dollars

SpaceX wants to reach a capitalization of 1.75 trillion dollars. Analysts are clear that it is worth less than half

by

SpaceX’s is the first of the record-breaking IPOs that are expected this year: it will take place on June 12, 2026 under the symbol SPCX. This operation promises to be the most important public offering of shares in history, and the company has already indicated that its objective is to obtain funds worth $75 billion to achieve an astronomical valuation of 1.75 billion euros. But how SpaceX is valued is one thing, and how analysts value it is quite another. Overrated. The financial analysis firm Morningstar has carried out an analysis of SpaceX’s financial accounts and have reached a striking conclusion: “We believe the company has been significantly overvalued and investors will have the opportunity to buy the shares at more attractive levels after the IPO.” Or what is the same: they advise not participating in that initial IPO, and waiting because they anticipate that the stock will fall in the first days on Wall Street. It’s only worth half. In these conclusions, Morningstar establishes that the valuation discounting SpaceX’s cash flow is $780 billion. That represents 48% than the valuation of the private market, which is 1.5 trillion dollars, and 44.5% less than the valuation attributed to the company itself, which amounts to 1.75 trillion dollars. Is it really more promising than Nvidia? Dan Coatsworh is one of the main analysts at the firm AJ Bell, and he commented on CNBC how that theoretical internal valuation of $1.75 trillion would mean that the value of SpaceX (P/E, Price to Earnings ratio) is 67 times its sales, two times more than, for example, happens at Nvidiathe most valuable company on the planet today. Beware of xAI. One of SpaceX’s theoretical strengths is its artificial intelligence division, xAIbut analysts explain that in reality its theoretical advantage is “undetermined”, and in fact they pose it as “a material threat of value destruction” for the parent company, SpaceX. Morningstar believes that the AI ​​division is worth $170 billion, and that what really matters is something else. The Starlink engine. SpaceX’s real argument for going public and its real strength is not the reusable Falcon 9 rockets, but the profitability of Starlink. The company’s satellite constellation has achieved sustained cash flow in recent months, and its global customer base is growing at an enviable pace. It is undoubtedly SpaceX’s great recurring revenue generation machine. Morningstar values ​​it at $611 billion. The double class trick. SpaceX plans to sell shares at a fixed price of $135 per share, but they will only list 3% of the total shares. In addition, Elon Musk will continue to maintain tight control of the vote with 85% of the total through a dual-class share system. Class A shares, those that go public, allow the right to one vote per share. Class B shares go to the founder and the first key investors. They are not sold on the open market, and each one usually gives 10, 20 or more votes. Institutional dependency. The value of the company, however, is supported by the contracts it has with the US government. Specifically with NASA and with the Department of Defensewhich depend entirely on SpaceX systems for their critical missions. That not only guarantees long-term income, but is a compelling argument to attract more conservative investment funds. Either you believe Elon, or you don’t. We are facing an operation that will test Elon Musk’s real power over the markets. Although SpaceX is an extraordinary company, it is overvalued due to its founder’s habit of selling hype. The tactic of coming out as an indivisible package (Starlink + xAI + Image | Xataka with Magnific In Xataka | Elon Musk knows that TSMC is overwhelmed: Terafab is his idea to completely change the global chip industry

He showered them with 500 million dollars

by

Larry Ellison He is known for being a co-founder of Oracle, a close consultant on AI in the Council of Advisors on Science and Technology of Donald Trump’s second term and the second largest fortune in the world, according to the list of millionaires of Forbes. The millionaire invested hundreds of millions of dollars in a technological agriculture project on Lanai, his private island in Hawaii, as published The Wall Street Journal. His idea was to revolutionize the way they produce food through an innovative and sustainable approach, combining advanced technology with methods of modern hydroponic farming. To carry out the project, Ellison created the company Sensei Ag, which promised to develop an innovative vegetable growing model that would multiply the food production in the future. However, this ambitious plan has not developed as Ellison expected and has become another example of the technological challenges that agriculture faces. Lanai, Ellison’s Paradise In 2012, Larry Ellison bought 98% of the island of Lanai, in Hawaii, for just under 300 million dollars. Their intention, in addition to turning it into their vacation retreat, was to transform it into a sustainability laboratory. One of its key projects was the development of vertical farming by Sensei Ag, which aimed to produce fresh and healthy food using less land area and natural resources. According to WSJEllison allocated an initial investment of 500 million dollars with the objective of building six greenhouses equipped with high technology and design a smart irrigation system that optimize water use. “Greenhouse structures were optimized for tulips in Holland in the 17th century and have not undergone major improvements since then,” said David Agus, a friend of Ellison and one of the founders of Sensei Ag. Sensei Ag built greenhouses and equipped them with advanced sensors, artificial intelligence and climate control systems. These greenhouses had to ensure the conditions conducive to producing fruits, vegetables and other high-quality foods, reducing the environmental impact. Furthermore, the Oracle founder planned to use renewable energy to power these facilities to create a complete sustainable model, so that it could be deployed in other parts of the world. The island did not make it easy for them. If something can fail, it will fail In the 1920s, Lanai became a huge estate dedicated to pineapple cultivationto the point of producing 75% of the world’s supply of this fruit. This intensive cultivation and chemical agents used To accelerate ripening, they wreaked havoc on the fields, which reduced the productivity of the island’s soil. The island’s climate also posed problems as the Israeli engineers who built the greenhouses did not take into account either the island’s humidity or its gusts of wind. Therefore, the coverage of 12 million dollars from the greenhouses flew through the airshooting up the repair cost to $50 million. Elon Musk, a personal friend of Larry Ellison, was in charge of provide solar panels that would feed greenhouse technology. However, again the strong winds They constantly dirty the panels that were left unusable. As pointed out in the article The Wall Street Journalon many occasions they had to obtain electricity by connecting diesel generators. In addition to failing roofs, solar, and land, Sensei Ag employees had to deal with an unexpected problem: Wifi coverage failures. It may seem like a lesser evil, but in a high-tech greenhouse where there are hundreds of sensors that regulate light, temperature, humidity or ventilation, having Wi-Fi makes the difference between a successful harvest or a failure. 500 million dollars worth of cherry tomatoes Although the Sensei Ag plans were very ambitious, the project faced the same profitability dilemmas that farmers suffer in any corner of the planet. “The vision was very big, but then it slowly became diluted as we faced the realities of implementation on Lanai,” said En Young, former general manager of the Lanai facility. The operating costs of advanced facilities and the maintenance of the greenhouses were too high compared to the income generated from the sale of food. And Sensei became the largest producer of different types of lettuce and cherry tomato from Hawaii. Its founding goal of “feeding the world” has been an absolute failure. Now, the project will focus on the development of agricultural management software, using its greenhouses as a testing laboratory, with the aim of selling the necessary software and hardware in the form of a package that other farms can franchise. In addition, it has begun operations in southern California to implement robotic cultivation systems to automate the care of the plantations, and acquired 11 hectares south of Austin (Texas) and the former headquarters of the robotic farming company Iron Ox. The investment amounts to 40 million dollars with which it intends to expand its market beyond Hawaii. For Lanai, the partial closure of the Sensei Ag project raised questions about Ellison’s long-term plans for the island. Some residents criticized that their agricultural resources were used for technological experiments rather than to help the island’s supply of provisions, which must import between 80% and 90% of the products it consumes. In Xataka | The dead end of the traditional olive tree: the price of the hectare of olive grove falls in Jaén while the rest of the land skyrockets Image |Sensei Ag, Unsplash (David Holifield), Flickr (Oracle PR)

35 billion dollars to build the largest airport in the world

by

95,192,160 passengers. This is the number of travelers who registered at Dubai International Airport (DXB) in 2025, according to data from Airports Council International (ACI). A figure that elevated it to second place in the world for passenger traffic, only behind Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport in the United States. This last location has been repeating for three years asThe busiest airport in the world and last year it moved 10 million more passengers than Dubai, breaking the barrier of 106 million passengers in a single year. A figure that, year after year, Dubai wants to reduce to become the airport with the highest passenger traffic in the world. And it has a $35 billion plan to achieve it. An airport like no one ever conceived As we said, so far Dubai has remained below 100 million passengers per year. However, the ambition is to break this barrier in just two years. Paul Griffiths, CEO of Dubai Airports, assured Time Out that they aspired to break this ceiling soon and that by 2031 they want to reach 113 million passengers. These figures would predictably make them the busiest airport in the world but it has a problem: the current Dubai International Airport (DXB) and remodeling it would cost as much money who, directly, prefer to get a new one. At least that is what they maintain from the Emirate. And in 2010 the Al Maktoum International Airporta space that until now has operated at half throttle and is a ridiculous size compared to its Dubai brother. But in 2024 an expansion was approved to position it as the largest airport in the world with the capacity to handle 260 million passengers in a single year. That is, almost the same passengers as the three busiest airports in the world right now: adding Haneda in Tokyo (third in the world) to those mentioned in Atlanta and Dubai. According to the voices that have defended the project, the problem is that the current airport is so large that maintenance work drives up costs and, they say, it is cheaper to build a gigantic expansion of the current Al Maktoum International Airport than to renovate the famous Dubai International Airport. For this, it has been planned to invest 35,000 million euros to make the current Al Maktoum International Airport the center of the Dubai World Central (DWC), the most ambitious mobility hub in the world. This space has been planned as a megacity with residential spaces, hotels, golf courses… and, above all, the largest airport in the world built by man in its history. Specifically, has been projected that the renovation of the new airport costs $34.85 billion. This figure reflects the ambitions to multiply the size of the DBX by five, building five 4.5 kilometer long landing strips separated by 800 meters. It will have four main concourses and more than 400 doors to operate flights. The intention is that, operationally, the new airport will be operating at higher performance by the end of the decade to make the complete move from the current DBX to the renovated Al Maktoum International Airport in 2032. That year they hope to manage the traffic of 150 million passengers in one year. That is, about 44 million more passengers than the current Atlanta airport, the busiest in the world, handles. These passengers will be distributed across three terminals. The intention is that one of them is dedicated solely to the operations of the Emirates Group and another to international flights. The third will concentrate low-cost flights. In addition, a parking lot with 100,000 spaces is planned for workers only. The intention is to build a high-speed train between both airspaces but to transfer the bulk of the operations to the new construction. Of course, its surroundings and all its services are not expected to be built until 2050. By then, Dubai intends to be able to operate flights with the capacity to move up to 260 million passengers. That is, it should be able to manage half the population of the European Union in a single year. To consolidate this mega-move, the Dubai airport is already working with new biometric recognition and baggage management systems using artificial intelligence as a test before the airlines arrive at the new space. Obviously, the intention is scale operations to mitigate the risk of collapse. Consolidation as the largest mobility hub in the world is not only understood with commercial flights. Dubai wants this new space to be the best place in the world for landing flights. Airbus A380the largest passenger plane in the world, but also the best place to carry out your maintenance and repair work. Likewise, it wants to consolidate itself as a key place for the transportation of goods and have restricted space for the landing and takeoff of private flights to which it will be offered all kinds of luxuries with a huge range of auxiliary services such as the aforementioned hotels, shopping centers and leisure spaces. Photo | DWC and Adam Khan In Xataka | European airlines are taking advantage of the Iran crisis to accelerate something old: making your trip even more complicated.

40 million dollars in gold bars

by

Sometimes an investigation leaves an image so powerful that it threatens to cover up the most important detail. In this case, the image is that of FBI agents entering a house in Virginia and finding more than 300 one-kilo gold bars (about $40 million), along with about $2 million in cash and about 35 luxury watches. The immediate question is obvious: what was all that doing there? The answer, for now, is not in the formal accusation. According to NPRDavid J. Rush faces, for now, a much more limited charge: alleged theft of public money for military leave payments allegedly obtained through false statements. It all started within the CIA itself. According to a joint statement from the CIA and FBI, an internal investigation by the agency identified possible legal violations and led its director, John Ratcliffe, to refer the matter to the FBI. The search of Rush’s home occurred on May 18 and the arrest came on the 19th. The key to the case. The discovery suggests a huge cause, but the accusation presented so far is much more limited. The New York Times points out that Rush is only accused of having inflated his academic credentials and collecting tens of thousands of dollars in military leave payments. He also falsely claimed that he was still in the Navy Reserve after being discharged. And here is the curious part: these assets are part of the investigation, but they are not yet the formal core of the accusation. An important piece. NPR describes him as a former CIA employee at the Senior Executive Service level, a category associated with high-ranking positions within the federal Administration. We are not talking, therefore, about a minor name within the story that the sources draw. We are talking about someone located at a level that does not go unnoticed. The unexplained hole. The big question is not only how those goods ended up in a private home, but why they had been requested in the first place. Rush began demanding foreign currency and tens of millions of dollars in bullion, arguing that it was needed for labor issues. The CIA later searched a storage space associated with it and only located some of the cash. Added to this is that the agency had not yet found records that justified the need to handle such an extraordinary sum. A resume in question. The FBI also looks back, long before the funding requests and registration in Virginia. The man would have included studies at Clemson University and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in several CIA applications, in addition to military merits that are now under suspicion. The two universities, according to the affidavit cited by US Public Radio, found no records that he had attended class. Something similar occurs with his profile as a supposed pilot: the documents reviewed would not support that he had passed evaluations or that he had a license. The case. Rush remains in the custody of the US Marshals Service after his bail request was rejected, and has yet to make a formal statement. Court records cited indicate that he waived a preliminary hearing and that the detention hearing was postponed until June 5. At the moment, one question still has no public answer: whether the gold was requested for an operation, for an internal project or for another purpose that we do not yet know. Images | Xataka with Grok In Xataka | Against all odds, Madrid has committed itself to building the largest Ferris wheel on the planet: 260 m high and worth 300 million euros

six companies, hundreds of millions of dollars and 25 missions to conquer the South Pole

by

NASA has already launched phase 1 of construction of your moon base. They have not yet taken a new batch of humans to the Moon, but it is important to prepare the ground, which is why this Tuesday they announced the first steps they are taking to do so. And, as it could not be otherwise, it all starts with million-dollar hires. 6 companies in total. At the moment, NASA has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in hiring six companies that will be in charge of developing the technologies necessary to launch the first phase of the lunar base. The companies in question are Blue Origin, Astrobotic, Intuitive Machines, Astrolab, Lunar Outpost and Firefly Aerospace. In general, in this first phase of construction of the lunar base it is expected to explore the south polar region, test various technologies and prepare surface operations. All of this will be carried out through 25 missions that will include 21 moon landings. Moon Base 1. To begin with, the first three missions are expected to launch this year. The first, Moon Base 1, will be carried out by Blue Origin. Jeff Bezos’ company will take its lander to the Moon Blue Moon Mark 1the “brother” of the Blue Moon Mark 2 that is preparing to become the human landing system for the Artemis missions. As payload will include the Stereoscopic Cameras for Lunar Plume-Surface Studies to study how thrusters interact with the lunar surface, and the Laser Retroreflective Array, which helps spacecraft in orbit determine a more precise location using reflected laser light. The mission will take place in autumn 2026 if all goes well. Since it will be the first to land in the Shackleton crater, where the base is to be built, it will also be in charge of checking the viability of lunar landings near the lunar base. Moon Base 2. The second mission, which will also travel to the Moon at the end of 2026, will be carried out by Astrobotic. It will send its Griffin lander to the Moon, loaded with 500 kg of instrumentation, including a rover to study the surface on which the base will be built and mature the mobility systems for future manned vehicles. Moon Base 3. The third mission to be sent in 2026 has been granted to Intuitive Machines. This company will take its Nova-C Trinity lunar module there, which will be in charge of studying lunar eddies and the behavior of materials under extreme conditions. Furthermore, this mission will not be 100% private, as it will include payloads from the European Space Agency and the Korean Institute of Astronomy and Space Sciences. Some of the models that NASA showed during the press conference Boogies to move around the Moon. So that future astronauts who travel to the lunar base can move around it, they want to take two manned lunar vehicles there. Said so that we can all understand each other, two boogie-type strollers, designed to move around the lunar surface, both with and without a crew. Its development has been entrusted to the companies Astrolab and Lunar Outpost, also as part of this first phase. Delimitation drones. The company Firefly Aerospace has been entrusted with taking the 4 Moonfall drones to the Moon, whose main mission will be to inspect the area in search of the best landing places for the astronauts. Although they will also have a much more peculiar mission. As explained At NASA’s press conference, its executive director of the lunar base program, Carlos García-Galan, these drones will also be stationed in the corners to delimit the perimeter of the lunar base. Next phases. This first phase will last until 2029. Then the next phase will begin, which will end in 2032. In this, the permanent infrastructure of the lunar base will begin to be built, including electrical installation. From then on, it will only be necessary to refine more and more details and little by little receive the astronauts of the Artemis missions of the future. Without a doubt, this is the beginning of a new era of space exploration. Image | POT In Xataka | We knew there was water on the Moon, but not why some craters were empty. Finally we have the answer

A woman won the lottery and had to choose between a million dollars or 1,000 a week forever

by

Brenda Aubin-Vega was 20 years old when scratched a lottery ticket in Quebec and saw the jackpot appear. What came next was not a celebration without complications: before it was a decision that unleashed months of debate on the networks. The game is called Gagnant à vie —”winner for life”—and offers the lucky person the choice between collecting one million Canadian dollars at once or receiving $1,000 a week for the rest of their life. She chose weekly payments. In networks they put it in broth. The criticisms. When his case became publicthe opinions on networks did not wait. Many users on Reddit and in X They debated their decision. Some argued that weekly payments were the safe option for someone young. Others argued that rejecting a full million (in Canada lottery prizes are not taxed) was a textbook financial error. Taxes, inflation, index funds, historical returns were mentioned. Who is right? The age factor Brenda was 20 years old when she won the prize, so to equal the million with weekly payments she needs to collect for 19 and a half years, that is, reach 40. From then on everything is net profit. If he lives to be 60, he will have earned more than 2 million Canadian dollars. Until 80, more than 3 million. Statistical life expectancy works completely in their favor. Of course, once you die, the payments stop and there is no inheritance left to leave, unless you have been very very saver. The advantages of a million. With the single payment, the numbers are also seductive. A million invested in a low-cost index fund with a conservative 6% annual return becomes more than 10 million by the time Brenda turns 60, assuming she doesn’t touch the money. There is also a nuance that the debates on networks overlooked: inflation erodes those $1,000 per week over time. That is to say, what allows us to live comfortably today may be a modest income in 30 years. The best of both worlds. There is a third way and that is to collect the million and manage it as a personal fund, withdrawing a salary equivalent to the weekly payment and investing the rest. The problem is profitability. With a return of 6% per year, the capital would probably be depleted before retirement age. For the million to last until 80 or more, a higher sustained profitability is needed, an ideal scenario, but one that requires a more aggressive investment strategy and, above all, not making a single serious mistake for six decades. Other factors. On paper it sounds impeccable, in practice it requires a lot of financial discipline sustained over decades and the ability to deviate from the plan, avoiding unforeseen situations or impulsive purchases. The history of lottery prize winners It’s full of bad decisions and million-dollar prizes that disappear in the blink of an eye. In this sense, the winner may not have chosen the most lucrative option, but she chose the safest and, above all, the most comfortable if what you want is to have a safety net without having to complicate your life. Image | Quebec Loto In Xataka | There is something even more difficult than winning the Lottery Jackpot: not making mistakes with the Treasury when collecting it

There are people reselling tickets to the World Cup final for 2.3 million dollars. Great news for FIFA

by

It is still too early to know if the 2026 World Cup will be a success, a failure or will be added without pain or glory to the extensive chronicle of FIFA. What we can say at this point is that enjoying the tournament in situ it won’t come cheap. Especially if you aspire to see the final, which will be played on July 19 at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey. The cost of your tickets it takes months embroiled in controversy, but the debate has soured after some positions have come to light resale market for the price of a 200 m2 apartment in the center of Madrid. All with the veiled pleasure of FIFA. What has happened? That although there is still more than a month until the opening match, the World Cup in North America (to be played between Mexico, Canada and the USA) is already earning the dubious honor of being the most expensive of history. The fans screamed in the sky last decemberwhen the first tickets were launched, but the rates that were offered then seem like a ‘bargain’ when compared to those that are now being achieved in the purchase and sale market. In this secondary trade, channeled through FIFA, there are passes that are offered for the same What does a 200 m2 apartment in Madrid cost? Does it sell so expensive? Yes. The news has advanced it the Associated Press (AP) agency, but it comes with taking a look at the buying and selling platform of tickets hosted on the FIFA website to verify it. If we look for available passes for the final on July 19, we will see that there are people reselling them for more than two million dollars. To be precise, there are at least four seats on sale in the lower stand (behind the goal) for a whopping $2,299,998.85. Not all tickets cost the same, but resale prices are generally not affordable for everyone. The cheapest seats, 3rd category, are offered for $10,900. If you want a position with better views and more comfort, you can add a few thousand more to that figure and purchase higher category passes for $16,100, $33,800, $43,200 or even $207,000. The prize goes to the entries of 2.3 million and 991,500, which is what a seller asks for seats located in the front area. On Wednesday FIFA itself put up for sale a new block of tickets on its direct sales platform, where it was possible to find seats for the final by $10,990. Who controls these rates? Direct sale tickets are launched by FIFA itself, but things change when we talk about the secondary market. There, in the so-called “Resale/Exchange Market” the federation does not control prices, although it does take a considerable part of the business. For each transaction you pocket a commission which is divided into two parts. One, 15%, is applied to whoever purchases the ticket. Another, of the same value, is borne by whoever detaches from the entry for resale. As they explain in Guardianthat means that if one of the tickets that cost 2.3 million is finally sold, FIFA would deposit $690,000 into its account. But… How is that possible? In other editions of the World Cup, the resale price of tickets was limited at face value, but this time FIFA has changed the approach. The reason? First, adapt to the market of the host countries, especially the United States, which is the one will host more games of the tournament. Secondly, FIFA hopes that by channeling the buying and selling itself, the use of portals such as StubHub will be discouraged. “FIFA has established a ticketing and secondary market model that reflects standard ticket market practices for major sporting and entertainment events in host countries,” alleges in a statement cited by the Associated Press. “Resale facilitation fees are aligned with industry standards in the North American sports and entertainment sectors.” Is it an isolated controversy? The controversy has now arisen due to the prices that are being reached in resale, but the truth is that the cost of the tickets has been a matter of discussion since the first phase of sale, activated in December 2025. The focus has been on both the prices themselves and the system applied by FIFA in the sale, the ‘variable pricing’similar to dynamic rates. Consumer organizations like the OCU have already raised their voices for that same reason. For reference, in December tickets for the final were already being sold for prices ranging from 4,185 and 8,680 dollars. And this despite the initial promise to offer them for 60 dollars in the group stage. “They only exist as ridiculous green splotches on the edge of seating maps, little more than mirages of inclusion,” ironizes Bryan Armen, from Guardian. Does it only happen with tickets? No. The tickets are so expensive because, FIFA allegesare one of their main sources of income. However, passes to matches are not the only thing that is valued at a gold price. In recent days, another controversy has arisen around the celebration of the World Cup in the US that revolves around something that has little to do with sport: public transportation. The New Jersey rail operator has decided that those who want to buy round-trip tickets to travel from Manhattan to MetLife and watch the July 19 final there will have to pay 150 dollars. It is almost 11 times more than what the same service costs on a normal day, when it is around $12.9. Images | FIFA and Wikipedia In Xataka | Mexico City is already noticing the economic effect of the World Cup: it is losing homes and gaining Airbnb apartments

Big Tech is pouring billions of dollars into GPUs for AI. 95% are inactive

by

When the COVID-19 pandemic began, toilet paper and yeast They flew from the supermarket. Paper because it is a basic good, but yeast because everyone was going to make a lot of bread in his house. That was the forecast, but we would really have to see how many of us ended up making bread. Well, something similar is happening in the data centers at the moment. Hyperscalers have spent billions and billions of dollars on GPUs for AI and, according to one report, 95% are idle most of the time. And all because of the fear of being left out. Kubernetes. Before getting into the matter, there is a concept that must be landed on. It is the one of the kubernetes. It is a kind of “operating system” in data centers, the foreman who organizes and monitors all the software that is being used. Imagine that a data center is a supermarket, the shelves are the servers and the products are the apps. Example of a control panel What this foreman does is find the perfect shelf to place the product in the most optimal way possible. In addition, he is constantly monitoring all the shelves at all times with the aim of not missing anything and ensuring that the data flow is perfect. It is, in short, a software that manages many physical servers in a very optimized way and 24/7. What’s happening. That said, the 2026 State of Kubernetes Optimization Report prepared by Cast AI has just revealed something: the tremendous inefficiency of data centers. They have analyzed about 23,000 kubernetes clusters in giants such as AWS (Amazon), Azure (Microsoft) and GCP (Google) and have discovered that the average GPU utilization of these data centers is just 5%. This translates another way: 95% are inactive most of the time, which implies that these companies are paying to get 20 times more computing capacity than they really need. Right now you might be wondering if it was worth it. destroy the RAM and SSD marketmaking computers, mobile phones, consoles and practically everything more expensive. And it is a question that makes all the sense in the world, but there is another interesting fact. To worse. As we see in TechRadarthose responsible for Cast AI point out that it is “the third year that we published this report and the numbers are getting worse.” Specifically, we are talking about CPU usage falling from 10% last year to 8% currently, while memory usage fell from 23% to 20%. Oversized needs. Something that the report also points out is that, although the use of equipment drops compared to the previous year, hyperscalers continue buying as if the world was going to end. CPU overprovisioning, as they describe it, increased from 40% to 69%. In the case of memory, it went to 79%. FOMO. A few weeks ago, one of the leaders of SMIC, the large foundry in China, already pointed out that Big Tech was buying all the resources that they will need, or that they think they will need, during the next decade… but in just a couple of years. They are investing a fortune in creating wide highways when there are no cars or real demand, and from Cast AI they are pointing in that same direction. Hyperscalers are buying piecemeal due to fear of being left out. It is what is known as FOMO or fear of missing outsomething that applies to many scenarios, but here it has to do with not wanting to come last in the race that is moving many millions from one place to another. This hoarding instinct is fueling a cycle of component shortages that affects consumers, but also the industry itself. According to the report, it makes some sense to want to buy everything as soon as possible because delivery times are long, but they are precisely so because everyone is buying more capacity than they need. Math doesn’t work. In the analysis they also point out that there are clusters that do not have such bad performance and that there are some that are using 49% of their H200 or 30% of their H100, well above the aforementioned 5%, but it is not the norm. And beyond having exploded the components market, the consequence of having so much equipment idle is that they are losing money because they are not profitable. According to calculations, an unused CPU costs a few cents per hour, but an idle GPU costs several dollars. And therein lies another key to this whole matter. Amazon or Azure data centers serve to satisfy the demands of their own companies, but they also rent computing power to whoever needs it. And since having the GPUs stopped costs them money, in recent months it has been reported that the prices of those rentals are multiplying. When will it all end? Cast AI is not optimistic, since they claim that most hyperscalers prefer to assume the costs rather than change their habits for fear that this will take off one day and catch them on the wrong foot. The translation is that… I will never have my Steam Machinesince everyone is focused on making hardware for AI. Image | NVIDIA In Xataka | There are data centers being watched and guarded by robot dogs because apparently the future is already the present

John Deere had been preventing farmers from repairing their tractors for years. Now he will have to pay them 99 million dollars

by

A modern tractor is a computer on wheels: GPS, sensors, telemetry and proprietary software. Buying it costs a lot more money than a normal car, but until now not even that made the farmer its real owner. John Deere has agreed to pay $99 million to close a class action lawsuit in the United States which accused him of monopolizing the repairs of his machinery, forcing thousands of farmers to depend on authorized workshops with inflated prices and waiting times that could ruin an entire harvest. Why is it important. This agreement is not just about tractors. It is the most visible case of a battle that affects phones, cars, appliances and consoles: that of right to repair what you have bought. If a manufacturer can software block access to the guts of a product you already own, ownership becomes a mere pantomime. What John Deere has done with its tractors, Apple has long done with its iPhones and Tesla with its cars. What has happened. The lawsuit was filed in 2022. Farmers Alleged Deere Purposely Restricted Access to Its Diagnostic Softwareforcing them to go to dealerships that charged artificially high prices. Deere has not admitted wrongdoing, but has accepted the following: Create a $99 million fund to compensate those affected who have paid reparations since 2018. Open to farmers and independent workshops the diagnostic tools that until now only their dealers had. Allow diagnostics and reprogramming in offline mode before the end of 2026. Between the lines. The figure of 99 million is not coincidental. Deere has chosen to stay a million short of nine figures, a classic psychological trick to make it sound less serious in the headlines. But the estimated real damages are much higher: the overpricing in repairs has cost farmers between 190 and 387 million, and total losses could reach 4.2 billion. The fund will be distributed among around 200,000 farmers. Each one will receive a symbolic amount. They cost less than $500 each. Yes, but. John Deere has committed to opening up its repair tools, but only for ten years. After that period, nothing prevents you from turning off the tap again. The company already promised to improve access to repairs in 2023 and, according to the plaintiffs, it failed to keep its word. Additionally, the Federal Trade Commission, the US regulator, keeps another lawsuit open against Deere by the same pattern of behavior. So this soap opera will have more chapters. The big question. The case of tractors is the tip of the iceberg of something that affects us all. A modern tractor, an electric car or a smart thermostat share the same logic: the software inside can turn the owner into a user with permission from the manufacturer. What has been decided in a US court about agricultural machinery will end up defining the limits of ownership in the digital age. Also in Europe. In Xataka | Every summer fires devastate Spain. There is a common culprit that goes unnoticed: old tractors Featured image | Randy Fath

shoot down missiles for less than a million dollars

by

A single advanced interceptor missile can cost more than dozens of drones of combined attack, and in Ukraine and Iran several have been launched to neutralize a single threat. This imbalance has led to situations where protecting a target becomes too much more expensive than attacking it. Therefore, in modern warfare, the key is no longer just who has the best weapons, but who can sustain their use without going bankrupt. The paradigm shift. For decades, intercepting a ballistic missile has been one of the most expensive operations in modern warfare, with systems like the patriot forcing the firing of two or three interceptors worth several million dollars each to ensure a kill. This model has worked in limited conflicts, but recent wars have shown its limits when the volume of threats grows massively. So much in Ukraine as in the Middle Eastair defense has become a cost battle where the attacker launches cheaply and the defender responds expensively. In that context, the idea of ​​shooting down missiles for less than a million dollars is not an incremental improvement, but a radical change in the rules of the game. Ukraine and logic. Since the 2022 invasion, Ukraine has developed a military industry based on economic efficiency, producing drones and missiles at a fraction of the cost of traditional Western systems. Companies like Fire Point They have transferred that philosophy to air defense, proposing a system capable of intercepting ballistic missiles at a much lower cost than the current one. The objective is quite clear: break the bottleneck of extremely expensive operators and systems, and allow a scalable defense in volume. This logic, moreover, comes directly from the battlefield, where survival depends on both effectiveness and cost per unit. The goal: below one million. The goal of intercepting a missile below the million dollar threshold It means attacking the core of the current strategic problem, where each defense costs more than the attack it tries to neutralize. Yes Ukraine achieve this milestone in 2027as indicated this week, would change the economic equation of air warfare, making it viable to respond to massive attacks without quickly depleting resources. Not only that. Even with somewhat lower success rates than systems like the Patriot, simply being able to launch more interceptors at a lower cost could make up that difference. In practice, it would mean that defense would cease to be a scarce resource and become something replicable on a large scale. The context: saturation and scarcity. Let us think that the war in Ukraine and the Iranian attacks in the Gulf have shown a common problem: the shortage of advanced systems and the impossibility of maintaining the rate of consumption. Patriot missiles They are limited, expensive and slow to produce, while threats (whether drones, missiles or swarms) can be manufactured and launched in large quantities. This imbalance has put powers with enormous military budgets in check, forcing them to prioritize objectives and accept vulnerabilities. In that scenario, a cheaper solution is not only desirable, but necessary to sustain any prolonged defense. The global implications. Here may be the real one crux of that announced advance. If Ukraine manages to develop this system, the impact would go far beyond the current front, generating a global demand between countries that cannot afford multi-billion dollar defense systems. This, a priori, would democratize access to air defense, allowing more actors to protect their space without depending exclusively on the United States or limited systems such as the European SAMP/T. Furthermore, it would alter the strategic balance, since it would reduce the effectiveness of attacks based on saturation and volume. In other words, it would make it much harder to win a war simply by launching more missiles. The new balance. Therefore, the real change is not only in the price, but in reversing the economic logic of the conflict, which indicates that defending is no longer more expensive than attacking. If that point is reach next yearmany current strategies would lose meaning, from the massive use of drones to saturation bombings. From that perspective, Ukraine would be on the verge of achieving something truly unprecedented in modern military history, redefining the relationship between cost and power in the war. And that, more than any specific weapon, aims to mark the future of conflicts. Image | Fire Point In Xataka | Ukraine is close to achieving a milestone that no one has achieved: building the largest drone industry without China’s help In Xataka | Thousands of cigarette butts are crossing into Russia without Ukraine being able to do anything. Their goal: to become missiles

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.