button

one in which the F-35 and its “button” are the winners

by

Europe has been repeating the same debate for some time every time a strategic technology comes into play: to what extent can talk about sovereignty whether critical systems depend on external decisions, codes and suppliers. Under labels such as autonomy or digital sovereignty, the Union has tried build own alternatives in key areas with the promise of no longer being tied to infrastructures that it does not fully control. History now shows that the challenge has not been to imagine these tools, but to get the major European partners to accept share real power to make them possible. A project for European sovereignty. He Future Combat Air System was born as the great strategic bet of France, Germany and Spain to prevent Europe will be relegated in the 21st century air race, combining a sixth-generation fighter with swarms of drones and a combat cloud capable of integrating sensors, weapons and command in real time. Designed to replace platforms such as the Rafale and the Eurofighter and preserve industrial knowledge that Europe never developed in the fifth generation, the FCAS was presented as more than just an airplane: it was the promise of technological autonomy against the United States, its own air war architecture and the symbol that European defense could act as a coherent block. A lost decade. From its inception, the program was trapped in a head-on crash between national and industrial interests, with France defending leadership Dassault’s absolute in the manned aircraft and Germany demanding distribution real technology and knowledge through Airbus. For its part, Spain was seen as a clearly secondary partner despite its key role in sensors through Indra. The Russian invasion of Ukraine further hardened positions: Berlin, in the midst of the Zeitenwende, began to question a project that did not guarantee its own capabilities. Paris, reinforced by the Rafale export successbecame even more reluctant to give up control. The result was a prolonged paralysisdeadlines that moved towards 2045 and the idea, increasingly less hidden, that the fighter could disappear leaving only remains of the original project. Germany begins to look home. The fracture has become explicit when unions and representatives of German industry have openly defended the option of develop your own fighter or, at a minimum, two separate aircraft within the FCAS, a conceptual break with the initial idea of ​​a common system. At the same time, in Berlin he began to discreetly explore a way out towards the rival program led by the United Kingdom, Italy and Japan, while the new German chancellor conveyed to Paris that even abandoning the FCAS was no longer a taboo. At that point, the project stopped being a complex negotiation and became a question of how to communicate its end without assuming the political cost of acknowledging failure. Sentenced in the offices. The last few weeks have confirmed what was privately taken for granted for months: the FCAS is practically dead and a closure announcement is more likely than any credible relaunch, despite Paris’ attempts to save time. As we count a few weeks ago, the confrontation between Dassault and Airbus over control of the Next Generation Fighter remains without a solution, Germany is already contemplating save only the cloud combat and other shared systems, and the program that was to be the flagship of European rearmament has become the best example of its limits. For Spain, the news is especially bitter: the project that was supposed to guarantee it a seat at the high aviation technology table is fading without a clear European alternative in the short term. The hidden winner: F-35. In this strategic vacuum, an indirect winner emerges that summarizes the worst of the paradoxes: the Lockheed Martin F-35, the plane that FCAS was to counterbecomes the default solution for many European countries. With the European program collapsedthe only new generation platform available, interoperable and in production is the American one, along with everything that its closed ecosystem implies, including the controversial technological dependence and the famous “button” symbolizing Washington’s ultimate control over the system. Spain has been clear reject that model and defend a European fighter like guarantee of sovereigntybut the message that comes from Paris and Berlin It’s devastating: The inability to reach an agreement has left the way clear for the F-35, making the United States the great beneficiary of a European failure. Thus, France and Germany have ended up conveying to Spain what it did not want to hear: that the project that was to emancipate Europe is dying, and the plane that symbolizes strategic dependence is the one that comes out stronger. Image | airbus, Vitaly V. Kuzmin In Xataka | If the question is where is the 100 billion European fighter, the answer is simple: stuck on a dead-end runway In Xataka | It is being a complicated summer for the US F-35: after Spain’s “no” Russia and China have appeared to do more damage

The US recorded something strange underground and didn’t know what it was. Now he has just accused China of pressing the nuclear button

by

During the Cold War, even at times of greatest nuclear tension, Washington and Moscow maintained an unwritten rule: If a test was done, the world had to find out. The explosions were political signals as much as military experiments, designed to be seen, measured and, of course, feared. Therefore, talking about detonations so small that they barely leave a seismic trace and about tests designed not to be detected, generates great concern. The United States just accused China exactly that. An unprecedented accusation. It happened last Friday, when the United States denounced China for having carried out at least a nuclear test with explosive performance in 2020 and to prepare for other low-power ones, a complaint made in Geneva through by Undersecretary Thomas DiNanno just as the classical arms control framework is collapsing after the New START expiration. According to Washington, Beijing would have resorted to decoupling techniques to dampen seismic signals and hide underground detonations, an accusation of enormous political significance because it breaks the previous ambiguity and indicates for the first time a specific date, the June 22, 2020in the midst of debate over whether the United States should recover the option of testing nuclear weapons again. The diffuse limit. The technical and legal background is key to understanding the controversy, since both China and the United States have signed, but not ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treatyallowing subcritical testing no self-sustaining nuclear reaction but prohibits any explosion with measurable output. Washington maintains that Beijing would have crossed that line with evidence very low powerdifficult to detect, while the body in charge of verification, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization, ensures that its network did not detect no event compatible with a nuclear explosion that day, thus underlining the fragility of a control system that never came into full force. Lop Nur, satellites and silent expansion. It we have counted other times. American suspicions are also supported by satellite images and intelligence analysis that point to intense activity in the historic Lop Nur polygonwith new excavations, tunnels and drilling that could be used for both subcritical tests and higher performance detonations. This movement fits with the rapid expansion of the Chinese arsenal, which would already exceed the 600 nuclear warheads and could reach a thousand before 2030reinforcing the perception in Washington that the real strategic challenge is no longer Moscow but a Beijing with the capacity and will to challenge US military primacy. A new nuclear race scenario. The Washington complaint comes accompanied by a clear political message: without binding limits, transparency or verification mechanisms that include China, the system inherited from the Cold War ceases to serve, and the United States reserves the right to adopt “parallel steps”including the resumption of testing, if it considers that other actors are breaking the rules. Beijing strongly rejects accusations, claims its moratorium and its doctrine of no first use, but the simple verbal clash shows a change of phase, one with the risk that the end of New START and mutual distrust open the door to a new nuclear race in which small, almost invisible explosions can have enormous strategic consequences. Image | CCTV In Xataka | Nuclear fusion is humanity’s great utopia in the short term: China has already set a date for it In Xataka | China is building something that looks like an oil well. It is actually a nuclear bunker with a command center

The fundamental trick to perfectly control the car’s temperature is a (not) forgotten button on the dashboard

by

Although with the fury of bringing screens to cars There are fewer and fewer buttons, we still find a lot of old-fashioned controls scattered around the steering wheel and the dashboard of the car. However, there is usually a small element (sometimes shaped like a circular knob, which may or may not protrude) that usually looks like a button that goes unnoticed due to its location: it is far enough away that it cannot be easily operated. Spoiler: if you touch it nothing happens. And nothing happens simply because it is a solar sensor or solar load sensor (if we get more technical, a phototransistor), a piece little known to the general public but of great importance as it is the element that the automatic air conditioning uses to regulate the temperature correctly. It is essential to control the temperature of the car More specifically, is located at the bottom of the dashboard and in the central area, attached to the front window. It usually has the speaker grille or the air outlet grille nearby to defog the window. Hence it neither looks good nor is it comfortable to touch. That position makes all the sense in the world: it is one of the best areas inside the cabin to capture sunlight from outside. Precisely the reason for the sensor, since the sunlight that enters a car can reach represent up to 60% heat load that the air conditioning system has to overcome in the search for comfort. A good everyday example: the temperature difference between parking in the same place on a summer day when the sun is shining overhead or doing so at night or when it is cloudy. This solar load sensor It is actually a photodiode which measures the intensity of solar radiation in order to be able adjust climate controlwhich includes the heating, ventilation and air conditioning system. On that hot day in the example, the air conditioning will have to work as hard as possible to cool the cabin as soon as possible. But if it’s night or cloudy, you won’t need to blow as hard. At a technical level, its mechanism is simple: the photodiode moves in an operating range between 0 and 5 Volts, offering more resistance as the light intensity increases, so that the sensor signal decreases as the solar load increases. This signal is what then reaches the control, which gives orders to the system to adjust the speed and intensity. The solar load sensor is not the only one responsible of the operation of the air conditioning, since the vehicle integrates more sensors such as the sensor to measure the interior temperature. And they also have other sensors to turn the lights on or off or configure the mode of the screens and dashboard depending on the exterior lighting. By the way, in some cars there is not only one solar charge sensor, but there are two, one on each side of the dashboard and in that same area adjacent to the front window: they are models that have dual zone air conditioning. In Xataka | The triangles on the plane window are not for decoration: they are a quick way to check that the flight is going well In Xataka | Few people know what the red balls on high-tension cables are for: they are a simple way to save lives Images | Skoda, Opel and SEAT

Russia has reminded the planet that the war in Ukraine is a ticking bomb. And for this he has pressed a nuclear button: Oreshnik

by

Over the past few months, the war in Ukraine has seemed advance by inertia: fronts that barely move, stalled negotiations and constant wear and tear that threatens with normalizing the conflict in Europe. But in recent weeks Moscow has remembered, without the need for major territorial conquests, that it continues to have the ability to alter the chessboard with a single gesture: the nuclear one. The button that is always there. In a stuck war In the mud of the front and industrial wear and tear, Russia has once again remembered that it is still sitting on a strategic bomb pressing a button that does not need to be pressed completely to take effect: that of Oreshnik missilean intermediate-range system with nuclear capacity whose use, even with inert or conventional charges, functions as a political message rather than as a tactical weapon. The launch detection from the Kapustin Yar strategic polygon and the subsequent explosions near Lviv, a few kilometers from the Polish border, do not seek so much to destroy decisive objectives as to point out that Moscow can escalate whenever it wants and from wherever it wants, even from facilities associated with its strategic nuclear forces, deliberately breaking the “conventional” routine of the conflict. Symbolic weapon, real threat. It we have counted before: the Oreshnik, derived from the RS-26 program and capable of carrying multiple warheads that separate in flight, it is not a missile designed to win battles in Ukraine, but to cross psychological red lines in Europe. Its hypersonic speed, its potential range of up to 5,500 kilometers and the fact that Ukraine lacks defenses capable of intercepting it turn each launch into a demonstration of the structural vulnerability of NATO’s eastern flank. When Russia first used it against Dnipro in 2024 with dummy heads, he made it clear that he was not testing marksmanship, but rather strategic credibility. Now, by bringing the impact closer to the NATO border and the European Union, the message is even more explicit. Controlled climbing. The reappearance of the Oreshnik is no coincidence. It occurs while Ukraine refuses to give up territory in the negotiations, while Moscow insists that any Western troops deployed on Ukrainian soil would be a legitimate objective and while Washington, under Trump, intensifies pressure on Russia’s allies like Venezuela. The Kremlin justifies the attacks as retaliation for alleged Ukrainian attempts to attack the residence of Vladimir Putinaccusations that even US intelligence services they doubtbut the real logic is different: to raise the psychological and political cost of Western support without formally crossing the nuclear threshold. Energy, winter and strategic terror. As in previous winters, Russian missiles and drones are once again baiting the Ukrainian energy infrastructureleaving entire neighborhoods in kyiv and other cities without electricity or heating amid sub-zero temperatures. The Oreshnik fits into this strategy of calculated terror: not only does it damage critical facilities, but it amplifies the feeling of helplessness by introducing a weapon that symbolizes the maximum possible escalation. Ukraine responds by hitting power grids in Russian regions such as Belgorod or Oryol, but the strategic asymmetry remains intact. Europe as a target audience. Furthermore, by hitting near Lviv and, by extension, Poland, Russia is not just talking to kyiv, but with Brussels, Berlin and Paris. The Oreshnik is a reminder that Ukrainian theater is inseparably linked to European security and that any expansion of military support has an immediate reflection on the deterrence ladder. It is no coincidence that Moscow recently showed the deployment of the system in Belarus, further extending the reach shadow over the continent. The temptation of blackmail. Thus, with minimal and extremely slow territorial advances, and a growing human and industrial cost, Russia uses the Oreshnik missile as a substitute for victories on the battlefield. It is not a weapon to conquer Ukraine, of course, but rather to remind the world that the conflict cannot be closed by ignoring the Russian nuclear dimension. From that prism, each launch is a warning: Moscow does not need to detonate a warhead to reactivate the founding fear of the Cold War. Just show the button, press it even half and make it clear that it is still there, waiting, like a time bomb that sets the pace of all future negotiations. Image | Ministry of Defense of Ukraine In Xataka | Ukraine has become an animal slaughterhouse: Russian soldiers appear with horses and drones blow them up In Xataka | First it was Finland, now the US has confirmed it: when the war in Ukraine ends, Russia has a plan for Europe

Two scientists tried to publish a paper on why we get belly button lint. And that’s where his problems began

by

In 2005, writer Mark Leyner and doctor Billy Goldberg published ‘Why do men have nipples?‘, a hilarious popular science book in which they answered very crazy questions: from the reason why hair comes out of our ears to the physiological reasons why asparagus perfumes our pee. However, they were not able to answer a key question: where did the fluff of the navel? Four years later, Georg Steinhauser wanted share your answer with the world. According to him, navel lint was mainly related to abdominal hair. According to him, the hair collected the fibers from the clothing and directed them to the navel. He did experiments for three years removing breasts to see the differences! But no one wanted to publish it. Nobody? No! A magazine populated by irreducible mad scientists still resists, as always, the most basic control practices of contemporary scientific publication. Welcome to the world of ‘Medical Hypothesis‘. Against the “gentrification” of science In recent years, “evidence-based” things They have enjoyed unprecedented fame. From politics to medicine, thousands of professionals have turned to science in search of solutions to respond to the problems of an increasingly complex society. However, all that glittered was not gold: again and again We have once again reflected on one of the blind spots of the approachthat science is, by nature, conservative. Not in a political sense, but in an epistemological sense. That is, we know better what we have; but when what we have doesn’t work, it’s a problem. A problem because, without resources to investigate new optionsare forced to implement interventions that do not work, leaving many professionals with their hands tied. For good reasons, yes. But with his hands tied. It is not strange, of course, that there are people who want more diversity. This is the case of ‘Medical Hypotheses‘, the most WTF science magazine of the last 40 years. ‘Medical Hypotheses’ was founded by the physiologist David Horrobin who directed it until his death in 2003. Horrobin, who was already himself a controversial figure (the British Medical Journal defined as one of the greatest “snake oil salesmen of his time”), made a magazine in his image and likeness. Fun, refreshing and dangerous In theory, the idea was to build a respectable forum to debate unconventional ideas unconstrained by current scientific publishing standards as a way to boost the diversity threatened by academic monoculture. ‘Medical hypotheses’ wanted to be a place to bring intuitions, extravagant ideas and crazy theories. In a world like the scientific one full of certainties and phrases in the present indicative, Horrobin’s magazine was all the y-sis and conditionals. That makes it a profound magazine. fun and refreshingbut it also does a bomb box. You can also read a study that relates heels with schizophrenia that one about the similarities between people with Down syndrome and Asians. These days, without going any further, a study is circulating in tabloids around the world about If we can abandon ourselves so much that we end up dying due to pure psychology. For years, the world was a party in ‘Medical Hypotheses’. In the first issues, pioneers from some of the most developing fields of the time wrote. But its main asset is also its main problem. It is a magazine that requires a very skilled editor to be able to navigate controversial terrain without publishing malicious and even dangerous work. The end of the party When Horrobin died in 2003, he was replaced by Bruce G. Charlton. Horrobin had written down that he was the only person he truly trusted to continue his work. At the end of 2009, an article in which he stated that “there was no evidence that HIV caused AIDS” was published in the magazine. The party was over. The paper had been rejected in all research area publications until it ended up in ‘Medical Hypotheses’. He scandal It was capital and Elsevier, owner and publisher of the magazine, fired Charlton a few months later. Furthermore, in an attempt to contain the damage, Elsevier introduced a review system halfway between the original system and the peer review of traditional publications. That clearly went against the magazine’s reason for being and Hundreds of researchers protested against the decision. ‘Medical Hypotheses’ is, in some ways, a symbol of the risky, indomitable and (often) reckless science that we still need, but it no longer plays a central role in public debate. Today, the preprints (and the repositories that store these open drafts — with arXiv.org at the head) fulfill that function. A function that, despite making our lives difficult, is best never missed. In Xataka | This frog is so photogenic that it is now on the verge of extinction In Xataka | Spain turns in the opposite direction to the rest of Europe. It is part of a geological plan: close the Mediterranean Image | Pexels

Google hit the red button when ChatGPT came upon it. Now it is OpenAI who has pressed it, according to WSJ

by

Sam Altman has activated high alert on OpenAI. Just like share From Wall Street Journal, the company’s CEO announced this Monday in an internal memo that the company enters “code red” to improve ChatGPTthe tool that has catapulted the company to stardom but that now sees its rivals closing the gap at breakneck speed. what’s happening. OpenAI is postponing several important projects to focus all its resources on improving the daily ChatGPT experience, according to the internal memo to which WSJ has had access. According to Altman, the chatbot urgently needs advances in personalization, speed, reliability and the ability to answer a broader range of questions. Among the postponed projects are initiatives to include advertising in the free version of ChatGPT, AI agents for health and purchases (the latter was announced very recently), and Pressa personal assistant in development. why now. The pressure comes mainly from Google. Your model Gemini 3released last month, has outperformed OpenAI in industry benchmarks and sent the Mountain View giant’s stock soaring. Just like assures In the middle, Gemini’s monthly active users went from 450 million in July to 650 million in October, a meteoric growth that sets off all the alarms at OpenAI. Although ChatGPT maintains the lead with approximately more than 800 million weekly users, the speed at which Google is gaining ground is worrying. The underlying problem. OpenAI is in a delicate position. The company it is not profitable and it needs constant rounds of financing to survive, which puts it at a disadvantage compared to Google and other technology companies that can finance their investments with their own income. It’s also spending more aggressively than its main startup rival, Anthropic. According to their own financial projectionsOpenAI will need to reach revenues of approximately $200 billion to be profitable in 2030. All while being committed to investments of hundreds of billions in data centers. The last setbacks. The company has had a difficult time lately balancing the security of its chatbot with making it more attractive to users. The GPT-5 model Launched in August, it disappointed some users, who complained about its colder tone and problems answering simple math and geography questions. OpenAI had to update the model last month to make it warmer and better able to follow user instructions. OpenAI’s response. According to point In the middle, Altman has established daily calls for those responsible for improving ChatGPT and has encouraged temporary team transfers. WSJ assures that the company uses three color codes: yellow, orange and red, to describe the different levels of urgency necessary to address problems. According to the outlet, prior to this “code red”, OpenAI had declared a “code orange” in its effort to improve the chatbot. Nick Turley, Head of ChatGPT at OpenAI, stated in X that ChatGPT represents 70% of global AI-assisted activities and 10% of search activities. An unexpected script twist. This represents a radical change compared to three years ago, when it was Google who declared its own code red in response to the threat posed by ChatGPT. And after a groundbreaking Google I/O Last May, those from Mountain View have witnessed brutal growth in all the directions in which the AI ​​race is currently pointing, with improvements in their chatbot, the deployment of countless AI agents, improvements in their applications and more. Now it seems that it is OpenAI who must defend its position. And now what. Altman advertisement that next week OpenAI will launch a new reasoning model that, according to internal evaluations, surpasses Google’s Gemini 3. However, he acknowledges that there is still a lot of work to be done in the everyday chatbot experience. Cover image | OpenAI and Xataka Android In Xataka | China already has an army of 5.8 million engineers. His new plan involves accelerating doctorates

Spain, France and Germany could not depend on the “button” of the F-35. So the future European fighter aims for something else

by

In the month of September the future European fighter in which Spain participates began to disfigure publicly. Germany threatened to open FCAS to new partners if there was no agreement with France, while Spain joined Berlin with Indra and, on the opposite sidewalk, a continental bet appeared, the Global Combat Air Program (GCAP) that brought together Italy, the United Kingdom and Japan around a different philosophy. Now, in a new twist of the script, the European fighter is aiming for something else. An overflowing program. He Future Combat Air System (FCAS), conceived in 2017 as Europe’s great bet to build the combat air ecosystem of the second half of the 21st century and put aside the american dependencyis going through its crisis deeper. Germany and France, political and industrial drivers of the project, they study abandoning the most symbolic piece (the new generation fighter) to take refuge in its only still viable element: the combat clouda command and control network based on artificial intelligence capable of integrating manned aircraft, swarms of drones, radars, sensors and naval and land systems in the same operational environment. The shift does not seem like a simple technical reorientation, but rather a tacit recognition that the differences between Airbus and Dassault Aviation They have reached a point of no return. At a time when Europe wants to demonstrate strategic autonomy after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the largest military program of the continent is at risk of fracturing due to the inability of its two main contractors to share responsibilities, cede control and coordinate incompatible industrial visions. The Airbus-Dassault divorce. The conflict between Dassault and Airbus it’s not recentbut it has now reached an intensity that makes advancing the fighter impossible. Dassault, creator of the Rafale and a family-owned company, demands total authority on the design of the aircraft and selection of suppliers. For its part, Airbus (which represents Germany and part of Spain) considers that a European project of this magnitude should be governed by a balanced distribution of work. Negotiations have been stalled for years, with each party accusing the other of breaking agreements. While Dassault threatens to continue alone because “it has all the necessary experience”, the temptation to replace France grows in Berlin through the United Kingdom or Swedentwo partners who already participate in the rival Tempest program. The result is a vicious circle: without trust, there is no cooperation, without cooperation, there is no plane, and without plane, the FCAS becomes an empty shell supported only by the idea. from combat cloud. FCAS The German temptation and the French dilemma. The pressure is not symmetrical. Germany, which has relaxed its spending limit to rearm on a large scaledoes not want to be held hostage by a French company that is blocking progress. According to the Financial Timesin the environment of Chancellor Friedrich Merz an increasingly clear message is heard: if collaboration does not work, Berlin has the resources to continue without Paris. France, for its part, shows caution: its nuclear deterrent It depends on the replacement of the Rafale starting in the next decade, and an abrupt divorce could delay a key system for its strategic security. Although Macron hoped to rebuild trust after years of disagreements, even French voices admit that the project is “immobilized and almost dead,” and that the only real way out is through direct intervention by the president on Éric Trappier, the powerful CEO of Dassault. Combat Cloud The combat cloud as a strategic refuge. Just because the plane stalls doesn’t mean FCAS is meaningless. The most transformative piece of the program is not the fighter, but the AI-based distributed command and control system: a combat cloud european that allows any platform (Rafale, Eurofighter, long-range drones, naval sensors or ground radars) to share data in real time. This system, developed by Airbus (Germany), Thales (France) and Indra (Spain), is the only thing that everyone agrees on: Europe can (co)live with several planes, but not with incompatible networks that depend entirely on the American technological umbrella as was the case with the F-35. That is why it is proposed to accelerate the entry into service from the cloud to 2030a decade ahead of schedule, and armor it as a common pillar even if the joint fighter disappears. For many European countries, having their own cloud is the only way to guarantee that, if Washington one day looks the other way, the continent’s armies can operate in a cohesive and autonomous manner. Failure with implications. If he FCAS collapsesit will not just be an industrial setback, but a devastating geopolitical message. Europe has been proclaiming its desire for military autonomy for years, but every time it tries to create its own capabilities it runs into problems. same obstacles: competition between nations, political misgivings, absence of common governance and divergent priorities. This crisis also comes at a critical moment, when the war in Ukraine has demonstrated that technological superiority it is played onlinethat reaction time is vital and that Western systems must interoperate seamlessly. That the largest European defense project could collapse for corporate disputes shows the extent to which the dream of an integrated defense continues to depend on fragile foundations. What is played in a few weeks. The Financial Times recalled that the calendar is tight. Paris, Berlin and Madrid must decide before the end of the year whether to finance the airplane demonstration, an investment of several billion that no one wants to approve while the project remains blocked. The meetings between the French minister Catherine Vautrin, her German counterpart Boris Pistorius, Merz and Macron will be decisive: or the FCAS is redefined around to combat cloud or formally disintegrates. Everyone repeats that the Franco-German bilateral relationship should not be damaged, but the reality is that companies have carried out the program to the limit. The FCAS was born to symbolize defense Europe, but today only the combat cloud keeps that symbol alive as the last possible bridge between two industries that no longer … Read more

The Fujian is officially China’s largest power catapult. Beijing already has a button to challenge the US Navy

by

It has been almost two years since China ended its long-awaited Fujian aircraft carrierits largest warship with cutting-edge technology for the nation. From then until now it has been going through different scenarios of tests and tests that will confirm reliability of what should be the spearhead for Beijing to compete in the same league as the United States. That day has already arrived. The naval power of the 21st century. China has made official the entry into service of Fujian, its first aircraft carrier with electromagnetic catapultsa milestone that marks a qualitative leap in the country’s naval ambition and in their direct rivalry with the United States. In a ceremony held in the port of Sanya, on the island of Hainan, President Xi Jinping performed the symbolic gesture of pressing the launch button from the ship’s control bubble, in an act that state propaganda presented as the beginning of a new era for the People’s Liberation Army Navy. Projection and vulnerability. With 80,000 tons displacement, 300 meters in length and capacity to operate nearly 60 aircraft, the Fujian becomes the jewel of the Chinese fleet, the third in service after from Liaoning and the Shandong. Its distinctive feature is the electromagnetic catapultsan aircraft launch system similar to the American EMALS that only equips one other ship in the world: the USS Gerald R. Ford. China has thus jumped directly from aircraft carriers with a “ski jump” ramp to a generation of electromagnetic propulsion directed personally, according to Beijing, by Xi. This technical advance has clear strategic implications: improves the rate of departures, reduces wear and tear on aircraft and allows the operation of drones or lighter devices, opening the door to a more flexible and modern on-board aviation. Fujian The jump and the dimension. The Fujian represents more than just a technical improvement: it is the first completely designed and built in Chinafree of the Soviet legacy that conditioned the previous ones. The Liaoning was originally a ukrainian helmet unfinished work of the eighties and the Shandong su national derivativeboth with STOBAR systems short takeoff. With Fujian, China abandons that past and exhibits its technological maturity, especially in a context of industrial rivalry with the United States, whose own EMALS program has faced years of failures and cost overruns. In contrast to the Gerald R. Ford problemsXi’s speech and the staging of the ceremony convey a message of effectiveness and national pride: that of a power capable of manufacturing its own cutting-edge ships while the adversary hesitates. The choice of the port of Hainan was also not accidental. from there, China control access to the South Sea and projects its influence towards the western Pacific and the Taiwan Strait. On that board, the Fujian is not just a ship, but a political statement about Beijing’s ability to contest global maritime dominance. Fujian Target of the future. However, the relevance of these steel colossi coexists with a paradox. While the great powers continue to invest billions in building them, the conflict in Ukraine has shown that he size no longer guarantees invulnerability. With low-cost naval drones, Ukraine has managed to disable much of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, inflicting a “functional defeat” without possessing a single aircraft carrier. The contrast is eloquent: asymmetric warfare reduces the effectiveness of the most expensive conventional weapons, but not their strategic value. In the case of China and the United States, aircraft carriers maintain their role as projection and deterrence instrumentsuseful for both combat operations and coercive diplomacy. Make fear. Washington continues to use them as pressure tool geopolitics: Donald Trump himself ordered the deployment of the Gerald R. Ford against Venezuela as a symbolic warning to the Nicolás Maduro regime. The scene, with an aircraft carrier escorted by four destroyers and armed with 70 aircraft, illustrates the extent to which these ships continue to be armed ambassadors of the superpowers, beyond their debatable military profitability. Global deterrence. Modern navies are aware that aircraft carriers are both a symbol like a target. During the Cold War, it was estimated that twelve conventional missiles to sink a super aircraft carrier. In 2005, the experimental sinking of the USS America required four weeks of sustained attacks, confirming its structural resilience, but also its exposure. In a scenario saturated with hypersonic missiles, swarms of drones and long-range anti-ship systems, its survival in real combat is increasingly uncertain. However, no other platform offers the combination of mobility, air capacity and logistical autonomy that an aircraft carrier provides. That is why China, despite investing in missiles to repel a US fleet off its coast, considers these ships essential for its own global ambitions. As pointed out analyst Nick Childsfrom the International Institute for Strategic Studies, Beijing understands them as an indispensable tool to project influence and support an eventual operation on Taiwan. Geopolitics of steel. we have been counting: the rise of Fujian is part of a broader strategy of naval expansion that has turned Chinese shipyards into the most productive on the planet. The country’s surface and submarine fleet is growing at a pace the United States can no longer match, and each new vessel reinforces the narrative of industrial self-sufficiency that Xi Jinping presents as an emblem. of the “national renaissance”. Facing eleven US aircraft carriers (ten nuclear and one conventionally powered), China has threebut with plans to build at least a nuclear one, the future Type 004which could directly rival the Fords of the US Navy. Unlike Russia, whose only aircraft carrier, the aging Admiral Kuznetsovhas been out of service for years and is headed for scrapping, China and the United States are today the only powers capable to sustain fleets with great oceanic projection. Europe, for its part, maintains a symbolic presence: the United Kingdom uses its aircraft carriers Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales on diplomatic or training missions, while France prepares its new future-generation nuclear aircraft carrier. Century of the seas and fragility. If you like, Fujian also symbolizes the meeting point … Read more

We have discovered the “button” that activates our hunger. And it is the next revolution in weight loss medications

by

In the molecular complexity that reigns in our body with the aim of controlling all its processes, Weight and appetite are undoubtedly one of the most complicated to keep under control.. Now, an international team of scientists has shed light about a molecular mechanism that acts as a master modulator, changing the way our brain processes hunger and satiety signals. Something that can give rise to new medications such as the famous Ozempic. The study. Published in the journal Nature, this research focuses on a key player in our metabolism: the melanocortin-4 receptor or MCR4. In this way, you can think that MCR4 is the “guardian of appetite” because it is nothing more than a protein present in our neurons that, when activated, tells us that we are satiated and that it is time to burn energy and reduce food intake. However, the operation is not as simple as the switch that turns the light on or off in our house. This is where its lesser-known, but crucial, partner comes into play: the MRAP2 accessory protein. The big change. Until now, it was known that the MRAP2 protein interacts with MC4R, but the consequences of this relationship were not fully understood. The new research reveals that MRAP2 has a drastic effect on the behavior of the appetite guardian and this is where the role it may have as a therapeutic target comes into play. What was known until now is that MC4R receptors tend to clump together on the surface of cells, forming “oligomers” or, to simplify, working in pairs or groups. Now the study shows that when MRAP2 enters the scene, it breaks these bonds and forces the MC4R receptors to act as “monomers”, that is, alone. A priori, the fact of going from being paired to acting alone may be insignificant, but the consequences it has are enormous and completely modify the recipient’s response to stimuli. Boosts the main signal. This is one of the effects caused by the MRAP2 interaction in this equation. Specifically, it has been seen that when it is in a monomeric state, MC4R becomes much more efficient in activating signaling pathways mediated by the G protein. This means that, with the same amount of stimulus (the α-MSH hormonewhich makes us feel satiated), the cell’s response is considerably stronger. Cancels stop signal. Normally, after activation, the receptors recruit a protein called β-arrestin2, which acts as a brake: it stops signaling and causes the receptor to be internalized, removing it from the cell surface to “reset” the system. Surprisingly, MRAP2 impairs this process. It hinders the recruitment of β-arrestin2, which in turn reduces the internalization of the receptor, so its ligands can bind to it in a much simpler way. The receiver on the front line. By preventing the receptor from entering the cell, MRAP2 allows MC4R to remain on the cell surface longer, ready to continue receiving signals. It’s like keeping a soldier on the front lines of battle instead of sending him to rest. In summary, MRAP2 acts as a “tuner” that modifies the MC4R receptor, biasing its function toward more potent and sustained G protein-mediated effects, while disabling its own braking system. The importance. Once this process has been understood, we move on to its importance in the clinic. The first thing that has been seen is that mutations in the MRAP2 gene are associated with cases of severe obesity in humans. This study provides for the first time the detailed molecular mechanism that explains why. Bottom line, if MRAP2 isn’t working properly, the MC4R “appetite keeper” doesn’t get that extra boost, becoming less efficient and contributing to an energy imbalance. These findings open a new avenue for drug development. Instead of looking for molecules that simply activate or deactivate MC4R, one could now think of therapies that modulate the interaction between MC4R and MRAP2. We could design treatments that mimic the effect of MRAP2 to enhance the satiety signal in people with obesity, offering a much more sophisticated approach tailored to the biology of our body. More drugs. Right now on the market we have different treatments that are focused on those people who have the most problems losing weight. We talk especially about GLP-1 agonists such as Ozempic or Mounjaro, which have given good results. But on the horizon we can see that they will not be alone and many others will arrive. Images | i yunmai Drew Hays In Xataka | Solving one of the great myths of losing weight: if “walking quickly” works by itself to lose weight

Ukraine has invoked what Russia vetoed since the beginning of the war. And he told the US to tighten the button: Tomahawk

by

Distances in modern wars are nuclear issues. In Ukraine it was very clear in November 2024, when the world held thinking that Putin finally had “tightened” the button. So, A few kilometers They were key for the Moscow missile not to activate all red lines. That is why also, since the invasion of 2022, a name that kyiv has just invoked as one of the greatest orders to Russia has rarely jumped to the fore. Tomahawks in Ukraine. USA Study seriously The request of the Ukrainian President Zelenski to incorporate cruise missiles Tomahawk To his arsenal, a step that would be an unprecedented escalation in the war. These missiles, with a range of between 1,500 and 2,500 kilometers according to the versions, would be able to reach Moscow and much of the Russian territory from Ukrainian soil, which would represent a qualitative change with respect to the current kyiv capacities, based mainly on long -range drones and the limited ones Atacms missiles previously authorized by Washington. The possibility of its delivery reflects the turn of the Donald Trump administration, which until recently was reluctant to extend the conflict, but now transmits a more belligerent speech: for its special envoy Keith Kellogg “There are no sanctuaries” and Ukraine should be able to hit Russia deeply to alter the dynamics of war. The Russian answer. From Moscow, the statements were received with an alarm and challenge mixture. Spokesman Dmitri Peskov recognized that the Kremlin was carrying out an “in -depth analysis” about the implications of an eventual supply of Tomahawks, raising questions about who would control its launch and the selection of objectives: if exclusively the Ukrainians or if there were American personnel involved, which would bring the scenario closer to a direct confrontation between powers. Besides, warned thateven if these missiles will be delivered, “there is no panacea” capable of rooting the situation on the front, where Russia claims to be constantly moving forward. The implicit message is that, even before a technological leap, Moscow would maintain the military initiative and not give in western blackmail. Reprisals and a shadow. The Russian political class went further in their warnings. The president of the Parliament Defense Committee, Andrei Kartapolov, said that any US military specialist who participated in operations with Tomahawks would become reprisal objective direct, “and no one can protect them, neither Trump nor Kellogg nor anyone else.” Similarly, Putin He has repeated On previous occasions that Russia reserves The right to attack military facilities in third European countries if attacks against their territory are facilitated. The threat is not less: it would make NATO base white, with an obvious risk of climbing towards a direct conflict of greater size. Even Dmitri Medvedev, in his usual tone, He warned that Europe “It cannot afford a war with Russia”, but that “the risk of a fatal accident always exists”, in reference to the possible trigger for a greater confrontation from an error of calculation or a crossing of red lines. Tomahawk Change of American course. No doubt, the reconsideration of the supply of Tomahawks to Ukraine symbolizes a Turn in the strategy United States. During the presidency of Biden, Washington was extremely cautious, Limiting to reluctant The use of Atacms within the Russian territory and fearing to trigger an uncontrolled escalation. Under Trump, however, the speech has mutated: he starts talking about Ukraine as Able to win the warRussia is qualified as “paper tiger” and Multiply the pressure For European allies to also contribute with long -range missiles, such as German bullfighting. Former Lithuanian Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis He stressed That these weapons would not only give Ukraine greater control, but also allow “marking the tone” of the climb, instead of letting it be Moscow who unilaterally decides the depth of the attacks. Atacms Military Comparison: Atacms. The debate on which long -range missiles should receive Ukraine is not only political, but deeply technical and strategicbecause each system offers different possibilities on the battlefield. In front of Tomahawk, the Atacms, already used by Ukraine, is a tactical ballistic missile launched since Himars systems either M270. Its most widespread versions can reach 300 km. HE They use above all to hit deposits of ammunition, aerodromes and troops concentrations behind the immediate lines of the front. Its impact has been remarkable by forcing Russia to displace its more logistics centers within, but its limited scope leaves most of the Russian strategic rear. For Moscow, the difference with a Tomahawk is abysmal: while the Atacms forces to retreat a few hundred kilometers, a Tomahawk would put all its military and political apparatus at risk. Taurus Kepd 350 Military comparative: Taurus Kepd 350. He Taurusjointly developed by Germany and Sweden, it is an aerial cruise missile launched from combat planes such as The Tornado or the Eurofighter. Its estimated scope is 500 km, with a penetration eyelet designed to destroy bunkers, landing clues and strongly protected objectives. His ultrabajo flight profile and his capacity for electronic evasion make it especially difficult to intercept. Ukraine has been claiming these missiles for some time, although Berlin He has shown reluctance for the risk of being used to attack on Russian soil. In case of reaching Kiev, they would give the Ukrainian Air Force the ability to attack with great precision key military facilities such as aerodromes, barracks or weapons deposits in areas that until now remained out of reach. Strategic implications. The essential difference is In the scope: Atacms offer a tactical radius limited to the immediate area of ​​the front, the Taurus would allow to hit deeply in the Russian operational rear, and the Tomahawk would open the possibility of strategic attacks to the entire interior of the country, including its large urban and military centers. This reach staircase translates into different levels of climbing: while the attacks are perceived as a weapon of containment and wear, the Taurus already touch the capacity for operational denial and the Tomahawk cross directly to the field of strategic deterrence, … Read more

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.