doesnt

The two-finger rule for sunscreen doesn’t fail, but this expert has taken it to the next level

by

At this point in the film, we are all clear about the importance of using sunscreen. Well maybe everyone except Marcos Llorente. The point is that, no matter how much we understand that we must protect ourselves from solar radiation, we do not always know how to do it optimally. For example, the amount of sunscreen is an essential point to which we do not always pay enough attention. It is recommended to use 2 milligrams of sunscreen per square centimeter of skinwhich are equivalent to some 9 teaspoons for the entire body of an average adult. The problem is that it is difficult to measure in parts (the face, arms, legs, etc.). Therefore, for the face there is the two-finger rule. We should cover the inner surface of our index and middle fingers with a line of sunscreen to know we are using enough. Many people already do it, but they run into a problem: maybe it’s fine for the beach, but for everyday life it’s too much. Fortunately, there are solutions, as you have explained. in an article for New Scientist the skin cancer expert at the QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute in Australia Rachel Neale. The key is to use two layers If we put two fingers of sunscreen directly on our face we will see that it becomes very loaded with product. If the cream contains physical filterswe may possibly become a whitish ghost. If they are chemicals, it may not look white, but we will notice it heavy. Therefore, Neale’s advice is very simple: Apply sunscreen in two layers. She says that she normally puts on half the recommended amount of sunscreen, spreads it well, and moves on to do another task, like brushing her teeth. Once this task is completed, the first layer should have already been absorbed, so move on to the second. With the two finger rulethe process is very simple. We covered a finger in cream, applied it, waited, and then applied another finger covered in sun cream. What about the amount of sunscreen on the rest of the body? The two-finger rule is very comfortable for the face, because it is the part of the body that we protect ourselves most daily, so we don’t need to go looking for a measuring spoon. On the other hand, if we are going to expose the rest of the body, as happens on the beach or the pool, we could use a dessert spoon to calculate the quantities. At least until we learn to do it by eye. We have seen that they are recommended 9 teaspoons for the whole body. To distribute them, we must use two teaspoons for the torso and back, another two for each leg, one for each arm and another for the face, neck and the head. In that case, don’t forget the back of the neck and ears, as they are areas that we sometimes forget about and that burn frequently, leaving them more exposed to skin cancer. Finally, if the feet are going to be exposed, we should invest an extra teaspoon on them. It is important to insist that these amounts are for an average adult. You may need to use more or less, depending on body size. Be that as it may, the key is to put ourselves a thick layer all over the body and, above all, reapply whenever necessary. It is usually recommended to reapply sunscreen every 2 hours or after bathing, sweating, or drying with a towel. In any case, the most intuitive thing is, if you see that your skin is getting too hot and you haven’t finished applying the cream, reapply it just in case. Think that, if you frequently go to the beach or the pool, it is not normal that with a sun cream bottle have for the whole summer. It has happened to all of us, but once you become aware of the appropriate amount of sunscreen you realize that you need several. Images | Magnificent | Isedeh et al In Xataka | Science warns of the dangerous success of anti-suncream hoaxes on TikTok: “Despite being a minority, this content is influential”

The oldest human remains in Antarctica are more than 200 years old. The problem is that it doesn’t make any sense.

by

In 1912, the British explorer Robert Falcon Scott He arrived at the South Pole convinced that he would be the first to set foot on it. There he found an unexpected surprise: a tent with the Norwegian flag and a letter from Roald Amundsen They showed that someone had been more than a month ahead of him. The history of polar exploration is full of “firsts” that, with the passage of time, have ended up being revised. The remains that should not be there. Antarctica has never had a permanent population. When humans arrived on its shores, it was already a continent too cold and isolated to be inhabited without modern technology. That is why it is so disconcerting that the oldest human remains found there belong to a deceased woman. between 1819 and 1825just when the first documented explorations of the continent were just beginning. A half-buried skull. The discovery occurred in 1985, when the Chilean biologist Daniel Torres Navarro found a skull partially buried on Yámana beach, Cape Shirreff. Years later they appeared other scattered bonesincluding a femur, which probably belonged to the same person. Analysis suggests that she was a young woman, possibly of Chilean origin, whose death occurred sometime between 1819 and 1825. The chronology turns the discovery into a puzzle. The problem is not only who that woman was, but when she died. The first confirmed observation of Antarctica is usually attributed to the Russian expedition of Fabian Gottlieb von Bellingshausen in 1820. If the dating of the remains is correct, the woman lived exactly during the period in which the first expeditions were just beginning to approach the continent. This temporal coincidence makes it extremely difficult to explain how he ended up in one of the most inhospitable regions on the planet. The first Russian expedition to Antarctica (1819-1821) The hypotheses and the mystery. Researchers are considering several possibilities. The first suggests that he could be part of a group of seal hunters from the 19th century who abandoned it after his death. The second proposes that she died on board a ship, was buried at sea (as was common then) and that the currents, together with scavenging birds, They would later disperse their remains to the beach where they were found. None of these explanations have been proven and, four decades after the discovery, new remains have still not appeared that would allow us to reconstruct what happened. The alternative. While that enigma remains open, another study invites us to review another of the great certainties about the continent. Researchers at the University of Otago maintain that Polynesian sailors, and in particular the explorer Hui Te Rangiorathey were able to reach the Antarctic waters already in the 7th century. The hypothesis is supported by Maori oral traditions which describe a frozen ocean, large masses of ice and a dark, fog-covered landscape, descriptions that some specialists consider compatible with the Southern Ocean. Between legends and archaeological evidence. The authors of the study make it clear that these traditions do not constitute a definitive demonstration that the Maori ever contemplated Antarctica. However, they do question the idea that the history of the continent began exclusively with European expeditions of the 19th century and claim the role of indigenous traditions in the reconstruction of the great oceanic explorations. If this interpretation ends up being confirmed, the first human contact with the southern tip of the planet would be more than a thousand years ago to what usually appears in history books. Two investigations that force us to look with different eyes. The two studies They speak of very different times, but they converge on the same conclusion: we still know surprisingly little about the first human contacts with the most isolated continent on Earth. One suggests that Polynesian navigators could have arrived much earlier than previously believed. The other remembers that the oldest human remains found there belong to a woman whose presence remains extraordinarily difficult to explain. Two centuries after his death, the biggest mystery is not who he was, but why he appeared on the only continent where, quite simply, no one expected to find it. Image | US Embassy, Bourrichon In Xataka | The map of Antarctica has been made for decades. And yet we just found something that changes what we knew about her. In Xataka | Antarctica was practically the last corner of the Earth immune to touristification. That’s ending

The US has put into service a new anti-satellite weapon. The most striking thing is that it doesn’t shoot anything

by

For decades, when we talked about weapons against satellites, the mental image was almost always the same: a missile, an impact and more space junk. But space warfare doesn’t always need an explosion to be effective. Sometimes it is enough to act on what we do not see: the link that connects a satellite with those who depend on it. That is what makes the US’s latest step especially striking. We are not facing a system designed to shoot down an object in orbit, but rather one that aims at something less visible and much more everyday in any modern military operation: communications. Attack communications. US Space Force Combat Forces Command operationally accepted on June 8 to Meadowlands, a new addition to its family of electromagnetic warfare systems. It’s not an isolated program: the Space Force describes it as an upgrade to Counter Communications System 10.2 and says it can detect, deny, disrupt and degrade adversary capabilities in active defense of joint force objectives. Its operation remains in the hands of Mission Delta 3, Space Electromagnetic Warfare. The key is in the sign. A satellite is not just an object in orbit, but a chain of links, antennas, ground stations and users that need to communicate with it. Meadowlands acts on that less visible part of the system. L3Harris, program contractor, describes the Counter Communications System as a deployable ground platform aimed at denying communications from satellites in orbit, and presents Meadowlands as a more compact and mobile version. A change of era. Meadowlands fits into a broader transformation of conflict in space. The Secure World Foundation classify capabilities counterspace in several families, from co-orbital capabilities and direct ascent missiles to electronic warfare, directed energy and cyber capabilities. That distinction matters because not all of them seek to destroy a satellite. Some, such as electromagnetic warfare, seek to degrade services, limit communications or alter access to a space capability during a specific operation. Space Force itself places it in that first invisible line of the electromagnetic spectrum. Looking at the precedents. When an anti-satellite weapon physically destroys its target, the problem does not end with the impact: a cloud of debris begins that can continue orbiting for years. The US Space Command assured that the Russian direct ascent test against Cosmos 1408, in 2021, produced more than 1,500 traceable pieces. NASA had already documented something similar after the Chinese test against Fengyun-1C, in 2007, with more than 2,000 fragments of about 10 centimeters or more identified. Meadowlands belongs to another logic: act without adding more junk to the orbital environment. The paradox. The less Meadowlands looks like a conventional anti-satellite weapon, the better you understand why it matters. Its value is not in converting a satellite into orbital debris, but in acting on the layer that allows it to be used in a real operation. This difference helps explain the US movement and also the fundamental change that we are seeing in the military space. The battlefield is not only in the orbit or in the objects that travel through it. It is also in the signs, in the links and in the ability to maintain them when they are most needed. Images | United States Space Force In Xataka | “We are going to see more and more cases like this.” There are six mysterious spheres on a beach in Australia, and everything indicates that they came from space

There’s a reason China doesn’t fire nuclear missiles from its most dangerous submarine. You just broke that rule

by

The greatest strength of a nuclear submarine is not its firepower, but that no one knows where it is. This ability to remain hidden for months has made these ships the most important pillar of nuclear deterrence since the Cold War and explains why each movement related to them is analyzed with a magnifying glass. It wasn’t just any test. China has insisted that the launch was part of its annual training and that it had previously notified the countries of the region. However, few maneuvers generate as much attention as the ballistic missile shot from a strategic nuclear submarine into the Pacific Ocean. Not only that, since it was an action practically unpublished in decades. Beijing had been avoiding a public demonstration of this type for years and, precisely for this reason, the test has been interpreted as a message directed far beyond the military exercise itself. The letter that is never shown. Missile submarines are the most discreet and valuable component of any nuclear power. Its main advantage is in remaining hidden for weeks or months, guaranteeing a retaliatory capacity even if the country suffers a first attack. This need to maintain secrecy explains why China has barely made public launches from this type of platform and that each demonstration has enormous strategic weight. The signal was directed to the United States. Although the Chinese authorities they emphasized that the missile carried a training warhead and was not directed against any country, the context tell another story. Western analysts believe that the test was intended to demonstrate that Chinese submarines can now launch very long-range missiles. from nearby areas on its own coasts and continue hitting targets thousands of kilometers away. In other words, Beijing wanted to remind that its maritime deterrence capacity is entering a new phase of maturity. Type 094 Submarine A doctrine designed to reduce risks. Everything indicates that the launch took place from protected waters close to China, a strategy known as “bastion.” Instead of sending its submarines to the center of the Pacific, the idea is to keep them under the cover of national aviation, fleet and anti-missile systems while retaining the ability to attack very distant targets. If the new JL-2 or JL-3 missiles They fulfill the benefits attributed to them by analysts, these submarines no longer need to travel too far from home to reach US territory. Nuclear expansion continues. Because the test comes in full modernization process of Chinese strategic forces. Beijing is building new silos for intercontinental missiles, deploying more advanced generations of land-based missiles and increasing the number of ballistically capable nuclear submarines. Pentagon estimates suggest that the Chinese arsenal could exceed a thousand nuclear warheads before 2030a transformation that is changing the military balance in the Indo-Pacific. The Pacific responds worried. Australia, Japan, New Zealand and Taiwan reacted criticizing a pitch which they consider destabilizing for the region, despite having received prior notification. The criticism was not directed solely at the missile, but in the context of a rapid increase in Chinese military capabilities and an increasingly visible naval presence in the Pacific. For many governments, the test represents a new step in a show of force strategy that had already included tests of intercontinental missiles and naval maneuvers increasingly distant from Chinese coasts. The real novelty was not the missile. It is known that China has had ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons for years. What is really new is that he has decided show publicly how one of its strategic submarines can use them, something it had almost completely avoided until now. In fact, the demonstration increases the credibility of your ability of retaliation, forces its rivals to assume that these submarines are fully operational and confirms that Beijing is willing to use its military tests as another tool of political and strategic deterrence. Image | PLA In Xataka | Satellite images leave no doubt: China has launched an underwater creature into the sea that defies naval engineering In Xataka | From cultivating the field to sailing underwater: the Chinese farmer who makes homemade submarines in his free time

What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger. Especially if you are a bacteria on Mars

by

Today, astronauts They usually quarantine before traveling to space to ensure that they do not carry with them any unwanted pathogenic microorganisms. This is for two reasons. On the one hand, it prevents them from getting sick at such a distance from a doctor who can treat them. On the other hand, we do not know how these microorganisms may behave beyond our planet, so it is better not to carry any. The problem is that, when lunar and Martian colonizations arrive, it will not be so easy to make this type of controls. Sooner or later it is likely that some pathogenic bacteria will reach there, so it is important to know what we should expect. Several studies have been done in this regard, but one of the most interesting and recent is the doctoral thesis of astrobiologist Tommaso Zaccaria, from Radboud University. In this thesisstudies how four species of bacteria would behave on Mars. Thus, he discovers that not only could they survive. They could also become much more dangerous to humans. Four pathogenic bacteria. The study was carried out with four species of non-extremophilic pathogenic bacteria. That is, disease-causing bacteria that are not naturally prepared to resist extreme conditions. Those chosen were Klebsiella pneumoniae, Serratia marcescens, Burkholderia cepacia and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. First, Zaccaria exposed them to a simulated Martian environment, with conditions such as very low pressure, desiccation, very high ultraviolet radiation and high concentrations of perchlorates. There were two that held up especially well: Klebsiella pneumoniae and Serratia marcescens. For this reason, they were chosen for a second phase of the research, in which they were exposed to human immune cells. The results were quite worrying. Martian superbacteria. When exposed to bacteria that had remained in Martian conditions, it was seen that the immune cells lost their ability to produce cytokines, proteins that are part of the defensive response. They also didn’t produce as many reactive oxygen species, which are also produced as a result of an inflammatory immune reaction. In short, it seems that Martianized bacteria become much more elusive for the human immune system. The reasons. Zaccaria thinks that, in part, the bacteria’s resistance is due to the influence of the martian regolith. And it has nooks and crannies where water can accumulate that would help with desiccation. In addition, it protects them against ultraviolet radiation. At the same time, they themselves develop resistance mechanisms, which help them defend themselves against Martian inclemencies, but also against the human immune system. They become superbugs. The regolith doesn’t help at all. We have already seen that the regolith becomes a protector of bacteria. But the thing doesn’t stop there. In his study, Zaccaria exposed both live mice and human epithelial cells to simulated lunar and Martian regolith. Thus, it was seen that regolith damages the epithelial cells that normally cover the airways and, in addition, enhances inflammation and the activation of genes for mucus formation and pulmonary fibrosis. Let us remember that one of the bacteria that survives Martian conditions is causing pneumonia. That the regolith sensitizes the lungs does not help at all. Although it should be noted that the lunar regolith turned out to be worse than the Martian one. The effects are not comparable. ‘Klebsiella pneumoniae’ Heroin yeasts. Finally, this scientist has verified how Martian conditions affect eukaryotic microorganisms. Bacteria are prokaryotes because they do not have a delimited nucleus. Yeasts, for their part, are eukaryotic microorganisms. One of the yeasts tested in the study, Rhodotorula frigidalcoholisshowed great resistance to Martian conditions. It is capable of stopping its cell cycle and repairing DNA, so that dangerous changes do not continue to spread from one cell to another. Learning more about this mechanism could help us protect ourselves in our future as space colonizers. After all, our cells are eukaryotic. This doesn’t end here. Zaccaria wants to study some bacterial defense mechanisms, such as the formation of biofilms or the synthesis of certain pigments. In addition, he hopes to be able to analyze how Martian conditions affect bacteria that are beneficial, such as those of the intestinal microbiota. With all this, we will be able to have a much more precise photograph to prevent the possible evils of future colonizers. When quarantines are not enough, it will be better to have a well-researched action plan. Image | NASA | Ajay Kumar Chaurasiya In Xataka | Chernobyl was filled with mushrooms after the nuclear accident. Thanks to them we discovered a “new form of photosynthesis”

when AI doesn’t free you from work, but instead creates a new task that ends up exhausting you more

by

Imagine that you hire someone to help you manage your email. Of course, the first week you have to explain to him how you like him filter messages and tell you the most urgent thing. The second week, you correct the mistakes he is making and, for the third week, you have to explain again what you already taught him the first week because he forgot the instructions. At the end of the month, you have a helper, but it takes longer than before because not only do you have to be aware of what he is doing, but you also have to manage your email. That is, in essence, what is happening right now with AI at work, according to the report. Work AI Index of the Glean Institute, carried out by researchers from the universities of Stanford, Berkeley and Notre Dame. According to their findings, employees spend an average of 6.4 hours per week making AI work. Almost one day of work lost every week. Time is not saved, it is transformed. 87% of workers who participated in the study acknowledge that they use AI at work. Of these, 75% affirm that AI makes them more productivesaving them approximately 11 hours per week with automation alone. However, only 13% of companies claim to obtain a real increase in productivity. The gap between what the individual perceives and what the companies’ results show is enormous, and the report has an explanation: those hours do not disappear, they are only redirected towards a new layer of work that no one was taking into account. The authors have called this new task botsitting (a play on words that translates as “bot care”) which consists of little more than “AI kangaroo” to give context to the tool, review errors in the results it generates, relaunch prompts that do not go well and clean up results that seem correct, but are actually full of invented data or hallucinations. As Rebecca Hinds, director of the Work AI Institute, describes, this guardianship is “often tedious and exhausting work”, which no one measures or rewards, so the time that AI saves ends up being a loan that you have to return a few hours later. Too many tools and context switches. The researchers highlight that part of this excess time spent using AI not only comes from reviewing its results but also from how each tool is used. 77% of respondents use multiple AI tools each week, and a third of participants combine four or more. Each jump from one app to another has a cost of time which is rarely countedbut that implies repeating the same instructions or rewriting the prompt on another system because the previous model did not deliver the expected result. Nearly half of workers (46.5%) have to jump between two or more AI tools to complete a single task. Researchers call it the “toggle tax”, the cognitive tax of constantly changing context. Harvard Business Review already calculated the cognitive cost of changing applications and the consulting firm McKinsey calculated that workers waste an average of almost two hours a day searching for information between tools, inboxes and chats. AI, which is sold as the panacea of ​​productivityhas only added a new layer to that chaos instead of reducing it. Of the botsitting to the botshitting. The study found that when the worker spends too much time fixing AI bugs and maintains its delivery deadlines, begins to skip reviewing the results, generating something that the report has called botshitting or “bot crap” which would be delivering work generated by AI without having previously verified. 69% of the participants admitted to having done this at least on occasion. The consequences go beyond the quality of the work itself, when that content reaches the next link in the production chain. without anyone having reviewed itsomeone who did not produce it you have to clean it. That is, both the cost and the time are transferred to another person, but you don’t save that much as it seems. To no one’s surprise, more AI doesn’t solve the problem. Bob Sutton, professor emeritus at Stanford and founding member of the Work AI Institute who produced this report, has pointed out On other occasions, one of the solutions usually taken from management positions when a process generates friction is to add more of that element. In this case, trying to solve a problem of misuse of AI…with more AI. The data in the report suggests that the organizations that are ahead are not those that use AI the most. They are those that have built what the authors call “human infrastructure.” 53% of workers say that the information they need does not come through their AI systems. In companies where it does arrive, employees are 64% less exhausted and are 52% less likely to deliver works that have not been reviewed. In Xataka | OpenAI assures that AI has not had that much impact on employment. Anthropic believes just the opposite and therein lies the problem Image | Unsplash (Flipsnack)

We don’t know if AI is going to take our jobs. The problem is that whoever is developing the AI ​​doesn’t know it either.

by

The arrival of AI has sown the seed of uncertainty in many sectors putting on the table a question for which, today, no one has a clear answer: Is AI going to take our jobs or not? The most curious thing is that not even those who are developing those models that would replace millions of employees they have a clear answer. Sam Altman and Dario Amodei, heads of OpenAI and Anthropic, have been offering two completely opposite visions for the same issue. After predicting a almost apocalyptic scenarioAltman now says everything will be fine. Amodei, for his part, warns of a very hard blow to employment. The data also does not shed light on the future employment of those who now must choose a career professional. Altman says he was wrong (for the better). Sam Altman, the head of OpenAI, has greatly softened the defeatist speech he had been holding. A while ago I talked about entire job categories that were going to disappear. Now he says something else, although perhaps he does so more conditioned by the IPO of your company than for the certainty of a future with more jobs. According to collected ReutersAltman is “I’m glad I was wrong about this; I thought the elimination of entry-level administrative jobs would have already had a bigger impact than it actually has.” This is a pretty big script twist coming from someone who has been setting the pace for the sector for years. Amodei and Anthropic do not let up. At the other end of the narrative is Anthropic. Its co-founder, Chris Olah, repeated at a conference on ethics and AI in the vatican the same idea as his boss, Dario Amodei, has been defending for a long time. There is a real possibility that AI will replace human work on a large scale. It does not speak of a smooth change or an easy transition. Talk about a serious, and sudden, impact. However, although both talk about the same type of technology and with similar data on the table, their interpretations of what is to come are clearly opposite. Employees were an expense, but AI doesn’t come free. As leaders at major AI companies debate the future of the millions of employees they will replace with AI, companies are beginning to realize that AI It’s not going to be much cheaper either. than an employee. The companies that have opted the most for workforce cuts and increased use of AI are receiving your first billsand they scare. So they have put a stop to the so-called “tokenmaxxing“: pay without limit to use models without measuring the return well. According to collected Business InsiderUber’s chief operating officer said AI costs are increasingly difficult to justify, just after its chief technology officer burned the annual AI budget early. According what was published by The VergeMicrosoft, also began reducing Claude Code licenses among its employees, a cut that Fortune linked to the high cost of massive use of these models. More jobs for programmers and security teams. However, the implementation of AI in companies, far from eliminating jobs, is increasing the demand for certain profiles. According to data from the hiring platform Indeed collected by Axiosvacancies for software engineering positions have grown by 18% in the last year, while total employment falls by 4.3% in the same period. Why is this happening? More code written with AI means more code that someone has to check. Companies continue hiring security analystsauditors and people who validate what the models generate. Automation detects failures at high speed, but prioritizing and fixing them still depends on human judgment. For now, that criterion remains scarceand expensive. Generation Z is not trusting. Without a doubt, those most affected by all this uncertainty are the generation that has just entered the labor market. Without enough experience enough to face the new demands, but too advanced in their professional career to choose another career path. Given all this uncertainty and closed doorsGeneration Z no longer sees AI as an opportunity. He increasingly sees her as a direct threat to his first job, so he has chosen to fight it. A survey According to Gallup, enthusiasm for AI among young people fell 14 points in just one year, and anger towards the technology rose to 31%. And they don’t stop complaining. a survey of Writer together with Workplace Intelligence, pointed out that 44% of Generation Z employees admit to actively sabotaging their company’s AI implementation plans, compared to 29% of the entire workforce. With all this on the table, the only thing clear is that no one has the complete picture about the future of AI in the labor market. Neither those who sell the technology, nor those who use it, nor those who are about to look for their first job. Probably the answer is neither disaster nor total calm, but a little of each, distributed very unevenly depending on the sector and the country. In Xataka | Technology workers have better salaries and an important “but”: more than half fear being replaced by AI Image | Flickr (World Economic Forum/Pascal Bitz, Sandra Blaser), Unsplash (syful islam)

what changes (and what doesn’t) in the new generation of large capsule coffee machines

by

The ecosystem of Nespresso capsule coffee machines changed with the arrival of the Vertuo system. His centrifugation technology (Centrifusion) and barcode reading allowed us to finally distance ourselves from the classic short espresso coffee to embrace long, creamy, American-style cups. Now, with the arrival of the new Nespresso Vertuo UP in the catalogue, the brand is once again shaking up its entry-level range. This model arrives with the promise of polishing the small design errors of its predecessors (the popular Vertuo Next and Vertuo Pop) and offering a more compact and stylish experience. If you are thinking about making the jump to this capsule format or want to renew your old coffee maker, we analyze how they change and which one best suits your kitchen. KRUPS Nespresso Vertuo Up The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Nespresso Krups Vertuo Pop coffee machine The price could vary. We earn commission from these links De’Longhi – Nespresso De’Longhi Vertuo Next capsule coffee machine for Nespresso Vertuo capsules. The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Technical sheet of both models of Nespresso Vertuo coffee machines characteristics Nespresso Vertuo UP Nespresso Vertuo Pop / Next Extraction technology Centrifusion (bar code reading) Centrifusion (bar code reading) Supported cup sizes Six sizes Up to five-six sizes (depending on model, includes format Carafe in Next) Water tank capacity 1.4 Liters (removable and modular) 0.6 Liters (Pop) / 1.1 Liters (Next) Warm-up time ~3 seconds ~30 seconds Connectivity Wi-Fi and Bluetooth (updates and alerts) Wi-Fi and Bluetooth design Slimmer and narrower (vertical design) More elongated towards the bottom (Next) / Lower and wider (Pop) Construction materials High resistance recycled plastics with matte finishes Recycled plastics (glossy finishes/Pop colors) The differences between the previous and the new generation of Nespresso Vertuo To understand which one to choose, you have to scratch beyond the surface, since both coffee makers share the same motor and the same coffee frothing system, but differ in some features. Dimensions and countertop space management The Vertuo Next suffered from being excessively deep towards the back. For its part, the Vertuo Pop solved this by becoming lower, but at the cost of a ridiculously small water tank (0.6 liters), which required constant refilling. Now, the Vertuo UP finds the perfect balance: It is noticeably narrower and more stylized from the frontgaining height to house a better optimized 1.4 liter tank that does not protrude as much from behind, making it ideal for kitchens with narrow countertops. Head design and closure system It is, without a doubt, the most important evolution. Users of the Vertuo Next and Pop often complained that the manual lever system for closing the coffee maker and piercing the capsule was too hard. In the new Vertuo UP The opening and closing mechanism has been noticeably smoothed. It is still manual, but the path is much more ergonomic and requires less physical force to ensure the seal before pressing the extraction button. Cup height and size versatility The Vertuo Next is the only coffee machine that supports the capsule format Carafe (for 535 ml), although the UP can accommodate cups of up to 550 ml. The Vertuo Pop, on the other hand, being so short, made it necessary to remove the drip tray completely even to fit a standard type cup. As a summary, these are the sizes supported each of the Nespresso Vertuo coffee machines. Vertuo UP: 25ml (Ristretto), 40ml (Espresso), 80ml (Double Espresso), 150ml (Great Lungo), 230ml (Cup) and 550 ml. Vertuo Next: 25ml (Ristretto), 40ml (Espresso), 80ml (Double Espresso), 150ml (Great Lungo), 230ml (Cup) and 535 ml (Carafe). Vertuo Pop: 25ml (Ristretto), 40ml (Espresso), 80ml (Double Espresso), 150ml (Great Lungo), 230ml (Cup). Noise and vibration level Although centrifugal technology makes all Vertuo reach thousands of revolutions per minute (generating a sound similar to that of a small motor), the Vertuo UP has a better interior acoustic insulation. The vibrations on the table are slightly less than on the Vertuo Pop, whose lightweight plastic chassis tended to resonate more than necessary during the first seconds of cream extraction. So… which model to choose The price difference It is the main differentiating factor between the three models. The new Vertuo UP costs 179.90 euros in the official store, while the Next is available for 149.90 euros (in the official Nespresso store) and the Vertuo Pop you can buy it now for 99.90 euros in the same Nespresso store. If after reading this comparison, you still have doubts about whether to choose the new Vertuo or a model from the previous generation, here are the keys to choosing. Choose the new Vertuo UP if: Your budget is higher and you prioritize comfort. It is worth paying that little extra if you have just enough space on the counter, you usually use large bowls for breakfast and you are looking for a model with a more refined design and a soft closure that does not require force. It is the smart long-term purchase. Buy the Nespresso Vertuo Next / Pop if: Your priority is immediate savings. The Vertuo Pop has become the queen of bargains and is often on sale. If you don’t mind that the water tank is smaller or that the lever is a little harder, its quality-price ratio for tight budgets is unbeatable. Some of the links in this article are affiliated and may provide a benefit to Xataka. In case of non-availability, offers may vary. Images | Nespresso In Xataka | Smart coffee makers: what you can do (and what you can’t) with connected coffee makers In Xataka | Five ideal accessories to get the most out of your super-automatic coffee machine

This is what changes and what doesn’t

by

If we think about it coldly, the operation of traffic lights has not changed much for decades. It is still based on a programmed timer that changes from red to green regardless of whether there are ten cars waiting or none. Perhaps it has not changed because it is still just as effective for the use to which it is given, but the truth is that we are about to see a fairly important evolution in how traffic is organized in our country, and the Royal Decree 450/2026published in the BOE a few days ago, lays the regulatory foundations for this change. And from this document, Spain establishes the legal framework to implement Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) on the country’s highways and urban roads. Below these lines we tell you all the details. What are SITs? Intelligent Transportation Systems are basically the technological layer that turns any traditional road infrastructure into something capable of communicating, processing data and adapting in real time. This can be achieved through sensors, radars, lidar technologyor artificial intelligence. And all these types of technologies can be implemented, for example, in a traffic light, in a section of road or in a sign. And the moment this is done, they are no longer static elements. The objective of the decree is to coordinate the implementation of these systems in a coherent and interoperable manner in Spain, systems that aim to more accurately manage traffic on our roads, improve road safety and provide useful information to the user. Europe forces Spain to move. With the publication of this Royal Decree, Spain incorporates into its legal system the Directive (EU) 2023/2661 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of November 22, 2023, which “updates the European framework for intelligent transport systems to respond to the new mobility, digitalization and sustainability challenges identified by the European Union.” The deadline to integrate this directive in the country expired on December 21, 2025, so Spain arrives several months behind schedule. The new standard replaces the previous Royal Decree 662/2012, which transposed the original directive on SIT. lThe data becomes mandatory. Until now, administrations had a more or less diffuse obligation to make traffic information available to the user. The decree takes a leap here, as it makes the availability of mobility data in real time, such as incidents, works or adverse weather conditions, mandatory through the so-called National Access Points. The royal decree configures these “National Access Points for Traffic and Mobility, Multimodal Transport and Safe Parking Zones” through critical nodes, with the aim of guaranteeing this real and efficient flow of data and services. The idea is that this information is open and interoperable, accessible both to administrations and to the connected vehicles themselves. That means for traffic lights in practice. A connected traffic light This data network can do things that are generally impossible today, such as detecting an approaching ambulance and chaining itself in green to create an automatic emergency corridor, analyzing the traffic density in a neighborhood and adjusting the cycles of an entire network of intersections to avoid a traffic jam before it happens, or reacting to a pedestrian crossing suddenly. The technology for all this already exists and is being tested in some cities. In fact, we were already able to tell how it works here. of the one in Córdoba. However, what was missing until now was a regulatory framework that would standardize how these infrastructures should communicate with each other and with vehicles. Not a Big Brother. The Royal Decree guarantees that the processing of personal data will be carried out exclusively when necessary for the provision of intelligent transport services and always in accordance with European and national data protection regulations. In other words, the objective of the decree is not mass surveillance of drivers or a remote sanction system. In fact, the current obligation of these systems right now is for the administrations, not for the drivers, so no driver today is obliged to carry any SIT device in their vehicle (And no, the V16 beacon It is not a SIT device, even though it has IoT connectivity). The previous step to the autonomous vehicle. What is intended is to standardize how Spanish infrastructures communicate in such a way that they speak the same language as those of the rest of Europe. And in the near future, the role of the SIT will be fundamental to enhance the functioning of the autonomous vehiclessince the aim is to improve connectivity and the digitalization of mobility. Without this standardization, communication between autonomous vehicles and road infrastructure ends up being impossible, or at least not as precise as required. What remains to be done. The decree establishes the framework, but does not set specific calendars or budget for the deployment of SITs in Spanish cities and roads. The standard enables the Ministries of the Interior and of Transport and Sustainable Mobility to develop it through future orders. So it is still early to see smart traffic lights, but it is not too early to talk about it now. In Xataka | Starting in July, all new cars manufactured will incorporate an annoying novelty: many more beeps

the trick to find the best pack and what to do if it doesn’t appear

by

We are going to tell you a trick to be able to see the entire 2026 World Cup in the cheapest way possible. And we are going to explain it to you clearly and without deceiving you, because although it is about paying a pack of 7.99 euros, then you have to activate an additional pack. In short, we are going to guide you so that ALL the matches of the ENTIRE World Cup they cost you 56 euros. It is expensive, but it is the cheapest offer you will find. Of course, it is a trick that you have to pay attention to, because If you make a mistake you can end up paying an additional 28 euros for not canceling it on time. Where can you watch the world cup? As we have explained to you when we told you where you can watch the 2026 World Cupyou could see that you basically only have four alternatives to watch the championship. On RTVE you will only be able to see part of the matches, although all of the Spanish National Team matches are included. But if you want to see them all, you will have to go to Movistar Plus+ with its football or Orange packages. These two payment alternatives are very expensive, and require either extra packages or phone rates with them… or even both. The fourth alternative is DAZN, a service that you can contract without belonging to any operator. But this service has several plans, and here comes the mess where you have to clarify. The cheapest option you can opt for The cheapest alternative to watch the World Cup It costs 28 euros per month. To do so, you will have to resort to a specific plan and include the World Cup package. DAZN has a series of 5 subscriptions with different content, and you can include the World Cup in any of them for 20 euros per month, except for its premium plan with practically everything for 26 euros per month, which is really 45 euros if you want to pay month by month and only use it for the World Cup. The trick is in hire the Made in USA pack and add the World Cup package. By contracting the plan individually month by month you only have to pay 7.99 euros. To this you will have to add the 19.99 euros for the World Cup. This pack has very little content, you will only be able to watch the NBA, NFL, NASCAR races and other American competitions. But if you are only interested in the World Cup, you can manually add this pack with the 104 matches. The World Cup lasts 39 days, from June 11 to July 19, 2026, so the total price will be 56 euros to be able to see ALL the games. To access the Made in USA pack you can enter in this link. But here comes the important thing, because you have to remember to cancel the pack in time so that you are not charged for an extra month. DAZN requires a 30-day notice to unsubscribemeaning that you will have to cancel as soon as you pay the second month so that they do not charge you for the next one. ‘Made in USA’ plan without permanence The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Be very careful, because there are pages that tell you about watching the World Cup for 7.99 euros per month, when the truth is that watching the World Cup matches requires adding the extra pack. What to do if you can’t find the Made in USA pack The fact that many of us are talking about this pack can mean that sometimes you click on the link and it does not appear, and you do not see it on the DAZN website either. If this happens to you, try entering with the browser’s incognito modeand subscribe from it.

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.