era

There is a booming job in the era of artificial intelligence: cybersecurity expert

by

Yeah Mythosfrom Anthropic, and GPT-5.4-Cyber, from OpenAI, have been presented as models capable of detecting and exploiting vulnerabilities, the quick conclusion seems quite evident: cybersecurity profiles could begin to become redundant. After all, we are talking about models aimed at moving in one of the most delicate areas of technology: finding flaws before others take advantage of them. The answer, at least for now, goes in the opposite direction to that first intuition. AI is not making the expert irrelevant. On the contrary: today it is more necessary than ever. That signal is already beginning to be noticed clearly in the United States, where the NYT has put figures and testimonies to a trend that was gaining strength: the hiring of cybersecurity profiles. The American newspaper points out that offers in the sector grew by 11% year-on-year in the first quarter, according to Glassdoorand shows how some executive search firms are receiving more assignments to find managers with experience in security breaches, data protection and code review. The reason is not just to protect data. There is also a need to respond to incidents and understand how AI changes the risk surface of companies. The key is that this new layer of AI not only changes the tools of those who protect the systems. It also modifies the possibilities of those who try to compromise them. Reuters pointed out a few days ago that Attackers are increasingly using AI to detect vulnerabilities, and Check Point has warned in its 2026 Cybersecurity Report that AI attacks have moved from the experimental phase to a routine criminal deployment. More tools do not mean fewer cybersecurity experts The market, furthermore, is not asking for exactly the same thing as it did a few years ago. Cybersecurity continues to be the umbrella, but more specific capabilities are beginning to weigh heavily within it: AI, cloud security, engineering, analysis and risk assessment. The 2025 ISC2 Cybersecurity Workforce Study points out that hiring managers place AI among the most in-demand skills, with 27%, and professionals raised that perception to 44%. The conclusion is important: knowing about security is not enough. It is becoming increasingly important to understand how this security is integrated into complex systems obviously crossed by AI. Fortinet did a survey and found that 49% of respondents fear that AI will increase cyberattackswhile 97% of organizations already use or plan to use a cybersecurity solution that takes advantage of this technology. So it seems that companies are not only concerned about the offensive use of AI, they are also trying to incorporate it into their own defenses. And that opens up another less visible, but equally important, need: having teams capable of evaluating these tools and integrating them judiciously. In Spain, photography also points to a sector in full expansion. INCIBE summarizes it with a very useful phrase to ground the phenomenon: “Cybersecurity is already one of the most dynamic sectors of the Spanish digital economy.” According to the study on the cybersecurity industry in Spain 2025the organization places employment at 164,761 people and points out that cybersecurity already represents 25.55% of employment in the ICT sector. The forecast, furthermore, does not speak of a specific increase: between 2026 and 2029, the sector will grow at an annual rate of 14.25%, until reaching 282,157 jobs at the end of that period. “Cybersecurity is already one of the most dynamic sectors of the Spanish digital economy.” The problem is that this growth comes with an obvious tension: there are not always enough profiles prepared to cover what companies need. Deloitte formulates it from the side of those responsible for security: “Nearly 38% of CISOs identify reliance on scarce profiles as a significant challenge, reflecting a persistent gap between growing demand for capabilities and limited market supply.” The consequence is that many organizations end up relying on external talent to support your defenses. In fact, Deloitte points out that in 2026, 60% of cybersecurity personnel will be external. Seen from Spain, the phenomenon shares the same background, although with its own nuances. The United States remains one of the epicenters of the AI ​​industry and we cannot understand this trend without looking at what is happening there, but it is also not advisable to extrapolate its market dynamics as if they were identical to those of Europe. Other indicators come into play here: employment growth, relevant weight within the ICT sector and dependence on external profiles in many organizations. The conclusion, however, points in the same direction on both sides of the Atlantic: AI is forcing cybersecurity capabilities to be strengthened, not reduced. Images | Xataka with Nano Banana In Xataka | How often should we change ALL our passwords according to three cybersecurity experts

In the era of drones and smart missiles, the US has recovered a relic of the First World War: the bayonet

by

In the middle of the Iraq war, a group of British soldiers launched a bayonet charge against Iraqi militiamen near Al Amara. The scene seemed like something out of another century, but the British Army considered it a tactical success in the middle of a modern combat already marked by night vision, digital communications and advanced weaponry. The unexpected return of the bayonet. More than 20 years have passed since the scene described, but they counted in a report in Insider that, in an era dominated by FPV drones, electronic warfare, artificial intelligence and guided missiles, the United States Army has decided to bring back something that seems straight out of the trenches of World War I: indeed, the bayonet. The US Army Ranger School, one of the toughest training programs on the planet, has incorporated new hand-to-hand assaults with this war tool within its extreme combat circuits. As? Apparently, soldiers must advance through smoke, tunnels, trenches and physical obstacles while attacking humanoid targets with knives mounted on the end of the rifle. At first glance it seems like an absurd military anachronism in the digital age. However, for the Pentagon the decision responds precisely to the type of war What do you think can happen? in the future. The Pentagon obsession. The war in Ukraine and other recent conflicts have shown something which is of great concern to Western military strategists: modern battlefields depend on extremely vulnerable networks, communications, GPS, drones and electronic sensors. Jamming, electronic warfare attacks, and combat chaos can isolate entire units in a matter of minutes. In this scenario, the US Army fears that soldiers accustomed to operating surrounded by technology lose capacity to continue fighting when screens, communications or air support disappear. That’s why Ranger School now insists on training something a lot. most basic and brutal: move forward, endure fear, maintain physical cohesion with teammates and continue attacking even in extreme situations of exhaustion and disorientation. A relic that never disappeared. The truth is that, although the bayonet is associated above all to suicidal charges of the First World War, never completely disappeared of modern armies. American troops still used it in Korea and Vietnamand British soldiers and US Marines set it again during particularly violent urban combat in Iraq in 2004. Its current value is not so much in the weapon itself as in what it represents psychologically. Military historians have been pointing out for years that the bayonet works especially like a tool to train aggression, discipline and the ability to continue fighting under extreme fear. It forces the soldier to accept something that modern technological warfare sometimes hides: that many combats still end at very short distances and in deeply chaotic conditions. Recovering very old ideas. The movement is especially striking because it arrives just when the war seems more futuristic than ever. Ukraine and Russia have filled the front autonomous droneselectronic interference and constant surveillance from the air. But precisely that same technological saturation is producing an unexpected effect: combat once again becomes extremely disorderly when communications fail or units become isolated. In many sectors of the Ukrainian front, soldiers survive entire days under drones and artillery hardly any contact of course with higher commands. The Pentagon appears to have drawn an uncomfortable conclusion from that experience: The more technological war becomes, the more important it becomes for a soldier to be able to keep fighting even when all that technology disappears. The fear of blackout. Plus: America’s new military obsession is not just about developing better drones or missiles, but about preparing troops capable of operating when the entire digital ecosystem collapsesif it does. The bayonet symbolizes precisely that idea. Not because the Army expects massive loads like those of 1916but because it represents the ultimate survival level military: keep moving forward when there is nothing else left. Ultimately, the decision reflects a very current paradox. The more sophisticated modern wars become, the more armies fear the moment when they will once again resemble something much more ancient, physical and primitive. Image | Joey Rhodes/US Army In Xataka | The United States has 54 billion euros for its army and a very precise place to invest it: in drones In Xataka | A soldier can and should disobey an illegal order. The problem that Anthropic faces is that an AI does not

a window that goes from the Castro era to the Middle Ages

by

The Cies Islands They are a natural gem. We have known that for a long time. It was first confirmed by Congress, which in 2002 declared them a National Park (along with other islands in the Rías Baixas), and later the British newspaper Guardianwhose reporters concluded almost two decades ago that the Galician archipelago hides the best beach on the planet. Which we just discovered Thanks to the archaeologists, the islands that appear in the Vigo estuary are something more: a site that tells us a story which extends from before the arrival of the Romans to the Middle Ages. Now the experts want to go one step further. What has happened? that archaeologists have rescued secrets that have been hidden for centuries on a hillside in the Cíes, the Vigo estuary archipelago that has been declared a Natural Park since 1980 and has been integrated into the Atlantic Islands National Park for almost a quarter of a century. Between April and the beginning of May, a group of researchers from the University of Vigo carried out a series of surveys on the islands that have allowed them to shed more light on their past. To be more precise, it has expanded what we know about life in the archipelago along a wide range from the castro culture to the Middle Ages. What exactly have they done? Focus on two points. The first basically expands the work done last yearwhen archaeologists identified a series of walls and what looked like part of a floor. The second survey was carried out in an area where the researchers noticed a change in elevation in the terrain, which led them to think that a wall could be hidden beneath the ground. The experts were not blindsided. The campaign focused on what is known as Hortas fortcataloged from the 90s and which stands out as one of the most emblematic Iron Age sites in Galicia. Unlike others castro settlements spread throughout the community, it is located at the southern end of the island of O Faro, a steep area that its inhabitants perhaps chose because of the control it offered them over the maritime routes. What did they discover? They have basically expanded what we know about the history of the archipelago. After clearing the area, at the first point the researchers discovered new structures and identified “two levels of occupancy” well differentiated. One dates from the late ancient period, between the 5th and 6th centuries AD). The other corresponds to the end of the Early Middle Ages, more specifically between the 9th and 10th centuries. This wide range reveals that the area probably had a more or less stable human presence for centuries. “This campaign allows us to affirm that the hillside of the fort was occupied from the fortress period until the Middle Ages, as well as its potential as a heritage element to deepen the knowledge of the ways of life on the islands during antiquity and up to the present day,” the researchers highlight. a statement from the University of Vigo. Did you find out anything else? Yes. The above is what they discovered in their first survey. The second, focused on the area in which they noticed a change in the terrain, revealed another piece of information just as curious: under the earth it was hidden a “cuncheiro“an area where the ancient inhabitants of the island accumulated the waste from their banquets. “From the beginning it was clear that it was an area for emptying food remains of the castro inhabitants of the area of ​​the island, with the appearance of a cuncheiro that almost reached three meters deep,” they explain. There is another important fact. These remains appeared outside a “great house” from the Castro era, the first of its kind identified in all of the Cíes Islands. It may seem like an anecdote or a minor detail, but for Galician archaeologists it is key information. “It is sure proof of the presence of an important human settlement prior to the arrival of the Romans,” clarify from the university, which remembers that the surveys are part of a larger initiative, Sentinel Projectwhich will continue until July. And now what? The information collected during the two surveys could still tell us more things about the ancient inhabitants of the islands. The reason? Archaeologists have not limited themselves to identifying the deposit of food remains. They have also recovered “several fauna samples” that now They will be in charge of analyzing specialists from the University of León in search of a key piece of information: what eating patterns the inhabitants of the Hortas fort followed in the Iron Age. The campaign also revealed a considerable amount of ceramics that will be studied in Ourense. Images | University of Vigo and Xunta de Galicia In Xataka | In the 20th century, lobster was an icon of the Rías Baixas, coveted in the kitchens of Spain. Today she is missing

AI enters the era of CPUs. To no one’s surprise, this is bad news for the consumer.

by

The current state of data centers is redefining the production lines of the main technological players. What seemed like a specific crisis in the price of RAM and SSDs has ended up becoming a tsunami that is sweeping away products and the consumer market. The data centers They need the same components as consumers and the rest of the industry, and there was one component that seemed safe: the processors. It’s over. Danger! During his presentation of results In the first quarter of 2026, Intel gave a worrying piece of information: the ratio of CPUs and GPUs in data centers could soon reach 1:1. So far, we’ve talked about memory and GPUs as the primary hardware in data centers, but there needs to be a CPU running the show, and currently, there was one CPU for every eight GPUs. However, things are starting to change due to agentic AI. How to know the components of your PC (RAM, Graphics, CPU…) and the state they are in Training is still important, but now we seem to be entering the era of inference, and that’s where CPUs excel. David Zinsner, Intel’s chief financial officer, described in the call with investors that the CPU/GPU ratio had already gone from 1:8 to 1:4 (one CPU for every four GPUs), but that this agentic AI was exploding the memory of the CPUs, approaching the aforementioned 1:1. Change of course. I think you can now anticipate where the shots are going to go. As we read in Tom’s Hardwarethis action has caused a reaction: that Intel begins to move its production lines to begin to reduce its capacity in consumer products and increase the output of Xeon processors, which are indicated for servers and continuous work. All because, currently, delivery times for server CPUs are about six months away and they cannot allow AMD, which also has its products for servers, to beat them in that race. Consequences. Price increases. Without palliatives. Xeon CPU prices are estimated to have risen in March by 10% to 20% due to that shortage, but consumer CPUs have also increased in price by 5% to 10%. It is not going to stop there, as another 10% price increase is expected for the second half of the year. In fact, it is the same as with mobile phones, with Intel pointing out that the consumer PC market will decrease by double digits this year. Here it happens as in the rest of the segments: manufacturers are raising prices for everyone (hyperscalers and consumers), but they allocate their production to data centers because they are the ones that will buy the most volume from them. Intel doesn’t care if there is no CPU for users because it is not the bulk of its current market, but what it cannot afford is to have hyperscalers for more than six months expectingespecially if data centers are expected to have to mount more CPUs in the short term. The objective: the great foundry. Intel has been in the doldrums for a few years. In the consumer segment, AMD’s Ryzens have beaten them to the punch, the ARC GPUs have not finished coming together and things were not going well. A series of poor results led the United States government to invest $2 billion to ‘rescue’ the company with one goal: to make it the largest American foundry. Because, even if things did not go well, they are still one of the few companies in the world with the capacity to create chips, like TSMC or Samsung. They have some of the best machines on the market and that government bailout soon began to bear fruit with clients such as Apple and Nvidia. During the presentation of results A few days ago, Intel declared a net loss of $3.7 billion, but something happened nonetheless: the stock rose 20%. The reason is that investors are not looking at Intel’s present, but rather its future, and the changes applied in recent months seem to be going in the right direction. They are not the only ones. This change of direction and production lines is not exclusive to Intel. We have seen it in other companies, but it is true that here they directly advocate leaving out the consumer to prioritize the large customer: Big Tech. Something similar happened with Samsung a few days ago, when it was reported that the company had begun to move your LPDDR4 memory production lines to LPDDR5. This type of memory is better, but also more expensive, which will cause devices that previously mounted LPDDR4 memory (low-end miniPC or entry- and mid-range mobile phones) to have to go directly for LPDDR5 memory that is faster, but also more expensive. In the end, the translation is the same as always: as users, we are going to have to tighten our belts and hold on with the devices we have for a while longer. How long? Until 2027 if you ask some, 2028 if you ask others or if that… 2030. Images | Intel In Xataka | There is no energy for so many data centers and the consequence is clear: half of those planned for 2026 in the US are in danger

We wanted electric cars and solar panels. The Hormuz blockade has returned us to the era of coal and nuclear energy

by

The Third Gulf War has caused what decades of climate summits tried to avoid: the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz has erased 20% of the world’s supply of oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) in one fell swoop. Faced with the imminent threat of a large-scale blackout, governments around the world have put their energy transition plans in a drawer. However, to keep the lights on and the economy afloat, the immediate response has been to look back to the past: burn coal by the piece and resurrect nuclear power. The mirage of “bridge fuel.” Asia buys more than 80% of the crude oil and gas that transits through Hormuz, but the problem goes far beyond a simple ship jam. This crisis has destroyed one of the great pillars of the energy transition. As explained The New York TimesLiquefied Natural Gas (LNG) was sold during the last decade as the perfect “bridge fuel”: less polluting than coal, more reliable than intermittent renewables and capable of being transported by sea to any corner. That bridge just blew up. The damage is far from being repaired, and it is estimated that the infrastructure attacked It will take years to operate again. Added to this is that Iran has turned the Strait of Hormuz into a kind of maritime “VIP discotheque”deciding by hand which ships can cross. No one can depend on LNG ships to guarantee their sovereignty. The main problem: live without pantry. But there is a technical factor that has turned this crisis into an immediate catastrophe: lack of storage. Unlike the West, most Asian countries lack underground gas stores, leaving them completely exposed to supply disruptions. While nations like South Korea can last up to 52 days and Japan about three weeks, Taiwan walk on a wire extremely fragile, with a legal security threshold of just 11 or 12 days of reserves. Without a “pantry” to store the LNG, Asia has no room for maneuver: if the ship does not arrive on Monday, the blackout begins on Tuesday. This structural vulnerability is what has forced an unconditional surrender to coal. Coal’s dirty lifesaver. As Jonathan Teubner, the aforementioned analyst, perfectly summarizes by Financial Times: “No coal ship passes through the Strait of Hormuz.” That is the key to everything. Being a cheap, abundant resource that does not depend on the troubled waters of the Middle East, the most polluting mineral has returned with a bang. According to FortuneSouth Korea has removed the 80% operational cap for its coal plants, a decision that has drawn the ire of environmental groups who accuse the government of using “energy security as a pretext.” Thailand, for its part, is restarting plants it had dismantled last year. From Seoul to New Delhi: the dilemma of the powers. Japan, one of the world’s largest gas importers, has also bowed to the evidence, allowing its least efficient coal plants to operate at full capacity for a year. Energy desperation is such that in Japan There are already voices demanding cancel the emissions trading system, calling it a “death sentence” for the coal plants they now need to survive. In India, the situation is critical. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has warned of a “major challenge” ahead of the summer. To avoid massive blackouts, New Delhi has commanded giants such as Tata Power and Adani Power operate at full capacity, while Bangladesh seeks multi-billion dollar loans. Sam Chua, analyst at Rystad Energy, sums it up in Financial Times: We are not seeing a transition, but a brutal “destruction of gas demand.” Although it is not that simple: the money wall. This coal revival has a glass ceiling. As experts point out in Japan Timesthe banking sector flatly refuses to finance the construction of new coal plants for fear of being left with “stranded assets” (stranded assets) in the face of global climate commitments. That is, countries are squeezing their dirty old infrastructure to the last drop, but they can’t build new ones. Charcoal is the assisted respirator, but not the cure. The atom as a shield: the great redemption of uranium. Panic too has broken atomic taboos. Taiwan, whose government promised a “nuclear-free homeland” in 2016, has announced plans to restart two decommissioned reactors. The Philippines has charted a fast track to atomic energy by 2032, and Vietnam has just struck a deal with Russia to build its first reactors. Uranium is no longer seen as a threat, but rather as the only way to protect the electricity supply against maritime blackmail. The domino effect reaches Europe. What started as an emergency solution in Asia is already infecting the West. The crisis has forced the European Union to break its own historical taboos, admitting that Europe committed a “strategic mistake” by moving away from atomic energy. Brussels has already put 200 million euros on the table to develop Small Modular Reactors (SMR) by 2030. This shift shows a continental fracture: while France entrenches itself protecting its nuclear investment of 300 billion euros and blocks energy interconnections with the Iberian Peninsula, Europe assumes that it cannot guarantee its future solely with the sun and the wind. War rationing in the 21st century. While the plants uproot, the daily suffocation hit the streets. Philippines has declared a “national energy emergency.” In South Korea, the government implores families to take short showers and Samsung has prohibited its employees from driving to work based on the license plate. In Thailand, officials operate with work weeks for four days and they are prohibited from wearing ties in order to raise the temperature of the air conditioning. The collapse is so severe that Thai ambulances have taken to Facebook to beg gas stations to reserve diesel for them to save lives. The collateral damage. The scope of this blockage transcends the electricity bill. If the conflict lasts until June, Bloomberg alert that the barrel could touch $200, a price designed to cause “demand destruction.” This would lock global inflation at a chronic … Read more

Sam Altman is laying the foundations for post-humanism as the philosophical current of the AI ​​era. It’s not good news

by

“But it also takes a lot of energy to train a human. It takes about 20 years of life and all the food you consume during that time to become intelligent.” These two sentences were enough delivered at the India-AI Impact Summit 2026to set the networks on fire. But Sam Altman didn’t stop there. “Not only that, it took the widespread evolution of the 100 billion people who have lived and who learned not to be eaten by predators and to understand science and so on to create you,” continuous. Therefore, the criticism about “how much energy is needed to train an AI model” They are extremely unfair. And it’s curious. The most “unpopular” technology in history… Not because it is not understandable (or even because it is not reasonable). It’s funny because Altman and the rest of the AI ​​bigwigs don’t seem to realize that they are making every effort to make AI extremely successful. unpopular among the population. Maybe it’s nothing new. Maybe it’s something similar to what happened with fabric making machine salesmen in the midst of the industrial revolution. Maybe it’s something similar to what motivated movements like that of the Luddites and the reason why dozens of historians rewrote their history as that of poor technophobes. What has changed is that we are now broadcasting it to the entire world — and live and direct. And very insistently. Although the discourse they use to ‘sell’ their technology to investors, technical elites and politicians around the world can only be understood at a public level as a very sophisticated way of saying: ‘human things get in the way.’ Or not so sophisticated, of course. …that is finding its “public” Team Mirai Over the last few years, in fact, the process has become less and less subtle and more blatant. It is not something that is limited to AI companiesbut it is an increasingly clear phenomenon: people speaking to a convinced hyperminority while alienating the vast social majority. And artificial intelligence is the tip of the spear. And it wouldn’t be a problem if there weren’t something else: the current great technological battle is not only technical, it is ideological, philosophical and of values. For the social changes they hope to be successful, it is necessary to move the ‘Overton window’ as quickly as possible. And it’s working. The best example is Japan: in the last election, Team Mirai ran. As Antonio Ortiz explainedis “a new Japanese party founded by engineers” with “a fairly accelerationist program: government chatbots and databases for transparency of donations and to make politics ‘faster’, reduce paperwork and achieve an increase in productivity to compensate for the labor shortage.” Well, those people just got 11 seats and 7% of the votes. In a way, two apparently contradictory processes are two legs of the same phenomenon: the discourse becomes more explicit as the population becomes more related. And changing the world is also (and above all) changing ideas. We tend to have a softened vision of social changes. However, there are several psychosocial processes that are usually key for these to be carried out: delegitimization (“what ruled until now no longer deserves obedience”), demonization (“those who hold these ideas are evil”) and dehumanization (“they are not human, moral norms do not apply”). You don’t always get to the last step, but some degree of moral disconnection it is necessary. And the artificial intelligence revolution (and all the tensions it brings) continues to show similar signs: for years, accelerationist and posthumanist groups have been ‘operating’ in the shadow of the great social and political discourses. Now, however, they face it: as the AGI approaches, everything we thought we knew (on a social, economic or institutional level) is useless. Or so they try to make us believe. And the best example is that of Altman: the CEO of OpenAI does not have to declare himself a posthumanist to lay the rhetorical tiles through which these discourses will travel: when you convert the human into energy cost comparable to an AI model, you are lowering the bar to justify “anything” in the name of efficiency But what exactly is all this talk about posthumanisms and accelerationists? Although they are two different philosophical traditions (posthumanism questions classical humanism and lays the foundations for its improvement, while accelerationism is a family of ideologies that propose accelerating certain dynamics – technological or capitalist to provoke radical social change), the truth is that in recent years they have ended up coming together. And, beyond that, they are providing the mental framework that allows certain decisions to be made that, in other scenarios, would not be socially acceptable. When the human being ceases to be the ideological ‘center’ of the system, acceleration becomes the great political principle and the AGI becomes the utopian destiny of a post-scarcity society (the modern equivalent of the Christian heaven or the Marxist classless society), everything that opposes this — rightly or wrongly — will become old, outdated or outdated. Altman’s statements in India are not an accident: they are part of the delegitimization of the current system of values ​​that the next revolution needs and, as we see, is already underway. Image | Xataka In Xataka | “A place of joy with pain”: the phrase that summarizes the Aztec philosophy to be happier in this life

NVIDIA was going to make the mother of all investments in OpenAI, but the era of favors between friends is over

by

NVIDIA has emerged as the pillar of artificial intelligence. Your chips They are the ones who move the more powerful data centers of the world and is getting billion-dollar investments to keep the wheel turning. At the same time, it has become one of the largest strategic investors of the artificial intelligence ecosystem. OpenAI She seemed to be his best friend, but that’s over. AND Jensen HuangCEO of NVIDIA, makes it clear: the next investments will probably be the last. Also in its great rival. Of 100,000 million. That was the magic figure of which we talked a few months ago. Recreating the schemes of “vendor financing“of the dotcom bubble, NVIDIA was going to finance OpenAI with $100 billion. In exchange, OpenAI would buy NVIDIA chips for the same value. It was a “trap” operation because the company would become the financier of its own premium client. With such an investment, it was expected that OpenAI will build data centers that they would need between four and five million NVIDIA GPUs: Huang already commented at the time that this represented double the total GPUs they distributed the previous year. In short: an absolute animal. And those 100,000 million were a mega-operation, yes, but one more of the many rounds of financing that the company led by Sam Altman. To 30,000 million. But in early February of this year, something unexpected happened. In what seemed like a historic turnaroundJensen Huang, cornered by the media after a Casual dinner at a Taiwanese restaurantcommented that there was never a 100% commitment to make that mammoth investment. The CEO of NVIDIA pointed out that they would surely continue making “the largest investment” they have made in their history, but although he did not give a figure, it was clear that nothing more than 100,000 million. How much? Lessmuch less: 30,000 million dollars. Good luck, OpenAI. Love broke, a love that began when Jensen Huang gave a DGX-1 server to Elon Musk back in 2016. Because it is not only that Jensen has commented that the figure will be around 30,000 million, but because he has mentioned that “it could be the last time” that they inject money into OpenAI. And the reason is very clear: “the reason is because they are going public.” From there, OpenAI will have to change its model completely and will be under the designs of the market. Big bets. NVIDIA, with this operation, shows that it is taking another course, one in which it prefers not to marry anyone and not commit in a truly serious way to a single company. Of course, OpenAI is not the only big operation that NVIDIA is going to get into. Another $10 billion is in store for Anthropic, OpenAI’s great rival both professionally and personally (since Altman and Amodei they can’t stand each other). Worse Huang has also mentioned which, again, will probably also be the last. They are also expected to go public. Fewer giants, broader base. OpenAI will have 110 billion soon. Apart from NVIDIA’s 30,000, Amazon will inject 50,000 million and SoftBank has committed 30,000 million. Huang has hinted that these two large operations could mark the beginning of a change of course. Instead of operations that can be counted on the fingers of one hand in giants, more investment in smaller companies. NVIDIA has gone investing more modest sums at other AI companies over the years. Model and software companies, infrastructure, robotics and even autonomous driving. It has been converting its GPUs and platforms into the standard on which it is founded the entire artificial intelligence industryand perhaps this break with giant companies like OpenAI or Anthropic marks a new beginning in which the focus is on supporting a broader ecosystem of partners. In this way, you will be able to continue shaping your objective: a range of more or less large companies that scale on your platform. Image | Steve Juvetson, NVIDIA In Xataka | AI engineers are closer to football stars than ever: NVIDIA has paid 900 million for one

The bargain Xiaomi has died. Its new era goes through luxury, sports cars and competing in premium

by

Xiaomi came into this world promising that the price was a conspiracy. That the absurd margins of Samsung and Apple were arbitrary, that a decent cell phone could cost two hundred bucks and that Democratizing was, in itself, a form of gainr. It worked and grew. It became the third smartphone brand in the world with a 14% global share, not so far from Samsung and Apple. And now, at the MWC in Barcelona, ​​he has set up a stand where there is no trace of that initial promise. There is a Xiaomi 17 Ultra for 1,500 euros with the Leica seal. There is a SU7 Ultra that breaks records at the Nürburgring. and there is a concepts of hypercar electric car called Vision Gran Turismo designed to appear in the PlayStation video game alongside Ferrari, Porsche and Mercedes. The Xiaomi of the bargain has not died of success. He died, in part, out of necessity. The numbers tell the story that the statements do not usually explain: The average selling price of their smartphones fell almost three percent in 2025weighed down by the weight of Redmi in international markets. In China, its natural market, closed the year in fourth positionlosing ground to Apple and a Huawei that has returned with force. With an R&D budget that exceeds four billion dollars annually and the pressure to sustain that spending, selling more cheap mobile phones is no longer a viable strategy… …so the move to premium is an Excel thing. The photography with Leica and the SU7 Ultra we already knew them. What’s new in Barcelona is the Vision Gran Turismo, and it is true that it deserves some attention. Xiaomi is the first Chinese manufacturer to join Polyphony Digital’s Vision GT program, a club that for three decades has been the exclusive territory of large European and Japanese houses. The concept itself (a hypercar electric, 900 volt platform, power that could be around 1,900 horsepower…) will never reach production. Xiaomi knows that and we all know it. But that’s not the question. The question is why a company that sells mobile phones, appliances and electric cars dedicates resources to designing a video game car and also creates its physical version. The answer is that The Vision GT is not a product but a positioning statement executed in the only territory where Xiaomi still has no history to defend or expectations to manage: the one of pure fantasy. A place where a brand that Four years ago it didn’t even have a car division. can sit without raising an eyebrow at the same table as Porsche. Some photos of stand from Xiaomi at the MWC explain well where the shots are going: What is not seen because it is covered by people surrounding it is the Vision GT, Xiaomi’s biggest eye-catcher at this MWC. Image: Xataka. What you see when you enter the security area thanks to a convenient press pass. Image: Xataka. The queue to get on the SU7 Ultra is already a classic. Image: Xataka. Cell phones continue to attract glances… but they are not even close to the ones that their cars awaken. Or his car and his concept car. Image: Xataka. The move is very reminiscent of Hyundai when it launched Lexus, although with one difference: Hyundai had the discipline to separate the brands. Xiaomi is trying to ensure that the same logo that for years crowned 150 euro phones now supports an ecosystem that ranges from hypercar to the ultra-premium mobile passing through the connected home. This identity clash remains unresolved. And at the MWC stand it looks great: the main protagonists are Leica, the SU7 Ultra and the Vision GT. Redmi and POCO surely have a big place in the hearts of the staff of the brand, but they do not appear on any display, they are something that the Xiaomi of 2026 does not want to boast about. The bet is serious because the premium margins are much better. The vertical integration that Lei Jun pursues with its own chip, its own operating system, its own AI model, etc., It only makes economic sense if the devices that incorporate them sell at a high price.and the total ecosystem that Xiaomi is buildingfrom the pocket to the living room and from the living room to the garage, generates a blocking effect that the low price segment will never be able to offer. The risk is also serious: luxury always works by accumulation of credibility, a unilateral declaration is not enough, and Xiaomi still carries the shadow of having been for a long time the brand you chose when you couldn’t afford anything else. Or when you could, but you preferred not to, and you clung to that comforting feeling of getting something as good as your neighbor while paying half as much. Convincing that neighbor that you are now worth three times as much is one of the biggest marketing challenges in the tech industry right now. In Xataka | Leica is teaching Xiaomi everything it knows. When the student no longer needs the teacher, the agreement will have fulfilled its function Featured image | Xataka

Telefónica is already selling its minicenters to compete in the era of real time

by

For years they have told us that the future of artificial intelligence lies inincreasingly larger data centersmore powerful and more demanding in energy consumption. And it’s true that computing muscle matters. But there is an equally determining factor that is talked about much less: distance. In the era of real time, it’s not just how much you process that matters, but where you do it. Every millisecond that data takes to travel can disrupt the ability to react instantly. This nuance, apparently technical, is beginning to become a strategic issue for Spanish companies. Telefónica’s bet. The company has activated the commercialization of its edge computing services for B2B clients in five Spanish cities, Madrid, Valencia, Seville, Bilbao and A Coruña, as part of a broader deployment that includes 17 nodes in this initial phase. This means that companies and administrations can now hire these processing and storage capacities close to the point where the data is generated. Closer data. Edge computing involves processing information where it is generated, rather than constantly sending it to distant data centers. As Microsoft explainsis about moving computing and storage capacity to peripheral network locations, such as factories, stores, offices or distributed infrastructures. In practice, local devices and servers analyze and filter data on site and only send what is relevant to central systems. The goal is to reduce latency, alleviate network traffic and enable real-time responses, complementing rather than replacing traditional cloud. The deployment. Telefónica’s Edge Plan plans to reach 17 nodes in this first phase throughout this year. According to the company, 12 infrastructures are already deployed: to the five with active B2B services, other nodes are added in Madrid, Barcelona, ​​Málaga, Palma de Mallorca, Valladolid, Terrassa and Mérida. This same year, the incorporation of Zaragoza, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Gijón, Santa Cruz de Tenerife and Santiago de Compostela is planned. Many of these facilities are located in old copper plants converted into Edge centers, adapted to availability and security requirements. Basic and Smart. Telefónica does not sell “edge” in the abstract, but rather two concrete ways of using it. The first is Basic Edge, a stable layer that brings computing capacity closer to the territory and focuses on data control and compliance with national, regional or local regulatory frameworks. Each node acts as an availability zone, allowing applications to be deployed with additional guarantees of continuity and resilience. The second is Smart Edge, which introduces dynamism: selection of the most appropriate node at all times, creation of instances on demand and operation with FTTH or 5G SA connectivity depending on the scenario. Beyond physical infrastructure. Telefónica integrates computing capacity with GPUs into its portfolio for artificial intelligence loads, available as a service and deployed in Edge nodes. This allows companies and institutions to run high-performance models without purchasing their own hardware and maintaining processing within the defined regional environment. The company also mentions the incorporation of RAG agents and capabilities to adapt models to specific contexts. Overall, the strategy seeks to bring AI closer to data under criteria of sovereignty and regulatory compliance. When the millisecond rules. An example helps to dimension the scope of this architecture. Telefónica developed with CAF a pilot that combines Edge and 5G Stand Alone for the railway sector, providing artificial vision solutions that process data close to the asset instead of depending on centralized infrastructure. According to the company, this approach avoids installing processing nodes in each car and keeps responsiveness at levels compatible with real-time operations. Images | Xataka with Gemini 3 Pro In Xataka | We had suspicions, but Sam Altman has confirmed it: AI is just an excuse to fire

Apple has found a way to win in the AI ​​era without having the best AI: be the door

by

Apple has just done something that was unthinkable until recently: publicly admit that you don’t have the best AI. That after fifteen years of trying to make Siri work, with the advantage of hitting first, he gives up. That the brains of Apple Intelligence, including the new Siri, Google will put it. And yet, it has just gained momentum to preserve its dominant position for the next decade. A technological paradox. This isn’t a move Apple should be very proud of, but it has a nicer side: in the age of AI, being the best may not be so important. What matters is being the door. For half a century, the value in technology has been in innovation. IBM, Microsoft, Google, Facebook… they were all winning by creating something that no one else had. The reading with this step by Apple is that that era may be over: if AI models are updated every quarter and the difference between the best and the second is indistinguishable for 95% of users, what sense does it make to spend 50,000 kilos on research to go behind? It sounds sexier, especially to investors, to be the one who charges a toll for each interaction. And for that you don’t need the best model, you need the device that people have in their pockets. That’s the bet: Siri will continue to work, being owned by Apple and running on Apple hardware, but the piece that changes is the intelligence, the LLM. The most expensive piece to develop and the one that possibly provides the least differentiation when you have a billion iPhones. Apple does not give up something that matters to it at all, but rather outsources the part in which it cannot compete. Bittersweet for the company, bitter for its devotees, reasonable for its investors. The real deal is not in what Apple pays, but in what it gets. Google pays 20 billion a year for being the default search engine in Safari, and now sells (or delivers, the terms of the agreement have not been made public) the Apple Intelligence feed. But Apple not only charges, it also receive data on how 1 billion users interact with AI in mobile context: You know what they’re asking. When. How they formulate queries. What do they reject? What do they repeat? Google gets better distribution, and Apple gets tremendously valuable training. If having the best AI is no longer a competitive advantage, what is? OpenAI has the best product. Anthropic has the best technology. Google has the best infrastructure. But Apple has the iPhone. And in a world where AI is gone commoditizingin which one model is valid until the next one arrives three months later, the only moat What holds is the device. There is not so much need to innovate if you control access. You just need what comes through your door to be good enough. AND Gemini is fantastic. Therein lies the problem. In the age of AI, whoever controls the device can live off income by letting others innovate. What incentive does Apple have to really improve AI? As long as Gemini works well on iPhones, Apple won’t care if there are models that are 12% better. Their business is collecting the toll, not pushing the border. Innovation still exists and Google / OpenAI / Anthropic / xAI will continue to compete, but Now it is made by companies that do not capture all of its value while it is exploited by those who do not create it.. Welcome to digital rentism. Where the one who controls the door decides how much those who pass through it should improve. AND “Sufficient” always beats “exceptional” when the decider does not pay for the difference. Apple did the rationally right thing. And that, precisely, should scare us. In Xataka | Alphabet has just overtaken Apple in the ranking of the most valuable companies in the world. The reason is in AI Featured image | Rubaitul Azad, Dennis Brendel

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.