changed

One night in 2000, Jennifer Lopez debuted a historic dress. And then Google changed the internet forever

by

If you have a moment, go to Google and type something like “Jennifer Lopez 2000 Grammy dress.” Leave that new AI Mode section aside and tap on the ‘Images’ tab to find a green Versace dress with a jungle print that caused a real sensation in both the fashion media and the world of technology. In fact, that dress marked a before and after on the internet. Because before February 23, 2000, when we wanted to see what clothes the current star had worn to an event (to give an example), we had to wait for the news to appear on TV, browse through magazines or go to the Internet to Google it. And there you didn’t find the photo, but instead you had to wade through a sea of ​​blue text links to search through. There was no Google Images. We’re not even talking about videos. Before JLo’s Grammys dress, this was all field text Why it is important. Google’s decision to organize information based on images and not only on text not only changed the world of fashion as the work of a European brand went from being seen on the catwalks and little else, to reaching the entire world. It also modified our way of accessing information, laying the foundations for an Internet (and later, social networks) focused more on audiovisuals than on pure and simple text. These were the dawn of the internet of content. What started in July 2021 with an index of 250 million images, went to one billion images in 2005 and by 2010, exceeded 10 billion. Later, Google stopped offering that figure to focus on quality over quality. Paradoxically, in 2025 it is following the opposite path, massively deindexing images by considering them low quality or generated by AI. The context. In the year 2000, the Google search engine was not what it is now: the undisputed leader with almost 90% share. And the “almost” thing is something about the post-internet – ChatGPT had been overcoming that barrier for more than a decade. In fact, with just a couple of years of life, he was beginning his rise at a time when there was no hegemony as he managed to impose later, with others like Yahoo! and Altavista with greater weight. And then she arrived on the red carpet at the 42nd Grammy Awards, nominated that year for Best Dance Recording for “Waiting for Tonight.” Jennifer Lopez wore a semi-transparent green dress with a dizzying V-neckline that fell to her navel. If you already existed at that time and were old enough to watch TV, you surely saw it because because her dress was viraleven before that concept was used for matters other than biology. Seeing it once wasn’t enough, so people went online to look for it en masse. “People wanted more than text (…). At the time, it was the most popular search we had ever seen” counted Eric Schmidt for Project Syndicate. The former Google CEO explained that at the time “we didn’t have a sure way to get users exactly what they wanted: J.Lo wearing that dress.” Between the lines. That’s when started to cook Google Search Image. According to Cathy Edwards, director of engineering and product at Google Images, it wasn’t something that happened overnight, but JLo lit the fuse. There were few employees, but like Edwards explained In 2020, it was clear to everyone that they needed to build a photocentric search engine. The question was knowing what priority to give it. That same summer, Google hired a newly graduated engineer, Huican Zhu, and put him to work with Huican Zhu, who was the executive director of YouTube and who at that time was responsible for product. The two stood hand in hand and, According to Edwardsthey practically developed it alone to launch Google Search Images in July 2021. In Xataka | People are so fed up with the current Internet that they are returning to MySpace. Not out of nostalgia, but out of rebellion In Xataka | All the times that throughout the 20th century we imagined ourselves on the Internet

Google just changed the rules of the lightweight model

by

Now, in the race to lead the development of artificial intelligence, something unusual has just happened. Gemini 3 FlashGoogle’s new model, has surpassed GPT-5.2 Extra High, the higher-reasoning variant of OpenAI, in several performance tests. And that forces us to rethink some of the rules that we took for granted. A fast model that also reasons. Google’s new model comes with a very specific promise: to demonstrate that “speed and scalability do not have to come at the expense of intelligence.” Although it has been designed with efficiency in mind, both in cost and speed, Google insists that Gemini 3 Flash also excels at reasoning tasks. According to the company, the model can adjust your thinking ability. It is able to “think” for longer when the use case requires it, but it also uses 30% fewer tokens on average than Gemini 2.5 Promeasured with typical traffic, to complete a wide variety of tasks with high precision and without penalizing response times. The truth is in the benchmarks. Are the benchmarks perfect? No. But they are still one of the most useful tools we have for comparing AI models.confront them against each other and detect in which scenarios they perform better or worse. And in this area, Gemini 3 Flash comes out well. In SimpleQA Verifieda test that measures reliability in knowledge questions, Gemini 3 Flash achieves 68.7% compared to 38.0% for GPT-5.2 Extra High. In multimodal reasoning, within MMMU-Pro, Google’s model scores 81.2% compared to OpenAI’s 79.5%. In Video-MMMU, Flash achieves 86.9% compared to 85.9% for GPT-5.2 Extra High. If we look at multilingual and cultural capabilities, Flash is again ahead, with 91.8% compared to 89.6% for GPT-5.2 Extra High. In Global PIQA, focused on common sense in 100 languages, the difference remains: 92.8% for Flash versus 91.2% for the OpenAI model. Everything indicates that Gemini 3 Flash is specially optimized to capture nuances outside of English and reason more fluently in global contexts. He also excels in the use of tools and agents. In Toolathlon, Flash scores 49.4% compared to GPT-5.2 Extra High’s 46.3%. In the FACTS Benchmark Suite, the difference is tighter, but still in favor of Google: 61.9% versus 61.4%. In long-term tool execution tasks, Flash appears to show greater consistency. But he is not the king of pure reasoning. Now, it is worth looking at the complete photo. Although Gemini 3 Flash outperforms the best OpenAI model in several tests, if you are looking for “pure” reasoning, the balance changes. In the most demanding tests in this area, GPT-5.2 Extra High continues to set the benchmark. OpenAI’s model leads ARC-AGI-2, focused on visual puzzles, with 52.9% compared to Flash’s 33.6%. In AIME 2025, with code execution, it reaches 100% compared to 99.7%. And in SWE-bench Verified, aimed at software engineering, it obtains 80.0% compared to 78.0% for Gemini 3 Flash. What exactly is GPT-5.2 Extra High. Throughout the article the name GPT-5.2 Extra High appears several times, and it is normal to wonder if it is something new or little known. In reality, it is not a model that is usually mentioned to the general public. Google uses this designation in its comparison table to refer to the maximum level of reasoning available in the OpenAI API for GPT-5.2 Thinking and Pro. In the official OpenAI documentation it is identified as “xhigh”. Where you can use Gemini 3 Flash. Access to Gemini 3 Flash is not country dependent. If you have access to the Gemini appyou are already using this model, which has become the default option. It is also reaching developers through the API, AI Studio and Vertex AI. In the United States, the deployment goes a step further, as the Gemini 3 Flash has become the default model of the AI Mode of the Google search engine. The price of using Gemini 3 Flash. For those who want to integrate Gemini 3 Flash into their applications, the model costs $0.50 per million input tokens and $3 per million output tokens. This is a slight increase over Gemini Flash 2.5, which was $0.30 per million tokens in and $2.50 per million tokens out. An increasingly tight race. Gone are the days when Google tried to confront ChatGPT with Bard, or when OpenAI seemed to be years ahead of the rest. Today, the distances between the big players in AI have been drastically reduced. The competition is more direct, more technical and, above all, much closer. Images | Google In Xataka | Amazon is preparing an investment of 10 billion in OpenAI because if you can’t beat your enemy, the best thing is to join him

An underwater drone from Ukraine has changed the future of wars

by

A little more than 24 hours ago an event occurred that was unprecedented in the history of war conflicts. It happens that there was only evidence from a video and statements of some involvedbut something else was missing that could certify that, indeed, an underwater drone had been able to disrupt a fortified port. Now there are no longer any doubts: the satellites have revealed what happened. Silent attack. The pfirst satellite images of the Ukrainian attack against a Russian submarine in Novorossiysk have confirmed that kyiv managed to introduce an unmanned underwater drone into one of the best protected ports in the Black Sea and detonate it a few meters from an Improved Kilo class diesel-electric submarine. According to the Ukrainian Security Serviceit would be the first known attack against a Russian ship using an unmanned underwater vehicle and, potentially, the first successful use of this type of system as an anti-ship weapon in a real conflict. Although the exact extent of the damage remains impossible to determine with certainty, the simple fact of having reached the objective is already a major operational and psychological milestone. What we know. Images obtained by commercial satellites confirm that the drone, named by Ukraine as Sub Sea Baby and until now unknown, detonated next to the stern of the submarine while it was moored to the dock. Part of the port infrastructure was clearly destroyed, consistent with the videos recorded from land and released by the SBU, where the explosion and damage to the dock can be seen. The submarine, a Project 636.3 Varshavyankaremains in the same position as before the attack, while two other units that were nearby have been displaced, suggesting an immediate security reaction. However, there are no unequivocal signs of sinking, no visible emergency operations, or fuel spills, which suggests that, if there was damage, it could be below the waterline or be of a limited nature, something impossible to confirm with aerial images alone. Satellite image after the attack, with a general view of the target submarine, inside the port, and another submarine moored outside. There are also other boats moored nearby Official denials. As expected, the Russian Ministry of Defense has denied any damage to the submarine or personnel, and has released a video which supposedly shows the ship intact, although without offering a clear view of the stern and with large areas censored. Still, even that material suggests concrete rubble on the dock, coinciding with the recorded explosion. The Black Sea Fleet has also rejected any operational impact, and Russian naval channels they have replicated that speechalthough without providing conclusive evidence. At this point, uncertainty is part of the information battlefield itself: Russia avoids recognizing vulnerabilities, while Ukraine emphasizes the audacity of the attack more than its physical effects. The same area seen before the attack, in an image from December 11, 2025. The gap in the defenses. Beyond the specific damage, the truly disruptive element of the attack is that the underwater drone managed to get through the defensive barriers of the port of Novorossiysk, designed to stop incursions Ukrainians. Those defenses had been deployed primarily in response to the surface drones that kyiv has used with notable success in the Black Sea, forcing Russia to adapt its port protection. The use of a UUV introduces a new dimension to the Russian defensive problem and confirms a key dynamic of the conflict: each countermeasure generates a different technological response, in a constant race of adaptation. Ukrainian ecosystem. He Sub Sea Baby It doesn’t come out of nowhere. Before this attack, Ukraine had already presented other underwater drones such as the Marichka, designed for kamikaze attacks against ships and maritime infrastructure, or the Toloka, of which fewer details are known. It is not clear whether there is a direct relationship between these systems, but the pattern is evident: kyiv is cbuilding a portfolio of unmanned submarine capabilities, aware that Russian underwater dominance was one of the few areas where Moscow still maintained clear superiority. The submarine as a target. The attack further confirms that the Black Sea Fleet remains a priority objective for Ukraine, especially its submarines Project 636 classcapable of throwing Kalibr cruise missiles regularly used against Ukrainian cities and infrastructure. Sustained pressure from kyiv had already forced Russia to withdraw a large part of its fleet from Crimea to Novorossiysk, and it is not the first time that these submarines have been attacked: in September 2023the Rostov-on-Don turned out seriously damaged in Sevastopol during a combined attack with missiles and surface drones. At the beginning of the large-scale invasion, Russia had six submarines of this type: each lost or neutralized one has considerable strategic weight. A message for Russia. Even if the submarine was not critically damaged, the attack has sent an unequivocal message: No Russian port is completely safe and naval warfare has entered a new phase, where underwater unmanned systems move from experiment to actual operational use. Other military powers, from United States to Chinacarefully observe a precedent that validates years of doctrinal development on UUVs as attack, reconnaissance and mining platforms. In that sense, the Novorossiysk episode reinforces a already recurring idea in the conflict: the war in Ukraine is not only fought over territories, but functions as a brutal laboratory for the military technologies of the future, where each innovation is tested in real conditions and its lessons are studied in all the military capitals of the planet. Image | VANTOR In Xataka | Drums of peace sound in Ukraine. And that should be a good thing for Europe… unless Finland is right In Xataka | If the video published by Ukraine is real, it has just blown up the naval war: an underwater drone has made history

Madrid had a plan to put all cars without a DGT label off the road in 2026. It has changed its mind

by

In 2024 it was December 12. In 2025 it was December 11. 20 days after all cars without a label were prohibited from entering the city of Madrid, the capital’s City Council has once again confirmed that those who are registered in Madrid will be able to continue driving for another year. That is to say, like last yearwith less than three weeks left before the ban would exclude unlabeled cars registered in Madrid and those registered outside the city, the City Council has extended the extension that will allow them to continue circulating. So, who can and cannot circulate in Madrid? What does the great ZBE that is now Madrid look like? In September 2024, a figure began to move: 1.2 million cars circulating in Madrid were going to be left out if the ban on any car without an environmental label circulating in the capital was activated, as planned, in 2025. This figure was, as we contrast in Xatakafalse. Or inaccurate, at least. In reality, the Madrid City Council estimated that there were 246,000 vehicles that were going to be left out of circulation in the city. This year, The figure that had moved was 300,000 cars which does not seem real because it would imply that the vehicle fleet of gasoline with more than 25 years and diesel with more than 19 years has grown in the city in the last year. In fact, Borja Caravante, delegate of Urban Planning, Environment and Mobility, has assured that prohibiting the circulation of cars without environmental label of registered in Madrid would only affect about 14,000 or 15,000 vehicles, according to words collected by The Country. The Madrid City Council alleges, therefore, that the measure would have a “low impact” and that they therefore prefer to extend the exception to the rule. Whatever the vehicles may be, the truth is that if the ban were applied, no car without a label could circulate in the capital, regardless of whether or not the car is registered in the city. And the thing is, right now, the only cars without a label that can circulate in Madrid are those registered in the city. That is, it is not enough to reside in the capital, it is necessary that the car be registered in the city. If not, there is no possibility of moving with a car without a label except for few exceptions, such as going to a hotel in the city. In summary, right now there are two possibilities for cars without a label and they will remain active next year: If the car is registered in Madrid: it can circulate If the car is not registered in Madrid: it cannot circulate In addition, it must be taken into account that cars without a label (whether or not they are registered in the capital) cannot enter the Central District Special Protection Low Emission Zone (what was previously Central Madrid). Only cars with an environmental label can enter this space. Of these, in addition, the B and C labels have the obligation to park in a parking lot, so only the ECO and Zero emissions vehicles have total freedom of movement. If you want to know more details, in this Guide to know if your car will be able to circulate through the Madrid ZBE in 2026 We clarify all these concepts. Photo | Jordi Moncasi and NuKi Chikhladze In Xataka | The intrigue of cars with the DGT B label: what we know about whether or not they will be able to enter large cities

Elon Musk has been refusing to take SpaceX public for 20 years. His new obsession has changed his mind

by

If there is something that Elon Musk has been repeating since before Starship was called Starship, it is that SpaceX would not go public until the gigantic Martian rocket was flying regularly. The excuse was that Wall Street likes short-term profitability plans more than multi-generational plans to colonize Mars. But the script has changed: SpaceX is preparing its jump onto the stock market, and not to pay for the trip to the red planet. He does this because he needs a lot of capital for “something more” than Starship and Starlink. The largest IPO in the United States. As revealed BloombergSpaceX plans to launch a Public Offering in late 2026 or early 2027. The company is seeking a valuation of $1.5 trillion (trillion, on an American scale) and more than $30 billion in cash, dizzying figures that would be the largest IPO in the history of the United States, close to the global record set by Saudi Aramco in 2019. Musk has been leaving breadcrumbs in X for days about this change in strategy. When the first rumors leaked about a financing round that valued the company at 800,000 million, the tycoon denied itclarifying that “the valuation increases are based on the progress of Starship, Starlink… and one more thing, which is possibly the most significant by far.” What is that thing that makes another round of investment insufficient? Orbital computing. What is clear from Musk’s latest tweets is that SpaceX wants to raise a lot of cash with its IPO for more than just Starship and Starlink: to develop space data centers. The logic, that Musk himself considers validis the same one that other companies like Google are following, but with the advantage of being the largest rocket launcher in the world. On Earth, AI data centers have two major bottlenecks: power and cooling. In space, satellites can receive sunlight 24 hours a day without atmospheric interference and with the possibility of dissipating heat on the dark side of the satellite, eliminating complex water systems and air conditioning of the Earth. Beyond Starlink. SpaceX already has a constellation of 9,000 satellites in orbit, many of them interconnected by laser links. The plan would be to take advantage of all the knowledge and technology that the company has to create a new constellation of localized AI: in Musk’s words, the cheapest way to generate AI bitstreams in less than three years. Their roadmap is hard science fiction: scale up to adding 100 GW of capacity per year using high-bandwidth lasers connected to the Starlink constellation itselfwhich is already highly profitable. And from there we move on to factories on the Moon and the use of electromagnetic rails to launch these AI satellites without the need for rockets. The umpteenth gold rush. Figures like Sam Altman, Eric Schmidt either Jeff Bezos They are already moving to have their piece of the pie in the orbital data center business. Google created the Suncatcher project and Nvidia collaborates with Starcloudwhile smaller startups like Aetherflux have announced projects like “Galactic Brain” planned for 2027. The difference is that SpaceX has the launch experience and is building the largest rocket in the world, with the peculiarity that it aspires to be completely reusable. It’s just the beginning. If 1.5 trillion is already a historic valuation, a recent report by ARK Invest projects that by 2030, SpaceX’s enterprise value could be around $2.5 trillion in a base case scenario, driven almost entirely by recurring revenue from Starlink and declining launch costs thanks to Starship reusability. Going public in 2026 would not just be a financial operation: it would give SpaceX the capital it needs to become the backbone of AI computing infrastructure, turning an internet service like Starlink into something that Musk himself considers “much more significant.” Images | SpaceX In Xataka | Building data centers in space was the new hot business. Elon Musk just broke it with a tweet

Google changed the news to summaries made with AI. Now the European Commission has something to tell you

by

In March of this year an earthquake shook European publishing houses. The reason was that Google implemented AI Overviews in your search engine. This means that, where links to media news previously appeared, a summary made with AI now appears, with the detriment that this entails for the media, which in some cases They have lost up to 50% of traffic. Now the European Commission has taken action on the matter. What has happened? The European Commission has formally opened a new antitrust investigation against Google. The reason this time is the use of content from media outlets and YouTube creators to feed their AI summaries, all without compensating the creators. The investigation will try to elucidate whether Google is distorting competition by placing unfair rules on the media, while its access to content (especially in the case of YouTube) displaces other competitors of AI companies. In the words of Teresa Ribera, Executive Vice President for a Clean, Fair and Competitive Transition at the European Commission: “AI is bringing remarkable innovation and many benefits to people and businesses across Europe, but this progress cannot come at the expense of the fundamental principles of our societies. That is why we are investigating whether Google has imposed unfair conditions on publishers and content creators, while putting developers of rival AI models at a disadvantage, in breach of EU competition rules.” Why is it important. The research involves questioning the model that Google has built around its generative AI, but it also calls into question the entire problem of the use of foreign content by these tools. Opens the door to reconfiguring the AI ​​market, imposing limits and compensation for original content creators The impact. As we said, the arrival of AI summaries has had a huge impact on media traffic. If readers receive the response without having to make a single click, that traffic is lost and not only that: it is unrecoverable. The worst thing is that to give that answer, Google drinks from the information published by those same media. In the case of YouTube, creators are required to accept a clause so that their content can be used for different purposes, including train your AI. Consequences. The investigation has just begun and there is no set date for its conclusion, which could take years. They will study whether Google has violated the article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU and the article 54 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area, which prohibit the abuse of a dominant position. If Google is eventually found to have breached these rules, the Commission could force them to take measures to comply with the law, such as compensating creators, allowing them to opt out of having their content appear in summaries, or even removing summaries across the EU, in addition to a possible fine. And now they go… It is not the first time that Google has faced monopoly accusations in the EU. In fact, it is the technology company that accumulates the highest fines. The highest was 4.3 billion for abuse of dominant position with Androidfollowed by 2,950 million for their abuse in the advertising market. He also had to pay 2,420 million for Google Shopping and 1,490 million for AdSense. Images | UnsplashEuropean Commission In Xataka | The EU has spent years fiercely fighting monopolies. Teresa Ribera has other plans for telecos

It also changed engineering forever

by

Shortly before 11:00 a.m. on November 7, 1940, an impressive American suspension bridge was minutes away from becoming engineering history. In that mass there was only one dog trapped that no one could save. After a few minutes after 11, the cameras filmed one of the most shocking scenes ever recorded. This was the story of a huge failure. A too light masterpiece. When the Tacoma Narrows Bridge opened in July 1940, its fine and elegant silhouette was intended to symbolize a new era of engineering economic and structural efficiency. Leon Moisseiff, one of the most prestigious engineers in the country and architect of the Golden Gate, had designed a stylized colossus that, however, from day one began to show a disturbing behavior: The board vibrated and waved even in moderate breezes. The workers named the structure as “Galloping Gertie”a nickname as colloquial as it was revealing, because it indicated that something deep and still misunderstood was disturbing its stability. First investigations. The University of Washington teams began intensive studies: scale models, wind tunnel tests and emergency solutions such as hydraulic jacks and temporary cables. Nothing managed to stop the oscillations. The bridge, too thin, too light, too faithful to a refined aesthetic, had been pushed to the limit by the design philosophy of the Great Depression, one in which materials were reduced to the essentials and aerodynamic resistance was not yet a mature science. The disaster. On November 7, 1940, with winds of around 65 km/h, Gertie experienced what she researched defined as “an abrupt transition between the usual vertical oscillations and a violent torsional movement that soon became unmanageable.” Motorists and reporters experienced scenes that seemed taken from a fantastic story: sections of the ground that disappeared underfoot, jumps in the void between undulations, and a torsion rhythm that intensified until the structure folded in on itself. At 11:02 in the morning, the center of the bridge fell into the strait. The only victim was Tubby, a dog trapped in an abandoned car. The show, filmed with a chilling sharpnessbecame one of the most influential visual documents of modern engineering. What the hell happened. After the fall, investigations determined that the collapse was due to an unknown phenomenon then in its complexity: the so-called as torsional flutter. When one of the suspensions gave way, the deck adopted an asymmetrical geometry that allowed the wind to feed the bridge’s torsion. The structure was no longer agitated by the atmosphere: it was its own movement that generated the destructive force, not the wind. The “self-excited” oscillation grew without limit until it caused a total fracture. That tragedy buried the classic theory of “deflection,” which held that only vertical movements were relevant in a suspension bridge, and forced the development of new aerodynamic principles and a rigorous standard of wind tunnel testing that has since been applied around the world. Bridge opening day in 1940 Reconstruction and correction. In later years, the United States rewrote the manuals of bridge engineering. A more robust replacement was designed, with a wider skeleton, heavier cables and open grilles to reduce wind action. “Sturdy Gertie,” opened in 1950, corrected the conceptual errors of its predecessor and became the symbol of a lesson learned through catastrophe. Decades later, in 2007, it was added a new section to absorb the growing traffic. And while engineers built a safer bridge on the surface, the underwater world began to claim the remains of the original bridge, which lay scattered more than 60 meters under the waters of Puget Sound. Collapse day Unexpected metamorphosis. In an extraordinary way, what began as an accidental shipwreck ended up becoming one of the artificial reefs more extensive and unique of the Pacific Northwest. In the depths of the strait, twisted beams and ruined metal plates were covered with anemones, sponges, algae and layers of organisms that transformed the tragedy into a hive. underwater life. Wolf eels snaked through the knots in the steel, giant Pacific octopuses found refuge in the folds of the collapsed deck, and schools of fish prowled the rubble. For divers, it was a palmost mythical landscape: a metal forest colonized by marine life, so exuberant that it gave rise to the legend of a gigantic “Octopus King” which, according to the inhabitants of Tacoma, reigned in the shadows under the bridge. The magic of that accidental ecosystem was that nature took a vestige of human engineering and turned it into a sanctuary. Depiction of Tacoma Narrows Bridge Collapse Threatened legacy. However, as the decades passed, the environment changed disturbingly. Various witnesses who dived in the nineties describe an underwater garden brimming with faunabut today, most of that splendor has disappeared. The overfishingcombined with ecological changes in the Puget Sound, has dramatically reduced the presence of iconic species. Sea creatures and giant octopuses have migrated In less exploited areas, the fish are smaller and in many sections only remains of hooks and gear remain. The least affected points are, paradoxically, those found under the current bridge, where fishing is complicated and marine life resists. Still, for many expertsthe deterioration of the artificial reef is a reminder of the vulnerability of unintentionally created ecosystems and how human intervention (on land or sea) defines which life thrives or disappears. History, memory and protection. Galloping Gertie’s remains were included on the National Register of Historic Places in the 1990s, not only as evidence of a failed engineering landmark but also as a testament to nature’s ability to transform ruins into habitats. Today some defenders aspire to an even higher status: turning the site into a marine reserveprotected against extractive activities and recognized both as ecological heritage and as a fundamental chapter in the history of engineering. An extraordinary failure. If you also want, the history of the Tacoma Narrows is not only that of the bridge collapsebut that of a double transformation: that of engineering knowledgewhich evolved as a result of the disaster, and that of underwater ecosystem that emerged from the … Read more

‘Stranger Things’ changed everything for Netflix. Your problem now is finding another brand just as powerful.

by

The expectation is through the roof: Netflix has just taken the first steps of the final season of ‘Stranger Things’‘, which will run throughout December with several episodes, many of them feature-length. In fact, the desire of the fans is such that Netflix even saw its servers falter. A (very possibly) triumphant culmination that, however, leaves a few unknowns in the air. Netflix flashes. Netflix experienced a service outage that in some cases It lasted about twenty minutes. (although the thing did not exceed about five, according to the platform’s official statement) with the premiere of the fifth season of ‘Stranger Things’. The incident occurred despite the fact that the series co-creator, Ross Duffer, had shared that Netflix would increase its bandwidth by 30% to avoid precisely this type of incident. All in all, thousands of users reported NSEZ-403 errors that prevented them from accessing the content, or accessed it with problems, which worked as a perfect thermometer of the expectation generated by the series. ‘Stranger Things’ continues to be a phenomenon capable of collapsing digital infrastructures three years after its previous season. Devastating figures. The fourth season accumulated 140.7 million viewsestablishing itself as the third most watched series in English on the platform, only behind ‘Wednesday’ and ‘Adolescence’. Of course, it is the only series with all seasons in the Top 10an unprecedented milestone on the platform. The impact on subscribers is more difficult to quantify: the third season, for example, contributed to add 520,000 subscribers in the United States. The cultural impact. The impact that ‘Stranger Things’ has had on modern pop culture is enough for a book, but let’s stick with some figures that will give us a rough idea. First, the economy: Netflix, for example, closed agreements with approximately 75 brands to promote the third season. Coca-Cola relaunched New Coke, generating 1.2 billion dollars in media value; Similarly, Nike obtained $178 million in media coverage with their Hawkins High collection. But this goes far beyond benefits for some brands: Butts County in Georgia, where the series is set, reported a 12% increase in tourism during the years the series was broadcast. And the small city of Jackson, with barely five thousand inhabitants and a per capita income of less than $30,000, revitalized its economy thanks to thematic tours. And of course, there is the strong role that the series has had in the recovery of the aesthetics and fashions of the eighties. It is no longer just that they have been revitalized Stephen King’s books and John Carpenter’s films: platforms like LTK registered increases of 3,000% in searches for clothing similar to those worn by the characters. What can we expect? For now, Netflix has planned very well to divide this final season into three: 4 episodes on November 27, 3 on December 26 and a final one on January 1. That is, coinciding with Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year’s Eve, and thus, contrary to what is usual on the platform, stretching the cultural conversation for two months. As for audience expectations, as expected, they are very high: analysts predict new viewing records given the three years of waiting until this end. Of course, the critics have spoken and they point to the signs of exhaustion that were already seen in previous seasons: 87% on Rotten Tomatoesthe lowest rating of the series so far, although the audience rises to 92%. It is not easy to maintain narrative quality after so many years, with obstacles such as the age of the protagonists. The future. The really interesting thing about the phenomenon is wondering what Netflix has ahead. Or to put it more awkwardly: can the platform replicate the phenomenon? It has certainly had successful series in its catalogue, such as ‘Wednesday‘, ‘The Squid Game’ or ‘The Bridgertons’, but except for the first, all of them have finished or are about to do so. It is true that Netflix has the ability to generate new hits like ‘Wednesday’, which also, although it came as a bit of a surprise to everyone, could be well exploited by the platform. Now, Netflix is ​​in a phase of prioritize quantity over qualitymercilessly canceling what does not interest you and attesting that we are in a different moment than the initial success of ‘Stranger Things’: the competition has multiplied and it is more difficult to get noticed among multiple offers. Netflix has all the space in the world before it to compete, but perhaps its main rival is its own legacy: how to make ‘Stranger Things’ forgotten. The series was perhaps, before the almost infinite atomization of the offer of the streamingthe medium’s latest great global success. And that is very difficult to overcome. In Xataka | Netflix loved movie theaters. Then he hated them. Now you have reached a very beneficial middle ground

Boeing wanted to get back on track with Starliner after its most difficult year. The contract with NASA just changed in a key point

by

For years, Starliner was presented as Boeing’s opportunity to aspire to a leading role in American manned flights, in a scenario in which SpaceX I moved faster with Dragon. The contract signed with NASA in 2014 It represented that opportunity: six manned flights and an open door to a new cycle of missions. Eleven years later, the situation is different. That agreement has been adjusted and the next mission has become an exam without people on board. That agreement placed Starliner within the program with which the US space agency sought to guarantee two different US vehicles to the International Space Station. The idea was clear: have more than one capsule capable of transporting astronauts, long-term planning and autonomy in low orbit. That document established that, once the ship was certified, Boeing would operate six manned flights for regular rotations. All this with an eye on the station’s deadline, scheduled for 2030. A shortened contract, by mutual agreement. NASA and Boeing have decided to modify the conditions of the original agreement and reduce the number of guaranteed flights. Instead of the six manned missions planned after certification, the new scenario includes a mission without astronauts, intended to validate the system, and up to three crew rotations. In addition, there are two optional flights that NASA can activate depending on its mission needs. This review also reduces the value of the contract, which goes from $4.5 billion to $3.732 million, after deducting $768 million. Starliner-1 changes roles. This mission without astronauts has a name: Starliner-1, and it has become a key piece of the system validation plan. NASA will use it to send cargo to the International Space Station and verify, in real conditions, that the changes introduced after the manned flight in 2024 offer sufficient guarantees. The target date remains no earlier than April 2026, provided the spacecraft successfully completes testing, certification and pre-launch preparation. A history of setbacks: The first warning came with flight OFT-1 in December 2019, when some problems prevented for Starliner to complete the planned profile and approach the International Space Station. The mission had to be terminated early. In 2022, the OFT-2 flight managed to reach the station, but problems appeared in several thrusters. Two years later, during the first manned flight, several thrusters failed again on approachwhich led NASA to order the return of the ship without the astronauts. NASA and Boeing engineers inspect the Starliner spacecraft after landing in White Sands, New Mexico, during the OFT-2 orbital test in May 2022 When NASA decided that Starliner would not bring Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams back, they both extended their stay on the International Space Station much longer than planned. In total it was nine months, until the agency scheduled a Dragon flight with two fewer astronauts than usual to have enough space. That landing, in March 2025, allowed the return to be completed and confirmed that the evaluation process on Starliner was still open after the 2024 manned flight. Meanwhile, Dragon. In parallel, Dragon began operating with astronauts in 2020 and was progressively incorporated into NASA’s regular planning. Since then, the SpaceX capsule has covered the planned rotations within the Commercial Crew Program, becoming the vehicle regularly used to access the International Space Station. In August 2025, the Crew-11 mission was completed, and Crew-12 is scheduled for February 2026. NASA has booked additional flights with Dragon until the station’s operational end, scheduled for 2030. Less flights, less income, more pressure. The contract modification also means a change in Boeing’s position within the program. The reduction of the total value to 3,732 million dollars implies 768 million dollars less compared to the original figure, with fewer guaranteed flights and a greater weight of optional missions. According to Reutersthe company has invested more than $2 billion since 2016 in this development, which adds relevance to Starliner’s performance in upcoming flights. Despite this, Boeing says it remains committed to the program. Redundancy against the clock. For NASA, Starliner remains relevant because the agency wants two independent systems that can transport astronauts to the International Space Station. Steve Stich, head of the Commercial Crew Program, summed it up by pointing out that the plan involves certifying the ship in 2026, scheduling its first manned rotation when it is ready and coordinating future flights according to the operational needs of the station, which will remain active until 2030. Maintaining this double capacity is key so that the agency does not depend exclusively on a single vehicle. What happens from now on will depend on the outcome of the next flights. If the system manages to be certified in 2026, Starliner can still participate in up to three crewed rotations, with two additional options subject to NASA decision. Boeing maintains its commitment and suggests that the ship could have a place in commercial projects after the end of the International Space Station, although these scenarios are yet to be defined. The opportunity has not disappeared, but it no longer looks as much like the one signed in 2014. Images | NASA (1, 2) | Boeing In Xataka | Starship’s great hope has gotten off to a bad start: a new and painful explosion

Putting four chickens in the yard seemed like a good idea to have cheap eggs. Bird flu just changed the rules of the game

by

From November 13, 2025, there is no poultry farm in the country that can be outdoors. With mass confinement, the Government wants to contain the spread of the H5N1 bird flu. And it makes sense: so far this season, 14 outbreaks have already been recorded in poultry, several in captive birds and dozens in wild birds. The problem is everything that falls under the radar. “What do I do with my chickens?” In Spain, at least from 2024, all chickens must be registered. And yes, that includes ‘self-consumption’ chickens; some animals that, according to the data, they represent only 0.77% of the census (but all experts know there are many more). A report from El País from the spring of this year confirmed that “the figures do not reflect reality and that a large part of self-consumers have birds (especially the ISA Brown species) without census.” This has meant that in a context in which self-consumption does not have inspections (and lives unaware of animal health regulation), the doubts and risks have grown exponentially. As Cristina García Casado explained in InfoLibrethe question most frequently asked by veterinarians across the country is “what do I do with my chickens?” And the answer is very simple: confine them. Because the regulations do not understand sizes: a backyard chicken infected by contact with a wild bird can be just as big a problem as any other type of chicken. Or maybe more. After all, the European authorities they continue to qualify the risk to the general population as low; but they raise it to low-moderate for people in direct contact with infected birds or contaminated environments. Having unmonitored poultry increases the risk to the “civilian” population and if we are realistic we will recognize that they cannot be monitored. The problem has names and surnames: at least when it comes to the flu, all those domestic pens have the same sanitary requirements, but much less infrastructure. The ‘boom’ of homemade eggs. We must remember that this does not happen in a vacuum. The truth is that in recent years we have lived a real ‘boom’ in self-consumption chickens. It is the confluence of the “happy chickens” movements with the response of many citizens to a price that does nothing but go up. According to the National Institute of Statistics, have gone up 15.9% so far this year and, according to the OCUthe growth has been 105% compared to 2021. And, be careful, we are not talking about a luxury product. We are talking about what may be one of the proteins cheaper and more accessible of the world. Faced with this ‘ovoflation’, the accounts are clear: “a hen costs about nine euros, it is easy to raise and maintain with fruit, vegetables and feed, and it lays an egg every 25 hours.” How can there not be a problem? What to do if I have a chicken coop for self-consumption? If we are in that situation (or are thinking about setting up our own domestic corral) there are some things to keep in mind: Whether larger or smaller, the corral must be registered in the REGA (General Registry of Livestock Operations). Implement confinement and biosecurity measures: separate chickens from any contact with wild birds; control inputs and outputs; record all changes in a log book. Improve cleaning conditions, more frequent bed renewal and tightening daily management protocols. Introduce wellness programs to contain the problems associated with a sedentary lifestyle. But, above all, be extremely vigilant. There are many warning signs (apathy, drop in production, high mortality or flu symptoms). Therefore, it is best to be alert. Anything can happen. Image | Finn Mund In Xataka | H5N1 bird flu unleashes a massacre in Antarctica: half of the female seals have already disappeared

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.