doesnt

“The world doesn’t realize how much the AI ​​industry depends on scientists in China” Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia

by

When someone as important to technology as Jensen Huang speaks, the bread rises. The CEO of Nvidia is a person who, although he is not known for giving headlines as controversial as his colleague Elon Musk, does say interesting and important things to understand the sector. At the beginning of the year he sat with Time to chat at length about the AI: whether or not it is a bubble, its impact or who is winning this race. In that interview China appeared and the commercial dispute that your company has with the Asian giant. There he made something clear: the world needs China more than the other way around. An example: his armyChina is achieving technological independence while its American counterpart increasingly resorts to Chinese imports. Thank China. When it comes to AI, Huang is clear: the providential weight of Chinese talent in the research and development of artificial intelligence. The CEO of Nvidia affirms that much of the world’s progress in artificial intelligence depends on Chinese researchers, and that the interdependence between the economies of China and the United States is greater than the public perceives. And he sums it up like this: “The idea that the United States can disengage from China is wrong.” Why it is important. Because the position of the boss of the most valuable company in the world, who is also American, collides with the toughest wing of the White House, which every now and then comes with new restrictions on the export of chips to China. If the industry’s reference supplier depends on symbiosis instead of separation, it is a warning to sailors for those who promote those obstacles in the form of laws that seek to limit Chinese access to the most advanced processors. Context. Note that this was not the first time that Jensen Huang argued for Chinese supremacy in AI. Already in May of last year at the Washington Forum claimed that 50% of the world’s Artificial Intelligence researchers are Chinese and that this data should influence “how we think about the game” of technological competition. Months later, in an interview with Citadel Securities collected by Fortuneinsisted that it is a mistake not to let these researchers build AI on American technology and that those policies that seek to harm China often also harm the United States. In detail. In that same interview Huang also made it clear that Taiwan will continue to be the centerpiece of AI chip manufacturing, despite the noise and interest from the White House in relocate production to the United States. In fact, in other interviews he has already clarified that manufacturing in America does not mean abandoning Taiwan, but rather spreading the risk. A complement. After all, You cannot abandon its highly refined production chain overnight as Trump intends. The small print. Jensen Huang has repeated the same speech on several occasions and scenarios, but as CEO of Nvidia we cannot lose sight of a reality: the commercial interest of his company. The Asian giant’s market share was enormous before export controls began, going from 95% to 0%. So Nvidia is the main one interested in defending openness. On the other hand, and although that 50% is real and matches different measurements Regarding talent in AI, this weight measures origin or training, not where these scientists work or what banner they have for the advances they achieve, since there is a large number who carry out their work in American universities and companies. In Xataka | “We chose the wrong technology”: Jensen Huang returns to Japan to acknowledge his debt to Sega 30 years later In Xataka | Jensen Huang enters the Samsung salary controversy: “Workers should earn as much as possible” Cover | Wikipedia and Gary Lerude on Flickr

Your body has been regulating temperature on its own for thousands of years. Until the air conditioning arrived and told him “calm down, I’ll take care of it” (it doesn’t turn out well)

by

Air conditioning is our best friend in summer. However, just as we are not attached 24/7 to our best friends, We shouldn’t do it with the air conditioning either.. With your friend it is not good because you would run out of gossip to tell him, but with air conditioning the problem is that it can be dangerous for your health. And for your pocket, logically. Thermoregulator, what for? As explained in an article by Meteoredone of the biggest problems with overusing air conditioning is that our natural thermoregulation system becomes a little lazy. Human beings are homeothermic animals. This means that we remain at a stable temperature, around 36.5ºC, regardless of whether it is 0ºC or 42ºC outside. To do this, we have mechanisms such as sweating in the heat or shivering in the cold. However, we usually make these adaptations with natural temperature fluctuations. If we spend the day at 19ºC air conditioning, when we go outside, our body will have a harder time adapting as it normally would. It is something that also seen during sleep. Thanks to circadian rhythms, our body temperature drops little by little during the night to help us fall asleep. However, if we lower it artificially and suddenly, it will be much more difficult for us to rest. dry mucous membranes. Air conditioning not only lowers the temperature. It also dries out the air. And if the air dries out, so do our mucous membranes. We have all noticed that dry nose and throat feeling when we spend a lot of time with the air conditioning. In fact, it is especially noticeable at night. The big problem with this is that one of our protective barriers against the entry of respiratory pathogens is precisely the humidity of the mucous membranes, which allows the movement of structures, called cilia, that keep viruses and bacteria at bay. The cold does not cause colds, it is a widespread myth. Viruses are what cause colds, so if there is none in the environment we will not get sick. However, if the cold of the air conditioning has dried out our mucous membranes and there is a virus lurking around, it will be much more difficult for us to defend ourselves. Muscle pain. When we spend a lot of time under air conditioning, our muscles cool down and tend to shrink to better generate and retain heat, so it is common for us to hurt. No more than 12 ºC difference. Logically, air conditioning is necessary. However, we should neither abuse it nor put it too cold. As explained to EFE Health Dr. Sandra Dorado, coordinator of the area of ​​Respiratory Diseases of Occupational and Environmental Origin (EROM) of the Spanish Society of Pulmonology and Thoracic Surgery (SEPAR), more than 12 ºC of difference when moving from one room to another is already considered unhealthy. We must try not to exceed this difference and, if possible, acclimatize before going out suddenly. Furthermore, it is important clean air conditioning filters regularly. This will prevent asthma problems and respiratory infections from breathing poor quality air. That being said, keep using the air conditioning, just like you would hang out with your best friend. But allow time without seeing each other for gossip to arise between you, and when you are together, treat it well. Image | Magnificent In Xataka | These days I’m having a hard time falling asleep because of the heat. But put this device on and sleep soundly

Mistral is very far in the AI ​​race. Samsung doesn’t care about that and plans to invest a fortune in it

by

Mistral is in fashion. It doesn’t matter that their AI models are not among the bestbecause it is enough for the French startup to defend the discourse of European and sovereign AI that has become so relevant in recent months. That has caused its valuation to rise, but it could do so even more with the arrival of a surprising actor to its shareholding: Samsung. betting big. The South Korean giant is having conversations to invest hundreds of millions of euros in Mistral. It would do so as part of a new round of financing that would make the valuation of the French startup reach 20 billion euros. According to sources close to the operation, Samsung – which had previously invested in Mistral through its venture capital division – could contribute around 1 billion euros in this new round. Now the important thing is “to be trustworthy”. The interest in Mistral is not coincidental. These talks come after the Trump administration temporarily blocked access to the latest AI models from Anthropic and OpenAI. That has triggered a wave of interest in what It is now known as the “sovereign AI”that is, AI models that no government or foreign country can disconnect suddenly. Since its foundation, Mistral has betting precisely by open models that any customer can customize and control on their own, without political decisions in country The money doesn’t stop coming in. The current round comes less than a year after Mistral was valued at €12 billion in a deal led by ASML, the Dutch chipmaking equipment giant. In September 2025 raised 1.7 billion eurosmost of them coming from the aforementioned ASML, which uses Mistral models to develop its advanced semiconductor manufacturing machines. At the beginning of the year he managed another 830 million euros in its first debt financing, and now, in addition to Samsung, the Scaleup Europe fund, from the Swedish EQT, is also considering entering the round. Samsung and Mistral love each other more and more. Both companies have been strengthening their alliance for months. In April several media reported that both companies had been negotiating a collaboration in the field of memories for AI chips. Samsung is the largest memory manufacturer in the world, and has seen its revenue and profits skyrocket thanks to demand for AI. Investing in Mistral gives it a direct relationship with the European startup with the most projection just at a time when the entire industry is fighting for access to the supply of chips and memory. It’s a more than reasonable move. Each sheep with its partner. This alliance is reflected in other similar movements in recent weeks and months. In June, the memory maker Micron invested in Anthropic as part of a broader alliance that includes a long-term memory supply agreement. This same week, Mistral already closed an expansion of its alliance with Microsoftwhich has committed to a “multi-million dollar” investment to use the French startup’s computing infrastructure. Mistral models will also be available through Azure. Mistral Medium 3.5, the most powerful model of the French startup, is very far from open Chinese models such as GLM-5.2 or Kimi K3, and certainly from frontier models from Google, OpenAI or Anthropic. Source: Artificial Analysis. But. Despite all this interest, Mistral’s open models face a very stark reality: they are far from the capacity of the latest Chinese open models. They have recently demonstrated it both GLM-5.2 as especially Kimi K3the Moonshot AI model that already almost competes with Fable 5 and GPT-5.6. They are good, pretty and cheap, and at the moment the only advantage of Mistral is being European. We’ll see if that continues to work. Ascending trajectory. Founded just three years ago, Mistral has become the most valuable AI startup in Europe. Its CEO, Arthur Mensch, assured in the Financial Times in February that the company’s annual recurring revenue will exceed $1 billion before the end of the year. The total focus is on the drive to win business customers, and although the promise is striking, it will be necessary for Mistral to also accelerate the capacity of some models that according to benchmarks They are falling behind. Image | Babak Habibi | Mistral In Xataka | “Only two years”: Mistral CEO warns Europe that time is running out to build its own AI infrastructure

what changes (and what doesn’t) in the new generation of Samsung smart watches

by

Samsung’s latest Unpacked has featured the brand’s three new foldables (yes, in this generation there are three different models), but we cannot forget the smartwatches, because there is a lot to tell. In this article we are going to review the most important differences between the Samsung Galaxy Watch9 and Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra2 with respect to their previous generations. The differences between the four Samsung Galaxy Watch More shine and absence of the Classic One of the most notable absences in Unpacked has been the absence of the Classic model that we saw in the previous generation and it had a very practical rotating bezel. In this way, the brand has only presented two models: Samsung Galaxy Watch9 and Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra2. between the Samsung Galaxy Watch8 and the Samsung Galaxy Watch9 there are no noticeable differences in their screens. We have two again 40 and 44mm configurations that we must take into account depending on the size we want. Where we are going to find differences is in the high range. Samsung has opted for the same size in the new generation of the Watch Ultra with a single 47 mm configuration. But be careful because while the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra offers a maximum brightness of 3,000 nits, the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra2 reaches a Brightness up to 5,000 nits. In practice this means that you will be able to see the screen better outdoors. From Exynos to Snapdragon At the performance level, things change with the arrival of the new generation, and Samsung has taken a fairly big step by betting on Qualcomm instead of its own processors. In this sense, while the previous generation (and here we are talking about the Watch8 and Watch Ultra) had the Exynos W1000, the Samsung Galaxy Watch9 and the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra2 incorporate the Snapdragon Wear Elite. More battery The battery capacity in the Galaxy Watch9 grows very little compared to the previous generation, going from 325 (40 mm) and 435 (44 mm) mAh of the Watch8 to 390 and 445 mAh respectively. Where we do have a change, and quite a big one, is in the high range. The Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra incorporates a 590 mAh battery, while the new generation arrives with a 800 mAh battery. The difference is notable and, although we will see this in its corresponding analysis, this will have a positive impact on autonomy. A much more complete sensor Although in general terms there are no major changes at the sensor level between both generations, there are some very interesting additions in the health section. The new generation comes with everything that the Galaxy Watch8 and Galaxy Watch Ultra already offered, but they also have the function of sleep apneaswhich is exclusive for Galaxy phones, and the cardiovascular health functions, the physical fitness index and hearing risk alerts. Price The previous generation is still on sale, so it can be purchased for a lower price than the previous generation: He Samsung Galaxy Watch9 It has a price from 409 euros (minimum configuration). He Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra It has a price of 749 euros. He Samsung Galaxy Watch8 can be found for a price of 324 euros (minimum configuration). He Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra can be found for a price of 630.85 euros. Which Samsung Galaxy Watch to choose? Why choose the Samsung Galaxy Watch8 The Samsung Galaxy Watch8 continues to be sold in many stores, and at a very good price. Right now the most notable thing is: Its pricewhich is inferior to its new generation. Your screenwhich does not vary too much from the Watch9. If you are going to buy a Galaxy Watch, it is important to keep in mind that the new generation right now has an introductory offer. The Watch9 is almost at the same price as the Watch8. Samsung Galaxy Watch8 – 40mm The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Why choose the Samsung Galaxy Watch9 The Samsung Galaxy Watch9 arrives with certain changes, especially internal. Where it stands out the most is in: Your processorwhich for this generation Samsung has opted for Qualcomm. Your batterywhich grows slightly compared to the previous generation. The new health functions. Samsung Galaxy Watch9 – 40mm The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Why choose the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra The Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra also continues to be sold at a lower price than the new generation. His key points right now are: performancewhich is still pretty good. Something to keep in mind is that the new generation is currently on sale with a launch offer, and at a lower price than the Watch Ultra. Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Why choose the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra2 The Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra2 is the watch that has undergone the most changes. Where it stands out the most is in: Its maximum brightnesswhich is now 5,000 nits. Your processorwhich incorporates the Snapdragon Wear Elite. The batterywhich grows a lot compared to the Watch Ultra. Your new health features. Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Technical sheet of the Samsung Galaxy Watch Samsung Galaxy Watch8 samsung galaxy watch ultra Samsung Galaxy Watch9 samsung galaxy watch ultra2 dimensions and weight 40mm: 40.4 x 42.7 – 30 grams 44mm: 43.7 x 46 mm – 34 grams 47.4 x 47.4 x 12.1mm. 60.5 grams 40mm: 42.7 x 40.4 x 8.6 mm – 31.5 grams 44mm: 46 x 43.7 x 8.6 mm – 34 grams 47.4 x 47.1 x 10.7mm 61.5 grams screen Super AMOLED 40mm: 1.34 inches, 438 x 438 pixels 44mm: 1.47 inches, 480 x 480 pixels sapphire crystal Maximum brightness: 3,000 nits 1.5 inch AMOLED Resolution 480 x 480 Maximum brightness of 3,000 nits Always On Display in full color Super AMOLED 40mm: 1.37 inches, 438 x 438 pixels 44mm: 1.47 inches, 480 x 480 … Read more

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)

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.