continue

a million Spaniards continue to watch it every year

by

Each Easter weekWithout fail, something happens that defies any logic of the audiovisual market: millions of Spaniards sit down to watch a film that they have already seen, which lasts almost four hours, which was filmed 65 years ago in Rome and which is not recommended by any algorithm. A chariot race that, for some reason, continues to draw viewers as if it were a recent release. The figures. Since 2008, the film ‘Ben-Hur’ has been broadcast on Spanish channels (free and pay) a total of 85 times over 17 Holy Weeks. That is equivalent to an average of five passes per holiday period, according to data from the consulting firm Barlovento Comunicación. has provided ‘El País’. No other religious-themed title has accumulated so many broadcasts in that interval. It is followed by ‘Quo Vadis?’, with 73 appearances on the grid, and ‘The Ten Commandments’, with 61. Completing the usual group are films such as ‘Barabbas’, ‘Spartacus’ or ‘The Greatest Story Ever Told’, almost all of them produced between the 1950s and 1960s. It doesn’t sound familiar to me. Well, they are all titles from a time in which Hollywood turned the biblical epic into an industrial venture, with million-dollar budgets and excessive technical ambition. ‘Ben-Hur’ cost $15 million in 1959 (the largest budget of any film up to that time) and grossed approximately $80 million worldwide. It won eleven Oscars from twelve nominations, a record that only ‘Titanic’ (1997) and ‘The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King’ (2003) have equaled. Why do they still work? ‘Ben-Hur’ has an advantage: Jesus appears in it as a peripheral figure, with his back turned or in the distance, which turns the film into an epic adventure production with a Christian subtext, rather than a typical religious film. The chariot race, filmed in five weeks with 15,000 extras and on a gigantic set in Cinecittà, works as a hook regardless of the viewer’s beliefs. ‘Quo Vadis?’ places Saint Peter fleeing Rome during Nero’s persecutions, but a vision of Christ appears to him asking where he is going, and Peter turns around and returns to the city to remain with the martyrs. It is the only scene in which Jesus has a direct presence, since he always appears mediated by his apostles, or with the conversion process of the Roman commander Marcus Vinicius. But the spectacle that the film sustains for the non-believing public is another: the burning of Rome, the circus with the lions, the megalomania of Nero… The hearings. Since 2021 La 1 has programmed ‘Ben-Hur’ every year on the after-dinner meal on Thursday or Good Friday. The results: screen shares of 11.4%, 10.7%, 12.5%, 11.3% and 11.1%, with figures around one million viewers in the three and a half hours that the film lasts. Today few programs achieve those numbers on a regular basis. The record remains the Holy Thursday screening of 2012, when more than two million people watched it on the night of La 1. For this year, RTVE has confirmed that La 1 will broadcast ‘Ben-Hur’ and ‘Pompeya’ on the afternoon of Good Friday, and ‘The Ten Commandments’ during the weekend. La 2 will offer ‘The Sacred Robe’ on Holy Thursday at 10:00 p.m. The private ones, less pious. Since 2018, La 1 has broadcast a total of 45 films with religious themes or those linked to Holy Week. Antena 3 barely reached seven. Telecinco, four. Atresmedia and Mediaset are betting on other types of programming on these dates, leaving the religious field almost exclusively to RTVE… …and the autonomous ones. These have turned this niche into their own asset. Between 2018 and 2025, Telemadrid programmed 99 films with religious themes, Canal Sur 82 and CMM (Castilla-La Mancha Media) 72. These are figures that reflect both the cultural harmony of these stations with their territories and a very economically efficient programming strategy: the rights to these classic titles are considerably cheaper than those of recent productions. And Channel 13. This is what takes logic to its ultimate consequences. The Episcopal Conference network has broadcast almost 300 religious films during Holy Week over 17 years. In 2025 alone, it programmed 19 different titles in that week, with more than 50 hours of special content that included broadcasts of processions, connections with the Vatican and film series ranging from Cecil B. DeMille classics to premieres such as ‘His Only Son’ (2023). Thirteen seems like a television built specifically for these dates. Last stop: ‘The Life of Brian’. There is a case that deserves separate analysis: ‘The Life of Brian’, the 1979 Monty Python film, has been broadcast at Easter on Spanish channels on 22 occasions over 17 years. In most cases it was on thematic channels, and La 2 only dared to program it in 2020 and 2021. The results were clear: a 7.4% share in full confinement and 5.5% in 2021, figures well above the channel’s usual average. Neox issued it the last two Good Fridays with equally notable results for its usual figures: 2.6% and 3.4%. The data is revealing because it makes it clear that the viewer of Holy Week is not necessarily looking for devotion, but rather cultural markers of the period. ‘Life of Brian’ fits that way just like ‘Ben-Hur’, albeit from the opposite end of the spectrum. In Xataka | We believed that Generation Z was returning en masse to the Church. An error in a survey is to blame for the mirage

AI already dominated chess. Now it is forcing us to play in a different way to continue competing

by

There is something almost universal in how we understand chess. We imagine it as a duel of pure intelligence, two players in front of a board, trying to anticipate, read the opponent and find the best response at all times. That image still holds true for most of us, whether playing at home or on an app, but in the elite the game has changed a lot. Not because chess has broken down, but because the emergence of increasingly powerful engines has altered the way it is studied, prepared and competed at the highest level. That change did not come suddenly, although it did leave a very clear scene in 2018. The world championship between Magnus Carlsen and Fabiano Caruana ended with the 12 classic games in drawssomething never seen in the history of the tournament, which dates back to 1886. That result was not an isolated rarity, but the visible sign of a trend that had been maturing for years. The more the best players relied on analysis engines to prepare their games, the narrower the margin to surprise from the start and the more difficult it became to break the balance. The trick was to stop playing like a machine To understand what has happened you have to look at how professional chess is studied today. The great masters have been working with engines, programs for years specifically designed to analyze positions and find the best continuations with precision well above the human level. We are not talking so much about conversational models as ChatGPT either Claude, who according to Bloomberg are pretty bad at chessbut from tools like Stockfish or the legacy it left AlphaZero. The underlying issue is that these tools have homogenized part of the knowledge in the elite: many players come to the board with a very similar preparation in the first plays, and that reduces the room for surprise. This shared preparation began to have a very concrete effect in practice. If both rivals know in advance the strongest lines and the most reliable answers, winning requires much more than avoiding gross errors. For years, the feeling grew that classical chess was becoming more closed at the top, not because of a lack of talent, but because each important detour was much more studied than before. Bloomberg also recalls that the fear of a “death by draw” was not new, but the arrival of engines superior to humans, since Deep Blue in 1997 and later with increasingly stronger domestic programs, gave that fear a different dimension. Carlsen’s career helps to understand to what extent this change has weighed on the elite. After the 2021 World Cup, an exhausting duel that included an eight-hour game and seven draws, The Norwegian decided not to defend the title again and cited a lack of motivation. He did not abandon classical chessin fact won Norway Chess in 2025 and is still the highest-rated player in the world, but he was showing more and more interest in faster formats such as rapid and blitz, and also in freestyle chess, which alters the initial position of the pieces to neutralize the preparation. The message that this evolution left was quite clear: even the best player on the planet seemed to look for spaces where previous study did not determine everything. The interesting thing is that the most powerful response came not only by changing the format, but also by changing the way of playing within the board itself. A new generation of grandmasters, already raised with motors, began to assume something that sounds counterintuitive: always following the computer’s first suggestion does not guarantee an advantage over another human. The aforementioned media gives a very concrete example in the 2024 Candidates Tournament, when Praggnanandhaa chose a play considered suboptimal by the engines against Ruy López, took his rival out of preparation and ended up winning. That’s the key to change. In elite chess it is no longer enough to ask what the best move is in the abstract, it is also important what it is. the most uncomfortable for the person in front of you. Engines may consider several nearly equivalent options, but not all of them create the same type of practical problem on the board. On the other hand, the engine can show you an optimal line, but that does not mean that it has taught you to understand it. Seen this way, what we are observing is a much more interesting transformation. The engines remain unbeatable and have been far ahead of humans for years, but precisely for this reason they have forced the grandmasters to move the battle to another terrain. Precision continues to be essential, but it is no longer enough on its own if it is not accompanied by judgment, understanding and the ability to adapt. Images | Florian Cordier | Pavel Danilyuk In Xataka | A study says that AIs are “cheating” at chess. That’s what we want to think

What exactly happens to your body if you continue drinking after age 65?

by

The alcohol is quite normalized in our society as it is for sale to the public as long as you are of legal age, and almost always because we associate it at leisure. But the truth is that we are talking about a drug that has important harmful effects on our body, that at 30 years old may not be noticed because we have a strong body that processes it relatively easily. But when we reach the barrier of 65-70 years this changes completely. An older organism. What at 30 years old can be easily counteracted with healthy organs, cannot be achieved with organs that are more ‘worn out’ with the passage of time. This means that science suggests that, from a certain age onwards, it is advisable to stop drinking alcohol, and scientific evidence behind It never stops giving us reasons to do so if we want to have a better old age and with fewer diseases. A structural change. The first and most critical factor that alters our relationship with alcohol as we age is drastic change in body composition. As we age over 65, the body experiences a progressive loss of lean muscle mass and, crucially, a reduction in total body water. This is vital, because alcohol is a substance that is diluted in water, and that is why, as there is less water in the body to dilute it, the same amount of alcohol ingested by a 65-year-old person will result in a significantly higher concentration than in a younger person of the same weight and gender. We go slower. Added to this is the slowing down of liver metabolism, since the aging liver produces Less of the key enzymes responsible for breaking down ethanolwhich means that alcohol remains in the bloodstream longer, prolonging its toxic effect. The direct result is drunkenness that comes much sooner with less alcohol, drastically increasing the risk of loss of balance, falls and bone fractures. Something that at that age is almost a sentence for the muscle loss that it entails. Neurotoxicity. If we start talking now about the direct effects that alcohol has on the different organs of our body, the first obligatory stop is the brainwhere one of the most severe impacts of continued consumption occurs. Here alcohol acts as a neurotoxin that accelerates neuronal lossa process that already occurs naturally due to aging, but that ethanol multiplies. Prestigious neurologists such as Richard Restak emphasize that neuronal damage after the age of 65 is irreversible, recommending total abstinence here. This joins reviews carried out in Spain that demonstrate that alcohol accelerates cognitive deterioration, the impact being even more serious with distilled beverages compared to fermented ones. In memory. But the loss of brain matter, which can lead to severe dementia, is also accompanied by loss of memory and control of what we do. Cohort studies, such as the NEDICES projecthave linked high alcohol consumption in people over 65 years of age with notably lower neuropsychological scores. Furthermore, the loss of motor coordination explains why 60% of serious falls in the elderly they are related to alcohol consumption. Multi-organ damage. Continued consumption in the elderly is not limited to one organ, but causes cascading systemic failure aggravated by oxidative stress, which is the great enemy of aging. A recent cross-sectional study made in Extremadura With more than 2,800 participants, it was demonstrated that in men over 65 years of age, the prevalence of risky consumption reaches an alarming 30%, being strongly associated with increased cholesterol, hypertension and cardiovascular risk such as a heart attack. The heart. Undoubtedly, you suffer the onslaught of alcohol-induced hypertension and an increased risk of arrhythmias, while blood vessels lose their elasticity. This makes it much easier to have high voltage spikes that lead to a stroke, for example. In the liver. Without a doubt, one of the most affected organs, being the ‘factory’ that is in charge of processing all the alcohol that enters the body. Chronic toxicity here not only increases the risk of cirrhosis, but, due to poor metabolism, prolonged exposure to toxic metabolites exponentially increases the risk of developing cancer, especially liver, breast and colorectal. Something that responds to the greater damage suffered by DNA in the elderly who continue to drink with some frequency. In the intestine. Perhaps one of the most recent notes we have is the erosion caused by alcohol in the intestinal mucosaand therefore to the microbiota found here. Little by little we are seeing that the microbiota is more important than we think, and it has been shown that its loss allows endotoxins to pass into the bloodstream, favoring chronic inflammation of different parts of the body. Something that is linked to many other effects. Without going any further, this inflammation aggravates the osteoporosis that is already marked at this age, damages the pancreas and causes an accelerated shortening of cellular telomeres, which translates into premature biological aging and a fragile immune system incapable of fighting respiratory infections effectively. The silent trap. A critical factor that is often overlooked is the polypharmacysince the vast majority of people over the age of 65 take several prescription medications daily. It is not uncommon to see a person with a pill for stress, diabetes, pain, to reduce fluid retention… The problem is that combining some of these pills, such as anti-inflammatories such as ibuprofen, increases the risk of suffering severe digestive bleeding. Images | Vlad Sargu In Xataka | The work ethic has been selling for years that getting up at 05:00 AM is good. Science is clear that absolutely

Spain is going to continue fishing for eels until we have no more eels to catch

by

A few days ago, the Ministry for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge he took to the Wild Flora and Fauna Committee the proposal to include the European eel as “in danger of extinction” in the Spanish Catalog of Endangered Species. That, in practice, means prohibiting fishing and marketing. Also that of the eel, its juvenile phase. As expected, the world championship has been messed up. And not because there is debate on the topic. For many years, scientists They are clear that the eel is on the limit. In fact, there are many communities that already prohibit fishing (some for more than a decade). And yet most of it fell this Tuesday the proposal. Galicia, Asturias, Cantabria, Murcia, the Valencian Community and the Balearic Islands, where the species is exploited, have voted against. Others such as Catalonia, the Basque Country, Navarra, La Rioja, Extremadura, Aragón, Castilla y León, Madrid, Castilla-La Mancha and Andalusia have abstained. It is the third failed attempt after those in 2020 and 2024. This has many readings, but the most obvious is simple: as Miguel Clavero says“Spain will continue fishing for eels until they become extinct.” It is also the most realistic. Because yes, a working group has been created between the Ministry and the CCAA to share data and discuss measures; but experts assume that it is just a way to save time. The thing is, it’s time we don’t have. And why isn’t eel fishing prohibited? The economic context is also simple: this fish moves little volume, but a lot of value. This is a premium product that generates a lot of money. For this reason, the sector is only willing to accept temporary moratoriums (such as this year in Euskadi), despite the fact that since the 60s the population has fallen by more than 90%. A problem that is also European. And that’s the other part of the problem, of course: lgovernance is fragmentedthe decline It is multifactorial (fishing, yes; but also river barriers, pollution, loss of habitats…) and the ‘revival’ of anti-scientific discourses when they touch the pocket. And without meaning to, that is what has turned this issue into a central issue for the entire European continent. After all, the extinction of the European eel is the chronicle of a death foretold. But also a portrait of our helplessness, of our inability to conserve what is valuable in our rivers. It is a portrait of ourselves. Image | Phil Robston In Xataka | China has mobilized 1,400 fishing boats to create a 300-kilometer “barrier.” Not good news for Taiwan

There is a graphic that explains the atrocity that has occurred in Grazalema. And it helps to understand why the people continue to be evicted.

by

And that graph is Nahel Belgherzea meteorologist who covers extreme events throughout the world and who, despite being used to them, has described what has occurred in the mountains of Cádiz as “hydrologically absurd.” “Hydrologically absurd”? It is. Grazalema, according to available datahas received more than 2,000 mm of rain in the last 20 days alone. That is, more than a normal year of rain and we are at the beginning of February. It is not surprising that Spanish reservoirs accumulate 43,341 hm³ of water; that is, 5,634 hm³ more than last week. As of today, Spain is at an astonishing 77.34% of its total capacity. And, in fact, today, many reservoirs continue to drain before the arrival of more water. What do you see in the graph? The graph in question is very simple: it is the accumulated rainfall for the Grazalema station. On the Additionally, in gray, you can see the cumulates from other years. And, as you can see, the curve is almost vertical: it has rained unspeakably in a few days. Compared to normal years (when the river grows in spring and winter), there is now a totally enormous water boom. Something unprecedented. And, precisely that, is what is forcing CISC technicians to continue reviewing the Grazalema aquifer. While the City Council insists that the return of the residents will take place when a safe return can be “guaranteed”, researchers from the Geological and Mining Institute of Spain (IGME) they are still on the ground. The aquifer, a geological structure 18 square kilometers in size, has been put under enormous pressure and authorities are focused on ruling out the slightest risk of collapse before the town’s inhabitants can return. The Junta de Andalucía, in fact, has been warning for days that it can go for a long time. Image | Nahel Belgherze In Xataka | Desertification is devouring southern Spain: Extremadura and Murcia face a completely dry future

Motorola has perfectly understood what it needs to continue growing: expensive mobile phones

by

If there is a manufacturer putting all its efforts to achieve a premium product that is far from its competition (for better or worse), it is Motorola. The smartphone market has taken giant steps in the last five years with the arrival of AIthe folding mobiles and recently high density batteries. A tug of war between Asian manufacturers and the rest of the world, with two clearly marked identities: China betting everything on the latest technology and the rest being more conservative. Along the way, we have a Motorola (now owned by the Chinese Lenovo, but maintaining its identity as an American company), striving to achieve a premium identity, trying along the way not be a clone of the rest of your rivals. And, at this CES 2026, we have two good proofs of this. The missing fold. It started RoyoleSamsung consolidated it, and manufacturers such as OPPO and Xiaomi refined the concept. The Fold-type folding devices are still alive as an alternative for users who want a pocket tablet, and Motorola has wanted to fully enter this field. A new Razr. Motorola Razr Fold is the name that the company has given to its first book-type folding, after years of betting on the clamshell type. The bet is clear: 8.09-inch AMOLED external screen, with 2K resolution and LTPO type technology. 6.56-inch AMOLED external screen. Triple camera system: 50 megapixel Lytia main sensor, 50 megapixel ultra wide angle and three optical magnification telephoto lens and also 50 megapixels. 32-megapixel external and 20-megapixel internal selfie camera. Bet on Pantone colors: Blackened Blue and Lily White. Optimized software with adaptive interface. Support for the Moto Pen Ultra pen. Little secrets to discover. Motorola has not revealed the rest of the specifications, but we can sense one of the best Qualcomm processors inside (Snapdragon 8 Gen 5), as this chip manufacturer is one of Motorola’s main partners. It will not be able to come short on memory configurations if it wants to be competitive, and the big unknown is reserved for the battery, one of the critical points in clamshell-type folding devices, with panels larger than 8 inches. The premiumization of Motorola. Xiaomi was clear that to make money it had to put cheap mobile phones in the background and bet on premium terminals. Something that Motorola also knows very well. For some time now, Motorola’s main bet is on your Edge familyolder brothers of the Moto G classics. Mid-premium range and high range with the software as the main star feature and an alliance with Pantone so that the design is a key point and differential compared to its competition. Edge, Edge Fusion, Edge Pro… And, to go one step further, The Signature family arrives now. Motorola Signature. Motorola’s new high-end is not an Edge Pro, it is a Signature. The design tells us that this model inherits quite a bit of essence from the Edge (it is practically identical to the brand’s latest models), but betting on even more ambitious specs. The latest Qualcomm chip. Memories up to 1 TB. Zoom up to 100x. 5,200mAh silicon-carbon battery. 6.8-inch screen with peak brightness of up to 6,200 nits. A key year. 2026 will be a very important year for Motorola. Its year-on-year growth in shipments was 24% in 2024. Still far from the global podium, but managing to gain a foothold little by little. Image | Motorola In Xataka | Motorola Edge 60 Fusion, analysis: I had been waiting for years for a worthy heir to the legendary Moto G. I just found it

“Free-range” eggs are no longer free-range due to the confinement of the hens. But they continue to pay much more

by

Eggs have been in the news in recent weeks for the price increase they have been experiencing for the spread of bird flu. But now it returns to the front line of information as a result of a notice that has launched the OCU which would point out that every time we buy eggs we may be being deceived. The types of eggs. When we go to the supermarket to get a tray of eggs, there are several types available depending on the type of care that the hen that laid them has had. The cheapest are from chickens that are locked in the chicken coop, but then there are ‘free-range’ eggs, which in theory are from hens that do go outside and are code 1. And the same thing happens with eggs marked as ‘organic’, which have a very specific diet. The price of freedom. Choosing one type of egg or another means paying an extra price for these special conditions. And it’s not a few cents, as the OCU itself points outsince the ground egg right now has an average price of €3.25 per dozen. But free-range eggs are priced at €4.13 per dozen, which is an extra 88 cents per dozen. All this for the premise of animal welfare: a chicken that has access to the outdoors and pecks in the field without being in an enclosed coop. Something also justified by the increased cost that this entails. The problem. We must remember that for a few weeks we have been immersed in an avian flu epidemic that affects the chickens that produce these eggs. To try to contain it, the Ministry of Agriculture He ordered all chickens to be locked up starting in November.. But… Has this price difference disappeared? The OCU is what is being complained about: in practice, producers are selling a product under the conditions of a chicken, enclosed as if they were truly free-range eggs. On top of that, logically respecting the price increase that this crisis has caused. European regulations. Is it legal to sell something that is not? It is the question we must ask ourselves when we pay for free-range eggs when in fact they are not. To understand it we must go to EU Delegated Regulation 2023/2465. This European regulation contemplates a kind of “grace period” for producers in cases of force majeure, such as this epidemic. The law allows the designation of “free-range egg” to be maintained for a period of up to 16 weeks, even if the hens have to be confined. The objective of the rule is to protect farmers: to prevent them from losing their certification and market overnight due to a health crisis beyond their control. Lack of transparency. For the OCU, the problem in this case is not the certification that accompanies the egg, but rather the little information that a consumer has who does not know what they are buying. And from their study, after analyzing the seven major brands on the market, none of them report on the labeling of the change in breeding conditions. What is requested. The consumer organization is not asking for the confinement to be lifted, which is necessary to maintain the epidemic, but for information. They argue that there are precedents for rapid adaptation such as when the war in Ukraine began when sunflower oil shortage had to force the industry to change the labeling. All this to make changes to the ingredients in the oil. Paying the same. But the most important thing is that a surplus of almost one euro on average per dozen eggs is being paid for being free-range. When in reality they are the same eggs that are cheaper in supermarkets. This makes us raise the possibility that although the denomination is maintained (although with more information about what is happening), the price will be equated with those of the lower category, since in both situations we have chickens locked up. Images | Jakub Kapusnak In Xataka | In the 1970s, scientists realized that large animals should suffer more from cancer. And that wasn’t the case

OpenAI knows that it needs to continue generating memes and virals. That’s why she’s willing to pay Disney a lot of money for her content.

by

Disney and OpenAI have announced a three-year licensing agreement that will allow users to create short videos featuring more than 200 Disney, Marvel, Pixar and Star Wars characters through soraOpenAI’s AI video generation platform. The operation includes an investment of $1 billion by the Mickey Mouse company in the AI ​​startup. Change of sight. Disney has gone from sue AI platforms like Midjourney for unauthorized use of its characters to become OpenAI’s first major content licensing partner. The company also sent a cease and desist letter to Character.AI in September for the same reason. This change in strategy gives clues to Disney’s move, choosing to monetize and control the use of its intellectual property instead of trying to stop it completely. What users can do. Starting in early 2026, according to OpenAI, Sora users will be able to generate short videos for social networks with characters such as Mickey Mouse, Iron Man, Darth Vader, Elsa, Simba or Groot, as well as iconic costumes, accessories, vehicles and settings from these franchises. From ChatGPT, users will also be able to create static images of these same characters using text instructions. The agreement expressly excludes the faces and voices of real actors. The business model behind the agreement. OpenAI need viral content to maintain the attention of users, and in recent months it has made it clear to us that this route is its current main source of income to attract more users who want to go through the hoops of its subscription plans. Disney characters are precisely the type of content that fits this vision. That is why the company is willing to pay to license this intellectual property. Disney as a corporate client of OpenAI. Beyond the license, Disney will become a “major customer” of OpenAI, under the terms of the agreement. The company will deploy ChatGPT to its employees and use OpenAI APIs to build new tools, products and experiences, including functionality for Disney+. In fact, perhaps the most striking thing about the agreement is that a curated selection of videos generated by Sora It will be available to play from the streaming platform. Investment and purchase options. Disney will provide $1 billion in equity investment and will receive warrants to acquire additional stakes in OpenAI in the future. The transaction is still subject to negotiation of definitive agreements and approvals prior to closing. Commitments on responsible use. Both companies say in the joint statement that they will maintain “robust controls” to prevent the generation of illegal or harmful content, respect the rights of content creators and protect the use of people’s voice and image. OpenAI is further committed to implementing age-appropriate policies and other safety measures on the service. The vision of the CEOs. Bob Iger, CEO of Disney, assures that “the rapid advance of artificial intelligence marks an important moment for our industry” and defends that collaboration will allow “extending the reach of our narrative in a thoughtful and responsible way.” For his part, Sam Altman, head of OpenAI, affirms that the agreement “shows how AI companies and creative leaders can work together responsibly to advance innovation.” What’s coming now? It remains to be seen if this licensing model extends to other studios and large content owners. Everything indicates that it certainly will not be the only large company to take advantage of this type of agreement. The litmus test will be when all the content in Sora is released and if it gains enough traction on networks for OpenAI to consider it a small victory in its quest for make ChatGPT a profitable tool for your business. In Xataka | Quietly, a country is becoming a technological power thanks to data centers: India

If the question is why we continue to be drunk on airplanes, the answer is simple: because it is a business.

by

We may all be more sensitive to flying from 9/11 attacksbut so is the feeling that every time there are more altercations inside airplanes with a common denominator: the alcohol. Scenes of drunk passengers causing delays, fights, vomiting or even attempts to open doors in mid-flight they are already part of the collective imagination of air travel. The question is almost obligatory: is there really no solution? An increasingly visible phenomenon. They remembered on CNN the recent case of the man who, completely intoxicated, forced to evict a plane in Chicago after vomiting during filming is just one example among hundreds of incidents documented year after year. In the United States alone, a review of more than 1,600 reports from the federal system revealed an incontestable pattern: alcohol in almost all levels of bad behavior, from arguments and disobedience to physical and sexual attacks. And although public perception confirms the problem (more than half of passengers in the United Kingdom claims to have dealt with with drunk travelers), there is still no consensus on how to stop it. Safety in the air. Plus: cabin crews operate in a space that is, by definition, a metal tube thousands of meters above the ground. They are the ones who must manage both the emotional tension of passengers and the consequences of alcohol mixed with fear of flying, long delays or increasingly narrow cabins. Without the ability to expel anyone mid-flight and with companies that do not always support their decisions, the attendants become in the first and last containment line. Although they receive de-escalation training, they face a type of passenger that did not exist a decade ago: the traveler who mixes alcohol with medications, stimulants or recreational substances, generating episodes of aggressiveness that are difficult to predict and control. Distribution of blame. And here comes the crux, because no one wants to assume the root of the problem. Airlines blame airports for allow consumption unlimited in bars and restaurants prior to boarding, pointing that they hardly sell alcohol on board, especially on short flights. The airports, in turn, point out that their role is commercial, not disciplinary, and that responsibility falls on the air operators. And within the flights themselves, the auxiliaries They blame gate agents for not blocking access to obviously intoxicated passengers, while pilots denounce that insufficient disciplinary measures are taken against repeat offenders. The fragmentation between ground and air causes each party to offload the problem on another, creating an operational vacuum that allows the situation to repeat itself flight after flight. The economic dimension. Behind the debate lies a factor that possibly outweighs any security protocol: alcohol, whether we like it or not, is one of the most lucrative businesses of the aeronautical industry. In airports it generates large margins for shops and restaurants, while in the cabin it is used as an incentive in higher categories. Precisely for this reason, rarely clear data is provided on income derived from its sale, and any attempt to limit consumption before boarding is met with resistance from both airport operators and airlines. The result is a permanent contradiction: The industry recognizes that alcohol causes problems, but depends on it financially. In other words, alcohol (and as a consequence, drunks) “interest(s)”, but with a small mouth. Public pressure. The number of passengers support restrictive measures It grows as incidents go viral and attract media attention. Some proposals already have a favorable majority: drinking limits at airports, breathalyzer controls before boarding or even total restrictions on certain routes. Meanwhile, regulators are toughening penalties: the FAA imposed its largest fine in history (more than $80,000) to an extremely violent passenger, and the airlines are expanding their ban lists to repeat travelers. However, the approach remains reactive, not preventive, and each solution encounters resistance in the chain of interests that sustains global air tourism. Between I want and I don’t want. Thus, the problem of the drunk passenger does not arise only from alcohol, but from a fragmented system where no one wants to bear the cost of controlling it. Airports that maximize profits, airlines that fear losing revenue, overloaded crews, regulators who act after the fact and frustrated passengers who see a drink as the instant answer to discomfort. Everyone agrees that there is a problem, but no one wants to be who imposes the solution. The result is a sky increasingly tensewhere safety depends on the professionalism of the crews and a kind of unstable balance that is broken too easily. Image | Instagram, X In Xataka | “This is the last time I pay 10 euros for a gin and tonic”: the anger of British tourists at the price of alcohol in Spain In Xataka | The “tourist cages” arrive in Valencia: holiday gentrification in Spain goes up a gear

nutrition remains unclear and we continue to improvise

by

In the new Frankenstein of Guillermo del Toro there is a silent detail that is repeated: Victor Frankenstein—played by Oscar Isaac—drinks milk. As a child, as an adult, at family dinners, even at a solemn moment when you are presented with a bottle of milk as if it were wine. In Gothic language, this gesture symbolizes innocence, purity, duality. But beyond the metaphor, something draws attention: that silent debate that touches our daily lives. Victor drinks milk without hesitation. Us, not so much. Whole? Semi? Skimmed? Because, unlike in movies, in the real world not even science is clear about what milk we should be drinking. Welcome to the dairy maze. An everyday food in an impossible debate. The debate is not trivial. We are talking about a food that is consumed daily, that is part of official recommendations, that is linked to cardiovascular risk and that even enters school programs. If one reviews the most cited studies, the sensation is peculiar: it is as if science described three parallel realities about the same food. In a recent large Norwegian study Those who drank more whole milk had a 7% higher risk of dying from cardiovascular disease. However, another study, published in Science Direct within the CARDIA studyfound just the opposite: those who drank more whole milk had a 24% lower risk of arterial calcification, an early marker of coronary heart disease. Yes, one study says “more risk” and another says “less risk.” It is not a typo. The confusion continues. A 2016 clinical trial showed that a blood pressure-lowering diet worked just as well using full-fat dairy as it did with low-fat dairy. And the studies on weight do not provide clarity either: the 2020 meta-studies, together with previous studies, agree that whole milk It is not more fattening than the skimmed one, despite having more calories. In fact, the Framingham Heart Study, published in Nature, relate greater dairy consumption —including yogurt—with less weight gain and long-term waist. So what are we left with? The magic—and misleading—word: “neutral.” Into this chaos comes Harvard to launch another narrative twist. According to its researchers, dairy products appear to be “neutral” for cardiovascular health. That is, they do not increase the risk of heart attack or stroke, but they do not reduce it either, when compared to the average diet. Now, Harvard adds a key nuance: “neutral” does not mean “healthy.” It only indicates that dairy products are as unhealthy as the rest of the common foods in the Western diet, such as refined cereals, soft drinks or processed meats. If instead of comparing them with these, we compare them with vegetable proteins (nuts, soy, legumes), the balance clearly leans towards the vegetable options, with less cardiovascular risk and lower mortality. So the scientific picture, for now, is anything but clear. Why so much contradiction? The mess is not accidental. Science does not contradict itself for the sake of it; It does this because the studies measure different things and compare foods that are not equivalent. For example, both in harvard as Washington Post They explain that many studies that conclude that dairy products are “neutral” compare them with very unhealthy foods: sugary soft drinks, processed meats, products with refined flour… It is easy to “look healthy” when the rival is an industrial sausage. But if the rival is nuts or soybeans, the results change radically. Another factor is the call dairy matrix. Cheese, for example, has saturated fats, yes, but also bacteria, proteins, vitamins and polar lipids that can modify how the body absorbs that fat. Whole milk contains compounds whose function we still don’t fully understand: some studies suggest that they may reduce inflammation or decrease intestinal absorption of cholesterol. This complexity means that the same nutrient—saturated fat—does not behave the same in dairy products as it does in meat. In addition, the genetic variant must be taken into account. The ability to digest lactose varies depending on the population. In northern Europe only 5% are intolerant; in Asia, up to 95% are. This implies that the same food can have very different digestive, metabolic and inflammatory effects depending on the person. One last detail of nothing. Most studies are observational, not experimental. That is, they detect associations, not causes. If people who drink skim milk usually do so because they want to control their weight, their level of exercise, their overall diet, or their risk factors also influence the results. And vice versa. Sometimes, more than studying milk, what is studied is the lifestyle of those who drink it. This battle is the milk. In Spain there is also a small shift taking place. After decades in which skimmed milk was the almost mandatory option for anyone who wanted to “take care of themselves”, whole milk has begun to regain prestige. Nutritionists and disseminators they have been pointing out for months something that was previously overlooked: that dairy fat not only provides flavor, but also satiety and fat-soluble vitamins such as A and D, which are lost when the fat is eliminated and then attempted to be reintroduced artificially. As explained by nutritionists cited by Infosalus“whole milk retains all its properties,” while skimmed milk may be more difficult to digest for some people. At the same time, the skim deflates. One could talk about “end of caloric fundamentalism”: that stage when we thought that removing fat was always synonymous with health. Experts now warn that reducing fat does not always compensate if, in return, we lose satiety or end up adding other more caloric or sugary foods to “fill” hunger. Not everything comes from the cow. Meanwhile, plant-based drinks continue their rise, but with important nuances. Mayo Clinic remember that most They have less protein, may include added sugars and, unless fortified, do not match the calcium naturally present in cow’s milk. Soy is the only one that comes close nutritionally, but even so, calcium absorption is lower due to the presence of phytates. Taken together, all sources … 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.