company

A company wants to sell sunlight on demand using gigantic mirrors in space. We have questions

by

A Californian startup wants to sell solar light at night and, although it has not yet started, many scientists are already putting their hands together. They find it difficult to do it correctly for technical reasons, but they consider that it would be even more serious if these difficulties are resolved. The consequences for people’s health, the environment and the work of astronomers can be devastating. The longest day. The goal of Reflect Orbital is to launch into space a swarm of 4,000 satellites loaded with giant mirrors. These would capture sunlight from the illuminated side of the Earth and reflect it in dark areas. Thus, the solar panels could work 24 hours a day, not only when sunlight naturally falls on them. First steps. For now, the objectives of this startup have been developed only on paper. They already have their first satellite ready, which they have named Eärendil-1, in honor of a JRR Tolkien character. However, They are still waiting for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to of the United States gives the green light for its launch. In principle It is scheduled to take place throughout this month of Aprilbut there is no definitive date. Once in low Earth orbit, this satellite will deploy an 18-meter-wide mirror, which would be capable of illuminating a 5-kilometer patch on Earth. If all goes well, a swarm of 4,000 mirrors could be launched by 2030. The background is not good. There was already a project similar to this developed in Russia in the 1990s. The goal of the project, named Znamya, was to illuminate Siberia in the dark winter months. And they got it. However, the resulting light was so dim and the satellite so difficult to control that the mission was never completed. More than technical difficulties. Fionagh Thomson, researcher in spatial ethics at Durham University, explained in statements to Live Science who does not believe that the project is viable today, since the engineering involved is very complex. They already verified it in Russia. But that’s not all. Both this and other experts warn that a large amount of light pollution would be generated, which could affect the circadian rhythms of living beings in the illuminated environment. It could also dazzle aircraft pilots and make the work of astronomers difficult. Even astronomy enthusiasts trying to look at the sky with binoculars or a telescope could suffer vision damage if they encounter the light reflected from these satellites. After all, the population would not be notified before changing the direction of the mirrors. Worse than Starlink. starlink, Elon Musk’s telecommunications companyhas been receiving criticism for many years for the artificial way in which they illuminate the night sky. However, this company’s satellites accidentally illuminate the Earth. In this case it would be something deliberate and, therefore, even more intense and serious. It’s not worth it. All these risks are not worth it when you consider the results. And many other experts assure that the light that would be obtained would be too dim. The solar radiation that would reach the solar panels, for example, would be a minimum fraction of that which arrives during the day. In order to obtain a sufficient amount of light, an exorbitant number of satellites would have to be launched into space and that would be expensive and even more dangerous. Beware of space debris. If the mirror of Eärendil-1 will measure about 18 meters in diameter, the goal of Reflect Orbital is to launch satellites into space with even larger mirrors, up to 54 meters. In general, they would be giant objects; who would therefore be at greater risk of impacting with meteorites or space junk fragments. The more exposed surface, the more risk. This would not only mean the uncontrolled release of fragments resulting from the impact, it would also cause damage to the structure of the mirrors themselves. A leaky mirror would be even more difficult to control and its harmful effects could worsen. Therefore, although the goal of selling sunlight at night seems feasible on paper, in reality it is complicated and dangerous. We’ll see where all this goes. Image | Reflect Orbital In Xataka | Solar thermal plants are in the doldrums, so now they have two jobs: generating energy by day and hunting asteroids by night

There is a company that remains committed to saving the manual gearbox no matter what the cost: BMW

by

The manual gearbox has been around for years on the tightrope within the motor world. More and more brands are abandoning it, emissions regulations are stifling it and suppliers are not exactly in favor of manufacturing it in smaller quantities. However, BMW’s M division has not yet signed his death certificate. What BMW said. Sylvia Neubauer, Vice President Customers, Brand and Sales at BMW M, confirmed in an interview with the German media Automobilwoche that the division’s engineers continue to actively work to find a solution that allows the clutch pedal to be maintained in its future models. Neubauer did not go into technical details, but according to the publication, the executive “promises a solution.” The technical problem. The obstacle is not so much power as torque. BMW M’s inline six-cylinder engines generate torque figures that current manual gearboxes cannot absorb without mechanical compromise. A clear example: the BMW M2 CS arrived without a manual gearbox option precisely because the transmission was not capable of managing the engine torque. The same S58 that produces 553 HP in the 3.0 CSL has torque limited to 550 Nm with manual, while in other configurations it can deliver an extra 100 Nm. And developing a completely new and more robust manual transmission for use in only a handful of models is, according to the head of BMW MFrank van Meel, “something that does not add up economically.” The possible solution: decelerated engines. What the engineers would be exploring is artificially limit torque output in engines that are paired with a manual transmission. It is not a new concept, it is already happening currently with the M2, whose automatic version has 50 Nm more torque than the lever variant. The question is whether buyers will be willing to accept that compromise in upcoming models. What models are left with a manual. After the Z4 M40i goes out of production this month, BMW M is left with only three cars equipped with a stick shift: the M2, M3 and M4. The current M3 is close to the end of its life cycle, with a replacement expected in 2028. What we do not know is if its new generation will arrive with a manual gearshift. From BMW Blog they are not very clear. The M2 and M4, however, still have plenty of power for a while. Why is it so difficult to save he manual. It is a constant pressure that comes from several fronts. Emission regulations in Europe they tighten more and more (in 2030, manufacturers must reduce fleet emissions by 55% compared to 2021) and automatic vehicles consume less in the approved cycle. Driving assistance systems are designed almost exclusively to work with automatic transmissions. And the transmission providers themselves They prefer to work with large volumesnot with short runs of manuals for niche enthusiasts. What this means. BMW M isn’t closing the door, but it isn’t opening any wide either. The brand is betting on saving time (and not disappointing its most purist customer base) while solving an engineering problem that is very economical. If the solution is to decelerate the engines with manual transmission, that could generate debate among those who expect maximum performance in each configuration. But for those who value the driving experience over the information on paper, it may be enough. In Xataka | China has been boasting about its driverless robotaxis for years. Until more than 100 have stood at once in Wuhan

OpenAI is the most successful company on the planet. Also the one that plans to lose 85,000 million dollars in a single year

by

Something special is going to happen in 2026: both OpenAI and Anthropic are going public. This will finally mean that individual investors can invest in them and bet on their future with their money. It will be the definitive exam for the credibility of companies that have grown exceptionally in recent years but also They have burned the money as if there were no tomorrow. But be careful, because there is a compelling reality here: they are going to continue burning it in an even more astonishing way. The two sides of the IPO. The Wall Street Journal has had access to the financial documents submitted to investors before the IPOs proposed by both OpenAI and Anthropic. They reveal extraordinarily striking data that have two sides. Amazement and concern with OpenAI. For example, OpenAI has indicated that it will almost double its revenue this year. According to their forecasts, they could become profitable in 2026 if one excludes the cost of training their models (which are stratospheric, of course). But there is the other reality: OpenAI expects to spend $121 billion on computing power in 2028, so even doubling revenue it will lose, attention, $85 billion. No company has ever lost this amount of money and survived, but OpenAI not only promises that it will survive, but that those losses will end up being almost anecdotal. I tell you the truth, but only part of it. Both companies wanted to show two different versions of reality when talking about how they present their profitability. In one, the very expensive model training processes are included, and in others in which these costs are excluded under a heading called “computing for research.” Excluding those costs, OpenAI is on track to achieve a small pre-tax operating profit this year. Anthropic also promises to achieve this if its most optimistic scenario comes true. Excluding the cost of training models, both OpenAI and Anthropic could be “profitable” this year. Source: WSJ. Until 2030, no real profitability. If the costs and investment in model training are included, OpenAI indicates that it will end up being profitable in 2030, a fact that They had already planned a long time ago and that could not hide a forceful reality: the company has not only not stopped spending money until now: it is going to continue spending it, but to an even greater extent with projects like Stargate to the head. Saying that in 2026 they will be profitable if we do not consider training costs is like an airline telling us that it is profitable excluding the cost of fuel. Anthropic, by the way, expects to be fully profitable in 2028. Revenues growing fast, costs even faster. In addition to those training processes, both OpenAI and Anthropic are spending billions of dollars every year in inferencea section that is beginning to be even more important at an operational and strategic level. Currently, these inference costs represent half of each company’s revenue, although inference technology is expected to becomes cheaper and therefore the costs too. Here, however, there are two big differences between both companies: OpenAI: most ChatGPT users do not pay to use the service, so OpenAI assumes these inference costs without making them profitable. According to OpenAI, this facilitates adoption and will allow users to become subscribers in the future, something that is not happening too much at the moment. Anthropic: This startup has managed to win over many companies that pay to use their models, and it is evident that the company is absolutely focused on making you pay to use their models if you want to use them. And if not, Tell OpenClaw. Betting on the future. The companies and venture capital funds that have invested billions in OpenAI or Anthropic have made a bet on the future. They have blind faith that these companies will end up taking over the world, so the fact that today they are still not profitable does not scare them… or not enough to withdraw from this expensive race. Both have experienced spectacular growth that serves as an argument for investors. In addition, the growing interest of companies in integrating AI solutions by paying for them has boosted Anthropic and even caused OpenAI to reorganize and change its strategy. Less fireworks and hypemore focus in what makes money. The IPO as a trick to survive. Both companies are going to continue burning money like there was no tomorrow in the coming years, but now they hope that investors will be the ones to sustain their businesses. The amount of money they will need has made even the Nasdaq make things easier: It will allow newly listed companies to join its renowned index more quickly, giving them access to larger capital reserves. Now it will be the public market and to a large extent the individual investor who will decide whether they want to bet on that future or not. A small survey. Would you invest in OpenAI or Anthropic if it went public? It is evident that both companies generate different impressions, and although their strategies and ways of doing things are different, it is clear that this public sale offer is going to be very striking when it occurs. So, it is a good time to find out a little about what you, the xatakeros, think about this financial movement of these companies. Image | TechCrunch | Wikimedia Commons In Xataka | NVIDIA has so much money that it is becoming something different: the largest startup incubator in the world

SpaceX is now a company in the railway sector and it is very bad news for its employees

by

For some people it will be ingenuity, for others a very hard face, but the point is that SpaceX has found a way to avoid lawsuits and strikes by its workers when obtaining the name of air transport company. This means that it is regulated under the Railway Labor Law, with all the benefits that it entails within US legislation. The news. On March 13, the official resolution was made public by which SpaceX, Elon Musk’s space agency, is now considered a company in the railway sector in the United States. This means that your activity is no longer subject to the supervision of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)which is typically responsible for protecting the labor rights of private sector workers. The layoffs that started it all. In January 2024, the NLRB put a lawsuit against SpaceX on the tableafter the company illegally fired 8 employees. The lawsuit requested reinstatement of the employees, back pay, and a letter of apology to each of them. Given this situation, SpaceX responded with another lawsuit to the NLRBalleging that the procedure being carried out was unconstitutional. Rockets have the same legal treatment as cargo planes. An ace up your sleeve. According to Elon Musk’s company, the NLRB should not be able to act against a company that is dedicated to transportation. He added that One of its main missions is the transport of humans and goods to the International Space Station.. In many cases, these jobs are carried out for NASA, so they would also be providing a service to the Government. For all this, they requested to be covered under the Railway Labor Law. A plan that suits many. In recent years, SpaceX, as well as other Elon Musk companies, have been the subject of complaints from a multitude of dissatisfied employees, either due to their personal situation or due to bad practices carried out in the company. In the case of Neuralink, for example, Very bad practice towards laboratory animals was reported. But returning to SpaceX, the increasing volume of complaints could put the company’s work pace at risk. This, logically, would harm its managers, but also the companies that benefit from its services. The entire US space program would probably collapse. For all this, although it seemed difficult, in the end Elon Musk’s company has had a resolution in favor of its new name. Immune to strikes. One of the peculiarities of railroad companies in the United States is that they benefit from special state protection. Since minimum transport services must be guaranteed, strikes and other similar activities that would normally slow down the normal pace of work are closely controlled. The NLRB no longer rules. Another of those special protections for railroad companies is that the NLRB no longer has power over them. Therefore, dismissed employees cannot resort to it to report their situation. Instead, the company is governed by the rules of the National Mediation Boardmuch more lax in the mediation of labor disputes. It is true that employees can request strikes, but to do so they must undergo a long and tedious process that often causes them to change their decision. And now what? With this new name, SpaceX has even more power and freedom than before. If measures are carried out that involve malpractice towards employees, it is difficult for their complaints to come to fruition legally. This gives them a lot of leeway and greatly speeds up their protocols. Other curious legal victories. It is not the first time that SpaceX has obtained an unexpected legal name. Last year, for example, The Starbase base was given the name of cityso that all employees who live nearby would also become inhabitants. This, far from changing a few patterns, also gave SpaceX more freedom when maneuvering in the areas surrounding its base. As with railway legislation, what may seem like a small name change can change everything. Image | Gage Skidmore (Wikimedia Commons) |SpaceX In Xataka | SpaceX is preparing the largest IPO in history: the fact that it is doing so right now is no coincidence

The Aragón justice system has shown how expensive it can be for a company to get involved with dismissal letters: 46,665 euros

by

There are mistakes that can be corrected with a simple apology. And then there are errors that, once committedhave legal consequences that no apology can undo. A freight transport company in Huesca discovered this in the worst possible way when it fired one of its employees, regretted it days later, trying to back down, and then fired him again. All of this while the worker was at home on medical leave. What seemed like an internal bureaucratic mess ended up in court and with compensation of more than 46,000 euros. The dismissal letters the devil carries them. Two layoffs, one leave and fifteen days of chaos. As documented in the sentence In the case that reached the Superior Court of Justice of Aragon, the worker had been in the company since 2011, with an indefinite contract, and had accumulated more than a year of medical leave due to a cervical injury when, on December 14, 2023, he received a burofax from his company informing him of the disciplinary dismissal. As indicated in the dismissal letter, the employee had carried out incompatible activities with his low status. The worker did not take long to react and began the process to challenge the dismissal in court. But then something unexpected happened. On December 20, just six days later, a second burofax arrived in which the company declared that the first dismissal was annulled and that an internal disciplinary file was opened in its place. Not satisfied with this, on December 29 they received a third burofax containing another dismissal letter, this time accompanied by the payroll and the corresponding settlement. Within two weeks, the employee had received two dismissal communications and one cancellation while was still convalescing at home. Why the company wanted to back down. As stated in the ruling, the company argued that the first dismissal had been a procedural error and considered that the initial letter had formal defects related to the applicable collective agreement, since the worker had questioned by email whether the merchandise transportation agreement or the chemical industry agreement should apply. The company’s intention was to annul that first dismissal, open the correct disciplinary file and issue a new letter in order. From his point of view, the only real dismissal was that of December 29, which had never been challenged by the worker. The company also tried to demonstrate to the court that the underlying reason for the dismissal was legitimate: a private detective report recorded the worker carrying out physical activity during his medical leave, which he interpreted as a simulation of the disability or, at least, as a behavior incompatible with recovery. A dismissal letter is not a draft. The problem for the company is that the dismissal letter is not a simple administrative communication with the employee, but is a document with key legal value with which an entire dismissal process begins with very well-defined deadlines and procedures to give maximum guarantees to both companies and employees. He article 55.1 of the Workers’ Statute establishes that disciplinary dismissal must be notified in writing, with the facts that motivate it and the effective date. Once that letter is delivered, a legal mechanism is put in place that neither party can stop unilaterally. The law itself contemplates the possibility for the company to retract the dismissal and provides a way out when a company wants to correct a poorly formulated dismissal, but as stated in article 55.2 of the Workers’ Statute, it is subject to very precise conditions and deadlines. Furthermore, it is only admitted if, during that rectification period, the company keeps the worker registered with Social Security and pays them all salaries. In this case, the ruling states that it was not proven that the company had complied with that requirement, which blocked this means of rectification. Without the worker’s acceptance, there is no turning back. On the other hand, and beyond the administrative procedures, there is an additional requirement that the company did not comply with in its process of rectification of the first dismissal: for the employment relationship to be restored, the worker who has been dismissed must expressly accept it. It is not enough for the company to declare on its own that the dismissal is without effect. The Supreme Court already established that a communicated dismissal determines that the worker is not obliged to accept any subsequent retraction from the company, and that claiming before the courts in that situation does not constitute any type of abuse. In this case, the employee did not explicitly accept the annulment of the first dismissal or return to his position. The email he sent to the company questioning the applicable collective agreement was not considered by the court as a tacit acceptance of the withdrawal, but rather as confirmation of his dismissal status. The employment relationship, in the eyes of the law, had been terminated on December 14 and no subsequent communication from the company could change that unilaterally. The outcome: more than 46,000 euros in compensation. The TSJ of Aragón also ruled out the argument about physical activity during sick leave. It was proven that the outputs recorded by detective They were walks or runs of about 40 minutes of moderate duration that, according to the medical assessment, were not contraindicated for the worker’s recovery from the cervical injury. With all these arguments on the table, the court declared the dismissal inadmissible, the first, because the second no longer had any legal value, and established compensation of 46,665.34 euros, calculated based on age of the worker. The company appealed that decision to the Superior Court of Justice of Aragon, which confirmed it in its entirety and also ordered it to pay 800 euros in costs. Dismissal letters, especially if they are not well formulated, are carried by the devil. In Xataka | He had been in the same notary office for 16 years and was fired for not passing the trial period: the Supreme Court ended up seeing the … Read more

The company that earns 2,000 million a month is already worth 852,000 million dollars

by

Just a year ago we broke the same news: OpenAI had broken the record for the largest financing round in the history of Silicon Valley. Then it was $40 billion, which raised the startup’s valuation to $300 billion. The curious thing is that today, a year later, history repeats itself, but with much (very much) higher numbers and also more doubts flying over the environment. Add and continue. OpenAI has broken the record again of Silicon Valley’s largest financing round, raising no less than $122 billion, which places its “post-money” valuation at $852 billion. OpenAI claims that this investment will allow them to expand their computing capacity and thus be able to sustain the development of their frontier models. Why it is important. OpenAI is the most valuable private company in the world, ahead of giants such as JP Morgan, Samsung or Visa. There are only 14 companies listed on the stock market that exceed their valuation, but they have also tripled it in just one year. All this happens in the shadow of a possible bubblewith many doubts about your business strategy and, above all, IPO on the horizon nearby. Who puts the money. Already They confirmed it a few days ago: Of the 122,000 million, NVIDIA, SoftBank and Amazon have contributed 110,000. The person who has contributed the most has been Amazon, which has put 50,000 million in OpenAI’s pocket. For their part, NVIDIA and SoftBank have contributed 30 billion each. The absence of Microsoft is striking, especially since they were expected to contribute “several billion more.” The remaining 12 billion come from venture capital firms in Silicon Valley and Wall Street. Of these, at least 3,000 million have been raised from individual investors through banks. An act of faith. OpenAI enters 2,000 million dollars per month, is a ridiculous figure compared to all the money that burns. Furthermore, we must not lose sight of the fact that those who are investing the most in the company are the ones who later charge it for using its chips (NVIDIA) and its data centers (Amazon). This circular financing scheme has not gone unnoticed and It is very reminiscent of another bubble from a while ago. Despite everything, investors seem to still have faith in OpenAI’s business model. Refocusing. OpenAI receives this round of funding amid its efforts to reorient its business model. After 2025 in which They have shot at everything that movedit seems that they have finally realized that AI is not won through memes. One of the most forceful steps in its new direction is Sora’s closurebut also They prepare a super app and They plan to double their staff. The underlying reason is that Anthropic is eating their toast in a field that is less viralizable, but much more profitable: business clients. We will see if this new OpenAI can be profitable. Image | Own edition with background Unsplash In Xataka | Here’s a disturbing message for OpenAI investors: Sam Altman’s new priority is finding money

OpenAI had to choose between “being the company that has erotic AI” or competing with Anthropic. And he has chosen the obvious

by

Sam Altman wasn’t afraid to try things. That people want to create Studio Ghibli style images? Forward. AI Videos hyperrealistic? Go for it. A browser with AI? we have it. Wherever I saw an option to add AI, OpenAI added it. But that was before, because these projects are being put on the back burner or directly closed for a simple reason: they are blank bullets. ChatGPT is not going to flirt with you. According to the Financial TimesOpenAI has canceled its plans to launch an erotic chatbot, and now the goal is to focus its resources on its most important products. The decision is partly a response to tensions and internal criticism from employees and investors when offering sexualized AI content. One former employee noted that “AI shouldn’t replace your friends or family; you should have human connections.” Making an erotic chatbot is not that easy. In addition to the social impact, it seems that OpenAI has had to face really complex technical challenges when creating this type of chatbot. Training an AI model to do something that “normal” models were trying to avoid was causing problems. For example, when including data sets with explicit content it was necessary to eliminate illegal behavior, such as bestiality or incest. That adult mode, called “Citron mode” internally, could have required users to prove that they were over 18 years old. Too much risk. The move to launch an “adult mode” of ChatGPT was reputationally risky, and people familiar with the decision have indicated that OpenAI wants to begin a long-term investigation into the effects of explicitly sexual chats and the emotional bonds that this type of interaction can create in users. They point out that at the moment there is no “empirical evidence” about the impact, but for now they are clear. And yet, there is another great reason to cancel it indefinitely. Let’s focus on what makes money. In recent weeks we have seen how the new pretty girl of the world of AI is Anthropic, which with Claude has managed to conquer precisely the market sector that is beginning to generate income decent for AI: the companies. OpenAI had been especially focused on end users, but the steps it has taken to try to convince us to pay for ChatGPT Plus/Pro They don’t quite work. No ads, no shopping. A few months ago OpenAI announced that ChatGPT was already capable of buy things for you with its Instant Checkout. The feature was really promising and proposed a paradigm shift in the rules of traditional e-commerce, but this launch seems to have had much less impact than expected. The decision to place ads during conversations seems not going to make ChatGPT’s revenue skyrocket either, so the solution is becoming clearer: if we have to be like Anthropic, we will be more Anthropic, we imagine Sam Altman is saying. Goodbye Sora… The ads don’t quite work, neither does Instant Checkout, and many other launches have not gone beyond generating a fleeting expectation. It happened with Sora: that OpenAI I abandoned her It is a disturbing sign that the company prefers to completely recalibrate. …hello superapp. Another sign of this reorganization is the fact that OpenAI is preparing a desktop tool that will unify its chatbot, its code platform (Codex) and the Atlas browser. The objective, to create a super app with agentic capabilities, not only oriented to code, but also to productivity. It is not clear if they will launch it as a solution for end users or the destination will be the company, where Anthropic is winning the game. New ‘Spud’ model in sight. In The Information indicated this week that OpenAI had recently completed development of a new AI model called Spud. OpenAI is expected to launch it in the coming weeks, and Altman reportedly told his employees that such a model “can really accelerate the economy.” It is not clear what it refers to (agent capabilities?), but with it OpenAI may be able to regain some of the ground lost with Anthropic. If Anthropic lets him, which we doubt. Image | Universal Pictures In Xataka | Wikipedia has banned using AI to write or rewrite articles in English. Human knowledge begins to raise barriers

Campo de Montiel has rare earths to cover 33% of European demand, according to a mining company. The Board has said “no, thank you”

by

Oil may be the resource that makes most of the headlines today, but the rare earthare “the cover” of the technology industry: they are decisive practically in any sector and also set the geopolitical agenda at a time of tariffs and vetoes. And if there is a country that cuts cod into rare earths (spoiler: They are neither earth nor are they rarebut 17 metals) that is China: there is no one to cough or in reserves neither in production. There was a time when The United States dominated this sectorbut that time passed away. And Europe? Well, at the moment rare earths are not produced, but we are working on it: has stepped on the accelerator at the Per Geijer superminein Kiruna (Sweden), where you could get 18% of what you need. Meanwhile, in a place in La Mancha whose name I don’t want to remember, there is who points that could obtain 2,100 tons per year of lanthanides, enough to cover 33% of European needs. There is only one little problem: the Junta de Comunidades de Castilla-La Mancha has said that they are not interested. And they are not alone. Campo de Montiel is a (potential) mine. Back in 2013 the Spanish company Quantum Mining put under his magnifying glass the region of Campo de Montiel, in Ciudad Real. Next to Torrenueva is that promising site that is the object of your desires: Matamulas. According to their analysis, it is full of monazite (along with bastnasite, the main rare earth ore) gray. But really loaded: the company assures that in Campo de Montiel more than 2,100 tons could be produced per year. Is that a lot or a little? According to the company, it is approximately a third of European consumption needs, although Eurostat figure in 12,900 annual tons imported by 2024, which would leave the percentage around 16% (the company does not publicly detail with what reference it calculates that third). The firm lands it with applications such as the construction of 350,000 electric cars or 10,000 wind turbines. Quantum Mining Production Estimates “We’re not interested.” A month ago Quantum Minería tried again and you already have an answer of the autonomous government: Mercedes Gómez, the Minister of Sustainable Development, explains that they are not interested in holding a competition so that tastings can be carried out at the Matamulas site. Not again: in 2013 the Board granted the mining company (and two other companies) exploitation permits, which was rejected in 2017. In 2024 came back to request permits, this time framed within the Neodimio project, again encountering a no. The EU also left them outside of their strategic projects. What Quantum wants to do. The mining plan It involves temporarily removing a half-meter layer of vegetation (mainly cereal) so that, once the process is finished, it can be reused in the restoration. Afterwards, backhoes extract two meters deep to reach the gray monazite. That material is taken to a concentration plant to be screened using physical processes, without chemical additives, so that the soil can be returned to its site later. Then the land is leveled and the crop is replaced. These works are carried out hectare by hectare, so that it does not interrupt the agricultural processes in the surroundings. According to the company, when the land is restored it can be cultivated “even in better conditions than the original ones.” Why not. Given the insistent interest of Quantum, the citizen platform ‘Yes to the Living Land‘ and other citizen activism movements once again opposed, in addition to one of the wineries in the region. A decade ago Ecologists in Action detailed that the environmental impact of this operation on the 27,500 hectares included in the project would be severe. One of the bottlenecks is water: for this operation they estimate that between 310,000 and 500,000 cubic meters of water would be needed annually during the estimated ten years of exploitation (washing and processing are two processes that consume a lot of water). In that area the water pressure is high, with droughts, reservoirs in states of emergency, overexploited aquifers and intense grassroots agricultural activity as icing on the cake. In addition, in the region there are two Special Protection Areas for Birds and it is the habitat of the lynx. In Xataka | The world’s rare earth reserves, laid out in this graph showing the brutal dominance of a single country In Xataka | Europe seeks its sovereignty in rare earths and knows how to achieve it the fast way: with a supermine in Sweden Cover | ダモリ and Karen Paredes Carabantes

The US tried to treat Anthropic as if it were an enemy company for refusing to arm its AI. The judge just stopped him

by

There is a new chapter in the clash between Anthropic and the Pentagon, and it is one that must not have sat well with the Trump administration. After declaring it “a risk to the supply chain” (put her on the blacklistOh), Anthropic went to court and now the judge has just agreed with them, so the order has been paralyzed. what has happened. The Trump administration sought to punish Anthropic after refuse to let their AI be used in lethal autonomous weapons and mass surveillance, but Judge Rita Lin, of the Northern District of California, just blocked the order. The judge has asked the government for a report, which they must present before April 6, in which they detail how they have complied with their resolution. The government has seven days to appeal. “Orwellian idea”. The judge is quite harsh with the government’s decision. He considers that it is an “arbitrary and capricious” move and that “no provision of the applicable law supports the Orwellian idea that an American company can be branded as a potential adversary and saboteur of the United States for expressing its disagreement with the Government.” Furthermore, he indicates that if the problem is that they do not trust Anthropic’s AI “the War Department could simply stop using Claude.” It’s not going to sit too well with the Trump administration. In his order he also mentions the “financial and reputational prejudice” to which Anthropic would be exposed if this measure is applied, arguing that it could leave the company paralyzed. Why is it important. It is the first time that a restriction of this caliber has been applied to a domestic company. Supply chain risk is defined as “the risk that an adversary could sabotage or subvert a covered system,” but what has happened here is that it has been used as a punishment for disagreement. Furthermore, if the order were implemented, Anthropic would be commercially isolated by being prohibited from working, not only with civilian agencies, but also with private companies that wanted to work with the defense department. And now what. Several legal experts They already warned that the decision would not survive legal scrutiny and it has. This decision represents a victory for Anthropic, which in a statement assured that “Our goal remains to collaborate constructively with the Government to ensure that all Americans benefit from safe and reliable AI.” The question now is what will be the next step of the Trump administration, which has not yet commented on the matter. In Xataka | OpenAI says its deal with the Pentagon is secure. Seriously, really, you have to believe it, trust it, it assures you Image | Anthropic, edited

Danone wants to pay 1 billion for a powdered shake company. It’s his answer to Ozempic

by

Danone has announced the acquisition of Smella British shake and powder company that competed with things like Soylent or Joylent in the “complete nutrition” sector, for about 1,000 million euros. It is an earthquake in the sector, but (above all) because of what it implies. The food industry is preparing for the earthquake caused by the new GLP-1 drugs and is doing so by gobbling up everything there is for functional nutrition. What is Huel? Founded in 2015 in the United Kingdom, it had a turnover of around 250 million pounds in 2025, sells in more than 100 countries and has among its investors to Idris Elba and Jonathan Ross. But none of that explains why a company like this is worth so much money. After all, Human Fuel sells nutritionally complete meals: powders, shakes, bars and instant meals. Although the idea is that these products cover 100% of daily needs, the same company recommends complementing it with conventional food. And why does Danone want that? That’s the big question. The purchase of Huel is part of the strategy Renew Danone which, since 2022, seeks to expand and diversify the company’s work. Danone already has Nutriciaits specialized medical nutrition division (Fortimeloncological supplements, pediatric formulas), which operates in the clinical and hospital setting. With Huel, you are building a functional and specialized nutrition ecosystem that covers all steps from the clinic either probiotics to mass consumption. The central issue is that the market does not stop growing. To grow and transform. It is estimated that meal replacements move between 16,000 and 21,000 million dollars each year. and heanalysts agree in which it will grow at a rate greater than 5%. But what makes this operation more than a corporate purchase is the context. GLP-1 drugs (Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro) are radically transforming food purchasing habits. Users eat less, buy less ultra-processed foods, and when they eat, they look for maximum nutritional density in every bite. According to Circana, households with LPG-1 usersThey will represent 35% of food sales in the US by 2030. Nestlé has already launched a specific line (Vital Pursuit), Conagra Label your dishes “GLP-1 Friendly” and General Mills is reformulating its products so they have more protein and fiber. And why now? Basically because Danone has money. In 2024, they had a cash flow of more than 3,000 million euros. In 2025, Danone CEO made it clear that the company wanted to “go on the offensive with acquisitions. And I have done it. In the last few years they have bought three emerging companies in key sectors (and many others that, finally, has not been able to acquire). Danone isn’t buying a smoothie maker: it’s buying a position in the new food chain the GLP-1s are creating. One where food is not sold for pleasure or convenience, but for function. Image | In Xataka | Neither Soylent nor Joylent. May the future not take away the ritual, flavor and texture of eating.

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.