international

NASA puts astronauts from the International Space Station on evacuation alert

by

It could have been just another day of work aboard the International Space Station, but the situation has taken a delicate turn. NASA has put in evacuation alert to several astronauts after an air leak in the Russian part of the orbital laboratory worsened, prompting the agency to order them to take precautionary shelter in a docked spacecraft. The order came from NASA mission control at 9:04 a.m., East Coast time of the United States (3:04 p.m. Spanish peninsular time). Several crew members were instructed to enter the ship SpaceX Crew Dragon and put on their corresponding space suits in case the situation led to an emergency evacuation. There are currently seven crew members on the ISS, but the preventive measure does not affect all of them. Bethany Stevens, of the NASA communications team, explains that The order reaches Americans Jessica Meir, Jack Hathaway and Chris Williams, from NASA; to the French Sophie Adenot, from the European Space Agency, and to the Russian Andrey Fedyaev, from Roscosmos. The leak is located in a very specific area of ​​the Russian segment: the Zvezda service module transfer tunnel, known as PrK. According to Stevens, that part of the station has been showing cracks and leaks for some time, an issue that NASA has closely monitored and that Roscosmos has tried to contain until now with operational measures and partial repairs. In development. Images | POT In Xataka | Western scientists have been debating the origin of Kamo’oalewa for years. China went looking for him

In two days the international blockbuster that has restored the luster to the erotic thriller genre arrives on Prime Video

by

In December 2025, Lionsgate released a psychological thriller based on a self-published novel that had gone viral on TikTok. Paul Feig, known until then for comedies such as ‘My Best Friend’s Wedding’ or ‘Spies’, was in charge of directing it, and the film, starring Sydney Sweeney and Amanda Seyfried, ended up being the biggest box office success for both actresses, the director, and one of the most profitable thrillers in recent years. It is about ‘The assistant’which this Friday the 5th comes to streaming from the hand of Prime Video. In it we will meet Millie (Sydney Sweeney), on parole for involuntary manslaughter, who accepts a job as a live-in maid for a wealthy family. And little else can be said without ruining the experience, because Millie soon begins to detect strange behavior in her boss (Amanda Seyfried) and that the relationship between her employers is not what it seems, in a trotted return to the erotic thriller of the nineties that actually plays as much at being a fast-paced pocket book full of twists and humor as it is an intuitive piece of post-feminist pulp. The film works as a box of surprises where Sweeney and Seyfried shine with two interpretations that seem to have been raised differently: The first is more B-series, the other is more melodramatic. It is this clash of registers that gives a self-conscious and unpredictable touch to the film, and also what makes the genre mixer work at full capacity: serious psychological thriller at the beginning, revenge fantasy later (also changing, for the better, the final stretch of the original novel). ‘The Housemaid’ opened in third place at the US box office with $18.9 million, behind a colossus like ‘Avatar: Fire and Ash’ and the animated film ‘David’. It was not a spectacular exit, but its secret was that word of mouth worked and it did not fall: it barely fell from its privileged position for weeks, and it performed very well at the international box office. The final gross was $401.7 million worldwide, against a production budget of $35 million. It is not surprising that the sequel is already in the works. In Xataka | Among the 19 premieres on Netflix this week, the documentary about the trial that Michael Jackson experienced in his final years

While the international pork sector collapses, Spain breaks records

by

The Spanish pig industry closed 2025 with a historical record and, a priori, that cannot be. Because, finally, we are talking about 5.27 million tons of meat just when the European pig has been in recession for four years. 6% year-on-year growth just as African swine fever reappears after 31 years of absence. To give us an idea: Spain already invoices 24.2% of all pork in the EU and is the third world producer behind the US and China. How is it possible? The question is timely. After all, the sector is growing against the tide. Not only because of the plague, nor because of the conflicts between Europe and China; but because the collapse in prices and the general retreat would have advised taking a more conservative line. However, the explanation is simpler than it seems: what is sold as an industrial success hides a history of extreme foreign dependence, health fragility and an environmental problem that the country refuses to solve. But let’s go in parts. December 16, 2025, China increased its final tariffs on European pork from 4.9% to 19.8% for five years. It is true that Iberian ham and sausages were left out and that for many Spanish companies the average tariff was 9.8%, but the blow was forceful. Above all, because (although apparently all this was part of the electric car wars) the problem is structural: China imports less and less because it produces more and more. To this we must add that a little earlier, on November 28, 2025, the Ministry of Agriculture had confirmed the first two positives for African swine fever in wild boars, unleashing a problem that made headlines for weeks (and has still not been resolved). And from this storm that threatened to break everything, the only thing that has reached the consumer is that pork is the animal protein that has become the least expensive during 2025. Because? Well, because the crisis has been metabolized, driving the concentration of the sector: today, the ten largest companies market today 65% of national meat (compared to 52% ten years ago). We have lost 32% of small farms; but the big ones have more and more power. Something that also explains why the country is about to a very serious European sanction for not complying with the nitrates directive. In the end the question is not “how is it possible that the most efficient and best armored sector in Europe is simultaneously on the verge of a collapse of margins and with major water pollution problems?”; The point is that Spain produces more pigs than ever precisely for those reasons. Image | Amber Kipp In Xataka | The gap between what pork costs on farms and in supermarkets does not stop growing. The ranchers have said enough

A crew member of the International Space Station lost his speech and NASA does not know why

by

Last January, four astronauts had to leave the International Space Station early due to a medical emergency. At the time it was pointed out that it was due to the health problems of one of the astronauts. However, at no time was it clarified which of them it was, in order to preserve their privacy. Over time, NASA has dropped some new data in dribs and drabs. Now, we know who it was and why, but the cause of his illness remains a mystery. The facts: At the beginning of January, NASA announced the cancellation of a space walk that astronauts Michael Fincke and Zena Cardman should have done. Just a few hours later, the imminent return to Earth of the entire Crew 11 was announced. That included both Fincke and Cardman as well as Kimiya Yui, from the Japanese Space Agency (JAXA) and Oleg Platanov, from the Russian Space Agency (Roscosmos). The return trip was planned to take place in February, but it finally took place on January 15. At that time, NASA had not yet announced which of the crew members was sick. It was only noted that he was stable and that he would have to undergo more tests. Without words in space. Shortly after that mysterious medical emergency, NASA announced that the sick astronaut was Mike Fincke. However, at that time he still did not provide information about the illness that led him and his companions to return home early. Now, finally, we know what happened. As stated by Fincke himself in statements to the mediaon January 7, while eating with his companions, he realized that he could not speak. Thanks to the quick intervention of his colleagues and the remote support of NASA doctors, he was immediately stabilized. However, it was urgent to return to Earth to perform the relevant tests. The episode has not been repeated and it has been ruled out that it was a heart attack or stroke. More tests. Fincke will possibly have to undergo more tests so we can find out why he temporarily lost his speech. However, he himself has reported that NASA suspects that it could be an effect of his stay in space. For this reason, the medical records of other astronauts are being reviewed, looking for an episode similar to theirs. space brain. Living in space can affect your health in many different ways. All organs are susceptible to the effects of microgravity. In the case of the brain, It has been proven that it can even move inside the skull. It is not known for sure what could have happened to this NASA astronaut. However, it seems quite likely that his medical emergency was for this reason. And now what? If all goes well with Artemis II, NASA hopes to travel to the Moon more and more regularly and even build a space base there at some point. Other companies, like SpaceX, have the same dream. Therefore, it is vital to study how microgravity or cosmic radiation can affect the health of future colonizers. All astronauts of Crew 11 Astronauts on the International Space Station have been testing these types of events for a long time. What has happened to Fincke at the moment is a mystery, but logically it is something that must be taken into account. What happened to him will have to be investigated to prevent it from happening again, whether on the International Space Station, on the Moon or at any other point in outer space that humans reach. Image | NASA | Unsplash In Xataka | Spanish technology in the return to the Moon: the system designed in Madrid that NASA will use in Artemis II

the international image of UAE

by

“It’s not the Dubai we know.” The phrase is from Satya Jaganathan, a woman from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) who on Sunday told the BBC how their routine has been turned upside down by something difficult to see in one of the richest and most stable nations in the Middle East: missiles. Over the weekend, in response to the US-Israeli attack that killed its supreme leader, Tehran responded with a wave of missiles that partly targeted your neighbors of the Gulf, targeting Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait or the UAE, where Jaganathan was caught. The Iranian drones and missiles have not left a large number of victims in the UAE, but they have dealt a severe blow to something equally important for the country: the image of stability that it projects globally, a fundamental value that has helped it become the destination of thousands of expats and a logistical reference. As Satya says, the Dubai of this Sunday “is not the Dubai we know.” What has happened? That the Middle East faces what is probably its most tense outlook in recent years. On Saturday, Israel and the United States launched a powerful attack against Iran that ended the life of the country’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khameneiin addition to the Iranian Minister of Defense and the commander of the Revolutionary Guard, according to Reuters. Tehran’s reaction was devastating. Unlike other Iranian attacks, such as the one in 2024 or the ‘Twelve Day War’when the offensive of the Islamic Republic seemed to seek a “planned de-escalation”on this occasion the Iranian forces have responded with force. And in the process they have pointed out where it hurts the most in countries like the UAE or Saudi Arabia. What has he done? Tehran has responded to the Israeli and American attacks with severity, launching missiles and drones that (now) do not seem to seek de-escalation. For now, it has managed to escalate the conflict and directly involve other countries in the Middle East. In addition to directing missiles toward Israel, the Islamic Republic has dealt blows against the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan and Iraq. It’s not a coincidence. To a greater or lesser extent, these seven nations facilitate Washington’s operations in the region. The port of Jebel Ali, for example, regularly welcomes American ships, Bahrain is home to the Fifth Fleet of the US Navy and the US also takes advantage of Doha. “All occupied territories and US criminal bases in the region have been hit by powerful Iranian missile strikes. This operation will continue relentlessly until the enemy is decisively defeated,” claims the Revolutionary Guard. Their purpose is clear: to pressure their neighbors to limit Washington’s reach. In case there were any doubts, the Iranian Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, remembered to the countries of the region that have the “responsibility to prevent the improper use of their facilities and territories.” How have the attacks been? Beyond the Iranian rhetoric, it does not appear that the attacks have had serious consequences either in terms of casualties or destruction of infrastructure. Jordan claims to have shot down a pair of ballistic missiles and, although “objects and debris” fell at several points, they only caused material damage. In Kuwait a drone attacked the airfield and in Saudi Arabia the Government insist in which it has repelled “cowardly attacks” against Riyadh and the Eastern Province. Of course that does not mean that Iran has not left destruction and victims. Are figures handled? Yes. In total The New York Times details that Iranian attacks have caused at least four deaths and more than a hundred injured in the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman. Perhaps the country that has received the most attention is the UAE, which received a wave of more than 540 drones165 ballistic missiles and another two cruise missiles, according to their authorities. Emirati air defense systems have intercepted most of the projectiles, but that did not prevent the blow from being felt in one of the most influential and thriving kingdoms in the region. In Dubai, the financial heart of the Middle East, images have been seen of luxurious hotels affected by fire, towers with windows burst by explosions and havoc at the airport. That’s all? No. Beyond the toll of injuries, deaths and damaged infrastructure, Iran has pursued another objective: to hit the international image of its neighbors, limiting their projection of reliable destinations. The worst part has probably been borne by the Emirates, where they live hundreds of thousands of expats. The nation has also become an important tourist hub, both for its attraction itself and for its strategic position, which makes it a stopover point for many Western tourists who fly to Asia or Oceania. In practice, that translates into two things: a constant flow of millions of travelers from the rest of the world and thousands and millions of dollars. A whole way to diversify the economy beyond oil, an objective that neighboring Saudi Arabia has also been pursuing for years. due to megaprojects. Is it that serious? Beyond its skyscrapers, luxury, landscapes, standard of living and great infrastructure, hooks that serve to attract expats and tourists, the UAE above all plays the card of its stability. The same one that Iran now wants to score against. “You don’t expect to hear missiles flying in Dubai,” recognize to TNYW Elizabeth Rayment, who was surprised by the attack in Palm Islands. The weekend attacks caused a fire for example at the Fairmont The Palm hotel in Dubai, a luxurious five-star establishment. Other accommodation damaged by the remains of an Iranian drone was the Burj Al Arab. What is the objective? For Middle East expert Andrew Thomas, there is little doubt about Iran’s purpose. “This is a deliberate strategy, designed to impose early and substantial costs on its neighbors and the overall stability of the region,” he explains in an article of The Conversation. “The strategy is to weaken the region and … Read more

International law was written with humans who decide in mind. AI just broke that chain and no one knows who answers now

by

Pete Hegseth’s threat to Dario Amodei has a subtext that goes far beyond the $200 million contract that the Pentagon can cancel: If the US military deploys AI-controlled autonomous weapons without the safeguards that Anthropic requiresyou will have removed the only firewall that has historically prevented an illegal order from being executed. Why is it importantand. The entire legal and ethical system of the US military rests on a principle that seems obvious but has important consequences: a soldier can and should disobey a manifestly illegal order. It is the mechanism that, in theory, prevents war crimes. A drone AI-controlled autonomous vehicle does not have that mechanism. You can’t refuse. You can’t hesitate. He cannot be tried in a court-martial. Between the lines. Amodei speaks of “autonomous weapons that fire without human intervention” to point out a legal vacuum. If an AI makes the decision to kill, who is responsible criminally? The programmer? The general who activated the system? The president who signed the order? International humanitarian law (including the Geneva Conventions) was written with human beings making decisions in mind. And now AI dissolves that chain of responsibility. The backdrop. The mass surveillance argument is also a bitter pill to swallow. The Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution protects citizens from warrantless searches and interventions. It works, among other reasons, because the State has never had the physical capacity to process everything that happens in public spaces. And in the same way, with AI that operational limit disappears: we move to millions of conversations recorded in real time, transcribed, classified and connected in just seconds. What was previously impossible due to lack of human resources becomes routine with a LLM. Constitutional protection until now has depended, in part, on the inefficiency of the State, its limitations. Yes, but. The Pentagon has an argument that cannot be ruled out: other democracies are also developing these capabilities, and China or Russia are not going to wait for the United States to resolve their ethical dilemmas. The practical question is whether having those unrestricted capabilities makes you safer or simply more dangerous to your own citizens. The big question. OpenAI and Google have accepted the Pentagon’s conditions“all legal uses” without specific exceptions, and xAI has just been cleared to operate on classified systems. Anthropic has been left alone in its position. And what is at stake now is not whether Claude survives as a military supplier or not, it is whether the AI ​​industry is going to set some limit on what it sells to the State, or whether that debate will be settled directly by Congress, the courts or, in the worst case, the first serious incident that no one could have foreseen. It seems like a matter of time. In Xataka | AI is already a battlefield: Anthropic has just accused DeepSeek and other Chinese companies of “distilling” Claude Featured image | Xataka

The plan has always been to destroy the International Space Station in 2030. Someone thinks we can do something else

by

The International Space Station this that falls. It has been orbiting the Earth since 1998 and was completed in 2011. The plan was to retire it in 2024, but the accounts did not work out and, in 2021, the NASA administrator set a definitive date: 2030. The question is whether it will last that long because a few months ago we already said that members of NASA expressed concern about the accumulation of problems technicians who were accelerating the decline of a seriously aging facility. air leaks, cracks in different modulesabsence of spare parts for critical systems and lack of budget to propose a solution It would be assumed that the Different agencies have been putting patches on for years. NASA has already commissioned SpaceX the development of a ship that would tow it to the space graveyard of the Pacific, but… is there no other solution for the 450-ton, $150 billion station? The answer is yes. At least, that’s what Greg Vialle, founder of a startup called Lunexus Space that is committed to recycling the International Space Station, thinks. Turning the International Space Station into a mine In the middle of last year, NASA had clear that he Point Nemoa remote location in the Pacific, 2,700 kilometers from the nearest pile of dirt, would be the station’s cemetery. There was only one thing I could avoid the dismantling: that ROSCOSMOS, the Russian space agency, refused to abandon the ship. Russia soon changed its mind by commenting that its cosmonauts were passing more time repairing equipment than conducting experiments. Come on, no matter how much they wanted to “annoy” NASA at a geopolitically unstable point, it didn’t work out for them. Everything was aimed at the disappearance of the current ISS, but there are those who have something to say. Lunexus Space is a startup focused on the development of industrial infrastructure in low orbit that reuse structures and space junk to facilitate the construction of goods directly in the lower atmosphere. The goal is to develop a kind of circular economy in low orbit by taking advantage of the tons of material already in space, eliminating the need to re-launch them from Earth. In Space Newsthe CEO of the company has developed an article in which he explains his plan to “avoid wasteful expenses.” Vialle affirms that the ISS has 430 tons of high-quality aluminum, titanium and other materials valuable for future space missions. He estimates the value of the material at $1.5 billion, which would be lost to the ocean floor if NASA’s plan goes ahead. And it also points out the almost 1 billion that NASA will spend on the vehicle that tows the station to its resting point. “It is a fiscally irresponsible plan that loses a strategic resource and a golden opportunity.” What he proposes is “a common sense alternative”: converting old infrastructure into raw materials for new construction. Their calculations highlight that launching a kilogram of material into space costs $3,500, but if they take materials from the ISS, the costs would drop entirely. And, faced with the 1,000 million dollars of the plan to sink it, Vialle suggests that Its recycling process could be carried out for about 300 million dollars to which an equivalent government loan would have to be added to launch the necessary infrastructure, appealing to significant savings for taxpayers while preserving valuable resources. American leadership, of course “How can we wait prospect, mine, refine and transport in deep space if we cannot extract the many tons of cataloged and space-grade materials that are already beginning to manage low Earth orbit?” Vialle appeals. But of course, there is a B side to this plan: Strengthen America’s Space Leadership. By receiving the ISS, the CEO believes that the seeds of “a new industry in space led by the United States will be sown, ensuring our economic and strategic leadership over competitors like China.” China too He has been planning his own station for years. And he compares the move to American manufacturing policy to prepare for the Second World War, japanese strategy in the 1970s that established the country as a technological miracle or Taiwan’s position with TSMC and chip manufacturing. His idea is for the United States to invest in resource management technologies in space, something that is taking its first steps and that, if it reaches a solid program, will make “the nation dominate the future of commerce and defense in orbit.” It is evident that Vialle has known what sticks to play in a moment as sensitive as the current one and, although in his letter he urges Congress to influence NASA’s decision to ‘deorbit’ the International Space Station, the space agency has already detailed that, after a session to evaluate the possibility of reusing the main components of the station, they did not receive any proposals of interest from the industry. On the other hand, the European Space Agency already pointed out that recycling in orbit was “a real challenge” and it was not clear whether the resources used to capture and process waste in space would be profitable. Either way, time is of the essence. We will see what happens with the ‘Recycle the ISS’ movement, but there are four years left and, as more and more voices point out, something must be decided because the installation is on its last legs. In Xataka | Decathlon has just made its way beyond sport: it will reach space with a prototype spacesuit for the ESA

Mafalda has been international 50 years, but he had a barrier to overcome: the English language

by

Published For the first time in 1964the sharpness of his observations, his tragicomic vision of the world and the microcosm of children’s characters that he developed made it a Comic icon in Spanish. However, until now I had not been able to make the leap to another of the most widespread languages ​​on the planet due to a mixture of fear that their stories were very local since it would lose grace with translation. But the universal dimension of the character has finally reached the bookstores. ‘Mafalda’ was a relatively brief series for what are usually the successful comics, only nine years of life: he was born in 1964 and died in 1973, when its quino creator (about which, by the way, it premieres An excellent documentary today in Filmin) He decided that he was going to end. Despite the innumerable reissues and new incarnations (next year we will have Netflix animated series Directed by the Oscarized Juan José Campanella), he has never been continued. Mafalda was born, in fact, a year before his first publication, such as part of an advertising campaign for some appliances that never got to. But Quino liked his creation and recycled it for the pages of the weekly ‘First Flat’. In his stories he told the Simple experiences of a girl, Mafalda, from a series of friends of her age (Felipe, Manolito, Susanita and Miguelito) and the adults around him. As in ‘Peanuts‘,’Calvin and Hobbes‘Or many others, the children’s environment hid the most adult of the reflections. In the case of Mafalda, dyed of sharp social criticism. The development of Mafalda was deeply marked by the tense political situation that Latin America lived in general and Argentina in particular after the coup d’etat of 1976. The unwavering Mafalda’s pacifist position made it an antiauthority symbol, and some of its vignettes (such as Mafalda pointing out the porra of a policeman and saying “This is the stick of abolloing ideologies”) pages, and became symbols of the protests, even appearing with the victims of the tragic San Patricio massacre. 30 languages ​​… less English Mafalda’s international success, which became a reference for the political comic (to such an extent that Quino had to exile for the content of his vignettes) It led her to be translated into 30 languages. And until today ‘Mafalda’ had been read in Poland, Greece, Italy, France, Taiwan and, of course, in all Spanish -speaking countries. However, English was resisted. 50 years later, the ‘mafalda’ strips are going to be published in the United States in a comprehensive collection translated by Frank Wynne, which has faced some problems it details In this interview: Of course, there are word games (milk cream leads Mafalda to wonder about the controls of Birth), but also the political context of the moment. Peronism or the situation in Latin America must be explained to the new readers, although others (Mafalda continually spoke of the Vietnam Guera) possibly relative to them. However, those responsible for this new edition say something we already knew: Mafalda’s concerns are eternal and transcend borders. The brutality of the powerful to submit to the humble, the inequalities, the imbalance between genders … all that is in ‘Mafalda’ and remains valuable today. Anglophones readers will discover it now, but it is never too late for Mafalda to give you some lessons, as a good sabihonda that always was. In Xataka | ‘The Eternaluta’ is a masterpiece of science fiction, but the story of its creator gives him an absolutely unique background

Putting the International Space Station at risk

by

The sudden open war Between Elon Musk and Donald Trump He has just jump to space with threats in both directions that could suppose the anticipated end of the International Space Station. Trump gave the first blow. After investing 277 million dollars in the presidential campaign of Donald Trump, Elon Musk He left his role in front of Doge With a seemingly friendly farewell broadcast live from the White House. The next day, the president of the United States withdrew the nomination of Jared Isaacman as NASA administrator. Isaacman, an old Spacex partner, had been recommended by Musk to lead NASA. The nomination was made public six months ago. Everything was ready for the businessman to assume the highest position in the space agency, but Trump has commented that he withdrew his nomination to discover that Isaacman was a Democrat. Isaacman, meanwhile, clarified that the government I had always known of his donations passed to the opposite party. Battle of Gallos. If something has in common Elon Musk and Donald Trump is his immeasurable thirst for attention. Although his relationship was already broken, he climbed after Musk described the megaproject of the law ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ of the Trump administration as a “disgusting abomination”. According to the tycoon, the law increases public debt instead of reducing it. This triggered several stabs that happened on Thursday in a matter of hours. Some as aggressive as an elon tweet suggesting that Trump has not published Epstein’s papers because he comes out in them. But the main cross of accusations and threats has been the following: Trump: “Elon was becoming a heavy one, I asked him to leave, I removed the EV mandate (the Biden order that forces more than half of the vehicles sold in 2032 to be electric) and even if I knew from the beginning that he was going to remove it, he went crazy!” Elon: “Without me, Trump would have lost the elections, the Democrats would control the House of Representatives and the Republicans would have 51-49 in the Senate. What ingratitude.” Trump: “The easiest way to save money from our budget, billions of dollars, is to end Elon’s subsidies and government contracts. I was always surprised that Biden did not do it!” Elon: “Before the president’s statement about the cancellation of my government contracts, Spacex will begin to dismantle the Dragon spacecraft immediately.” The end of the ISS? Although SpaceX’s main business Be the Starlink Satellite Internet servicethe cancellation of all its public contracts would affect multiple government, military and NASA programs, including the resupply and transport flights of astronauts to the International Space Station. With the Boeing Starliner capsule In an indeterminate limbothe Crew Dragon of Spacex is the only ship available in the United States for crew rotations in the ISS. To top it off, NASA committed to its international partners to keep the space station operational until 2030. For all this, Trump’s threat seems impossible to materialize. Nevertheless. If by Musk it were. Elon Musk answered the threat of running out of public contracts with an even worse threat: the immediate dismantling of the Dragon program. It would look like a heated without much route, if it weren’t because it coincides with The wishes that the businessman had expressed Previously: advance the end of the ISS and focus on the conquest of Mars. It is not completely impossible to happen (Musk has been very clear in the past on Starship and Mars as company priorities), But dismantling the Dragon would be a headache, in addition to NASA, for all types of Spacex partners: ESA, the Japanese space agency, the Canadian space agency, Axiom, the companies that had them for their commercial stations, and a long etc. To top it off, NASA had commissioned Spacex the development of the spacecraft that will be in charge of exorbiting the ISS After 2030. If there is a public contract that should not be canceled now is that. Leave a 455 tons space station to your fate and the size of a football field does not suit anyone. In Xataka | Open war between Musk and Trump: the fight between “giants” makes Tesla collapse in the stock market and lose 100,000 million in a few hours

In favor and against an increasingly international and ‘desestationalized’ diet

by

Yesterday There were creeks in the supermarket. Round, orange and bittersweet, the fruits of the loquat of Japan are one of those little miracles that gives us May. And I know it is an anecdote: a handful of thousands of tons of an absurdly seasonal product distributed by the supermarkets of five or six Spanish provinces. But it made me smile, first; And frown, later. Because yesterday, looking at those two bars in the middle of the ocean of fruits and vegetables, I realize that we almost always eat the same. Yes, a varied and balanced diet: provided we do not get out of the same 20 or 30 fruit and vegetable references. There is a battle in the world of distribution forever, let’s eat the same; so that our diet is the most standardized the same; so that there are no media in the supermarket. It may seem exaggerated, but there are examples to thousands. If we think about it, the idea of ​​being able to go down to the store and find avocados whatever the time of the year is almost magical. Avocado flowering in Spain It occurs in April. Also in March and May, but especially in April. The collection and marketing, on the other hand, goes from October to March. What happens in the spring and summer months? Where do the avocados that fill the shelves of the supermarkets come from? The answer is that of Peru. Of other sites, but fundamentally from Peru. The market and globalization has achieved something incredibly difficult: to be able to have seasonal products throughout the year. Sometimes, bringing them from other areas of the world (as in the case of avocado); Other times, looking for macrovarities that allow their cultivation throughout the year. That is what happens with potatoes (extra -time, early, half -season and late) and tomatoes. The Jungle Law. In this sense, international trade and international coordination select products with the ability to generate sufficient demand to ensure its supply during the year is profitable. As not all products allow it, nor all consumer groups are large enough: the current result is that many traditional products can only be found at the local level and those of great consumption The shelves of the supermarkets fill half the world. In our pantry there is a fierce knife fight from which only the most suitable products for these plethoric market societies come out. Is such a standardized diet ‘a good idea? Without a doubt, it has positive things. For the love of God, we can eat avocados at any month of the yearHow are you not going to have positive things? For thousands of years humanity has had to eat what it touched, but now we are very close to simply eat what we feel like. And that, even in a subject so crossed by cultural, social and personal factors Like food, it limits the future of gastronomy: it unifies it little by little, it makes it less diverse and more insecure. But, without a doubt, more appealing: a breakfast buffet in a hotel of many stars: the best – the most popular – of each kitchen in the world. While science fiction writers imagined a future with astronaut food, A kind of Soylent with steroids. What we are discovering is that the diet is changing, yes; But towards the promise that in the end We will all eat more or less the same. Image | NRD In Xataka | How, when and why the tomatoes will know Tomato again?

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.