Spain is letting the lisp die in Andalusia without knowing that the /θ/ sound is a global rarity that we are losing

In recent days, the University of Granada has presented a macroatlas with almost half a million audios that shows how the way of speaking of Andalusians has changed. The research is very interesting for many reasons, but today I want to focus on something specific: the slow, but inexorable agony of lisp. What is lisp. While the distinction between ‘s”https://www.xataka.com/”z’ and seseo gains ground in the south, lisping is losing speakers in the only place where lisping is used. It is a sociological question, yes: researchers are clear that stigma is the main force against this phonetic subsystem. But there is something else Because, in reality, what we are seeing is not just the death of the lisp, it is the end of the sound (θ) itself: one of the most unknown oddities of the Spanish language. A Spanish oddity? Although it is not something that is often explained much, the ‘c’ sound (/θ/) is relatively rare in the world — only in 43 of 566 languages ​​(7.6%) in the world. WALS sampling appears and only in 4% of the counts in typological databases (UPSID: 3.99%; PHOIBLE: ~4%). That is, very few living languages ​​have that sound among their phonetic repertoires. To give us an idea, the phoneme of the ñ (ɲ), quintessence of Spanish, appears in 35% of the world’s languages. But… what about the ‘c’? The usual explanation Why (θ)/(ð) are less frequent and why they are disappearing is simple: they are “soft” fricatives; That is, they are less strident sounds than (s)/(z) and, therefore, have less perceptual salience. This is what makes them tend to be lost or transformed easily over time. That does not mean that the Spaniard of the future is going to be sesante; but there is a high probability that it is sesante. The heritage of a language in the trash. It is clear that it cannot be argued from a philological point of view that the disappearance of (θ) is a bad thing. The Earth turns, languages ​​change. But it is striking that in a society in which historical heritage continues to be “valued”, the progressive loss of a sound does not set off alarm bells. And that it does so because we are not capable of accepting the diversity of our own language, normalizing it and defending it in the public sphere, is perhaps worse. Image | Wiebrig Krakau (Modified) In Xataka | “The most serious attack since there is memory”: Pérez-Reverte has started a crusade against the RAE from within the RAE

Companies are not just letting go of their youngest workers. They are making them CEO

The business fabric in the US is experiencing one of its most turbulent periods. Not only because of the coming to power of Donald Trump and his upstart tariff policiesbut because of the challenge in management and governance models that poses to AI. OK to what was published by The Wall Street Journalthe US is experiencing a generational change at the head of the main listed companies. In 2025 alone, one in nine CEOs at the 1,500 largest companies in the S&P 1500 will be replaced, the highest rate since records began in 2010. The demands of AI they are retiring the CEOs more experienced. Relay record at the top. According to data revealed by a study from the consulting firm Spencer Stuart, 168 people debuted as CEO in large listed companies. In more than 80% of these appointments, the new managers lacked previous experience leading companies of that category, although 60% of those appointments were promotions. Furthermore, two-thirds of these incorporations had also not served on boards of directors before. That is to say, its greatest value It was not his experience, but his youth. The trend continues strongly during the first two months of 2026. Top-tier companies such as Walmart, Procter & Gamble, Lululemon, Disney, PayPal and HP have made changes in his highest executive position. This pace marks a great experiment in leadership by large companies in the face of unstable markets, where the pressure to obtain immediate results accelerates the departures of veterans. Younger and younger leaders. The average age of new CEOs dropped to 54 years in 2025, which is almost two years less than the record in 2024, thus confirming that this is a trend that has been occurring for some years. Although only 3% of managers in large companies are under 40 years old, 64% are between 50 and 59 years old, and only 12% are over 60 years old. Some examples are found in recent replacements like disneyin which Josh D’Amaro, 55, took the replacement of Bob Iger 75 years old. This replacement reflects a commitment to fresh talent, but with a deep knowledge of the companies they are going to lead, but without experience in decision-making. The life cycle of a CEO. Spencer Stuart analysts found that CEOs of large companies have “a useful lifespan” at the helm. During the first year in office, the new CEO begins the “honeymoon effect” and his companies outperform the S&P 500 by 10% on average. However, in the second year of office, 73% experience a drop in returns of an average of 21%. Between the third and fifth years at the helm, a reinvention of leadership occurs, which precedes a stagnation between the sixth and ninth years. Beginning in the tenth year, stable leadership is established. The majority cannot taste that stability since, after the third year, 25% have already left the position. 50% do not reach the sixth year as CEO. The average duration of active CEOs is 7.1 years, and 86% of departures are voluntary and agreed upon with the board of directors. Only 9% of CEO changes in the S&P 500 group of companies have been forced removals. It should be noted that only 16% of new appointments to senior management positions they have been womenwhich represents a bittersweet historical record. In Xataka | The average salary of Ibex 35 managers has grown by 172% in two decades: the purchasing power of its employees, not so much Image | Unsplash (Bruce Mars)

Ukraine’s latest tactic is an explosive turn for the war. It’s called “letting in,” and the Russians are falling into the trap.

Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the front has been mutating with all kinds of tactics who sought to wear down the enemy. The arrival of drones everything has changedbut the strategies and ingenuity In the use of artillery they have remained a fundamental asset for the advance or defense of the front. For this reason, Ukraine’s latest strategy has disconcerted the Russians. When they reach the bunkers there is no one, and then the surprise comes. Win by letting in. Ukraine is applying a more flexible and lethal defense consisting in “pre-register” their artillery on their own front-line positions, so that when the Russians assault and capture them, they literally enter an already calibrated point to be destroyed: the fort falls, the enemy concentrates, and then comes the massive punishment that turns Russian success into a death trap. After that blow, a Ukrainian assault branch recover the points again devastated, closing a cycle that maximizes ranged damage and reduces the exposure of own infantry, something key in a context of growing shortage of trained soldiers. This logic, denounced even by pro-Russian voices as the strategy of “letting in” is actually a way of imposing the pace: it is not about always preventing them from advancing, but about making each advance expensive, slow and bloody. The “death zone” as doctrine. The tactic works because the battlefield has become in a “kill zone” permanent where the defender attempts to maintain a deadly gap between the leading edge and the rear: artillery is placed further back, out of the usual range of rival drones, and forward positions are fortified to attract attackswaiting for the enemy to enter to destroy them right there with fire and drones. The drone operators They not only strike at the front, they also hunt for supply and reinforcement routes, and any activity near “newly taken” positions becomes visible and attackable. Added to this is the constant mining (including remote) and the use of “ambushers” in the few possible logistical axes, so that the attacker not only pays to capture, but also pays twice as much to try to consolidate. The “let in” tactic after pre-registering a position The decisive blow. The most surprising point about this approach is that the defender does not seek so much to “hold every meter” as to prevent the attacker deploy your second step– When the advancing force attempts to bring in specialized reinforcements (e.g. drone operators to hold the ground), the defender launches fast local offensiveseven if they cost material, to keep the death zone intact and keep the enemy trapped in a space where they cannot settle. Thus, the advance exists on paper or in the drone image, but it becomes tactically sterile: you capture something and, before transforming it into a usable position, it becomes a slaughterhouse, like is described in sectors like Kupiansk. It is a war where “letting in” is not an extra: it is the moment in which the enemy advance stops being progress and becomes a loss. The psychological and moral consequence. These types of dynamics are eroding the offensive will because it forces us to choose between kilometers and livesespecially the “faces” of competent soldiers who know how to move in that death zone: It’s not just that advancement costs, it’s that it costs exactly the most valuable thing. From this arises a dilemma on the front itself: advancing in a big way without preparation means burn trained unitsbut advancing “minimally” or little to be able to report presence saves resources… at the cost of generating absurd situations where you can no longer request fire on positions that officially “they are yours”although in reality they are being crushed or disputed. In this framework, the information war of territorial control is mixed with real survival, and “progress” becomes a very diffuse decision. The technological revolution to the rescue. we have been counting. The bottom line is that Ukraine is at the center of a military transformation: soldiers are the most expensive and difficult resource to replace, while unmanned systems have passed to dominate the combatexpanding on an industrial scale, lowering costs and multiplying impact. The front is increasingly managed from the rear or bunkers with operators controlling the space, and attempts at “classic” breaches become almost suicidal: the key is no longer to launch columns, but to disperse, camouflage and gradually push the death zone back. As the war evolves into swarms, AI coordination and persistent attacks, the advantage is not having the most expensive weapon, but having thousands of cheap weaponsreliable communications networks and the ability to update systems non-stop. The coming war. Thus, the strategic decision moves to logistics and industry: cut off land routes, protect supplies, attack factorieslogistics centers and hidden commands, and do so with reusable media and unmanned is increasingly determining. Victories depend on producing drones en massesecure components, sustain communications Starlink type and dominate the cybernetic layer that can blind, uncoordinate or paralyze an entire front. That is why the strategy to “let in” It does not seem like an isolated trick, but rather a direct consequence of the new battlefield: if the first to enter dies, the one who waits and finishes with precision (with drones, mines, artillery and digital coordination) keeps the initiative even if it seems that is receding. Image | US Army Europe In Xataka | The video of the Russian soldier in Ukraine who ignores the bomb that just exploded on him has only two explanations. And one is science fiction In Xataka | The war in Ukraine has a new level of brutality. Russia calls it a “can opener” and turns recruits into detonators

Spanish banks have no problem letting you buy cryptocurrencies. What they don’t want to do is advise you on them.

In March 2025 BBVA he stuck out his chest. It was the first large traditional bank in Spain that allowed its clients to operate in cryptocurrencies. Then other entities such as CaixaBank and OpenBank followed. In all of these cases there is a crucial detail: one thing is that they let you operate with cryptos. It’s quite another to advise you on how to do it. You cook it, you eat it. That traditional banking has made this move is definitive proof that cryptocurrencies have managed to convince even this very conservative sector. But these institutions are not willing to risk too much, so although they allow their clients to buy or sell cryptocurrencies, they leave all responsibility to the client: they do not advise or advise. And it’s not likely that they will. Nobody wants to advise. A report published by the ESMA and the EBA reveals that the vast majority of entities follow the same pattern: they allow trading with cryptocurrencies, but do not advise clients about them. Of the 110 entities that have achieved authorization of the MiCA regulation in Europe, only 20 have requested to provide crypto advice. 11 provide recommendations (like eToro) and another nine offer portfolio management. There is a clear reason why these entities leave the ball in the clients’ court. Too much risk. Caution is absolute not only on the part of traditional banking, but also of traditional exchanges or trading markets. These entities, which have traditionally been the only resource for users to operate with cryptocurrencies, have never offered advisory services, and one was clear when investing that they assumed full responsibility for their actions. The surprise is that exactly the same thing happens with traditional banking. They ignore it, and they do so because they have no interest in advising: the reputational risk is too high, and the volatility of these assets makes it especially difficult to make reliable recommendations. Crypto analyzes guarantee (almost) nothing. As explained in five days Gliroia Hernández Aler, co-founder and partner of finReg360, “Crypto assets have the value that the market assigns to them. By not having an underlying that can be analyzed, such as an income statement, for example, it is difficult to base advice on objective data. Although there is more and more news that can impact bitcoin, it is difficult to do a quantitative analysis with traditional methods.” MiCA opened the market. Europe wanted to try to regularize that “wild west” that the crypto market had become. To this end, in mid-2023 it approved the MiCA (Markets in Crypto Assets) regulation, a European regulation to regularize this activity. Among other things, it offers consumer and investor protection and establishes measures to prevent market abuses. Banks as the new exchanges. We had to wait two years to see how the first banks took advantage of this regulation, but little by little more and more entities joined in. The message was clear: you no longer have to resort to “mysterious” cryptocurrency trading markets (exchanges). You can buy at your usual bank. Image | BBVA | André Francois McKenzie In Xataka | A British man was not allowed to look for his bitcoin disk in the trash for years: now he is considering buying the landfill

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.