losses. Brad Gerstner is not at all wrong when he asks Altman about the inconsistency between his company’s expenses and profits. A few days ago, Microsoft presented its results and, given that they own 27% of OpenAI, in The Register They calculated how much money Altman’s company had lost in the last quarter. The figure is dizzying: 11.5 billion in just 90 days. It’s something to be worried about. For profit. After months of rumors about a impending divorcefinally Microsoft and OpenAI signed a kind of separation of assets. In parallel, OpenAI finally achieved his desired goal: finally become one for profit company. This measure gives them more flexibility to collaborate with third parties and make new rounds of investment. More wood. Despite the more than justified doubts about the astronomical spending on AI, the big technology companies announced a few days ago that They were going to spend even more than they planned. Investors are worried, and if not, tell Zuckerberg, who despite achieving record income, saw how its shares fell 8%. Question of faith. Sam Altman shares the same optimism and, responding to Gerstner, states that “revenues are growing rapidly (…) we are making an open bet that they will continue to grow.” Curious that he doesn’t give any figures to back it up. Image | TechCrunch, Flickr (License CC BY 2.0) In Xataka | The world of AI has a problem: there is no energy for so many chips

When asked if AI is a bubble about to burst, big technology companies have just responded: hold my cap

by

The AI ​​race is about computing power and data centers the size of entire cities. And that doesn’t exactly come cheap. Big Tech is spending indecent amounts of money so as not to be left behind in AI and the fear that everything is a bubble flies over the environment. That doesn’t seem to stop them. Microsoft, Google and Meta have announced that they are increasing their planned spending on AI. what’s happening. Microsoft, Google and Meta have just presented their results for the last quarter and there are two pieces of news. The good thing is that all three have managed to increase their income. The not-so-good news is that they have sent a message to their worried investors: they are going to spend even more money than they planned on data centers and AI infrastructure. More wood. That AI is a bonfire of money we already knew it. Now we know it’s going to get even bigger. Meta had planned that Capex (capital expenditures) for 2025 would be $66 billion. Now they just said that The total will be between 70 and 72,000 million. And not only that, next year it will be even bigger. For its part, Alphabet (Google) had planned a Capex of 75,000 million, but they confirm that They will spend between 91 and 93 billion dollars. Finally, Microsoft has not given the annual data, but in this quarter They have spent 34.9 billion dollars5,000 million more than planned. In 2026 they expect spending to be even higher. Planned CAPEX REVISED CAPEX goal 66 billion 70-72 billion +24% GOOGLE 75 billion 91-93 billion +23% microsoft 30,000 million (quarterly) 34.9 billion (quarterly) +23% Also more income. Don’t panic, or at least not too much. All three have achieved record profits in this period. Meta earned 51.24 billion, Google 102.3 billion and Microsoft 70.1 billion, an increase of 26%, 16% and 13% more than the same period last year. All three assume that the numbers will continue to grow, and that is precisely what Those who warn of a bubble are not so clear. It’s not AI, it’s the cloud. In the case of Microsoft and Alphabet, the main vector of revenue growth is their cloud business, a trend that It started in the previous quarter and has continued to increase. Google Cloud generated 34% more revenue thanks to growth in “core products, AI infrastructure, and generative AI solutions.” In the case of Microsoft, its cloud services brought in 26.8 billion, 33% more than last year. And I published it. Meta is building data centers like there’s no tomorrow, but it doesn’t have a cloud business. Mete has something else: Facebook and Instagram. Its income comes largely from advertising and Zuckerberg assures that the good numbers come precisely because They are applying AI to improve their advertising systems. Not so fast, Zuck. Although Meta is the one that has increased its income the most compared to last year (26%), its shares have fallen 8% after announcing that it would continue to increase spending on AI. It seems that investors have quite a few doubts about their latest decisions, such as spend a million to create your superintelligence team or the plan to spend $600 billion in data centers. Image | Pixabay In Xataka | OpenAI is burning money like there is no tomorrow. The question is how long can he last like this?

Iryo arrived in Spain with a very ambitious plan to tighten the screws on Renfe. It has just asked its Italian parent company for a ransom

by

Iryo has a problem in Spain: it can’t get clients. Or, we should say, it does not get enough clients to start making its railway project profitable in our country. Its occupancy rate in each and every one of the corridors is better than that of Renfe or Ouigo. In some cases it is certainly worrying. This is leading it to lose tens of millions of euros. And they have already asked Italy for help. 32 million euros. They are the ones that Iryo has lost in 2024. The losses are added to the 79 million euros that the company already lost in 2023 and the occupancy rates of 2025 are not inviting optimism. Although the company defends that They aim to be profitable this yearthe truth is that they had to pick up the phone and dial a number that begins with +39. Help. The call for help has reached Italy. In November 2024Trenitalia has already increased its participation in the company to go from 45% of the capital to 51%. The objective was clear: to provide the Italian parent company with full control of the company and, in this way, have greater room for maneuver to provide it with funds. However, the process to achieve profitability has become complicated. Air Nostrum and Globalia, which are part of the company’s shareholders, committed to putting up 15 million euros more to face possible losses this year. This economic push is just one more within a package that provides aid which has already had contributions of 44.7 million euros in April of last year and almost 35 million euros in the summer of 2024. The occupation. One of the problems that Iryo has encountered is that it cannot fill its trains. If we go to the CNMC datathe Italian company has the worst occupancy data of all Spanish high speed. Madrid-Barcelona: Occupancy of 96.4% (Renfe 112%, Ouigo 99%) Madrid-Seville: Occupancy of 83.2% (Renfe 93.3%, Ouigo 86.4%) Madrid Málaga-Granada: Occupancy of 82.2% (Renfe 93.3%, Ouigo 93.9%) Madrid-Valencia: Occupancy of 70.2% (Renfe 73.3%, Ouigo 88.8%) Madrid Alicante: Occupancy of 66.6% (Renfe 75.9%, Ouigo 87.8%) Added to this is that its power to attract customers by price is much smaller than that of Ouigo since only in Madrid-Alicante does it offer cheaper tickets than those of the French company and for just a few cents. In the rest of the corridors, Iryo is more expensive than the services of Ouigo and AVLO (Renfe). The plans. Yet, Iryo continues defending who aspire for 2025 to become their turning point. They plan to balance their accounts this year and make the jump to profits in 2026 and 2027. To do this, they trust in the arrival of new trains that will expand their capacity and allow them to play on price, first by lowering the price of the ticket and, second, by amortizing Adif fees more easily. In the words of its CEO, the company hopes that Galicia can be another beta where it can make money. However, it must be taken into account that the line moves between the Iberian width and the international width. S106 trains that can “jump” between both tracks are committed to Renfe and the only way to operate would be with a transshipment, which is more costly in time and less attractive to the customer. But it is not the only case. Perhaps the most worrying thing about Iryo’s situation is that, at the moment, Renfe and Ouigo are also losing money with high speed in our country. Since the market opened, the benefits have been exceptional. In 2024, Ouigo received an additional 25 million from SCNF, its French parent company, to cover losses. The initial investment of 200 million had to be expanded given that the company plost more than 40 million euros only in 2024. It is one of the reasons why the Government alleged that from France they were doping the company economically to weaken rivals. Despite everything, Renfe has also suffered heavy losses with high speed. In 2023 they exceeded 120 million euros in losses although in 2024 profitability has already been closelosing in this case about three million euros. Of course, Renfe Viajeros (the part of the company that competes with Ouigo and Iryo) did achieve just over five million euros in profits. Photo | Trenduck In Xataka | Spain wanted to turn the train into the great alternative for traveling in summer. Renfe has never had so many dissatisfied customers

Red Eléctrica asked for calm. Immediately afterwards, thousands of Spaniards flocked to buy generators and camping gas.

by

“The ghost of the great blackout has once again haunted Spain,” This is how my partner summed it up after learning that Red Eléctrica Española had detected new “sudden voltage variations” in the peninsular network. The news was enough to reactivate a recent fear: being left in the dark again. And with that fear, the fever for forecasts also ignited. In search of forecasts. Demand for products related to energy supply and survival has increased by 76%, according to data from the European price comparator Idealo. Among which stand out stoves and camping gas, with an increase of 253%, followed by power stations at 87%, radios at 56% and portable batteries at 49%. Interest in products such as water purification tablets has also skyrocketed by 20% and flashlights by 14%. An alert that set off the alarms. The alert issued by Red Eléctrica Española October 7 was enough to put the population on guard. Although the company assured that the voltage fluctuations “do not pose an imminent risk of a blackout,” the population reacted quickly. Many households, still with fresh memories of the April 28 blackout, began to reinforce their domestic emergency kits, as recommended the European Commission at the beginning of the year. The great precedent. The current prudence is not accidental. Half a year ago, the peninsula suffered a blackout that left the entire country without power for more than twelve hours. During that day, the chaos moved to the stores: endless lines and empty shelves in hardware stores and large stores. Servimedia data they confirm it: The demand for electric generators shot up by 639% and that for gas camping stoves by 547% in just 24 hours. Mass hysteria or rational prevention? The figures may suggest an emotional reaction, but the data rather points to a new culture of foresight. Before the blackout, only 5% of Spaniards had an emergency kit prepared. After the event, the figure doubled to 10%, and the intention to prepare for it went from 32% to 58%. as detailed on YouGov. The CIS adds that 78% of citizens did not feel afraid during the blackout, although 53.5% acknowledged that they remembered the kit recommended by the EU. Furthermore, 88.2% positively valued the civic and supportive behavior of their neighbors during those hours of darkness. The phenomenon has revived the debate: are we facing a “collective energy hysteria” or a modern form of domestic resilience? The business of self-supply. In a matter of months, concern about a possible power outage has created a new market niche: that of energy self-sufficiency. Sales of generators, solar panels and stoves they multiplied by five after the blackout in April. Large chains such as Leroy Merlin or Decathlon sold out their stocks in hours, while neighborhood hardware stores had their own special August selling flashlights, radios and batteries. The trend has not stopped. From Idealo confirm that the searches of these products continue to rise. In parallel, interest has grown in so-called portable power stations, small devices capable of charging everything from mobile phones to basic appliances, and which are already among the most consulted articles on the internet. “Prepper” culture is normalized. Added to this fever of prevention is the rise of the so-called prepperspeople who prepare for emergencies. In fact, two of them described how the blackout tested their preparedness: Their kits allowed them to cook and stay informed when most people lost power. A phenomenon that, far from eccentricity, reflects a growing search for domestic autonomy. A new energy consciousness? Electrical Network insists that “There is no imminent risk of a blackout,” but citizens—and the market—think differently. The culture of self-sufficiency is no longer a rarity and has become established in the collective mentality. There is no blackout in sight, but there is a change: many prefer to rely on their generator before the electrical system. In times of uncertainty, energy is no longer only measured in kilowatts, but also in peace of mind. Image | FreePik and FreePik Xataka | A ghost haunts Spain: the ghost of another massive blackout caused by network tension problems

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.