fine

The Government applauded Repsol’s discounts in the midst of the gasoline crisis. Competition the fine now with 20.5 million for them

by

February 2022. Spain is still suffering the economic consequences of the coronavirus crisis. After two years with workers suffering ERTES, Russia invades Ukraine and a war breaks out that we continue to suffer four years later. Immediately, the economy of the entire continent is reeling. Basic products skyrocket in price and, among them, fuel enters a runaway inflationary race. One that, in turn, once again raises the prices of basic products. February 3, 2022 we counted on Xataka that gasoline was more expensive than ever. We paid 1,538 euros per liter. 24% more than the previous year. In summer we were close to two euros per liter. By then the Government had launched its action plan. After a transport strike and with France applying state aid to the purchase of gasoline, the State began to subsidize with 20 cents/liter the purchase of fuel for all drivers. The measure only proved to be a plug through which water leaked. In summer the most pessimistic voices already pointed to a price of up to three euros per liter in gasoline. The pump price, fortunately, did not reach that point. In fact, that same summer another war began. This time at the service stations. And although the price of gasoline continued to rise to the point that at the till We were paying 1.80 euros for each liter again, The big oil companies brought out all their weapons: points cards, temporary discounts, loyalty plans… Movements that hid something that the CNMC already warned about that same summer: the big oil companies were getting rich. Now, it is the same CNMC that has made a decision: to fine Repsol 20.5 million euros. Abuse of power against competitors The CNMC has confirmed a sanction of 20.5 million euros to several Repsol Group companies and punishes them with disqualification from participating in public contracts for six months on the understanding that they abused their position of power to narrow profit margins with the intention of driving competitors out of the market. Competition defends that the discounts applied during the year 2022, which at the time were applauded by the Governmentthey narrowed the profit margins in the sale of fuel to the point of preventing companies selling low-cost fuel from competing on equal terms. The CNMC alleges that “competition law requires that companies in dominance position are especially responsible for not restricting competition. They assure that after various complaints they went to the Repsol Group service stations at the end of 2022 and that at the end of 2023 They initiated the disciplinary proceedings with the information collected. In the investigation. The behavior of Moeve, then Cepsa, and BP was also analyzed. However, only Repsol has been sanctioned. From the company, they point out in Five Daysassure that they will appeal the fine while arguing that “it is the first time in the history of national and community competition law that the CNMC sanctions a company for applying discounts.” Those days of 2022 were marked by the role of the oil companies. In April, when the State began to apply the discount of 20 cents per liter of fuel, low-cost operators They threatened to strike because they understood that the money they had to put out of their own pocket (of the 20 cents/liter, five were borne by the operator) destroyed their profit margins. Later, the CNMC confirmed that the companies in charge of supplying fuel were obtaining a juicy profit with the increase in fuel prices, to the point that their profit margins had widened despite having to put money in to subsidize fuel, with record gross margins. Now, the entity in charge of ensuring competition points out that Repsol also took the opportunity to try to sweep away the competition. It will have to be Repsol that manages to demonstrate that it did not act in this way and as the CNMC defends. Photo | Repsol In Xataka | For the first time, electrified cars are outselling gasoline cars. It is the beginning of the inevitable

The DGT is not going to fine for the V-16 beacons at the moment, and therein lies the key

by

Since last January 1, anyone who is stranded on the road due to a breakdown has to place the V-16 beacon connected. And what happens if I don’t have it? Absolutely nothing. At least that is what the Government assures. Because, with the law in hand, the agents can fine us if they consider it appropriate. We also don’t know how long this “truce” will last. “It is not tax collection”. This is what Fernando Grande-Marlaska stated in the press conference in which he gave the results of the road accidents relating to 2025. The DGT has made public the accident data for last year but a good part of the press conference has revolved around the topic of the moment: the connected V-16 beacon that the DGT has been required to carry since last January 1. The agents, Grande-Marlaska assures, will not fine for a “reasonable” period of time, in words reported by The World. They do it because, they say, “our objective is not sanctioning or collecting, what moves us is the obligation to save lives.” “Reasonable”. It is the temporary measure that the Minister of the Interior has used to refer to the time that the agents have before fining. The word says nothing because, really, from January 1, 2026, Traffic can fine us for not having the corresponding signage elements. The fine is 80 euros and it does not take into account whether we carry the triangles with us because the only essential element in the car when signaling an accident is the connected V16 beacon, which must be approved by the DGT. And the triangles have been left in a kind of limbo so that the driver can do with them whatever he considers. Not now. The position of the DGT has changed over time. Since it was confirmed that the V-16 beacon would be the only signaling element of a road breakdown, the discourse has changed and its position has been relaxed. At first it was argued that the use of triangles could be grounds for a fine since an incident was not being correctly signalled. Now, Interior says that there will be a period in which fines will not be imposed for this. Later it was left up in the air whether the beacon+triangle combination was valid. Finally, it will be allowed put the triangles “at your own risk”. many doubts. In his speech, Grande-Marlaska pointed out that last year more than 100 people died on the road, “a significant number for getting off to put up the triangles”, in words reported by Motorpassion. In The World They point out that estimates point to 25 pedestrians dying while trying to put the triangles in what Grande-Marlaska describes as “bleeding.” However, as we have said in Xatakathe DGT has never offered clarifying data. Traffic has always classified these victims as people run over “after getting out of the vehicle” but without clarifying under what circumstances. They do not indicate whether they were hit when getting out of the car, putting the triangles on, changing a tire on the shoulder or waiting for help to arrive. According to their accounts, between 2018 and 2022 (a period that includes before and during the COVID-19 pandemic), an annual average of between 18 and 26 people died in accidents “after getting off the vehicle” on high-capacity roads. as reflected in the document itself which explains why the regulations and technical requirements of this connected V-16 beacon are changed. Taking the total number of deaths in this entire series (8,615 people, according to data from Statista), we are talking about just over 1% of deaths that fall into the category “after getting out of the vehicle.” No fines but no extensions. The result in the application of the measure has been paradoxical. From the Interior they say that the measure is “essential” to reduce the number of road accidents but omitting its use or not having the beacon will not be penalized despite there being no extension. And, at the same time, Traffic defends that it has not implemented an extension because it is something that has been known since 2023 and that we should have already purchased the device. According to Pere Navarrodirector of the DGT, “we considered delaying it” but that “would not have changed anything.” Also left to the driver’s discretion whether or not they want to put the triangles in despite the fact that they consider it a sufficient risk to promote a regulatory change. And they recognize that something has been done wrong with the communication of the new measure. Photo | DGT and Help Flash In Xataka | The V-16 beacon business: who is making money with the elimination of the DGT triangles

Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold, first impressions. Samsung’s most ambitious leap in foldables has fine print

by

Imagine carrying a cell phone in your pocket that can transform into a 10-inch tablet when you fully deploy it. That is the promise of Samsung Galaxy Z TriFoldan idea that was already on the table and that really makes sense as soon as you have it in front of you. Closed, it behaves like a bar format phone with a 6.5-inch screen, something familiar and relatively comfortable, but just start opening it to understand that the South Korean company wanted to go one step further. I think it’s not just about gaining inches, but about materializing a complex idea. After the initial impact, my first reading of the Galaxy Z TriFold is that of a device that surprises with its degree of maturity within a still young category. It is noticeable that Samsung has focused on the solidity of the whole, on how the pieces are assembled and on conveying a certain confidence when handling it, something that, as my colleague Javier Lacort commented in 2024, has not always been evident. Before moving forward, it is worth remembering that we are dealing with first impressions, they are clear sensations, open questions, but without a thorough approval in search of definitive conclusions. Samsung Galaxy Z Trifold technical sheet Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold dimensions and weight Folded: 159.2 x 75.0 x 12.9 mm Unfolded: 159.2 x 214.1 x 3.9 mm (screen with SIM tray) / 4.2 mm (center screen) / 4.0 mm (screen with side button) 309 grams indoor screen Dynamic AMOLED 2X 10 inches 2160×1584 269 ​​ppi 1600 nits peak brightness 120Hz (adaptive) outdoor screen Dynamic AMOLED 2X 6.5 inches 2520 x 1080, 21:9 422 ppi 2600 nits peak brightness 120 Hz (adaptive) processor Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy (3nm) memory and storage 16 GB of memory with 1 TB of internal storage 16 GB of memory with 512 GB of internal storage Not compatible with microSD rear camera 12 MP Ultra Wide Angle, Dual Pixel AF, F2.2, 1.4 μm, 120° 200 MP wide angle, autofocus, OIS, F1.7, 85˚, 2x optical quality zoom 10 MP PDAF telephoto, OIS, F2.4, 1.0 μm, 36˚, 3x optical zoom, up to 30x digital zoom front camera 10 MP F2.2, 1.12 μm, 85˚ selfie (outdoor screen) 10 MP F2.2, 1.12 μm, 100˚ selfie (indoor screen) battery and charging 5,600 mAh QC2.0 and AFC connectivity 5G LTE Wi-Fi 7 Bluetooth 5.4 operating system Android 16 One UI 8 others IP48 resistance price From 3,594,000 won The promise of a 10-inch tablet, and the price you pay for it To fully understand what this Galaxy Z TriFold proposes, we must stop at its physical approach. We are not looking at a conventional folding device, but rather a device with three panels and two folds that only supports two real ways of use: closed, like a phone, or completely open, “like a 10-inch tablet.” Unlike the approach we have seen in the Huawei Matewhere it is possible to use the device partially deployed with two active panels, there is no middle ground here. When you use it unfolded and the interior screen becomes the center of the experience, the TriFold begins to justify its approach. We are talking about a 10-inch Dynamic AMOLED 2X panel with 2160 x 1584 resolution, 120 Hz and a density of 269 ppi, figures that explain why it feels so visually solid indoors. My contact with the device has been in the Samsung offices, in the evening and with artificial light, and in that context the experience has been excellent, with vivid colors and constant fluidity. It is true that the maximum brightness of the interior panel is 1600 nits, compared to 2600 nits for the exterior screen, but I have not had the opportunity to test it outdoors. When you leave content consumption, the TriFold lets itself be loved in multitasking scenarios. The screen offers real margin to maintain multiple applications open at the same time without the experience feeling limited, something that marks a distance from smaller folding products. Everything is more comfortable and less compressed, and the whole thing conveys a sense of order that is appreciated. It also seems relevant to me that it allows executing Samsung DeX directly on the screen itself, without an external monitor, because it reinforces your productivity focus. Now, in the hand, the Galaxy Z TriFold makes it clear from the first moment that it is not a light or discreet device when closed. With its 309 grams and a thickness of 12.9 mm when folded, it feels powerful, even more than one would expect when reading the technical sheet. That said, it is also worth putting it in perspective, because in numbers it does not go to the most extreme part of what we have seen in first generation folding devices. Opened, the perception changes noticeably, the weight is better distributed and the whole is surprisingly manageable for a 10-inch screen. One of the elements that caught my attention during the test was the way in which the TriFold manages its own folding. It is not just a question of hinges, but of how the device conditions the user’s gesture to protect itself. The route is clearly defined and if you try to close it incorrectly, the phone responds with a vibration and a warning on the screen that tells you not to continue there, something that reinforces the feeling of being in front of a product designed to avoid errors. Although the interior screen is the TriFold’s great attraction, it is also its most delicate part. When unfolded, the two folds are there and are part of the experience, although not in an intrusive way. It is not something that is constantly obvious and, in many moments, you can forget about them, but when you change the angle or the light hits it in a certain way they appear. In my case, for years the folds have bothered me a lot in folding ones, but over time I have learned to … Read more

In 2010, the owner of a Ferrari missed a radar in Switzerland at 137 km/h. He took home the most expensive fine in history

by

The fine for speeding highest ever recorded did not come from a German road or a French motorway. It arose in Switzerland, and they gave it to the driver of a Ferrari Testarossa. The most curious thing is that they did not put it in for pushing the power of this 90’s classic to the limit since it was traveling at 137 km/h. The result was a fine of more than 247,000 euros, an amount that officially appears in the Guinness World Records as the biggest fine for speeding. A record fine. The highest speeding fine officially recorded was imposed in Switzerland in January 2010. A court in the canton of St. Gallen sentenced the driver of a Ferrari Testarossa to pay about $290,000 (more than 247,000 euros at the exchange rate) after being detected by radar traveling at 137 km/h in a section limited to 80 km/h. The amount of the fine was not arbitrary. In Switzerland, judges do not set fines based on rigid tables according to the infraction, but rather based on the real impact they must have on each driver’s pocket. A system designed so that everyone hurts equally. Swiss legislation contemplates a model of fines proportional to the driver’s income, instead of establishing a table of fixed amounts as happens in Spain. This applies an equivalence factor with respect to economic capacity, making the sanctions truly have a deterrent nature. A fine of 200 euros for a person who charges a salary of 16,000 euros It can be a compelling reason for you to take your foot off the accelerator when you don’t play. But that same figure is insignificant for someone with a net worth of several million euros. Sanctions in Switzerland are at another level. In the case of the driver of the Testarossa, the sanction was triggered because the driver declared assets that exceeded 22 million dollars and accumulated a record for similar violations. For the Swiss authorities, the fine should reflect not only the risk committed, but also the economic impact it should generate. The 2010 record is not an isolated case. According to collects the local newspaper 24hourslast August a billionaire resident in Lausanne was fined 90,000 Swiss francs (about 96,500 euros) after exceeding the 50 km/h limit on the road while traveling at 77 km/h. Although the violation was not extreme, the final calculation was, and was justified by evaluating income, assets, and family circumstances. 96,000 euros for exceeding the speed limit by 27 km/h. Switzerland is not the only country that applies it. Finland shares a sanctioning philosophy similar to that applied in Switzerland. There are also fines calculated according to income, with precedents that have exceeded 120,000 euros. One of the best known cases It is that of a businessman who was traveling at 82 km/h in an area limited to 50 km/h and ended up facing a fine of 120,000 euros due to his level of income. In Austria, for example, a millionaire They took away his driving license and the Bugatti Veyron was immediately seized for traveling at 123 km/h in an area limited to 60 km/h. Spain will never come close to these figures. The Spanish traffic legislation is located at the opposite extreme. The fines depend exclusively on the margin exceeded over the speed limit, not on the financial capacity of the offender. Thus, the case of the Finnish driver fined 120,000 euros, in Spain would be resolved with a fine of 400 euros and four points less on the driving license. In fact, you would even have a 50% discount on the fine if you pay it in the first few days. In Spain, the most serious sanctions are penalized with a maximum of 600 euros and the withdrawal of six points on the license, without there being a link between the sanctions and the level of income. This implies that someone with high purchasing powermay consider the cost of the infringement to be minimal, thus losing its deterrent nature. In Xataka | The DGT allows legal circulation at 150 km/h without being an emergency vehicle. The secret: a sign Image | Unsplash (Noah Boyer)

Apple made privacy its flag. One of his functions has resulted in a fine of 98 million euros in Europe

by

Privacy has been one of Apple’s great arguments to explain why its ecosystem works differently. It is not just a technical issue, but a narrative built over years. Precisely for this reason it is surprising that a tool presented as an advance for the user is at the center of a fine of almost one hundred million euros. The Italian Competition Authority has imposed Apple fined 98.6 million euros for abuse of dominant position, considering that the implementation of App Tracking Transparency restricts competition. The focus is not on the idea of ​​​​protecting data, but on how those rules were applied to developers who distribute their apps on iOS. This is where the underlying shock lies. The origin of the function. Transparency Tracking App It does not arise in this regulatory context, but several years earlier, as part of a broader change in Apple’s privacy strategy. The feature was introduced in April 2021 with the release of iOS 14.5 and was presented as a direct way to return control over advertising tracking to the user. From then on, each app had to ask for explicit permission before tracking user activity on other apps and websites. It was a turn that reordered the mobile ecosystem from within. The logic behind App Tracking Transparency is based on a specific definition of what Apple considers tracking. It is not just about displaying ads, but about linking data collected in an app with information obtained from third-party services for targeted advertising or measurement. If the user chooses not to be tracked, the developer loses access to the IDFA and, according to system rulesnor may you use other personal identifiers for the same purpose. It is a technical cut that simplifies the user’s decision, but has direct consequences on how many applications are monetized. A position of strength in the iOS ecosystem. For the Italian authority, the key is not the subsequent opening of the system, but the situation that existed when ATT began to be applied. During that period, Apple concentrated control over the distribution of iOS apps and over the rules that govern advertising tracking at the system level. From that dominant position, the regulator concludes, the company was able to set conditions that had a competitive impact. All of this, beyond the stated objective of protecting user privacy. The App Tracking Transparency Notice The core of the reproach: “double consent.” The heart of the penalty is how ATT was applied to third-party developers. According to the Italian authorityApple’s screen required a first permit to be requested which, by itself, did not meet all the requirements of European data protection regulations. This forced developers to request a second additional consent for the same advertising purpose. That extra step, the regulator maintains, reduced the probability of acceptance and limited the collection and use of data necessary for personalized advertising. The economic impact is one of the pillars of the file. By increasing the friction of obtaining consent, ATT limited the collection and linking of data used to measure and personalize ads. For the Italian authority, this harmed developers whose business is based on the sale of advertising space and also affected advertisers and intermediation platforms. In the summary of the case, the regulator adds that this design could generate benefits for Apple, both through higher commissions associated with App Store services and the growth of its advertising business. Was there another way to do it? One of the keys to resolution is that the problem is not in the goal, but in the path. The Italian authority claims that Apple could have achieved the same level of privacy protection without requiring duplicate consent requests. Disagreement and notice of appeal. Apple has expressed its disagreement with the resolution of the Italian authority and considers that it does not adequately value the privacy protections provided by ATT. In a statement cited by Reutersthe company insists that the system was created to give users clear control over ad tracking and that its rules apply equally to all developers. The company has also confirmed that it will appeal the fine and that it will maintain its commitment to protecting user privacy. The fine is the result of a long and complex investigation. According to the case summarythe Italian authority opened the file in May 2023 and expanded its scope in October 2024, in coordination with the European Commission, other competition regulators and the national data protection authority. This joint approach underlines that ATT’s analysis was not limited to a single country or a single dimension. Rather, it was approached as a intersection between competition, privacy and the functioning of the digital market. Beyond the announced appeal, the resolution imposes immediate effects. The authority orders Apple to immediately cease the aforementioned conduct and refrain from repeating similar practices in the future. In addition, Apple has 90 days to inform the AGCM how it will comply with those demands. It is not clear, for now, whether this calendar also depends on the appeal process, but the case makes it clear that the debate is no longer just theoretical. Images | Georgiy Lyamin | Screenshot In Xataka | We believed that Microsoft had already put Copilot everywhere. LG shows us that we were very wrong

Europe was happy with the changes in the App Store, but not with those in Google Play. There is a historic fine at stake

by

Google is in the crosshairs of the European Commission. A few days ago they announced a new investigation into monopolistic practices with AI summaries, but it is not the only front they have open. The company has already paid historical fines and you face a new one if you don’t make changes to Google Play, your app store. what has happened. They tell it in Reuters. The European Commission is not satisfied with the changes that Google has made to its app store to comply with the Digital Markets Act or DMA. Regulators consider that there are two points that do not comply with the standards: There are technical restrictions that make it difficult for developers to direct users to external channels with better prices. Google continues to charge a commission to the developer even if the user buys the app from its website, with the excuse that they have “facilitated” the purchase. Why is it important. If Google does not make the necessary changes to comply with the DMA, it faces a fine that could amount to 10% of its total revenue. In 2024 they will invoice 350,000 million dollarsso the maximum fine would amount to 35,000 million, the highest to date. Google can still offer to apply changes to avoid paying the fine. The Apple case. The one the Commission is satisfied with is Apple. In fact, they are using your case as an example of what needs to be done. It was not a bed of roses and Apple was fined 500 million euros for not complying with the DMA. Apple had to remove restrictions that prevented redirection to alternative offers. The Epic trial. The European Commission is not the only one that has Google Play in its sights. In the United States, the judge of the Epic vs Google case made a historic decision: Google would have to allow rival stores within the Play Store. Recently Google and Epic reached an agreement through which Google undertakes not to charge commissions of more than 20% on purchases’in-game’ and 9% for the rest. In addition, developers will be able to showcase other payment systems through Play Billing. The agreement must still be approved by the judge, but it seems that Google will have no options but to comply with what both the judge and the EU ask of it. What Google says. The company announced changes in Google Play last August to avoid the fine, is what the Commission now considers insufficient. Google competition lawyer Clare Kelly said the company was “concerned that these could expose Android users to harmful content.” This is the usual position of American companies that are under the scrutiny of the European Commission. Mark Zuckerberg called the DMA “censorship” and there has also been harsh criticism and tariff threats since the Trump administration. Recently, a national security strategy document He claimed that European laws could mean an “erasure of American civilization.” The fruits of the DMA. He overregulation of the European Union is subject to criticism, but It also has a good side. Thanks to the DMA has made USB-C mandatory for all manufacturers, forcing Apple to abandon its proprietary connector. It has also brought us the Universal AirDrop and the changes in the app stores so that we have more freedom when it comes to where to download our apps. Image | Xataka, Pexels In Xataka | Europe wants to protect itself against Huawei, but the energy sector knows something uncomfortable: it cannot move forward without it

everything was fine until he forgot the password

by

That let’s forget a password It is a fairly common mistake that normally does not have major consequences, but there are cases in which things are more serious. Today we learned the story of a man who has forgotten the password for a chip he has implanted in his hand. And there is no way to get it back. What has happened? They tell it in Futurism. The protagonist of our story is called Zi Teng Wang and a few years ago he thought that implanting an RFID chip would be fun for his magic shows. As narrated in your Facebook pageAfter trying several uses that did not convince him too much, he programmed the chip so that when scanned with a cell phone a meme would appear. One day, the link where he had hosted the image stopped working and when he went to change it, he realized that he had forgotten the password for the chip, so now he has a chip in his hand that redirects to a broken page. A solution. It is not possible to use the classic “I forgot my password”, so Zi Teng Wang has consulted with friends who are technologically savvy and they have told him that the only option to regain access is to hack the chip. Simply use an RFID reader and try all possible combinations. The problem is that you have it in your hand, so you would have to strap the reader to your hand or remove the chip. In the end he decided to let it be and is glad that the link to the meme worked again. Biohacking. In 2016 it was very fashionable about implanting RFID or NFC chips in the body. RFID technology is the same as that used in the chips that are implanted in dogs and cats, while NFC is what we usually use to transfer data between mobile phones or pay. These chips do not have a battery, but rather work passively by “responding” with identification when a reader approaches. Years ago there were people who did it to be able to open doors or unlock your computer simply by reaching out and also to pass your contact information. Currently, the original biohacking has been eclipsed by more ambitious proposals that aim at extreme longevity with figures like Bryan Johnson and more advanced technologies such as the brain chips proposed by companies like Neuralink. epic forgetfulness. Being left with a chip in your body that is useless is a chore, but it is even fun when compared to other cases of forgotten passwords. In 2021 we learned the story of a German engineer who lost your bitcoin wallet passwordwhose value amounted to 256 million euros. And it has not been the only one, it is estimated that there are at least 3.7 million bitcoin lost for the same reason. Image | Cottonbro Studio on Pexelsedited In Xataka | Password managers: which ones are the best to protect and remember all the ones you have

There are eight million Airbnbs, but only one where the disconnection is so extreme that there is fine print: risk of death

by

At the beginning of the year, the figure by Bryant Gingerich began to circulate in many media. In a secluded corner of the Ohio wilderness, Gingerich, a 34-year-old engineer, seemed to have found an opportunity to transform his professional life by converting a simple cave in a successful vacation rental business. However, if we talk about places far away from the world, none like the one in this story. Stay at the extreme. I told the story a few days ago BBC. In the Kulusuk Fjords of eastern Greenland, the Floating Glacier Hut It has established itself as one of the most remote accommodations, if not the most, in the world. The cabin, installed on a floating hexagonal platform and anchored to the surrounding rocks, it is located in an area where the distances between settlements are enormous and the human presence is minimal. Access is made only by boat and the infrastructure responds to the idea of ​​offering a space completely removed from any urban dynamics, in a territory dominated by glaciers, icebergs and an unpredictable climate. This approach fits with the rise of the so-called as “quietcations” and hyper-remote destinations, which seek to satisfy the growing need for total disconnection that many travelers express in the face of the accelerated pace of daily life. Disconnect without technology. The cabin dispenses with the internet and reduces outside communication to a satellite phone, which forces us to live real isolation throughout the stay. The Finnish-made module is thermally insulated and has a glass roof that allows you to observe the polar sky and phenomena such as the northern lights without leaving the interior. The equipment it’s basic: a small stove, a toilet, a minimal kitchen area and a double bed. The lack of a shower is part of the design, and some visitors resort to quick dips in the frozen sea to clean themselves. This austerity is proposed as a central feature of the experience, focused on the observation of the environment and sensory immersion without digital interference. Views from the accommodation Caution and logistics. Extreme isolation coexists with reasonable vigilance against the risks inherent to the Arctic. According to the local guide Nicco Segretoresponsible for the project, the cabin acts as an effective refuge from potentially deadly fauna like polar bears (there is a sign that warns you before entering), as long as you stay inside. However, the operator warns that weather conditions may prevent the arrival of the boat in charge of transporting guests, an element that is part of the operational reality in the region. The landscape offers opportunities for activities such as glacier hiking, exploring ice caves formed by subglacial rivers, and ice fishing through a small hole prepared in the structure. These excursions show the dynamics of ice and the visible effects of melting, reinforcing the educational value of the trip. A tourist project. Secret discovered a decade ago a glacial cave that today is part of the activity offerand that discovery was the origin of his initiative to develop low-footprint tourism in the area. In addition to generating employment in the Tasiilaq community, the project aims to attract travelers interested in geology, the behavior of ice and the magnitude of the polar landscape. The Floating Glacier Hut It is the initial phase of a broader plan that includes a future retirement of greater capacity, Vision Lodgeaimed at structured stays of several days. The accelerated retreat of the glaciers, visible even year after year, becomes a central component of the experience, which allows us to observe climate changes on a human scale. An exclusive model. The stay, designed for two people, has an approximate cost from 1,000 to 1,200 dollars per night and includes private boat transfers, dinner prepared by the guide himself, and breakfast. Despite the price, remembered the BBC that the accommodation It has received very positive reviews for the combination of isolation, landscape and silence, elements that guests point out as difficult to find in other destinations. Thus, the general perception is that it is an experience designed for those who seek to completely disconnect (from humanity and devices), observe the environment without filters and face a slower pace, where nature is the central axis of the room and the passage of time seems to acquire another scale. Image | Vision Lodge In Xataka | An engineer left his job to transform a cave into a vacation rental. He’s making a fortune a year without Airbnb In Xataka | Italy vetoes one of the great symbols of mass tourism: the use of key boxes for self-check-in is prohibited

to what extent will we accept that AI cameras fine us

by

Spain has begun to automate the surveillance of minor infractions with AI: Technology stops optimizing traffic and starts monitoring it. Why is it important. This marks a paradigm shift. Until now, urban AI was used to improve mobility (adjust traffic lights, predict traffic jams, reduce emissions). Now he goes from assistant to inspector. And it does so with a key nuance: it does not pursue major crimes or flagrant dangers, but rather small daily infractions that previously escaped control due to cost and surveillance capacity. AI reduces the marginal cost of sanctioning to practically zero. Once deployed, everyone can be observed all the time. The facts. The Barcelona pilot test involved four buses of lines H12 and D20 equipped with cameras that identify, through AI, vehicles blocking reserved lanes. In Madrid, the City Council has installed smart traffic lights that count pedestrians in real time and has announced systems that will detect seat belt use. The DGT has taken another step. It has deployed four cameras on the A-1, A-2, A-6 and A-42 highways that monitor the crossing of continuous lines. The system works with two cameras per section: one records the license plates at the beginning, another at the end. If a car changes lanes between both points, the fine is automatic. It is 200 euros per violation. In figures. Spain already has 3,395 devices to control violationsaccording to Faconauto. Of them, more than 1,300 are DGT surveillance points between fixed and mobile radars. Added to this are more than 200 cameras that monitor belts and mobile phones, Pegasus helicopters and now these new continuous line detection systems. Barcelona has not yet activated the sanctions on its buses, but the volume of violations detected (80 daily in just four vehicles) anticipates what is coming. Between the lines. There is a delicate balance that is being renegotiated without us having barely opened the debate. On the one hand, more compliance with fewer agents: administrative efficiency is indisputable. On the other, the sensation of an omnipresent eye. The difference with the classic radar is not so much technical as range. The radar monitors specific points where there is proven risk. These new systems turn the entire city into a guarded zone: each bus is an inspector, each intersection a control point. AI does not change what is sanctioned, it changes where and how much. Move from selective surveillance to ubiquitous surveillance. Yes, but. To what extent will citizens accept being recorded and punished by a machine? It’s not just a legal issue, but a cultural one: trust in the algorithm versus human interpretation. Who audits the system’s decisions? What room is there for error or appeal? Technology is not neutral: each deployment reflects political priorities about what deserves to be monitored and sanctioned. The big question. What is relevant is not whether this is good or bad in the abstract, but what it tells us about the new contract between citizen, city and AI. AI stops being an abstraction and enters the daily urban experience. The citizen goes from user to observed subject. And the unresolved question is who sees, who decides, who corrects and, above all, how far we are willing to go when automating the chase is so easy and cheap. In Xataka | The “made in China” business of the DGT’s V-16 beacons: homologating the same product 24 times and selling it under different brands Featured image | Barcelona City Council

2,000 euros fine for the minor’s parents

by

The Spanish Data Protection Agency (AEPD) has imposed the first sanction in Spain for the creation and dissemination of false images generated with artificial intelligence. The parents of a minor have been fined 2,000 euros, reduced to 1,200 for prompt payment, after a case that has set a precedent in the protection of minors’ data in Europe. What has happened. A minor used the ClothOff app to create a fake image of a naked high school classmate. The AI ​​tool takes the victim’s face and superimposes it on an unclothed body, taking into account physical characteristics such as complexion or skin tone. The image was later spread through social networks and messaging groups. The origin of the case. Although the public resolution does not identify the parties involved, the AEPD has confirmed that it is one of the cases that occurred in AlmendralejoBadajoz, in September 2023. Then, it came to light that at least 20 minors had been victims of similar schemes that circulated on the municipality’s cell phones. The images even reached portals such as OnlyFans and pornographic pages, according to the resolution. Why it is important. This is the first time that a data protection authority in the European Union sanctions by spreading a deepfake. The AEPD opened the file ex officio on September 20, 2023, just two days after the case became public, and was able to learn the identity of those responsible thanks to the collaboration with the Prosecutor’s Office. The regulator has acted on the basis that a person’s image is personal data that has reinforced protection when it comes to minors. The debate on the sanction. The amount of the fine has generated some debate. Jorge García Herrero, lawyer and data protection officer, account to El País that “very few risks related to AI cause as much social alarm as the creation of non-consensual sexual deepfakes of minors” and questions whether the sanction is ‘not very exemplary’. On the other hand, the jurist Borja Adsuara, account to the media that this is “a crime against privacy, which goes through criminal proceedings,” and wonders what sense it makes to impose an administrative fine when the case has already been judicially sentenced. The parallel path. This administrative procedure of the AEPD is independent of the criminal process that has already been initiated against those responsible, who were between 12 and 14 years old at the time of the events. In the judicial process, a year of supervised release was imposed on 15 minors for manipulating images of classmates. According to Miriam Al Adib, mother of one of the victims, “there was an exemplary sentence according to which the children are on probation for a year and have to take a training course.” And now what. It is expected that the AEPD will publish more similar fines related to the events in Almendralejo in the coming months, given that there were at least two dozen victims. The resolution exempts the creators of ClothOff from liability, an application designed specifically to generate images of naked women without their consent and which is currently closed. Its creators face a judicial process in the United States. Al Adib warns that these cases represent “a pandemic of tremendous violence” that requires coordinated political strategies and effective protection protocols for victims. Cover image | Swello In Xataka | We already have the first controversy of this Christmas: Coca-Cola has once again made an advertisement using AI

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.