faced

Faced with the fear of a barrel of oil at $200, the US has made an unprecedented decision: remove sanctions on Russia

by

After almost two weeks, the Iran war already has a great (and unexpected) beneficiary: the Kremlin. days after giving carte blanche to India to buy million barrels of Russian crude without fear of sanctions, yesterday Washington was one step further by lifting (partially) the sanctions imposed on the Russian oil industry after the invasion of Ukraine. With this, he hopes to alleviate the effects of the Iran war on the energy market and prevent Tehran’s threat from becoming a reality: that the barrel of Brent shoots to $200an all-time high. The question is… What will it mean for the war in Ukraine? What has happened? That the US has decided to pause the sanctions that penalize the purchase of Russian oil, a measure adopted four years ago and which seeks asphyxiate the Kremlin’s ability to finance its troops in Ukraine. The White House just published an order in which it gives the green light to the purchase of crude oil and oil products from Russia. Of course, with small print. The suspension of sanctions is temporary. It will only affect merchandise previously loaded on ships and (a priori) will be limited to one month: from March 12 to April 11. Click on the image to go to the tweet. Why do you do it? The task of announcing the measure has been the Secretary of the Treasury, Scott Bressent, who a few hours ago insisted in the White House’s efforts to “promote stability” in the global energy market and above all “keep prices low” while the Iran war lasts. “To expand global supply reach, Treasury grants temporary authorization for countries to purchase Russian oil stranded at sea,” explains the high office. “This measure, which is limited in scope and short-term, applies only to oil that is already in transit.” In the same messageBressent insists that the rise in crude oil prices this week, coinciding with the escalation of tension in the Persian Gulf, is “temporary” and claims that “in the long term it will greatly benefit” the US economy. In recent days, Trump himself has tried to downplay the fluctuations in the Brent barrel. Recently he even stated that, being “the largest oil producer”, the US makes “a lot of money” when crude oil rises. Does context matter? A lot. In fact, the decision of the Treasury Department cannot be understood without taking into account several factors. The first, the escalation in the value of oil to which Bressent himself refers. The stock charts show that the cost of a barrel of Brent has skyrocketed in recent days: from marking just under 70 dollars in mid-February, it has gone above 90, with peaks that exceeded the barrier of the 100. Those fluctuations already affect to those who need to fill the car tank and threaten to go beyond transportation, infecting the shopping basket. What will happen now? The problem is not just how much oil has risen over the last two weeks. There is (very much) concern that the barrel of Brent will continue to become more expensive and, if so, by how much. The Iranian regime already has shown its ability to condition oil tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic maritime passage that channels 20% of international oil, and Tehran seems willing to use ‘black gold’ as a weapon of war. On Wednesday the regime of the ayatollahs threatened to the US (and the West) with a scenario in which the Brent barrel doubles its value and shoots up to $200, shattering the all-time high of 2008, when it reached $174.5. How will it affect Russia? That’s the other big question. The order just published by the US Treasury will allow Russia to market oil for a month without its customers risking sanctions, generating a flow of cash for the Kremlin. Bressent questions in any case the scope of that injection of funds. “It will not bring significant financial benefits to the Russian government, which derives most of its energy revenue from taxes levied at the point of extraction,” defend the secretary. Is it an exceptional measure? The truth is that it is not the first ‘balloon of oxygen’ that Trump has granted to the Russian oil industry since he began his military operation in Iran. It’s been a week now temporarily relaxed its sanctions policy so that India can buy Russian oil. The measure was approved with conditions very similar to those that Washington now extends to the rest of the countries: a 30-day suspension limited to crude oil already loaded on ships. It is not the only card that the White House has tried to reduce market tension. Another, adopted hand in hand of the International Energy Agency, has been to release millions of barrels of reserves. How much will it benefit Moscow? The great unknown. The measure approved by the US is temporary and has a limited scope, but it will probably allow the Kremlin to sell its oil without having to apply significant discounts to offset the possible sanctions that its buyers faced. Recently Financial Times I calculated that Russia is already winning up to 150 million of dollars in extra income every day through the sale of oil, a plus directly related to the conflict in Iran, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the turbulence in the Gulf and the growing interest of India and China. But will it help the Kremlin? The situation of the Russian coffers is not particularly buoyant. Its public deficit accumulated during the first two months of the year almost reaches the objective set for the entire year and there are those who question that the extra injection it will receive over the next month thanks to oil will increase its room for maneuver in Ukraine. The reason: hydrocarbons represent only a part of the income (relevant, but not decisive) on which the Kremlin depends, which after four years of war has seen how the country’s military industry is conditioning its economy. Images | … Read more

Faced with the threat of an “orbital Pearl Harbor”, Europe has made the same decision as the US: shield space

by

The race to militarize space has accelerated to an extent unprecedented since the end of the Cold War. The reasons are several, but the main one is driven by the combination of explicit russian threatscovert sabotage and an international architecture incapable of containing the emergence of atomic weapons out of the atmosphere. The last one to join: Europe. The war in orbit. Moscow not only has reactivated its classic nuclear discourse, but has opened a second front in low Earth orbit through the development of anti-satellite systems equipped with nuclear warheads that openly violate the Outer Space Treaty. In this context, European and North American experts match in which the Kremlin is lowering the threshold for the use of tactical nuclear weapons both on Earth like in spacewhile experimenting with platforms capable of camouflaging orbital bombs designed to disable satellites essential for the economy, defense and communication. Thus, the very idea of ​​a “Space Pearl Harbor” (a nuclear explosion that destroyed thousands of satellites, blinded entire continents and turned low orbit into a radioactive dump for generations) has forced Europe to abandon the romantic vision of an exclusively civil space and enter a new strategic reality which combines deterrence, diplomacy and operational preparedness. The bet of the old continent. This turn has crystallized in a historic decision: For the first time, European Space Agency countries have approved funding a program designed explicitly for military functions. He ERS projectconceived as a “system of systems” equipped with surveillance capabilities, secure navigation, encrypted communications and Earth observation, marks Europe’s entry into the club of actors who recognize that their future security depends both on what happens on the ground and what happens hundreds of kilometers above it. The approved financing (1.2 billion euros with more to come) comes accompanied by an unprecedented political mandate that redefines the concept of “peaceful purposes” at a time when China multiplies its space capabilities and Russia turns orbit into a space hybrid pressure. The magnitude of the support, bordering 100% of what was requestedreflects an internal consensus: without its own capabilities, Europe would be a vulnerable spectator in a conflict that would be decided by the speed and resilience of its satellite constellations. The French and German response. On this new board, France and Germany have assumed a central role both for its industrial capacity and for its newly adopted conviction that the wars of the future will begin (or be decided) in space. Paris has invested 10 billion euros in its new Space Command, oriented to military operations in orbit, to shield satellites against kinetic attacks and to promote an interoperable architecture with NATO. Berlin, for its part, has announced an investment of 35 billion until 2030 to reinforce its own Space Command, develop guardian satellites and equip itself with advanced early warning systems. Both countries have publicly assumed that orbital infrastructure is so critical such as energy or digitaland that any Russian aggression could paralyze not only defense, but European civil society as a whole. National security is no longer decided solely on the eastern land border, but in a three-dimensional environment where the loss of a single satellite node can destabilize entire sectors. Nuclear beyond the atmosphere. Analysts agree that the most feared scenario is not a specific attack against specific satellites, but the detonation of a nuclear charge in orbitcapable of generating devastating electromagnetic pulses and cascading space junk that would render low orbit useless for decades. Historical precedents, such as try Starfish Prime that destroyed a third of existing satellites in the 1960s, serve as a warning of what it would mean to repeat a similar experiment today, with more than 10,000 active satellites. Such an explosion would kill astronauts, destroy global navigation infrastructure, fossilize the digital economy and cause a domino effect that could move the war from space to Earth. Although some experts hold While Moscow would only resort to such action in a scenario of terminal collapse, the mere existence of these capabilities forces Europe to prepare for a type of conflict that would break the traditional limits of deterrence. Political pressure and a new order. Fear of an orbital conflict has reactivated debates on nuclear disarmamentboth in the United States and in Europe, where legislators are promoting initiatives to revitalize multilateral negotiations that have been stagnant for decades. At the same time, ESA has achieved a record budget (22.1 billion euros) that not only finances its transition towards space security, but also promotes scientific and commercial programs, such as reusable rockets, Martian exploration or new astrobiological missions. This growth, supported by Germany, France, Italy and Spain, reflects the strategic convergence between defense, research and technological sovereignty. In the new scenario, Europe seeks not to be a secondary actor in the face of spatial duopolization between the United States and China, but to develop real autonomy that reduces dependence on private platforms like starlink or American systems such as the space interceptors of the Golden Dome. Militarize space. If you also want, the intersection between russian threatsAmerican technological advances and the European strategic awakening marks the beginning of a stage in which the Earth’s orbit is consolidated as the new global scenario military competition. What was once a scientific and commercial domain has become a space where the resilience of entire societies is decided. He ERS projectthe expansion of national space commands and the growing funding of dual capabilities make up a defense ecosystem that seeks to avoid a conflict that no one wants to imagine. And in that scenario, Europe seems to have understood that the only way to deter orbital escalation is to demonstrate that it has the same means to resist it, respond to it and recover. Image | RawPixelESA/Mlabspace In Xataka | The US wants to build an unprecedented anti-missile shield called “Golden Dome.” And SpaceX has the ideal technology In Xataka | Space solar never worked. A military escalation in orbit is making it a reality

Faced with impossible housing prices, an alternative is gaining weight: living in a motorhome

by

If you consult the online dictionary of the Royal Spanish Academy you will see that, at least for academics, a mobile home It is a “vehicle with its own engine conditioned to make life in it.” In the Spain of 2025, that of the housing crisishe floor deficit and the price escalationcaravans increasingly have more of the latter and less of the former. They are still vehicles, but above all they are spaces in which their tenants live: they sleep, have breakfast, cook, wash, study or spend time reading or watching movies. They do not do it out of vocation (at least not in all cases), but out of necessity. Although they work, have a stable job and a salary, the money is not enough to access an increasingly tight real estate market, so they choose to do their daily lives in the few square meters of a motorhome. Housing, impossible. that the housing is getting more expensive (a lot) is nothing new. In fact, its price is one of the issues that most take away sleep to the Spaniards and has already motivated massive protests, some with a hint of tenant strike included. However, it is good to review a few data to understand the scope of the housing crisis that the country is experiencing. According to Idealista, rents have skyrocketed 96% in just a decade, a percentage that falls short if markets such as that of Palm, Tenerife either Malaga. The situation in the purchase and sale market is not much more buoyant. The increase in the price of the square meter, which fool around now with the values ​​prior to the brick bubble, have complicated access to the market, forcing families to dedicate years of salary to pay for housing. Result: homes that exceed the “effort rate” recommended economic and young people who only have one option left if they want to become owners: inheritances or donations. What if I move to a caravan? In view of all of the above, more and more people are asking themselves the question: if the market has become so draconian, if it prevents any ability to save and requires assuming exorbitant prices, why not change apartments for caravans? There is no data to help follow the trend, but a search on Google or diving on YouTube to check that abound the news of people who moves into mobile homes. It occurs in Balearics and Canary Islandsvery places touristifiedbut also in cities like Madrid. By necessity, by strategy. Although the price of housing is (almost) always the backdrop, not everyone who moves into a caravan does so for the same reason. There are those who take the step pure necessitybecause their salary does not allow them to rent a regular home, and those who decide to spend a stage of their life living in a caravan in order to gain savings capacity and make the jump at some point (without pressure or rush) into the buying and selling market. That is the case of Antonio, a 37-year-old civil servant who I counted these days to The Country What is it like to live in a caravan in Madrid. Although he has a stable job with a salary of about 1,900 euros per month, Antonio, a native of Alcoy, has lived in a motorhome since 2020. The formula gives him flexibility when he has to travel for work, allows him to have more private space than he enjoyed when he shared a flat and, above all, it seems like the smartest option today. “I live in a motorhome right now because I want to, not out of necessity. Although obviously if housing prices were different I would move to a house, my future project. What happens is that after this satisfactory experience I have become more demanding and I am not willing to be drowned like I did for 10 years,” relates. His mobile home, a second-hand 2003 Fiat Ducato Carioca, cost him 22,000 euros and by living in it, utility costs have been significantly reduced. Right now they don’t reach 100 euros a month. Are there more cases? Of course. The profiles vary greatly from one case to another. Also from one region to another. There are those who live in motorhomes because it is “the only solution” that finds itself in a market of skyrocketing prices, who are forced to opt for that exit while they work temporarily in tourist destinations and those who prefer to enjoy “their” handful of square meters before sharing a conventional and larger apartment with other colleagues. “I have everything in four meters, but it is mine and I don’t have to share a flat,” confessed in April to The Vanguard Begoña, a 61-year-old woman who lives in a motorhome in the Balearic Islands. “Here I have my kitchen, next to it I have the oven and the refrigerator and the field. I pay for parking, but it is infinitely cheaper than renting,” agreed in 2023 during a talk with La Sexta Carlos, a 23-year-old engineer from Murcia who had a job opportunity in Madrid. When he started looking at apartments he decided that the best thing was a caravan. Is there data? One of the big problems in tracking the trend is that it lacks official data as such. The INE census shows that in Spain there are 7,200 people registered in shacks and caravans, but that category does not have to fit exactly with that of people who choose to live in motorhomes and the statistical institute itself recognizes that when preparing the census it encountered “a certain limitation”, so the overall figure is probably higher. As a reference, in 2024 the local press pointed out that in Ibiza alone there were almost about thirty of caravan settlements. Even was spoken of locals with houses who chose to move into caravans in the high season to rent their houses to tourists. The goal: get some extra income in the summer. More registrations. … Read more

In 2014, Ibáñez drew a ‘mortadelo’ where he faced marijuana traffickers. Has been in a drawer until today

by

The story of Mortadelo and Filemón has lived, over 67 years and 221 albums, innumerable ups and downs. Although Ibáñez always signed the adventures of the two disastrous spies, in its realization there was everything: apocryphal authorsRights struggles, frightened towards other publishers … and even an unpublished album, which will see the light next October. Ibáñez Mético. Mythological, even because this album had been heard in forums and between fans, but it was not known if its existence was real or an urban legend. ‘Hachish … Health!’ It presents the Aunt agents facing a network of traffickers. Penguin, current owner of the rights of Bruguera and the characters of Ibáñez, has barely given more details about the comic and the reason why he remained unpublished, but with that title the assumptions are already being shot: Ibáñez had crossed, for the first time, a red line with his agents? A new collection. ‘Ibáñez Mético’ is the title of the collection that Penguin opens with this album and will release stories of the characters with extras as original pages of the scripts and scanning of the pencil pages. Everything comes with notes from the expert in the comics of the time Jordi Canyissà. What Penguin has not yet made clear is whether in the next numbers of this collection they will discuss and score already published comics or will continue to recover unpublished after the death of Ibáñez, as it has been done here or took the last album of the characters, the posthumous ”Paris 2024‘. Always the present. As we commented on Our article about ‘I and I’in 1991 Ibáñez recovered the authorship of the characters after the closing of Bruguera. But the characters crossed a strong creative crisis from which they left in 1996, when the author decided to focus his histoprias on current issues, a resource that they would keep until the death of Ibáñez in 2023. Ladies were born as ‘The lord of the bricks’ in 2005, about the brick crisis, ‘For Isis, the crisis arrived!’ In 2009 u ‘Okupas!’ In 2002, about anti-okupation paranoia. And the hashish. The Legalization of marijuana It was one of the key debates of Spanish society in 2014, the year to which this story belongs, and Ibáñez, faithful to the trend that were following the last adventures of Mortadelo, approached it with its characteristic style. Ibáñez did not feature in these years to get into somewhat more controversial issues that brought the Aunt’s agents closer to social satire: ‘The treasurer’, of 2015, about corruption in the PP, it is a good example, and possibly this ‘hashish … Health!’ Follow the same line. Ibáñez recovered. Penguin has finally decided to start giving a good cueta of the deep Bruguera catalog he has in his possession. To this first installment of Ibáñez Mético is added the recent ‘The first 200 cases of Mortadelo and Filemon‘, which recover in chronological order the first and unusual adventures of the agents, published between 1958 and 1961, very different from the long adventures that would give them fame later. It is a process that we hope will continue at a good pace, and that it seems that the editorial is cultivating with other legendary characters such as Superlópez or Anacleto. Header | Penguin In Xataka | ‘Exterminius’: the alien photonovela that traumatized a generation from the pages of ‘Mortadelo’

European car manufacturers faced milmillionaire fines in 2025. They have postponed them thanks to fear

by

It was known since 2019 but this 2025 will not be applied. The new broadcasting regulations of the European Union for Tourism is suspended … until 2027 and with nuances. After months of pressures by the manufacturers, European institutions have allowed a forward kick that softens in the background but not in the forms the restrictions on combustion cars. This is all we have ahead. Since 2019. It was called European green pact and, in fact, it established more hard emission limits of those established for manufacturers at the moment. Then there was talk of limiting the maximum emissions to 80.8 gr/km of CO2. The most ambitious objective raises zero emissions in every car sold from 2035 with combustion engines. Why does an electric car have less autonomy than the announcing Over the years, the limit rose and It ended up setting 93.6 gr/km of CO2. With a strong fine flying over, manufacturers should not be able to pass from this year this emission limits. A barrier imposed until 2029. From then on the figure will be (or should be) of 49.5 gr/km of CO2. And they should only be able to sell neutral cars from 2035. The fine. It has been the main reason for concern for manufacturers. To calculate it, the average emissions of the car fleet sold were taken into account. This average should not exceed 93.6 gr/km of CO2. If so, the fine could be a thousand millionaire. Specifically, the manufacturer had to pay 95 euros for each gr/km of CO2 surpassed… for each car sold. That is to say. If the average emissions of the cars sold was 94.6 gr/km of CO2 (+1 gr/km of CO2 above the expected) the manufacturer paid 95 euros per car. If you sold a million cars in Europe, you would have to pay 95 million euros. This was a real problem for companies such as Volkswagen, Ford, Stellantis, Renault and even Toyota. All these automobile groups, in the first half of 2024, exceeded 100 gr/km of CO2. That multiplied the sanction for each car in a minimum of 665 euros. According to data collected by Motor.esIn Volkswagen, fines were waiting for 1,500 and 4,700 million euros. And the machinery began to work. Before the imminent abyss, the manufacturers launched the fan. They talked about unrealistic measures and From Acea (Employers of manufacturers in Europe) They pointed out that up to 16,000 million euros were compromised. A strong blow to the finances of some European manufacturers trying to find solutions before the arrival of new Chinese cars that are eating land in the Low and plug -in ranges. As if that were not enough, they warned what they were coming: more expensive cars. First because the development of the cars was going to be more expensive. Second because lower ranges cars They had it more complicated, then electrify them, They said, destroy the profit margin. And, third, because if they could not sell combustion cars so as not to affect the average emissions they would have to smaller of them at a higher price. It was already known. Which The European Parliament has voted (With 458 votes in favor, 101 against and 14 abstentions) it was already known. It has been the confirmation of something that was put on the table last March. Then the European Commission has already voted in favor of a FLEXIBILIZATION IN THE REGULATIONS of emissions. A kind of kick to the regulations. Until 2027 they will not have to meet manufacturers, although the matter has some nuances. What has been approved? A change, as we said, in the form but not in the background. 93.6 gr/km of CO2 are maintained but manufacturers have between 2025 and 2027 to meet. Arrived 2027, an average will be made with the emissions sold since this year. That is, manufacturers will have to compensate for 2025 excesses during the coming years. A manufacturer will not receive a fine if it passes at 10 gr/km of CO2 this 2025 but in 2026 and 2027 it will have to compensate it. You may choose to reduce emissions in five grams per kilometer below the regulations in 2026 and 2027 or accumulate the excesses of 2025 and 2026 and sell well below those 93.6 gr/km of CO2 last year. An exit. What options have a manufacturer that does not reach these emission stockings? The simplest to avoid fines is to make a group against Europe with companies that are well below the limit. Which is it? Manufacturers such as Tesla, which obviously have very low emissions by selling exclusive electric cars, or byd that only sells plug -in cars. This alternative was already considered by 2025. It will be essential for small brands with very little electrification, Like Mazdabut the door opens to that groups like Stellantis, who also contemplated an associationhave time to sell enough plugs to compensate for emissions or, in the worst case, buy less bonds than those raised in 2025. What do we expect? A gradual increase in the sales of plug -in (hybrid and electric) and an acceleration for 2027. If it is necessary with automation to reduce registered emissions, it will be done with automation. That if the regulations are maintained and nothing changes. Who wins? The flexibility in the regulations is an oxygen ball for some manufacturers. Renault, for example, is in the middle of the launch of the Renault 5a car that It is working very well and that will allow you to lower emissions. Has put the market on the market Renault 4 And soon he will have a Berlina. Volkswagen, has a way 25,000 euros electric car For the coming months and another of 20,000 euros (although it points to 2027) And the group has reached options to Skoda either Cupra They can give good results. It is also facing a good Mercedes opportunity that has the car with which They hope to make a leap in the sales volume. Of … Read more

The Plan of Spain for leading green hydrogen has been faced with an unexpected problem: Zamora

by

The countdown for the passage of the H2Med corridor It is underway. The one that will be the first clean hydrogen corridor of the European Union will be underway by 2030, but, as in any project, it is not exempt from controversy, since the section that goes from Zamora (Spain) to Celorico da Beira ( Portugal) has aroused a conflict. The controversy. The Duero Hydrographic Confederation (CHD) He has authorized A INARI SOLAR SL The extraction of 117,000 cubic meters per year of groundwater of the Natural Reserve of Las Lagunas de Villafáfila. The initiative will supply a 40MW green hydrogen production plant. Located in Moreruela Granja (Zamora), the Unión del Pueblo Leonese party (UPL) has warned about environmental impact of this project in a protected wetland. For this reason, divisions between neighbors, environmentalists and politicians have not been expected, between those who support it and who fear its consequences. In addition, the controversy has reached the Unesco Through the Ramsar agreement, an international treaty for the protection of wetlands. The decarbonization process. Spain It has different green hydrogen pointsbeing Zamora one of the most strategic points for the installation of infrastructure for the production of this renewable. However, producing green hydrogen requires large amounts of water, an increasingly scarce resource in Spain. In fact, 82.5% of the water It is used for agricultureand the country Face an accelerated desertification process. For this reason, the choice of the Villafáfila aquifer as a source of supply has generated outrage. The process. The CHD granted The concession in January after a period of public information of a month that, according to the agency, was closed without allegations or reports against. The Confederation argues that the extracted water will be minimal compared to the total of the aquifer, representing only 0.1% of the available resources. In addition, the concession will be 25 years, allowing a maximum flow of 3.8 l/Sy will capture by means of a 70 -meter depth survey. However, environmentalists in action, among other organizations, He has questioned These data because they point out the devastating impact on the wetland. In addition, he has denounced the lack of transparency in the process and has pointed out that authorization has been done on a place where restrictions for agricultural irrigation. From the town. Social discomfort has grown rapidly and already circulates In Change.orgunder the motto: “#Salvemosvillafáfila! A natural treasure in danger of disappearance.” The initiative accumulates more than 7,000 signatures, denouncing that water extraction will endanger an ecosystem necessary for bird migration and the local economy. From the political sphere, and as we have pointed out above, UPL has resorted to authorization before the Junta de Castilla y León and has taken the case to Ramsar agreementwith the aim of opening the door to a possible international review. In favor. From the Popular Party, the president of the Diputación de Zamora, Javier Faúndez, He has shown Your support for green hydrogen, but Reject the choice of aquifer as a water source. In addition, he argues that there are more viable alternatives, such as the Esla River or a nearby reservoir. While from the Ministry for Ecological Transition and Demographic Challenge, on which the CHD depends, has defended the concession ensuring that the regulated procedure has been followed and that the impact will be insignificant. However, the authorization must still pass the filter of the Junta de Castilla y León, which has promised a rigorous evaluation of environmental effects. Forecasts The conflict continues to climb and everything indicates that there will be citizen mobilizations in the coming weeks. The Junta de Castilla y León has the last word, so if the authorization continues, the debate could reach European instances. All this would test the compatibility between the EU climatic ambitions and the conservation of the environment. Image | Akiv and designed by Freepik Xataka A Japanese study is being able to transform methane into a clean energy source: turquorogen turquorogen

It is the greatest existential threat that Silicon Valley has faced

by

They have barely spent five days since its launch, but Deepseek R1 has caused An earthquake in markets (-6.5% NVIDIA, -3.5% Microsoft, -8% ASML) that goes beyond its technical efficiency. The true threat to the American industry is in its open nature: Depseek is democratizing technology that Silicon Valley has kept jealously stored after its own walls. Why is it important. The western industry of AI has been built on two pillars that Depseek has just dynamit: The need for multi -million dollar investments in hardware. The extreme secretism about the architecture of its models. The money trail. Wall Street is reacting hard because Depseek directly threatens the dominant business model that has taken us here. Investors ask questions: how to justify projects such as Stargate (and its half billion dollars) If there is an open and efficient alternative? What value intellectual property when your competitors openly publish their advances? Between the lines. The Chinese strategy seems clear: to use the open source as a Trojan horse to destabilize Western domain in AI. It is no coincidence that Depseek has chosen this moment, when: American models show signs of stagnation (where is it GPT-5?). Inversiones in infrastructure are triggered. Business models remain without clarifying. The big question. Several experts have pointed out that we are facing Sputnik moment For AI: when the United States discovered that it did not have the monopoly of advance in the space race. R1 has that magnitude, or do you have to relax expectations about its implications? Perhaps “only” (add all the quotes they want) we are rather at a Linux time: their arrival democratized the operating system starting from open source as a disruptive tool, but the industry continued to thrive. Windows did not disappear, he simply adapted to a new scenario in which open and closed source coexist. The difference is in the rhythm. Linux took years to seriously impact the market. R1 has caused immediate shaking even in stock assets of giants. Perhaps the market understands that AI is too valuable and promising to afford as closed and expensive development as the current one. Whether it is a Sputnik as if it is a Linux, R1 marks a before and after: it shows that the toe can be created more openly and efficiently. Yes, but. There are certain persistent doubts about the real costs of Deepseek. THE CEO OF SCALE AI He has suggested They have more hardware access than they say, but hide it for violating commercial restrictions. Even so, even if their costs were greater, R1 would continue to have a strong impact on the industry to choose the open model for such a powerful model. The time of truth. The American’s industry now has a dilemma: or maintain its current model, based on very high investments and a strong secrecy, risking being displaced by Chinese efficiency … or pivoting towards a greater opening to compete on the board raised by Deepseek . Deepen. The analogy with Sputnik beyond technological surprise. As then, this moment can catalyze a transformation in how technology develops and markets. The difference is that this time disruption does not come from the state apparatus but from the Chinese private sector, and its weapon is not the space race but the open source for AI. China, frequently criticized for its control over information, is using the openness and transparency to stand up to Western technological domain. In Xataka | Two years and 60 million users later: how Luzia has become the greatest success produced by Spain Outstanding image | Deepseek, Xataka with Mockuuuups Studio

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.