The University of Córdoba has found a pesticide in the eggs of up to 14 different wild birds. The only problem is that it has been banned since the 70s.

One has the intuitive idea that within each egg lies the promise of a story that is just beginning. But it’s a lie. Nature is amazing and elusive and blind and cruel: many eggs, in fact, never even hatch; They end up lost in the countryside or as food for scavengers. For this reason, one day, a group of researchers from the University of Córdoba They decided to collect them and analyze them as what they are: capsules that summarize the chemical memory of the place where they were placed. They collected eggs from bearded vultures, red kites, gray teals and many other species. And inside found everything: from veterinary drugs to heavy metals to all types of pesticides, pesticides and fungicides. Among them were traces of DDT, the organochlorine that we banned in agriculture in the 70s (and could no longer be used as an insecticide in 1994). Curiously, this is not the most worrying thing. What does an egg hide? An egg, as I said, is a photograph of the environment. What accumulates in each bird’s body turns out to be a fairly accurate reflection of what it eats, what it drinks, and where it spends its day. The entire trophic chain is hidden inside each egg. Therefore, when we approach them as the UCO has donewe are not talking about bird problems… we are looking at the chemistry of an entire territory in which we are also. And what have we seen? The most striking thing is not, in fact, DDT (or DDE, its main derivative). Although it is curious that there is a pesticide banned decades ago floating around the environment, it is almost expected: it is what toxicology predicts and why it was ultimately banned. The most interesting thing about the UCO’s work is that it allows us to see, at a single glance, the reality of the pollution with which our mountain coexists. The AGR-125 Veterinary Toxicology group and the Center for Analysis and Diagnosis of Wildlife of Andalusia they used the eggs as ‘non-invasive matrices’ and their data are a canvas that covers many compounds, many birds and a lot of time. There we have found, along with the remains of DDT, commonly used pesticides and fungicides, persistent exposure to endocrine disruptors, heavy metals (such as lead, mercury and cadmium) and, in two bearded vulture eggs, veterinary drugs. And now what? Little, really. The history of DDT shows how difficult it is to work with these realities. As I said, it was banned in agriculture in the 70s, but it remained as an insecticide until 94 and, in fact, It continued to be manufactured (a derivative) in Monzón until 2008. The world of pesticides is a rabbit hole from which rural society never emerges unscathed. Besides, as the authors point outthe concentrations they have found are low. This means that, although we are concerned about the long-term effects, it is very difficult to take extra measures to control the exposure of these birds to these compounds. Luckily, as I also said, this work opens a new door for us to understand what is happening in the countryside and in the mountains. And that, believe me, is already a lot. Image | Kishan Upadhyay In Xataka | We have a problem with pesticides in agriculture. And a bigger one with the panic they generate

A beach in Sardinia has banned umbrellas for people between 10 and 65 years old. The reason is simple: fire

Summer yes, summer too, dermatologists they insist on the importance of protecting ourselves from the sun’s rays with creams, caps and umbrellas. In Molentis Pointone of the beaches most popular of Sardinia, the bathers they will have to conform however with the first two tools. If they want to plant an umbrella in the sand they will have to meet a series of requirements, beyond paying the 10 euros it costs to access the cove: the parasols will only be available to families with children or people who have already turned 65 years old. The rest have to burn. What has happened? Villasimìus is a commune of Cagliari, in the Italian region of Sardinia, where slightly less than 4,000 people. Despite this, it has been making headlines for days in the media throughout Italy and the rest of Europe, including headlines within the scope of Guardian, cnn either The Telegraph. The reason is not so much the spectacular nature of its beaches and its attractiveness at the gates of summer (which too), but rather the effects of that pull: faced with the avalanche of visitors, the local authorities have decided prohibit that the majority of bathers use umbrellas on the sandy beach. No umbrellas? More or less. Which have decided in Villasimìus is that the majority of the population cannot bring their own umbrellas to Punta Molentis. This privilege is restricted to only two groups: families with children under 10 years old and adults over 65. The large group between 10 and 65 years old that remains in the middle will have to make do with protecting themselves from the sun of the Sardinian coast with caps and a good sunscreen. Not only that. In a statement Posted on its official website, the commune of Villasimìus details other measures that bathers must take into account: the number of vehicles and people that can be simultaneously in the area is limited, as is the influx of bathers arriving by boat. The rules also include time guidelines and a warning: those who go to the beach should know that there is an “environmental ticket” of 10 euros for those who travel by car. If you go by boat the fee remains at 5 euros. But… Why? The authorities insist on the need to protect the natural environment and remember the serious forest fire that the region experienced last summer, when dozens of tourists had to flee in boats. The flames spread so quickly that they burned cars stationed in the area, they blocked land escape routes and caused serious environmental damage, environmentalists warn. “The Punta Molentis ecosystem is one of the most valuable in our territory, but also one of the most fragile. The forest fires of 2025 and exceptional weather phenomena have reduced the capacity of the dunes and put habitats and biodiversity to the test,” warns the commune. “It is necessary to limit the human impact and ensure the protection of heritage for future generations.” Part of the rules disclosed by the Villasimìus authorities. What do people think? The Government argues that it wants to protect the environment and preserve the natural wealth of the beach. Neither one nor the other seems to have convinced bathers, who were quick to use irony to question the ban on umbrellas. “How wonderful, a beautiful day at the beach and 20 hours in the emergency room for burns. I think they’ve tried this ordinance before and it went wrong,” comments sarcastically a user on networks. At stake would not only be the environmental wealth of the coast. A spokesperson for the Villasimìus town council assured this week to CNN that behind the veto of the parasols there are also security reasons: they want to reduce their number to prevent situations like those of 2025 from being repeated. “It is fundamentally because of that fire and the difficulties we had in evacuating the beach due to the large number of umbrellas installed that the city council has established this rule,” recognize from the Italian commune, who remember that in that area there are no paid ‘beach clubs’, so “people place umbrellas next to each other, blocking access, causing risks and obstructing the view of the sea.” The Telegraph precise that in the bathing area you can rent parasols. Does it only happen in Sardinia? Villasimìus’s decision has attracted attention because it is unorthodox, but the truth is that the use of umbrellas (and other beach equipment) on the sandy beaches has not only generated controversy there. In Italy the ‘beach clubs’ have generated debate after, according to Altronconsumo calculationsthe rental of sun loungers and umbrellas has skyrocketed by 24% in just five years. Beyond Italy, in Greece they have just expand your list of “virgin” sandbanks where the rental of umbrellas is prohibited. Here, in Spain, the use of furniture on the beaches (and that includes everything from parasols to tents and windbreaks) also has generated debate the last years. Images | Heather Cowper (Flickr) and Villasimius SRL In Xataka | It is increasingly common to find jellyfish on Mediterranean beaches before summer. And it’s a bad sign

When King Charles III commissioned a map of South America and then banned it because it was too accurate

TO Juan de la Cruz Cano y Olmedilla professional zeal played tricks on him. When in 1764 took charge of Charles III To create a map of South America, the good geographer put so much effort, so much into the project and so precise was it. the end result That upon seeing it the king was frightened. His map was a true cartographic gem, but it ended up condemned by the Bourbon. By express order of the count of Floridablanca The few copies of the map disappeared, as if they had never existed: the Government suspended the printing of the map and collected all the copies it could to keep them under lock and key. The reason: good work in bad times. The order of orders. At 30 years old, the cartographer and geographer Juan de la Cruz Cano received between 1764 and 1765 an assignment that would make any of his colleagues salivate with excitement. He Marquis of GrimaldiMinister of State, entrusted him with the ambitious task of drawing a large map of South America. The result had to be precise and capture the territories of the Spanish Crown, well positioned and in relation to the possessions controlled by Portugal. As if the mission were not challenging in itself, the minister was acting by order of the monarch Charles III himself. “Geographic map of South America” ​​by Juan de la Cruz Cano. A long decade of work. The assignment was difficult and required Juan de la Cruz Cano to make a considerable investment of effort and time. More than ten years he dedicated to the mission, according to details the National Library of Spain (BNE), which assures that to shape the map the geographer carried out meticulous data collection work, consulted testimonies from explorers and colonizers, dedicated himself to verifying sources and of course made “a magnificent cartographic layout.” After many headaches and relying on the studies of Jorge Juan and Antonio de UlloaJuan finished the work in the 1770s. The map was first stamped at end of 75. “One of the most important”. He in quotes It is again from the BNE, which insists that Juan de la Cruz Cano’s map is one of the most important of South America that was printed in 18th century Europe and even served as the basis for many other plans that were published later. So accurate was it that its initial reception was good. And it is logical that this was the case: the map was made up of eight enormous plates, measuring 2.6 meters high by 1.85 m wide and presented a scale of 1:4,000,000. If you examined it carefully, you could also see annotations, abundant toponymy and a detailed representation of the hydrographic and road network, as well as drawings that completed it as artistic work: allegories of America and Europe, the symbol of the order of Charles III, shields and even the illustration of a column profusely decorated with the bust of Columbus. The older he incorporated calculations for the drawing of demarcation lines between the Portuguese and Spanish domains according to the Treaty of Tordesillas. Portrait of Charles III. Good, dangerously good. The initial satisfaction generated by the map soon turned into a very different and much less uplifting sensation: fear, worry. 1775 was not a good time to show a map of South America as exact as the one Juan de la Cruz had made. Spain was in full negotiations with Portugal to reach a new treaty on the delimitation of its possessions in America, an effort that would lead to the Treaty of San Ildefonso of 1777, and that map of South America did not exactly benefit the Spanish position. “The data on the map favored Portugal’s aspirations. For this reason, the Government ordered to suspend printing and collect the distributed copies,” reports the BNE in the file dedicated to the plan, known as Geographic map of South America. “Wrong limits”. The history of the map was short-lived. After three editions and given the discomfort that that fortunate map generated for the Crown, in 1789 the Count of Floridablanca ordered that all copies be made to disappear. The effort did not go badly. The Country precise that today only a handful of copies are preserved, distributed by the National Library, the Royal Academy of History and private and public collections. “151 maps and the copper plates were kept in the Royal Calcography, with the prohibition that no copy be sold because the limits between the Spanish and Portuguese domains were erroneous,” the Cerralbo Museum specifies. That was the official version, of course. The reality was quite different: the Government feared that the precision of the work would harm the position that Spain had defended before Lisbon after the first Treaty of San Ildefonso. “The map implied a recognition of Portugal’s territorial usurpations,” slide the museum. A bittersweet ending. That of Juan de la Cruz Cano’s map is a peculiar story. Its finish too and leaves a bittersweet taste. The enormous cartographic work that he developed over the years would end up receiving recognition inside and outside of Spain and today it is claimed as a historical gem and one of the maps most important that were printed in Europe in the 18th century, but all that praise was of little use to those who had dedicated themselves to the project, including Juan de la Cruz Cano himself, who died in 1790, a year after Floridablanca ordered any sample of the map to be swept away, as if it had never existed. Auctions. “The engraver, who had invested his entire fortune in this work, was compensated, but died bankrupt and discredited as a cartographer,” reminds the Ministry of Culture. However, not all the zeal of the Spanish Crown could prevent some copies of that work from ending up traveling through Europe and even reached Thomas Jeffersonfuture president of the United States and at that time American ambassador in Paris. Despite Floridablanca’s efforts to prevent it, … Read more

Three months ago Australia banned social media for those under 16 years of age. It is already investigating possible breaches

Just three months ago, Australia launched one of the most ambitious regulations that have been proposed so far on social networks and minors. The measure came into force on December 10, 2025 with a clear message: force platforms to prevent those under 16 years of age from having accounts and give families back part of the control over the digital lives of the youngest. From the first moment it was presented as a pioneering initiative, but something important was also assumed from the beginning: applying it was not going to be easy. The first doubts. The rule has already entered its most delicate phase, checking whether it is really being applied as planned. The eSafety regulator has opened the first formal review and has put platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube under scrutiny. The agency speaks of “significant concerns” and points to failures in control mechanisms. It also points out that current systems are not effectively preventing those below that threshold from continuing to open new accounts. How minors are sneaking in. The report goes beyond a general warning and focuses on very specific failures in the control systems. It has been detected that there are not enough safeguards to prevent users under the permitted age from creating new accounts, but also something more striking: some platforms allow the verification processes to be repeated until the user manages to pass them. Also in certain cases, these profiles are invited to demonstrate that they meet the age requirement even after having indicated that they do not, which shows inconsistencies in the application of controls. A problem that was already anticipated. The difficulties in applying the rule have not arisen now, they were already on the table from day one. When the law came into force, The Australian Government itself admitted that its implementation would not be perfect, and the first signs pointed in that direction. According to ABC, Some minors managed to bypass the verification systems with basic tricks, such as altering their appearance in facial controls. The outlet itself also warned that parents and older siblings could help some children get around the restrictions, an early sign that the challenge was not just in passing the law, but in making it really work. What is at stake for the platformss. The investigation opened by eSafety does not remain a diagnosis, it opens the door to possible sanctions if it is demonstrated that companies have not taken reasonable measures to prevent minors affected by the rule from having an account. Reuters points out that The fines can reach 49.5 million Australian dollars and affect the aforementioned services and platforms. The regulator has already begun collecting evidence and hopes to close at least part of its investigations by mid-year, which places technology companies in a scenario in which non-compliance is no longer just a reputational risk. The Spanish mirror. What is happening in Australia helps to put into context a debate that has also gained weight in Spain, although here it is at a different point. Peter Sánchez announced in February that The Government wants to prohibit access to social networks for minors under 16 years of age within a broader package of measures on age verification, traceability of hate and responsibility of technology managers. The key difference is that that ban has not come into force and is not being enforced. Still, the Australian case offers a useful reference to anticipate what kind of challenges may appear when such a measure moves from political announcement to actual implementation. Images | cottonbro studio In Xataka | “What the hell is happening with Lidl Spain?”: Germans are speechless at the chain’s comic surrealism

Wikipedia has banned using AI to write or rewrite articles in English. Human knowledge begins to raise barriers

The English version of Wikipedia has just banned articles made with AI. In the last update of their guidelines are clear: content generated with language models violates content policies. The largest encyclopedia on the internet positions itself as a refuge for content created by humans. AI no thanks. The ‘AI yes or AI no’ debate has been going on for a while generating tension on Wikipedia and they have finally opted to support human content with an overwhelming majority 40 to 2. The new restriction imposed reads as follows: “Text generated by large language models (…) often violates several of Wikipedia’s fundamental content policies.” Those fundamental policies What it refers to are the neutrality of the content, verifiability and that the content cannot be original research, but must be attributed to reliable sources. With this change, editors are prohibited from using LLM “to generate or rewrite article content.” Two exceptions. Wikipedia contemplates two scenarios in which the use of AI is allowed: Basic style suggestions and corrections, as long as the LLM does not introduce its own content. They warn that it must be used with caution since LLMs tend to “go beyond what is asked of them and alter the meaning of the text.” Translation of articles into other languages, as long as it is reviewed by a person competent in the two languages ​​involved. Here it is important to note that Wikipedia has already had dramas in the past because of AI translations. Why is it important. Wikipedia has positioned itself as a repository of genuinely human content in an internet that is flooded with artificial content. At a time when distinguish the authentic from the synthetic is increasingly difficult, the largest encyclopedia in the world chooses to rely on human authorship as a guarantee of reliability. There is certainly something ironic and that is that Wikipedia rejects AI, but AI continues to draw on Wikipedia to provide answerscausing them to lose clicks and saturating your servers. AI generated vs human made. Until recently we thought that the solution was flag artificial content on platforms with the classic ‘AI’ label, but we are already at a point where it is more valuable and useful to highlight the opposite: that it is made by humans. The advancement of image generation tools and the amount of texts made with AI are overwhelming, to the point that an anti-AI current is emerging; Some artists are starting to designing “badly” to differentiate itself from AI homogenizationthey have created extensions to return to the internet before ChatGPTthere is browsers that filter AI results and even ‘Not by AI’ badge has been created. The point is that it is a David against Goliath. The Etsy case. It is perhaps one of the most bloody cases of the flood of low-quality AI content. The platform that It was presented as a refuge for the authentic, today it is an AI market which also tries to pass itself off as artisanal. Ghibli-style portraits for 20 euros, profiles managed entirely by AI that say things like “I can’t wait to draw you”… Etsy allows content made with AI, but says you have to label it as such. Nobody does it. Proof that the label is no longer useful. A key detail. The last paragraph of Wikipedia’s guidelines is especially striking because it talks about possible sanctions for those who violate the rule, the problem is how they plan to detect who uses AI. Wikipedia admits that “some editors may have writing styles similar to those of large language models” and that “more evidence than mere stylistic or linguistic clues is needed to justify the imposition of sanctions.” We have no idea how they are going to do it, what we do know is that AI text detectors fail more than a fairground shotgun. Image | Wikipedia, edited In Xataka | The last barrier against AI is good taste. The problem is that an entire generation is growing up without developing it

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.