happen

OnePlus is preparing to leave Europe and the United States. I had been sending signals for months that this was going to happen.

by

OnePlus and Oppo are going to announce in the coming days a total withdrawal from two large markets such as the United States and Europe, according to the German media has advanced WinFuture. Neither of the two companies has confirmed it in public yet, but the evidence has been accumulating for months and this time they all fit. What has happened. WinFuture cites internal sources who speak of “fundamental changes in strategy” that will be communicated this week, a classic euphemism to say that OnePlus is going to stop selling new models in two of its historical markets. There have already been press conferences behind closed doors with specialized media in which neither OnePlus nor Oppo have wanted to explain the reason for the closure. There will be no new launches of mobile phones, tablets or wearables in Europe or the United States. He stocks What remains will be settled in the coming weeks. Devices already sold will maintain software support until the end of their life cycle. India and China are left out of the announcement, although the brand will lose its independence there and will become a cheap line within Oppo. The context. This doesn’t come out of nowhere. In January, a report –without clear sources– he was already talking about dismantling and OnePlus denied it. In March, 9to5Google public that the global withdrawal could come in April. In April, the brand itself admitted that it was “evaluating its roadmap” in Europe, while also cutting its workforce in the region, with layoffs focused on communication, marketing and sales. The team that explains, advertises and sells a brand to the public is not fired if that brand is going to continue to need to be explained, advertised and sold. Then came the rumor of a merger with Realme, the leak that OxygenOS would be integrated into ColorOS (Oppo’s software) and, finally, OnePlus’ own websites in Germany, Spain and France They began to redirect buyers towards Oppo products. Between the lines. The replacement plan has an obvious crack. Oppo wants to fill the gap left by OnePlus in Europe, but its phones do not cost exactly the same. OnePlus built its entire brand on the promise of delivering high-end specs at a mid-range price tag, the “flagship killer” with which it was born in 2014. Replacing that proposal with a more expensive catalog is not a change of logo but a change of a brand’s target audience. There is another fissure that is caused by those who are still their clients. In several EU countries Complaints about unfulfilled guarantees have multiplied: users whose OnePlus headphones damaged under warranty receive compensation a voucher of 199 euros for an online store that barely has stocksand which also does not allow the voucher to be applied to the few remaining discounted products. Some have already opened complaints with the European Consumer Center. When after-sales service begins to systematically fail months before an unconfirmed closure, it stops being a customer service problem and becomes an exit signal. We saw it in Spain with BQ. Yes, but. OnePlus already denied similar rumors in 2023 and did so again in January of this year. Neither of the two denials has aged very well. Neither OnePlus nor Oppo have confirmed anything yet an official confirmation. From Xataka We have contacted Oppo and their response has been to explain to us that they are in talks with the regional teams, waiting to get more information to share. They neither confirm nor deny it, something that says a lot after years of categorical denials every time this rumor arose. Meanwhile, the accumulation of coincidences (execution departures, website redirects, software merger, empty store, guarantees that They are paid with hardly usable vouchers…) leaves little room for the benefit of the doubt. Why is it important. OnePlus was born in 2014 selling the promise that you didn’t have to pay more to have the best, and that promise ended up costing it its own identity: the brand was absorbed by Oppo in 2021which pushed its co-founder Carl Pei to leave to found Nothing. Since then, OnePlus has been losing room for maneuver within the group until it has become, by all indications, more of a label than a company with its own criteria. Its disappearance in the West closes the cycle of an idea (that of the premium mobile without a premium) that the market itself has been eroding as the differences between ranges have become smaller and Chinese brands have preferred to compete by volume rather than by differentiation. And now what. He OnePlus 15 It remains as the brand’s probable last major launch in Western markets. In parallel, similar rumors are circulating about other second-rate Chinese brands, but this week we could have the official announcement of the OnePlus outcome. In Xataka | Nothing is the most fascinating mobile phone brand in years for a very simple reason: it doesn’t sell mobile phones Featured image | Xataka

Someone thought it was a good idea to bring a Bluetooth device called “Bomb” onto a plane. What had to happen happened

by

Imagine that you are sitting in that modern torture chamber that we call “economy class” on a transcontinental plane when, after an hour in the air of the eight-hour trip from New Jersey to Mallorca, the aircraft turns around to land at the point of origin because the bomb threat protocols are activated. Now stop imagining because that is precisely what happened this past May 30 when the United Flight Boeing 767 that covered the Newark – Palma de Mallorca route thad to turn around with 12 crew members and 190 passengers of which one was the owner of a Bluetooth device with a peculiar name. “Bomb”. The “Bluetooth bomb” He United Flight 236 It should be just another conventional flight, but those who took the one last Saturday experienced an unusual adventure. When the ship was flying over the Atlantic and in a period Between 60 and 90 minutes after takeoff, someone noticed a disturbing detail: searching for Bluetooth networks, They found a device called “BOMB”. If someone was carrying a bomb with a Bluetooth connection, I highly doubt it would be visible to everyone and, on top of that, it would be called “Bomb”, but it was enough for the situation to explode. The crew, using the public address system, repeatedly asked that the Bluetooth devices be turned off, even threatening with turning around, but after seeing that there were still some lights left and that the “bomb” was among them, the maneuvers began. In coordination with the company’s operations center in Chicago, it was decided that it was best to declare a state of bomb emergency and return to Newark. The plane landed as if nothing had happened, but on the ground there was a significant police and security deployment that forced the passengers to vacate the ship, leaving their hand luggage behind. Image | Flightradar24 As part of the procedure, it was now the security forces that were going to be in charge of inspecting that luggage again. It has not really emerged what the device was, but what is clear is that there was no real explosive device. United has not given detailsbut different media indicate that a 16-year-old passenger had a device named with that name. Some say it’s a Fitbit, others say it’s a Bluetooth speaker. No details have been given about the consequences. that the passenger will have to face and everything has remained an anecdotal situation and a story that those 212 people will tell at some point. Now, there are interesting readings. The first is that there are devices for which you can change the name of the Bluetooth connection. For example, we can call our cell phone whatever we want, just like Wi-Fi networks, but there are others that are not easy to change the name of. A speaker or headphones usually have the name they come from the factory, unless they have an app that explicitly allows you to change the identifier. This is important because there are speakers like the Bombbox from JBL and, above all, the Hama Bomb 3.0 that have ‘BOMB’ in the name. Obviously, it doesn’t just say that and there are numbers and the brand, so it would be easy to deduce that it is a totally different device than a bomb. Also, if this were the case, the device would be turned off and not searching for Bluetooth all the time, so what makes the most sense is that it is a mobile phone with that ‘nickname’ for Bluetooth. That said, when the crew asked to disconnect the Bluetooth, if the person had headphones on they might not even notice and, if they did, it was a message that could be interpreted as “put the phone on.” airplane modeThere are cell phones that, when they activate airplane mode, deactivate all wireless communications, but there are also those that only deactivate Wi-Fi, the mobile network and leave Bluetooth to allow connection with headphones. This is for trying to find an explanation for a bizarre story like few others that had a happy ending for the passengers, being able to board a new flight the morning of the next day, but which could be very serious for the funny or clueless owner of the device. Because it is one thing to take longer to take off, but having a plane turn around, relocate all the passengers and the company pay compensation… is not cheap. AND I’m sure someone at United Flight isn’t happy at all.nor were those who were on that flight and who had zero information about what was happening, even having to go to reddit to find out about the movie and report the company’s compensation: a $15 bonus to spend on food. Moral: take a look at what your devices are called. In Xataka | Airplanes have circular windows for a reason. It took two plane crashes to find out.

“We overestimate what will happen in the next two years and we underestimate what will happen in the next ten”

by

Bill Gates, on AI: “We overestimate what will happen in the next 2 years and underestimate what will happen in the next 10” There is a phrase that Bill Gates often repeats with the conviction of someone who has already seen how the world made mistakes when judging a technology: “We overestimate what we can do in one year and underestimate what we can achieve in ten.” Although it may fit in a time of uncertainty and technological leaps like the one we are currently experiencing with AI, it is not actually new. It appeared in his book ‘Path to the future‘and recovered it in ‘Source Code: My beginnings’. However, the co-founder of Microsoft does not use it to show off that he has succeeded in his technological commitment to desktop computers, but rather to ask for a little calm and perspective in the face of the most disruptive technological moment since the arrival of the personal computer that he lived in first person. a déjàvu technological. Gates has spent months dedicating a good part of his interventions to cooling the collective panic around the arrival of AI. In one of his interventions to promote his latest book, the millionaire intervened in the Jay Shetty podcast and took the opportunity to send a reassuring message: we already experienced something similar when Windows arrived, and then there were also those who thought that the world was ending. Since he left the helm of Microsoft in the hands of Steve Ballmerhas continued to advise its management team, including those responsible for the alliance with OpenAI. According to collected Business Insiderboth CEO Satya Nadella and the Microsoft management team turn to the founder as an advisor in the face of relevant strategic changes for the company. That low-key but influential role gives him a different perspective on the current AI revolution. For this reason, he insists that society’s fear of this new technology follows the same patterns that it already experienced in the early years of Microsoft. AI is an opportunity, but also a risk. In his annual letter The Year AheadGates described AI as a technology with “no upper limit” to its capabilities, leaving it in a full of opportunitiesbut also of great risks that must be managed. In that same publication he assured that “of all the things that humans have created, artificial intelligence is the one that will change society the most.” The millionaire identifies two major threats for the next decade: the use of AI by malicious actors and the emergence of AI in the labor market. Among the dangers that he cites with most concern is the use of this technology to design weapons with a comparable scope to that of the COVID-19 pandemic. Work, the great battlefield. One of the effects of AI that Gates analyzes in more detail is what it will have on employment. Assumption It is not catastrophicbut direct: technology will allow the economy to produce more goods and services using less labor. He points out that AI is already doubling the software developer efficiencywhich makes programming cheaper and alters labor demand in that sector. Gates also points out that AI will affect less expected industries, with medicine and education in the spotlight. He does not present it as an inevitable threat, but as a wake-up call to adapt before change arrives without warning. Optimism with nuances and a commitment to act now. In his analysis of 2026, the technology magnate insists that the decisions made in the coming years will determine whether AI becomes a factor of shared progress or an additional source of inequality and social suffering. Staying true to his phrase, Gates assures that the time to act is now, not when technology is already uncontrollable and its effects irreparable. What makes his vision different is the balance that proposes an intermediate place between catastrophism and blind euphoria. Gates learned this concept forcefully in his first years at the helm of Microsoft: consider the worst and best scenarios, because you cannot be so optimistic as to think that everything will always turn out as planned, nor be so pessimistic as to believe that everything will be an absolute failure. In Xataka | Bill Gates had a tendency to procrastinate until he found an infallible remedy: Japanese companies Image | Flickr (Governor Tom Wolf)

Someone connected an unprotected Windows XP PC to the Internet to see what would happen. The result is not surprising

by

When Microsoft ends its support for security updates in its operating systems, it is not usually advisable to use a PC with said system unless it is for a specific and specific case. Eric Parker, content creator specialized in technology, wanted try with an experiment: use Windows XP today connected to the Internet and eliminating all types of protections. As you may have imagined, the PC has become a magnet for malware. In fact, in just 10 minutes, the operating system was completely compromised. Parker also helped make this happen for educational purposes and to demonstrate how dangerous it can be to use an operating system like Windows XP today. Windows XP without firewall and without NAT 10 minutes later: a magnet for malware The expert configured a virtual machine with Windows XP Service Pack 3 on a Proxmox server, also disabling its firewall and NAT (Network Address Translation) settings and replicating the connection conditions common in the early 2000s. To recreate this scenario, the researcher Completely disabled Windows XP firewall and assigned a direct public IP address to the system, exposing the machine without any intermediate protection. As seen in the video, in just ten minutes, the system showed the first signs of infection with the appearance of the “conhoz.exe” process in the Task Manager, which turned out to be a Trojan disguised as a legitimate component of the operating system. After downloading a compatible browser and continued use of the system, in a short time we see how the PC starts to accumulate malware from multiple unknown sources. The system had been a victim of several Trojans and malicious programs running from temporary folders. He was also the victim of a rogue FTP server that allowed full remote access to files, DNS modification to redirect traffic to attacker-controlled servers, and the creation of additional user accounts for attackers to maintain access to the system. A whole string of malicious processes that ended up hijacking the PC. Image: Eric Parker The key factor that allowed the rapid entry of all these malicious components was the vulnerability EternalBluepresent in unpatched Windows XP SP3. This security breach, which was later used by the famous ransomware WannaCryallows attackers to execute remote code without any user interaction. Parker explains that tools like Nmap allow cybercriminals to scan the network for vulnerable systemsquickly identifying exposed and unprotected Windows XP computers. A system that was crying out to be violated and a Windows 7 stronger than it seems The content creator himself admits that the conditions were as optimal as possible to get malware: disabled firewall, direct connection without NAT and unpatched system. Under normal circumstances, with a basic home router and the firewall activated, Windows XP would be significantly more protected. However, the risk does not disappear completely. The use of outdated browsers and the ease of privilege escalation on this operating system remain serious problems. And as shown in the experiment, once infected, The malware was able to automatically close security tools like Malwarebytes. To contrast the results, Parker performed the same test with Windows 7 under identical conditions. Surprisingly, after ten hours of exposure, the most modern system showed no signs of infectionevidencing the significant security improvements implemented in later versions of Windows. Now that official security update support for Windows 10 is ending soon, it’s good to take a look back and see how an outdated system can easily become compromised. Fortunately, today we have many more alternatives if we do not want to update to Windows 11. Cover image | Eric Parker In Xataka | FCKGW-RHQQ2-YXRKT-8TG6W-2B7Q8 This article was originally published in Genbeta in June 2025 and is part of Genbeta’s “greatest hits” that we will discover here in the coming weeks.

10,000 tons of almonds have disappeared in Granada in a single night. It is a warning of what is about to happen.

by

On the night of March 30, 2026, about 30 million euros they vanished. The figures They are from COAGbut (taking into account the precedents from the beginning of the decade and the growth of almond cultivation) they sound plausible: the region that concentrates the largest almond production in the country, lost around 10,000 tons due to a late frost. And it’s not even the most interesting thing. What the hell is up with almonds? With 70,000 hectares dedicated to almonds, the Granada Altiplano has become the national epicenter of the production of this fruit. Paradoxically, we might add. Because it is something very rare: there are not many more cases of crops that do not stop growing on the surface while their vulnerability increases to levels never seen before. A vulnerability that, of course, is not limited to March 30. Because that would be the easy thing to do: blame everything on cold air intrusion from the north that knocked down the thermometers of the Altiplano (-5 in Galera and Baza, -4 in Puebla de Don Fabrique or -3 in Castril) just at the moment of greatest sensitivity of the almond tree. However, that is only part of the story. Of course, frost during flowering and fruit setting is a problem. But in the last five years, the region has suffered 3 frosts of this type and the area of ​​almond trees does not stop growing. That is to say, the vulnerability is deeper and exceeds the climate risks: we are talking about the advance of the almond wasp, insufficient agricultural insurance, the tariff asymmetry with our main competitor (California) and, of course, the enormous pressure that international prices exert on farmers. And what happened to the harvest? According to COAGpreliminary estimates draw a very complicated scenario: between 8,000 and 12,000 tons lost, an economic impact of between 25 and 40 million euros and the complete loss of all production in the most affected areas. The assessment of the Junta de Andalucía and the Ministry is missing, but the figures serve to measure the destruction. Hunger with the desire to eat. Spanish almond production It was already affected by the drought and none of the explanations are surprising (late rains, winds that make pollination difficult, hailstorms in April and fungi derived from humidity). However, in 2025, things seemed to turn around and the campaign was positive. But it was a statistical artifact: production grew by 5%but the productive surface had increased by 10. That is to say, the situation was still complicated. And the data does not stop changing. It is enough to keep in mind that 15% of all the almond trees planted in Spain are not yet productive to understand that the crop has been experiencing a boom for years that does not end (and that may end by give us some displeasure). What does the almond tree need to avoid becoming the new lemon? That is, so that we are not forced to have to start ripping them out in a few years. And the answer is also simple: what you need is a better safety net, a better way of looking to the future, a better way of moving in the market. I have said it many times: In agriculture, Spain is a giant with feet of clay. And the almond tree is the best example that this is still the case and we have enormous difficulties to change it. Image | Marcia Cripps In Xataka | Spain is the second largest almond producer in the world. Tariffs or not, farmers are already in trouble

The US Navy already knows what is going to happen to the planet. The mission to open Hormuz is the closest thing to a suicide operation

by

In the world there are only a dozen maritime passages capable of altering the global economy if they are blocked. Some are so narrow that, at certain points, they barely exceed 30 kilometers wide. However, millions of barrels of oil, huge ships of liquefied natural gas and a good part of the planet’s energy trade circulate through them every day. When one of those places goes into crisisthe impact it doesn’t take long to feel in markets, governments and homes around the world. And the Strait of Hormuz points to a unprecedented scenario. The impossible mission. Yes, the Strait of Hormuz has become the point most dangerous on the planet for global energy trade. Some 20 million barrels of oil daily (around 20% of global consumption) in addition to one fifth of liquefied natural gas that supplies numerous countries. The conflict with Iran has transformed that corridor into a war zone where attacks on oil tankers, drones, missiles and sabotage have paralyzed much of the traffic. But what is most revealing is not only the violence of the incidents, but Washington’s reaction: even the world’s largest naval power just recognized which is not prepared to escort oil tankers through the area. That delay is a clear sign of the magnitude of the problem, because if the US Navy needs weeks to organize convoys, and that is exactly the words they have usedthe implicit message for the markets is that the Gulf energy blockade may last much longer than many imagined. Convoys under fire. To understand it we must imagine the scenario. The idea of ​​accompanying oil tankers with warships seems, on paper, a direct solution. In practice, it is one of the riskiest missions that a modern navy can face. The convoys would need frigates and destroyers protecting the freighters while specialized units They search for mines and drones in an environment saturated with threats. The ships would be exposed to anti-ship missiles launched from mobile trucks off the Iranian coast, swarms of explosive speedboats, kamikaze drones and possible mines hidden in the strait. To completely eliminate these threats, some analysts they even propose something Washington would prefer to avoid: a ground operation to control the Iranian coast that dominates the sea passage. This scenario explains why military planners speak of a “very complicated” situation: reopening the strait does not depend only on naval superiority, but on neutralizing an entire ecosystem of asymmetric warfare. Iranian missile boat moments before being attacked The cheapest weapon to paralyze commerce. And among all the threats, one stands out for its effectiveness: naval mines. We are talking about simple, cheap and extremely disruptive weapons that can transform a maritime corridor in a death trap. Even a few mines in a narrow spot are enough to paralyze traffic, because shipping companies and their insurers simply refuse to take the risk. Iran has several types of these devices, from floating mines to models anchored to the seabed capable of detonating charges of more than one hundred kilos of explosives upon contact. Not only that. You can also display them in ways difficult to detect: from small boats camouflaged as fishing boats or by divers who attach them to the hull of the ships. History, in fact, has already demonstrated his powerbecause mines have damaged more American ships than any other weapon naval since World War II. Hence its true effect is not to sink ships, but to sow enough fear to block traffic. Map with the strategic location of the Strait of Hormuz The invisible lock. The paradox of this type of war is that it is not necessary to mine the entire strait to close it. In reality, it is enough the simple suspicion. The reason is simple: in such a narrow channel, the presence of a few mines requires inspection every meter of water with sonar, underwater drones and specialized ships. A slow and dangerous process, especially if the enemy continues to lay new mines or attack demining units. Plus: recent experience in the black sea has shown that even uncertainty about their presence can keep commercial ships away for months. And in the Persian Gulf the same thing happens: Thousands of ships wait for instructions while the risk of mines, missiles or drones turns each voyage into a gamble. Oil as a geopolitical hostage. There is no doubt, all this gives Iran a strategic power of large dimensions. Before the conflict, about a fifth of the world’s oil passed through Hormuz daily. With this altered flow, energy prices react immediately and governments release strategic reserves to contain the impact. The strait thus becomes a colossal geopolitical lever: Even if the war were to end soon, something that is currently a utopia, an Iranian regime still capable of launching drones, missiles or mines could keep threatening maritime traffic when it suits you. That means oil and gas can stay hostage of Gulf stability for a long time, something that worries both the markets and Washington’s regional allies. There is no easy way out. Under this scenario, the dilemma For the United States it is evident. Stopping the war too soon could leave intact Iran’s ability to blockade the strait and put pressure on global energy markets. Continuing it could require a major climbincluding land operations or prolonged naval campaigns to ensure the security of the sea passage. Meanwhile, the conflict has already demonstrated something truly disturbing: even in the face of a military power like the United States, Iran retains enough tools to disrupt the global energy system. That is why the real alarm signal is not only the closure of Hormuz, but the realization that opening it may be much more difficult (and expensive) than many thought at the beginning of the war. Image | US NAVY, Oils & Fats international In Xataka | China has just found a hole in the US’s quietest weapon: an algorithm has hacked its B-2s in Iran In Xataka | The great paradox of war: the … Read more

Now they are building a “highway” so it doesn’t happen again

by

Valencia will not be the same after DANA. The long reconstruction process has not yet finished and there is no shortage of key infrastructure so that citizens can regain normality and, if they suffer floods again, they will be less affected. An example: the new Quart de Poblet substation DANAs-proof to guarantee the electrical supply or the new pipelines of the La Presa (Manises) and El Realón (Picassent) water treatment plants so that no matter what happens, there is no shortage of drinking water. Context. Valencia and its metropolitan area drink from two rivers: the Júcar River (Picassent) and the Turia River (Manises) through their respective Drinking Water Treatment Stations with a high water network system. We are talking about the capital and approximately fifty municipalities, about 1.7 million inhabitants. Until before this canalization work, Valencia’s supply system operated in a compartmentalized manner, that is, the DWTPs were not interconnected. This represents a serious inconvenience: in the event of a failure in one plant (floods, breakdowns, lack of electricity supply) in one, the other does not have the physical capacity to divert flow to the affected sector. In short: there are parts of Valencia that are left without drinking water. Why is it important. Because this water highway project will ensure uninterrupted and proper supply to the metropolitan area of ​​Valencia. DANA tragically taught us that extreme climate events occur closer than we think and that we must get ready because we are going to see more of them: Spain should raise awareness of the culture of emergency. In this sense, a possible blackout or a flood is not a theoretical incident, but something that happens in reality: part of the metropolitan area of ​​Valencia he ran out of water those days. The work. To connect the two water treatment plants, 1,667 meters of pipe have been installed from the end of section I in urban Xirivella to the DN1600 pipe located in Valencia. The project is not new: it began in 2014 and will culminate in 2027 with a final section, which requires this 25-kilometer-long water highway with a large-caliber pipeline (1.4 meters in diameter) under the ground. The new channeling requires tunnels under the Turia River bed and other infrastructure, minimizing the surface impact on the Natural Park and the Orchard, a technical challenge of underground surgery in which the main pipes of the city will be connected, minimizing supply cuts. The total investment is 113 million, of which 13 will go only to this last section. A “smart” water highway. The achievement is not so much the implementation of this new network of pipes but the interconnectivity: now the water will be able to go where it is needed in an intelligent way, so that no one is left without supply, giving a new twist to the resilience of the facilities. From here, the ball is in the state of the Júcar and Turia rivers. In Xataka | Iberdrola deploys in Valencia the first 66 kV substation in the world “armored” in front of the DANA In Xataka | The floods in Valencia, Catalonia and Aragon illustrate something else: Spain is not prepared to deal with more and more hurricanes-storms Cover | Waters of Valencia and EMIVASA

There are those who claim that AI is going to kill software. Most likely, just the opposite will happen.

by

It was 1993 and a young man named Marc Andreessenstill with his hair intact and a lot of ambition, set out to create a web browser with a colleague who worked with him at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) at the University of Illinois. They called it Mosaic. That browser allowed you to explore the newborn World Wide Web with the click of a mouse, something amazing because to date the browsers that had been developed were in text mode and were used with the keyboard. Suddenly the web could include images and even multimedia content. A little later Andreessen met Jim Clark, founder of the legendary Silicon Graphics, and he encouraged him to embark on an adventure with his web browser, so together they decided to set up their own startup and that led to the creation of one of the mythical browsers in history: Netscape. Marc Andreessen. Source: Wikimedia. That made Andreessen a multimillionaire, and from 2005 his interest changed. I no longer wanted to start a business, but rather help others start a business. He ended up founding the venture capital firm Andreessen Howoritz and became richer and richer (while losing more and more hair). His successes and bets in the technology industry are notable, but also he left some famous phrases. The most notable is probably the one delivered in 2011 when saying “Software is eating the world.” His argument was compelling: the companies that were growing the most were software or had software as one of their key pillars. He was not wrong—today these companies are absolute technological giants—and that quote became one of those seemingly immutable laws. And then AI arrived. Is AI eating software? The appearance in November 2022 of ChatGPT caused an extraordinary impact, although it had been clear for a year and a half that something was changing in the software world. In July 2021 we talked about GitHub Copilot when the conversation around generative AI was still awakening. That project allowed machines to program for us. This concept has become over the years the clearest example that AI can change things– Developers have embraced this tool like no other industry, but they know that they cannot trust her 100%. Still, we are living in an exciting time for software. One in which the rise of vibe coding is absolute. Andrej Karphaty I thought about it these days and explained that when coined the term A year ago maybe he was wrong with that way of calling it. Now he proposed changing it to “agent engineering” to reflect the type of tool it has ended up being. Be that as it may, the vibe coding/agent engineering has sparked a fever for software development. In many ways it has democratized it and turned us all into potential developers. I am experimenting myself with Open Source tools that I am modifying to my liking, and others are doing exactly the same in this era of “custom micro-applications”. But in recent days we have also experienced a disturbing phenomenon. The threat of the “SaaSpocalypse” The generative AI models and AI agents that have appeared in recent months have ended up having an extraordinary impact on the software world. In fact we are not referring to vibe coding as suchmore aimed at occasional programmers or users without knowledge who are encouraged to create their own apps. We are referring to what has happened to the large software companies that for years have controlled the market with the SaaS (Software as a Service) philosophy. This model has made it possible to convert, for example, Photoshop or Office no longer into software that was sold in boxes and you installed on your PC, but into applications that run in the cloud and that you can use from a browser. Applications are no longer applications, they are services. And you don’t pay for them by buying them at once: you subscribe to them. But AI appears to threaten that model. Last week, software companies lost a total of $300 billion on the stock market overnight. The shares of MongoDB, Salesforce, Shopify or Atlassian lost between 15 and 20% in value in a few hours, and talk of the “SaaS apocalypse” began (“SaaSpocalypse“). Source: Perplexity These falls are obvious if you take a look at Google Finance or any monitoring platform for these companies. Or if you ask Perplexity like I did, which creates a nice (and worrying) graph about some of the companies consulted: the collapse in the last month is really terrible, although it seems that the trend seems to have stopped. Be that as it may, this “SaaS apocalypse”, whether it exists or not, raises a question that is precisely in line with what Andreessen said. If software ended up eating the world, Will AI eat software? Will it kill him? Software is not going to die. Just the opposite What is happening at the corporate level with these falls has of course to do with AI, but also with the model and philosophy of these companies themselves. Those SaaS platforms that dominate the world They have not stopped abusing their dominant position for years with aggressive price increases and rigid contracts. We have seen it with companies like Salesforce, whose customers have seen prices rise 35% in the last two years, or the mind-blowing case of Broadcom, whose customers in Europe were facing price increases of 1,500% in your VMware virtualization software licenses. This has created an ideal breeding ground for clients of these and many other companies with SaaS platforms to look for alternatives, and also look for them in AI. Artificial intelligence is not only offering efficiency, but is giving many customers that “key to the cell” that allows them to escape from their suppliers, who treated them like hostages. In fact, the current correction in stock market valuations can also be understood as a post-bubble hangover from 2021, when the pandemic boosted all these companies. We saw it with … Read more

TCL is growing wildly in TVs while Samsung falls. The surprise that no one saw coming is about to happen

by

The global television market fell 1% year-on-year in November 2025, but behind that decline is the sign of a change in hierarchy: Samsung continues to be the leader with a 17% share, but TCL has boosted its sales by 20% compared to the previous year and is already close to first place. What seemed impossible two years ago (a Chinese brand that used to be seen as ‘cheap’ taking the throne from Samsung) is now a very real possibility. The data comes out of latest monthly report sales report published by the market analysis firm Counterpoint Research. The figures. Samsung has gone from 18% to 17% market share in one year, with a 3% decline in units sold. TCL, on the other hand, has climbed from 13% to 16% and continues to rise. Hisense, the third manufacturer, has fallen 13%, dragged down by the collapse of the Chinese market (-24%), where it is stronger than in the West. LG has grown by 7% and stands at 9%, while Walmart has strongly entered the top 5 after completing the purchase of Vizio in December 2024. Between the lines. TCL’s rise is neither coincidental nor ephemeral. The company has stopped being seen as a manufacturer of cheap TVs to position itself in premium technologies such as MiniLEDwhich sells at more competitive prices than Samsung. That combo has been lethal in emerging markets such as Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa, where demand for quality is growing but price remains decisive. And there is another key factor: TCL hardly depends on the Chinese market, which is in free fall. Hisense has collapsed due to its exposure to its country of origin (it accumulates almost a third of its sales there), but TCL has diversified its sales and is now reaping those fruits. The master stroke. TCL just signed a historic agreement with Sony to manufacture its televisions under a joint venture in which the Chinese will control 51% and the Japanese 49%. It is a move that changes everything: TCL gains instant credibility in the premium sector by associating with a brand synonymous with image quality, and also manages to penetrate Japan, a protectionist market where Chinese brands have a very difficult time. For Sony it is a way to survive in an increasingly competitive market where it does not manufacture its own panels and its premium prices leave it out of the game. For TCL it is the definitive boost: it stops being the cheap-Chinese manufacturer and starts managing one of the most respected brands in the sector. The joint venture will start in 2027, so the immediate effects will be less than anecdotal. But in the medium term, history may change. Yes, but. Samsung is not going to let itself be dethroned without going down into the mud. Although its share has fallen, it still has great financial muscle, a global distribution network full of alliances forged after many years of relationships with distributors, and an advantage in premium segments such as OLED and QD-OLED. Besides, Walmart’s acquisition of Vizio It marks the entry of a third major contender in North America that could make life difficult for both Samsung and TCL. What is clear is that 2026 will be the definitive year: TCL, Hisense and Xiaomi are going to continue putting pressure on MiniLED and medium-large screens, just where demand grows the most. And if Samsung does not react as it should, the surprise It may be a matter of quarters. He 2026 World Cup can alter all forecasts. It is one of the great incentives for millions of homes to renew their TVs, and whoever best positions themselves in price and technology will win the jackpot. And now what. The battle to lead TV sales is no longer just a technological issue, it is also a question of pricing strategy and geographical expansion. TCL has shown that it can grow with a lot of commercial aggressiveness without giving up the best technologies. Samsung is going to have to decide whether to lower its prices or take refuge in the most premium segment. The third option (staying still) does not seem viable for anyone’s sake. In Xataka | I also plugged the HDMI cables into the first port I found: I was wasting half my TV Featured image | TCL

Now that we know what is going to happen in Greenland, the most surprising thing is the name of the winners: Russia and China

by

If the Trump’s words in Davos are confirmed, it seems that “nothing” is going to happen in Greenland. This leaves another reading that is beginning to gain strength among analysts: that the threats from the United States to force control of Greenland they have opened a crack which, without needing to fire a single shot or lift a single finger, immediately benefits two nations. The geopolitical gift. While Washington has presented the move as a maneuver to stop your rivalsin Europe it is interpreted as a direct threat to the sovereignty of an ally and to the very credibility of NATO. Meanwhile, in Moscow and Beijing it is read as proof that the Western order no longer holds about shared rules, but about impulses, blackmail and force. In this climate, the simple debate about “who’s in charge” and “how far the American umbrella extends” erodes the cohesion that for decades had been the main strategic brake (at least on paper) for Russia in Europe and the biggest structural obstacle for China in its global struggle. Russia far ahead. It we have counted before. In the Arctic, Russia is not starting from scratch or playing for the future: it is already installed and has been operating for years with a material and geographical advantage that the United States can’t match quickly. Moscow has a consolidated military presence in the north, with bases, infrastructure, operational experience and an integrated defense logic around its sea routes, its resources and its strategic deterrence, in addition to key assets such as its Northern Fleet and the symbolic and technical weight of having used the region as a space for testing and projection since the soviet era. So when Washington turns Greenland into an open crisis, Russia watches. two things at the same time: the opportunity to weaken Western unity and the risk that the Arctic will go from being a terrain of contained competition to a zone of direct confrontation, one in which any miscalculated move accelerates militarization and possible escalation. The Russian method. The Russian reaction to the tension over Greenland has been marked by a combination of irony, enthusiasm and cold calculation, like someone who suddenly finds a perfect lever to improve your position without visible effort. The message that is repeated around the Kremlin is transparent: the best thing that can happen to Russia is for the United States and Europe to dedicate themselves to fight among themselvesbecause that, first of all, distracts from Ukraine, poisons cooperation and pushes allies to distrust American leadership. In that framework, they counted in AP that Russian propaganda allows itself the luxury of celebrating that “Atlantic unity is ending,” of joking that Europe has no real tools against Washington and to present the entire episode as a didactic scene in which Russia’s rivals tangle themselves. Greenland as a smoke screen. One of the most immediate benefits for Moscow is that focus shift political and media: when the European agenda is filled with Greenland, Ukraine loses diplomatic oxygen and negotiation space. The tension is forcing European leaders to put out internal fires rather than focus on the war, and that rreduces pressure collective action on Russia just when Moscow is seeking concessions or relief in any negotiation process. Furthermore, the simple fact that NATO is discussing whether or not to “block” American expansion introduces a disturbing idea: that the alliance is not an automatic pact of trust, but rather a kind of club where the strongest can change the rules if it suits them. Putin and Trump. Russia, furthermore, seems to be watching your tone with the White House because his priority is not to clash with Trump while he tries to obtain advantages over Ukraine and rebuild his relationship with Washington. That is why he avoids openly condemning the pressure on Greenland (a few hours ago Putin said that they care about “zero”) and, instead, wraps it in a comfortable ambiguity. It is a position that, although passive, in reality It’s strategicbecause it lets the conflict cook within the Western camp without Moscow appearing as the instigator. At the same time, introduce a dangerous idea in the debate: that international legality is secondary to the will of a great power, something that Russia knows well and cynically exploits when it suits it. China doesn’t need Greenland. From Beijing, the opportunity is not so much in “winning” Greenland, but in observing how the United States fights with its allies and devalues ​​the system that gave it a strategic advantage over China. They remembered in the Guardian that, in Chinese eyes, the ideal scenario is not to conquer Arctic territory, but see how it breaks the discipline of the Western bloc, because the great multiplier of American power has always been its network of alliances. China may have interests in polar routes, research and resources, but its biggest prize It’s political: a Europe more distrustful of Washington, open to its own balance and more tempted to take refuge in trade as a lifeline in a world of tariffs and blackmail. The Polar Silk Road. It we have counted before. China has been building an Arctic story for years that presents it as a legitimate actor, with official roles where it defines itself. as “almost arctic” and with the promise of a Polar Silk Road supported by melting ice, new sea routes and faster transport between Asia and Europe. There is concrete signs of that ambition, such as the use of Northern Maritime Route to drastically shorten travel timesalthough that route depends largely on Russia and its control over the corridor. In that sense, each crisis between the United States and Europe is not only a political problem: it is an economic window for Beijing, because it messes up rules, pushes Europe to look for alternatives and gives China room to present itself as a “stable” trading partner, although that stability may be more rhetorical than real. Davos and a resignation. He clash over Greenland It is aggravated … Read more

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

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

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

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