dont

They have asked 1,600 experts how the Universe works. They don’t agree on almost anything

by

We continually read news about new findings that they defy the known physics of the Universe. This may lead us to ask ourselves something: do we know so little about the Universe that absolutely everything challenges it? To answer this question it is important to give a little context. Yes, a lot is known about astrophysics, but when we talk about something as immense as the Universe, even that “a lot” can fall short. Furthermore, much of this information is based on hypotheses that have been accepted as consensus, but not on absolute truths. Therefore, it is not strange that in the largest survey ever conducted It has been proven to astrophysicists and astrophysics fans that there is a lot of disagreement on almost everything related to the cosmos. The largest survey. In 2024, during an astrophysics conference in Copenhagen, a survey was carried out in which 85 experts participated. All of them had to answer a series of questions about some of the best-known theories in astrophysics. With this survey it was seen that there is a lot of disagreement, even in those theories in which there is supposed to be a great consensus. In order to check whether these disagreements were a result of the sample size, a new survey was carried out in 2025, this time with 1,600 people who had to answer 11 questions. Some participants were experts from the American Astrophysical Society. Others were amateur readers of Physics Magazine. With a larger sample, the results were very similar. There is very little consensus. From hypotheses to certainties. Science in general, and astrophysics in particular, is built on hypotheses that evolve as scientific advances are made. For this reason, it is often more full of probabilities than certainties. It is important to differentiate different branches of science. In health sciences, there are certainties. For example, we know that antibiotics attack bacteria and are not useful against viruses, no matter how many people insist on taking them for the flu. We also know that their abuse can be very harmful, since it contributes to the development of resistance in bacteria. Those are certainties, although logically there is also information that evolves over time. In astrophysics, hypotheses accepted by consensus often outnumber certainties. There are very clear certainties, such as that the Earth is not flat or that it revolves around the Sun. But also some hypotheses with which not even experts agree. Cosmic inflation wins. The issue on which there was the greatest consensus in the 2025 survey, the results of which were recently published, was cosmic inflation. That is, the hypothesis that points to an exponential expansion of the Universe which began in its first moments, after the Big Bang. 51% of respondents agreed that this theory explains many problems in cosmology at once and therefore has a high probability of being true. Talking about the Big Bang. The existence of the Big Bang was another of the theories with the greatest consensus in the survey, although the truth is that the figure is nothing to write home about either. 25% of the participants agreed that this event gave rise to the Universe 13.8 billion years ago. On the other hand, there were 68% of people who indicated that the Universe was born at a time when there was a large increase in temperature and density, but they did not indicate when that occurred. Disagreements with dark matter. Gravitational behaviors that do not respond to the observed mass have been observed in the Universe. That is, it seems as if there are massive objects exerting a gravitational attraction on others, but these objects are not detected, not even large accumulations of atoms. There is nothing. 27% of those surveyed consider that this can be explained by the existence of dark matter. However, there are 12% who believe that all this may be due to changes in the behavior of gravity on cosmic scales. That is to say, when we talk about the immensity of the Universe, the gravity exerted by objects is not the same. On the other hand, there are 5% of people who consider that the key is in primordial black holes. Although here we must emphasize that one of the hypotheses about the origin of dark matter is that it is formed in part by primordial black holes, so they would not be denying its existence. String theory to solve incompatibilities. The theory of general relativity was proposed on large, cosmic scales. On the other hand, quantum mechanics talks about the behavior of matter on a subatomic scale. Both questions seem incompatible, but to understand the Universe we need to work at both scales. Therefore, for a long time there has been thought about a theory that helps unify both issues. This, for 19% of those surveyed, is string theory. In it, subatomic particles, instead of being treated as points, are considered vibrational states of a more basic extended object, called a string. Normally, when we try to calculate the energy of a particle by considering it a mathematical point, without extension, we get closer to it eternally. We can do a kind of infinite zoom. On the other hand, when the points are replaced by strings with a minimum length, a result must necessarily be obtained. It does not tend to infinity. On the other hand, in string theory gravity, which not normally considered on a quantum scalearises naturally. Another hypothesis. The point is that, in the survey we are talking about, there are 12% of people who consider that string theory does not solve the problem, but that another theory does: that of loop quantum gravity. This, basically, acts in a completely opposite way. String theory emerges with quantum mechanics as a starting point and tries to find ways to make gravity make sense. On the other hand, the theory of loop quantum gravity starts from the General Theory of Relativity and attempts to quantize it in a way that … Read more

“People don’t appreciate how unique it is”

by

Elon Musk is a polarizing figure opinions: for some he is a visionary genius; for others, a businessman with controversial practices. However, those who have worked closely with him describe a unique leadership style that challenges traditional norms of large corporations. Andrej Karpathyformer head of AI and computer vision at Tesla, spent five years working directly with him. “It’s hard to describe how unique it is”says Karpathy. But he tries: in his own words, Musk represents a leadership style that does not fit traditional molds, but is precisely what has allowed Tesla to redefine sectors such as automotive and aerospace. In some statements 2024, this former collaborator explained what makes Musk so different and how his personal style shapes the dynamics within Tesla. Against bureaucracy One of Karpathy’s main observations revolves around Musk’s emphasis on maintain small and highly specialized teamss. According to Karpathy, while many companies tend to grow in size and bureaucracy, Musk acts as a constant counterweight to that trend. “At Tesla, I practically had to beg him every time someone had to be hired“says Karpathy. In addition, Musk does not hesitate to fire employees who do not meet his standards, a policy that may seem harsh, but which in his opinion is essential to maintain agility and efficiency in a company that seeks to constantly innovate. The rejection of bureaucracy is also manifested in his aversion to non-technical middle managers: Musk prefers that engineers, and not managers, be the primary source of information and decision-making. This philosophy ensures that the company’s priorities remain aligned with its technical objectives. The importance of the work environment “He doesn’t like stagnation”. Another distinctive aspect of Musk’s leadership is his insistence on a dynamic work environment, in which employees are engaged in problem solving, which has led him to eliminate large and unnecessary meetings and to encourage employees to leave those in which they are not actively contributing. This contrasts with common practices in large Silicon Valley companies which, according to Karpathy, tend to “pamper” their employees with superficial comforts that do not always translate into greater productivity. An involved CEO Unlike many executives who delegate most decisions to senior managers, Musk has direct and constant contact with engineers and technical teams. According to Karpathy, Musk spends about 50% of his time interacting with engineering teamssomething unusual for a CEO. Your proximity allows you to deeply understand technical challenges and address bottlenecks immediately Karpathy goes so far as to give the example that if a team faces a lack of GPUs, Musk does not hesitate to contact key suppliers directly to solve the problem… even if that means calling the CEO of Nvidia directly. This level of involvement ensures that strategic decisions are based on accurate technical information, rather than going through multiple layers of management. Ambitious promises and complex realities The style of Musk also has his criticsclear. Above all because of his extreme optimism… or, rather, their tendency to promise overly ambitious goalsas fully autonomous vehicles capable of crossing the United States without human intervention, has generated skepticism. Despite having achieved significant advances, such as the arrival of robotaxis not without controversyTesla has not managed to meet these goals within the established deadlines. However, he claims that Musk’s obsession with continuous improvement is what allows Tesla to remain a leader in advanced assisted driving technologies. Image | Marcos Merino through AI In Xataka | Elon Musk’s word is not reliable: the failure of Tesla’s “solar roofs” exposes him again This topic was originally published on Genbeta in December 2024.

Porsche has stopped production of the Taycan because the rich don’t want it. And that says it all about the new Ferrari Luce

by

The sports and luxury electric car market has been in a week like no one remembered for a long time. Mercedes and Ferrari have presented two supercars that anticipate their next steps regarding their zero emissions and that confirm their commitment to this technology. Porsche, however, is taking the opposite path: it has temporarily suspended production of its Taycans. What has happened? Porsche has temporarily stopped production of its most advanced electric car, the Taycan. At the moment, we know that at the end of last week the production chain stopped and more closures are anticipated in the short term, explain our colleagues from Motorpassion. And the reason is as simple as that they do not sell. They point out in Automotive and Sportwhich in the first quarter of the year barely 3,420 units have been delivered (19% less than in the same period of the previous year). If these figures hold, at the end of the year Porsche would have sold about 14,000 electric supercars, the lowest figure since its launch. We better stop. They say that a withdrawal in time is a victory. In the case of the automobile industry, it is totally true. When overproduced, the product accumulates in warehouses, takes up space and depreciates. In the end, it is best to give it a way out with suggestive discounts that can eat into the profit margin. This is a problem that Stellantis has experienced firsthand, which even came to “give away” the electric Fiat 500 in the United States to get them off your back. Honda has preferred cancel its upcoming electric launches and assume more than 2,000 million dollars in losses due to the expected low demand. This is a problem for any company but it is much more so for a brand like Porsche whose value is based on exclusivity and brand image. Finding dozens of Porsche Taycans online at ridiculous prices (as ridiculous as the price of a car that starts at over 100,000 euros can be) would be killing its position as a brand that one longs to achieve at some point in their life. Have we reached the limit? The Porsche Taycan was a success in its first years. In a few months of 2020, it already placed more than 20,000 units and in its first full year it exceeded 41,000 units. After a small drop in 2022, in 2023 it once again surpassed that barrier of 40,000 units and everything seemed to be going smoothly. In fact, the company based its strategy for the future on electricity as a fundamental pillar. But 2024 arrived and the crash began. Sales fell by half that year. In 2025 they remained at just over 16,000 units and the accounts say that it looks even worse for the remainder of the year. Along the way, the Chinese public that was essential for Porsche has turned its back on itfocusing on luxury cars much cheaper they are faster and that, above all, They offer other types of experiences. Chinese market closedeverything indicates that in the United States and Europe the market is already full of Porsche Taycan. It must be taken into account that the brand also has to deal with the tariffs in the United States which forces them to raise the price of the car or assume a narrower profit margin. We might think that we are facing the usual drop in sales of a product at the end of its commercial life, but the Taycan was renewed in 2024 and there is no announced replacement model that would make it lose its appeal. a trend. The production stoppage of the Taycan is just one more example of how the market is retreating. The company opted to convert the Macan, its great best-seller, into electric and the bet has gone wrong in numerical terms. Also they seem to have gone backwards to its “electric-only” project for the future Porsche 718. “We were wrong,” its former CEO has come to point out.now president of the Volkswagen Group. On the same wavelength, Lamborghini has stopped its plans to put an electric supercar on the market. Lotus, which within Geely was betting everything on pure electric, will also return to the combustion engine although with hybridization. And Mercedes is going the same way because does not sell its most expensive models. a problem. The electric supercar has a problem: it is not sold. In China, where electric has been assumed as the only future, it seems that there is no turning back but in United States emissions regulations have been eliminated and in Europe it will be allowed to sell cars with combustion engines in a movement that limits them to the most expensive and exclusive vehicles. That is to say, in Europe combustion sports cars will be even more exclusive, as the general fleet of vehicles is rapidly electrified. But, also, an electric can’t match the experience of its sound, its smell and its touch. It may be faster but it doesn’t sell the same experience. a clue. In the last week, Mercedes has presented the new Mercedes-AMG GT in its fully electric version. Without noise, they have recorded the sound of the legendary V8 that until now was under the hood to include it as a soundtrack. An attempt to make the car more than just a fast but aseptic product. The other great failure among the public has been the Ferrari Luce. On social networks and even the most renowned voices within the Ferrari orbit They have skinned him. But the movement is interesting because the new electric points to a different strategyto an audience that Ferrari does not have right now. It doesn’t want to be an electric supercar, it wants to be a fashion accessory. And only from there is its launch understood. Photo | In Xataka | The new Ferrari Luce is much more than Ferrari’s first electric car. It is a desperate cry to find a new audience

In 1967, Canada built futuristic homes like Lego pieces. Half a century later they still don’t know how to repair them

by

When Moshe Safdie designed Habitat 67 As an architecture student, he had a revolutionary idea: he used thousands of Lego pieces to test how housing modules could fit together in three dimensions. Decades later, the architect himself I kept remembering who even emptied entire Lego stores in Montreal to build the models. And maybe that was the problem. Reinvent the home like Lego. In the early 1960s, Western cities were trapped between two models that seemed inevitable: huge blocks of impersonal apartments or endless car-dependent suburbs. A young architecture student named Moshe Safdie He believed that there was a third way. His idea was apparently simple and radical at the same time: build prefabricated homes by stacking concrete modules as if they were giant lego piecesso that each family could have light, a terrace, vegetation and the feeling of an individual house within a large urban structure. The project ended up becoming Habitat 67, the great futuristic icon of the Montreal Expo. What Canada presented to the world as the definitive future of cities ended up being one of the most fascinating and problematic works of architecture of the 20th century. Habitat 67 was a utopia. The image of the building continues to look futuristic even today: 354 huge concrete modules prefabricated, each weighing about 90 tons, stacked in irregular shapes on an artificial peninsula facing the St. Lawrence River. Safdie was obsessed with solving a problem he considered central to the urban future: how to maintain density from the city without sacrificing privacy, nature and the feeling of home. His motto was “For everyone a garden”. Each apartment had to have its own garden, cross ventilation, open views and elevated pedestrian streets instead of closed corridors. Inspiration came from both the Pueblo homes of the American Southwest and the japanese metabolism that we talked about a few days ago, an architectural movement that imagined buildings made up of modular cells capable of growing and reorganizing like living organisms. The big problem: making it cheap. The paradox of Habitat 67 is that it was born precisely to make urban housing cheaper… and ended costing a lot more than expected. Safdie imagined that industrial prefabrication would allow apartments to be manufactured in a chain quickly and efficiently, but the reality It was very different. The complex required an extremely sophisticated assembly system, a factory installed within the work itself, gigantic cranes and very complex technical connections between modules. Each box had to leave the factory practically finished, with windows, wiring, bathrooms and kitchens incorporated before being lifted into its final position. The reduction of the original project (from 1,200 planned homes to just 158) shot even more the costs. The experiment designed to democratize the city ended up becoming a too expensive complex even for the middle class it sought to attract. Leaks and mold appear. As time went by, the other great enemy of Habitat 67 appeared: the water. The stepped structure full of terraces, gardens and joints between modules generated a waterproofing nightmare. The concrete began to leak constantly in Montreal’s extreme climate and water ended up penetrating walls and ventilation systems. Some residents reported serious problems moisture and mold for years. The repairs they were never simple because the building does not function like a conventional block: each module is a structural part of an extremely complex three-dimensional framework. Half a century later, restorations are still almost surgical. In the major rehabilitation carried out for the 50th anniversary, it was necessary to remove outer layersre-insulate huge surfaces and redesign entire systems to protect the structure from Canadian winters. From social dream to elite symbol. Another of the most striking ironies of Habitat 67 It is its social evolution. What was born as a manifesto for accessible urban housing ended up becoming one of the directions Montreal’s most exclusive. The original rents were already prohibitive in the 60s and subsequent privatization converted the apartments in luxury properties. Today some units reach millionaire prices and the monthly maintenance costs are very high. The “city for all” ended up being an enclave for cultural elites, businessmen and architecture lovers. Yet even its critics admit that the building accomplished something extraordinary: demonstrating that dense housing could be emotionally distinct from the repetitive blocks that dominated modern urbanism. He never completely died. The most fascinating thing is that, despite all its problems, Habitat 67 continues to exert a gigantic influence on architects and urban planners. decades later keep inspiring modular projects, terraced complexes and new ideas on how to combine urban density and quality of life. Even today’s digital tools have resurrected the original never-built project. In recent years, Safdie Architects and Epic Games they virtually recreated the gigantic “Project Hillside” which the Canadian government cut due to lack of money in the 60s. Thanks to Unreal Engine, drones and hyper-realistic models, the architect was able to tour for the first time the complete version of the modular city that he had imagined as a young man. There is something deeply symbolic in that image: Habitat 67 was so ambitious that not even the technology of its time could do it. fully viable. Maybe that’s why it continues to fascinate today. Because it seems like a relic of the past… but also a vision of an urban future that we still don’t know how to build without collapsing due to leaks, crazy costs and eternal repairs. Image | Parcours riverain – Ville de Montréal, Thomas Ledl, Vassgergely In Xataka | In 1970 Japan built homes of the future where each capsule would be replaceable. Half a century later he discovered that no one knew how to repair them In Xataka | The incredible story of the tallest building on the planet that ended up becoming the largest swimming pool in the Soviet Union

We thought that buying a yacht was a luxury. The real luxury that they don’t tell you is another: maintaining it

by

Owning a yacht is synonymous with luxury and opulence. It is not for less. Superyachts like the koru by Jeff Bezos or the Leviathan by Gabe Newell, they had a purchase price of 500 million dollars; he launchpad by Mark Zuckerberg about 300 million dollars. However, although buying a yacht seems the most difficultwho has been in the sector for some time knows that this initial disbursement will not be the only one, it is only the first. The true luxury (and what is really expensive) is what comes after and is repeated every year: the maintenance of that yacht. There is an unwritten rule that has been circulating around moorings and ports for decades to prepare future buyers for what awaits them. It is called the “10% rule“, and refers to the annual maintenance cost that a yacht requires: 10% of its price, each year. The inhabitants of the Caribbean island of Antigua they learned it the hard way. The price of a yacht does not come on the label When someone is going to buy a boat, it is usual to take into account whether they can afford its purchase price. That’s the easy part. You look at the price and compare it to your checking account. If it fits the budget, honey on flakes. However, there is a cost that not always taken into account in which the owner of a yacht (or any boat in general) should reserve approximately the 10% of the purchase price to cover all expenses annual operation and maintenance. Yes, 10% of the price each year. A 500,000 euro yacht will generate annual costs of around 50,000 euros; If the value amounts to one million euros, the figure rises to 100,000 euros per year. That 10% includes practically everything necessary to keep the boat sailing and in perfect condition: routine maintenance, regular repairs, average fuelannual insurance, mooring fees and, in the case of larger superyachts, crew salaries. Boat insurance alone already represents between 1.5% and 2% of the value of the yacht per year, which in a 500,000 euro boat translates into between 7,500 and 10,000 euros per year in premiums alone. At this point, it should be noted that these premiums are also calculated based on the location of the mooring. A yacht moored in the Mediterranean does not pay the same insurance as in areas like Florida where hurricane warnings and tropical storms are the order of the day. As the ship ages, the numbers change The 10% rule is stated as a reference guide for the entire life of the yacht. That is, it is an average in which some years the maintenance cost will be well below that 10%, while in other years it will far exceed it. However, above or below, the cost always remains close to that 10%: As and as they point out from WS Yatch Brokersone of the decisive factors, for example, is that this 10% varies as the age of the boat advances. When the yacht is new, the manufacturer’s warranties are in force, the mechanical systems are working well and maintenance costs can remain around 2% of the purchase price for the first few years. That 2% corresponds to fixed expenses such as insurance, mooring, or basic deck maintenance. As the years go by, parts wear out, warranties expire, and breakdowns become more and more frequent. For boats between 5 and 15 years old, the recommended percentage rises to 10%, with bad years that can reach (and exceed) 15% of the purchase value. The reason is that, as the market value of the boat goes down, its maintenance costs go up, so any calculation based on a fixed percentage loses reliability. That is to say, a 15-year-old yacht that has cost 100,000 euros second-hand will not (or at least not always) have expenses of 10% since its engine and hull begin to need major repairs due to years of use. That is, what the buyer has saved on the purchase price must then be invested in repairs anyway. Hence the 10% rule is a reference average applied to the entire life of the yacht (with its ups and downs), not a rule written in stone. The size, the crew and the place where you moor Size also determines the maintenance budget proportionally. From 25 meters in length, the yacht can now require professional crewand that 10% falls short to cover the cost of maintenance. A captain’s salary alone starts at around $50,000 per year, and a full crew for a large yacht easily exceeds $200,000 per year. On megayachts, managers usually plan 10% for operating expenses (which are included in the 10% rule), plus an additional 10% for onboard personnel, their maintenance, etc., which places the real maintenance cost closer to 20% of the acquisition price. This percentage does not apply to those yachts that, due to size, only require the services of a captain during the high season, thus reducing their annual cost. He port where it is moored It also has a decisive influence on the calculation of annual fixed expenses. It does not cost the same to moor in a small fishing town on the Catalan coast as in Puerto Banús or in the port of Monaco. In Spain, the monthly mooring fee for a boat between 12 and 14 meters ranges between 450 and 575 euros per month (about 6,900 euros per year), but it skyrockets in large tourist ports. to put a practical examplemooring in Marina Ibiza, the main recreational port on the island, for a yacht of about 15 meters in length costs between 25,000 and 30,000 euros per year, while if you opt for other secondary ports on the island, the price is reduced by half to between 10,000 and 15,000 euros per year. According to estimates of Ocean Independencea company specializing in superyacht management, the annual routine maintenance of a superyacht, which includes hull cleaning, fuel, engine inspection and electronic systems, ranges between … Read more

The Earth has had a traveling companion for millions of years and we don’t know where it came from, but there is a ship ready to give us answers

by

The Earth does not travel alone around the sun. And not only because of the Moon, which logically always accompanies it, orbiting around it. It also has several traveling companions: objects, called co-orbitals, that take exactly the same time as our planet to make a complete revolution around the star. These objects are well known, but their origin is quite mysterious. There are astronomers who bet that they escaped from the asteroid belt. However, their silicate content suggests that they could be fragments of the Moon that jumped from its surface after the impact of a meteorite. Now, a team of scientists has assigned probabilities to each option, although for definitive proof of its origin we will have to wait a little longer. (469219) Kamo’oalewa. This is the name of one of the best-known coorbitals on Earth. It measures between 24 and 107 meters in diameter and the spectral analyzes that have been able to be carried out Telescopes such as the Large Binocular Telescope (LBT) and the Lowell Discovery Telescope (LDT) indicate that it is very rich in silicates, so it is likely that it comes from the Moon. In fact, the most accepted hypothesis so far indicates that it could have been formed during the impact that gave rise to the Giordano Bruno crater on our satellite. However, this new study, published in the journal Icarus, suggests that it is more likely that it is an asteroid escaped of the belt between Mars and Jupiter. Very unlikely. For an asteroid or a piece of the Moon to become co-orbital, they must not only escape from their place. Also They must have enough energy to be located in what is known as a quasi-satellite orbit. This, for a body the size of Kamo’oalewa, is highly unlikely. Quasi-what? A quasi-satellite has certain similarities with a satellite, but it is not the same. When we look at one of them from the planet it accompanies, in the direction of the Sun, it appears that it is in orbit around the planet, but in reality it rotates around the Sun itself. This, among other reasons, is due to the fact that is outside the Hill sphere of the planet. That is, the environment dominated by its gravity. Being outside of said orbit, it is influenced by the planet’s gravity, but above all, in this case, it is influenced by that of the Sun. Be that as it may, falling and staying in that orbit is complicated, as we have already seen and, above all, as these scientists have demonstrated. Win the asteroid option. These scientists have created models that simulate the trajectory of 12,000 synthetic particles launched from the lunar surface at different speeds and angles, following their orbits for millions of years. The goal was to see how many stabilized at co-orbital points with the Earth. In total they found 70 objects with a diameter greater than 10 meters capable of doing so. 70 out of 12,000! Now, when they repeated the procedure by swapping lunar particles for objects from the asteroid belt, they found more candidates. 1,600 in total. Tianwen-2 will return samples to answer the mystery in 2027 Tianwen-2 will have the key. The origin of coorbitals is so intriguing that China already has sent a ship to analyze the surface of one of them. Specifically from Kamo’oalewa himself. The Tianwen-2 mission left in May 2025 towards this object, with the aim of collecting at least 100 grams of samples and return them to Earth for analysis. It is already known that there are silicates, or at least it is suspected, but a deeper idea of ​​the composition is needed to understand the origin of this object. Orbit insertion is expected to occur next June if all goes well. Then he will spend a few months collecting samples to put them in a capsule, which will land back on Earth. already in 2027. Two options. If the analyzes of Tianwen-2 conclude that Kamo’oalewa came from the Moon, the lunar impact mechanics would have to be rethought, since it would be very rare for one of these fragments to have been able to reach its final location with what we know so far. On the other hand, if it is proven that it comes from an asteroid, it would be necessary to study where these silicates come from, since they are very unconventional for an object of these characteristics. Whatever is concluded, there will be a lot of fabric to cut, that is clear. ç Image | NASA |China News Service In Xataka | The Earth has moons that we don’t know about: exploring them is key to revealing the secrets of our solar system

Chinese Big Tech can now buy Nvidia GPUs. The problem for Nvidia is that they don’t need it now

by

The United States and China are immersed in a trade and technological war that has caught the line of fire to the AI ​​giant: Nvidia. The situation is that Nvidia must prioritize AI companies from the United States to guarantee the supremacy of this country, but as a company it would be interested in taking a bite out of the giant Chinese market. And the problem is twofold: it has not been able to do so for a long time due to trade vetoes, but now that it seems that it can sell its famous H200 to China, it turns out that China has turned the page. More or less. green light. Nvidia has gone from having a monopoly on AI GPUs in China to have a 0% quota. These are the words of the CEO, Jensen Huang, and the reason is the aforementioned trade restrictions between the powers that prevented Nvidia from selling its most powerful products to the Asian giant. Huang has spent months insisting on Donald Trump’s government to allow them to sell with a very clear logic: China is going to develop its alternatives and what better way to make a profit until then. The situation is gone relaxing at the end of last year and at the beginning of this to get to the point where we are now. According to Reutersthe US Department of Commerce already allows ten Chinese companies and distributors such as Foxconn and Lenovo acquire that long-awaited H200the company’s second most powerful AI chip. Good news for the company. Or they should be if it weren’t for the fact that the Chinese industry is going its own way looking home. Alibaba, ByteDance, JD.com and Tencent are the Chinese giants that can supposedly already buy H200. Up to 75,000 chips each, to be exact. However, it is noted that they have not yet made any shipments. Here there is a mix between very restrictive bureaucracy and, above all, that emphasis on national development. Tencent, for example, noted in September last year that they had no intention of producing AI chips, but that they were going to invest a lot of money in domestic partners. For example, they are in the process of adapting their infrastructure to be able to connect Huawei’s Ascend platform (particularly the Ascend 950 series) as the main training tool for large models. A few days ago, Tencent’s strategy director already pointed out that that strategy was still in place and that the company expects a significant increase in spending on AI GPUs designed in China. Manufacturing at home. Alibaba and Bytedance have a different approach. If Tencent is focusing on acquiring Huawei platforms, Alibaba and Bytedance are looking to create their own chips. Alibaba seeks to be the most powerful RISC-V chip created to date and it was reported that Bytedance wanted Samsung will manufacture its processor. In the end, whether buying from Huawei or developing the tool internally, the two approaches respond to the great national objective: that at least 50% of the data centers that belong to the State use at least 50% Chinese integrated circuits in their servers. That is one of the great Chinese technological impulses of recent years, one of the crucial points of the Five-Year Plan for the development of the country and, above all, the strategy that Nvidia had been warning the United States about for some time. The age of inference. Because this period of ostracism to which the US condemned China has served for the country to develop three very clear alternatives to Nvidia and encourage companies that are already working with models to develop their own hardware. This is important especially in the new AI framework we are entering, that of inference. Although the AI ​​will continue to train and GPUs will be needed for this, the next step is inference, the agentic era in which the processor or CPU is very important. AMD is moving there, same as Intel or ARMand precisely processors are something that Huawei is good at and in which the Chinese giants can shine as much as their American counterpart by developing chips tailored to their models and needs. Also, as pointed out in CNBChaving your own chips means you don’t have to fight with anyone else in a time when there is scarcity and, of course, if you don’t have to buy from an outsider, there is an improvement in the gross income margin. juicy cake. And this leaves Nvidia in that uncomfortable situation, one in which it wants to participate, but in which it seems that it is no longer needed as much as before. Because China is developing its chips for this new era of AI and Nvidia is running into a final boss called bureaucracy and the pressure groups of the ‘Make America Great Again‘. The first is due to the slowness of the export order processes, something that takes months when orders should be much more agile. The second are the aforementioned pressure groups that hold that any deals Nvidia makes with Chinese companies are less chips for American companies, something that should not be allowed. Meanwhile, Chinese companies are developing their alternatives and Huawei wants to flood the market with 750,000 chips this year, three times more than its shipments in 2025, and Nvidia is falling short of a $50 billion pie. In Xataka | The US has the best AI models. China has something else: AI too cheap to care about

TikTok now has an answer for those who don’t want to see ads: check out

by

Consuming social networks for free and without any type of advertisement is something that has been disappearing for years. Bombarding with advertising to later launch a payment model is something that applications like Instagram learned very well, and now TikTok is beginning to follow in its footsteps. TikTok Ad-Free. TikTok began testing a payment model back in 2023 in the United Statesan idea that did not spread beyond American territory. The company now makes official TikTok Ad-Free in UKopening the ban to expand it to the rest of the regions. How it works. The company has announced that, “in the coming months”, users over 18 years of age will be able to gradually subscribe to the new advertising-free option, TikTok Ad-Free. Those who continue using the free version will see no changes, and will see personalized ads. The price is £3.99 per month, in exchange for not seeing a single ad on TikTok and our data not being used for advertising purposes. It’s something that sounds familiar to us. Instagram Vibes. In 2024, Meta gave his ultimatum: either it was checked out or our information would be used for advertising purposes to show us the relevant advertisements. On Instagram they went a step further, since paying users not only got rid of ads: they got a verification badge and got more “love” from Instagram in terms of the visibility of their own account if they were a content creator. Why is it important. TikTok is in the crosshairs of the European Commissionas you consider your ad library to be non-compliant the Digital Services Law. The social network will have to be especially careful when implementing measures related to ads and data collection, even more so if billing is involved. In the same way, the fact that TikTok has given free rein to its subscription monetization model (although its application is not immediate), closes a circle of services that we use on a daily basis and that, whether we like it or not, force us to checkout if we do not want to see ads. And if not, Tell them to the paid version of WhatsApp. The big question. If you’re wondering when TikTok Ad-Free will arrive in Europe, the answer is that we don’t know yet. What seems inevitable is that this ends up happening, after the test in the United States and its progressive implementation in the United Kingdom. In Xataka | TikTok’s infinite scroll has just entered the EU’s crosshairs: Brussels marks it as “addictive design” and demands change

The RAM memory crisis is complicating the task of upgrading a PC, but there are alternatives if you don’t want to spend a fortune

by

Straight to the point: if you want to upgrade or build a PC right now, you’re going to have to dig deep into your pocket. The price of RAM it’s shot right nowsomething that It is already being extended to storage as well.. But what if you have no choice and need to upgrade your PC or a new one in parts? Assuming that RAM is going to cost you more than it did a year ago, There are alternatives to spend less money. There are certain aspects to take into account that we will talk about a little further down, but in order not to spend a small fortune, the most economical option is to get some 32GB DDR4 RAM like these from Corsair: we have them available for 199.99 euros. CORSAIR VENGEANCE LPX DDR4 RAM 32GB (2x16GB) 3200MHz CL16-20-20-38 1.35V Intel AMD Desktop Computer Memory – Black (CMK32GX4M2E3200C16) The price could vary. We earn commission from these links An especially interesting option if your PC is already a few years old Let’s go in parts. The first thing to take into account is the price, obviously. The price history of this article tells us that these RAM memory modules They have been between 50 and 60 euros before the month of August last 2025. Obviously, if we compare those prices with what it costs now, it is obvious that the same product costs much more. But of course, it must be seen from the perspective of the current price crisis suffered by these components. It’s not all bad news. These same modules They cost more than 280 euros in February of this yearan absurdly high price. So are they worth buying right now? The situation with the RAM does not seem to be getting better in the short term, but it is 32 GB of DDR4 RAM, which means that you have to take some things into account before buying them. If you already have a PC at home and it is already a few years old, then DDR4 RAM is a very interesting option. It is much cheaper than DDR5 which, despite offering more performancehas an even more skyrocketing price. In addition, this DDR4 memory offers more than enough performance for simple tasks such as office automation, Internet browsing or even undemanding games. DDR5 RAM prices are still high, but not as high as a few months ago Now, imagine that you want to build a PC and you want the most current so that it lasts longer. Here the ideal would be to go for DDR5 RAM, but the problem is, as you can imagine, the price. Among everything that there is right now, we also have from Corsair these two 32 GB modules per 399.99 euros. Yes, they have a very high price (more so if we take into account that they cost around 120 euros last year), but they have reached over 500 euros. CORSAIR Vengeance DDR5 RAM 32GB (2x16GB) up to 6000MHz CL36 Intel XMP 3.0 Desktop Computer Memory – Black (CMK32GX5M2B6000C36) The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Keep in mind that your motherboard and processor must be compatible with this memory, so if your PC is a few years old, you will also have to update these components. Now, in return, we will have a longer PC and that will also allow us to upgrade to other components in the future without spending too much. Other Corsair RAM memories that may interest you CORSAIR Vengeance DDR5 RAM 32GB (2x16GB) 6000MHz CL36-44-44-96 1.35V AMD Expo & Intel XMP Desktop Computer Memory – White (CMK32GX5M2E6000Z36W) The price could vary. We earn commission from these links CORSAIR VENGEANCE RGB PRO DDR4 RAM 32GB (2x16GB) 3200MHz CL16-20-20-38 1.35V Intel AMD Desktop Computer Memory – Black (CMW16GX4M2C3200C16) The price could vary. We earn commission from these links CORSAIR Vengeance DDR5 RAM 32GB (2x16GB) up to 6000MHz CL30 AMD Expo Intel XMP 3.0 Desktop Computer Memory – Gray (CMK32GX5M2B6000Z30) The price could vary. We earn commission from these links 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 | corsair In Xataka | DDR4 or DDR5? What RAM to choose so as not to pay even more than necessary in the middle of the price crisis In Xataka | Buy and assemble your PC in parts: guide to choosing processor, SSD, RAM and graphics card

Anthropic was the “don’t be evil” of AI for developers. Now he’s squeezing them all

by

Claude Code and Claude Opus 4.6 sparked a golden era for developers, who found themselves with a fantastic AI agent and model for their work. Suddenly OpenAI was no longer the trendy company: Anthropic was, which users and developers fell in love and became in the pretty girl of AI. Months later we are seeing how Anthropic is making changes that are being highly criticized and that point to something that we have already seen repeatedly: platforms conquer you and inevitably then the platforms squeeze you. The trigger. On April 2, 2026, Stella Laurenzo, Senior Director in AMD’s AI group, published a text in Claude Code’s GitHub repository titled “Claude Code is useless for complex engineering tasks with February updates.” This directive included a meticulous analysis of almost 6,600 real Claude Code sessions with nearly 235,000 tool calls and about 18,000 reasoning blocks in four different projects. The conclusions were obvious to her: the performance of Claude Code and Claude Opus 4.6 had degraded. The numbers. In this analysis, two periods are shown according to Laurenzo. In the good period, from January to mid-February, the model read 6.6 files for every file it edited. In the theoretically degraded period, from March onwards, that rate had fallen to 2.0 files read. Code edits in files that Claude had not recently reviewed went from 6.2% to 33.7%: one in three changes to the code were being made “blindly.” In addition, the visibility of the reasoning was reduced, from 2,200 characters to only 600 on average, but there is something more. The costs of the process multiplied by 122 in the same period, although it is true that in that period they went from using 1-3 concurrent agents to using 5-10, which complicates the interpretation of the data. Anthropic tries to clarify what happened. Anthropic’s official response It was published by Boris Chernyresponsible for Claude Code. This engineer confirmed two actual product changes: On February 9, Opus 4.6 switched to using so-called “adaptive reasoning” by default. On March 3, the default effort level moved from high to medium, sitting at level 85, which Anthropic describes as “the best balance of intelligence, latency, and cost for most users.” Closed debate. Cherny also spoke of that suspicion that Claude was now hiding “how he thought.” He explained that the change in visible reasoning records is not a real degradation, and the detected header was simply a user interface modification that hid intermediate reasoning to reduce latency without affecting model performance. Laurenzo herself had already foreseen something like this and tried to implement solutions to avoid it, but her data confirmed this drop in performance. Cherny closed the debate as if the issue had been resolved, but it doesn’t seem like it really is. Computing capacity crisis. Thariq Shihipar of Claude Code’s team revealed in March that Anthropic was adjusting session limits to 5 hours during peak hours. That is to say: if there was a lot of demand, your Claude tokens would probably run out faster. He pointed out that the measure would actually only be noticed by 7% of users (the most intensive during those peak hours), and confessed “I know this is frustrating. We will continue to invest in scaling efficiency.” This is contradicted by a comment in the debate on Laurenzo’s post in which explained that “we do not degrade our models to better serve demand, I have said this many times before.” More degradations. They appeared other discoveries and criticismssuch as how Claude Code’s prompt cache had also been drastically reduced (from one hour to five minutes), triggering quota consumption in long programming sessions. Anthropic he indicated to VentureBeat that Team and Enterprise accounts are not affected by these session limits, but the pattern seems increasingly clear: computing is scarce and must be rationed… or at least that is what all these Anthropic measures seem to point to. What remains unclear is whether the quality of the model has actually been degraded, although there are Reddit “megathreads” that also point in that direction. “Nerfing”, nothing. When a company deliberately degrades its service, it is often called “nerfing.” on social networksand criticism in this sense was increasing in the case of Anthropic. Numerous publications of users in X and in media of technology have done reference to Laurenzo’s studio and accused Anthropic of this voluntary degradation of its models. Boris Cherny intervened in at least one case to flatly say that “That’s false” and to explain that they reported the changes and in fact gave users the option to disable it. But rationing exists. In The Wall Street Journal they confirmed that this rationing of computing is certainly occurring among AI platforms due to high demand. We have a good example of the consequences in David Hsu, founder and CEO of Retool. He explained in said newspaper that although he preferred Claude Opus 4.6 to power his AI agent, he recently had to switch to the OpenAI model because “Anthropic keeps crashing all the time.” Prices change (silently). The Information indicated yesterday that Anthropic is changing the way it bills users of Enterprise plans. Instead of a subscription of $200 per month with a “flat rate” for using their AI models, what they will do is charge a base rate of $20 per user per month and to that they will add the consumption of each user with the standard price of their API. Your own updated documentation points it out (“Use is not included in the per-seat rate”) and it is estimated that the change could double or even triple the cost of using Claude for heavy users. The discounts of 10 to 15% on the API that were included in the past and that allowed companies to scale this token consumption in a more affordable way also disappear. Prices per million tokens have not changed, but we went from a “flat rate” (with usage fees) to a pay-per-use model, much more expensive for heavy users. It’s not just Anthropic. … Read more

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

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

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

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