May loved ones be fertilizer for plants

Beyond our cultural differences, most countries in the world (especially in the West) tend to share something: we do not like to talk about death. Nothing. That is why it is curious that in New York part of the public attention take a while revolving around one of its great cemeteries, Green-Wooda 190-hectare cemetery founded in the 19th century. Even more striking is that Green-Wood does not it’s news for its infrastructure or logistics, but for the new service it wants to implement: the “natural organic reduction”also known as “terramation” or (more graphic) “human composting.” And yes, it is exactly what it sounds like: treating corpses so that they become human compost. It may sound strange or macabre, but its defenders they assure which is an alternative and much more “ecological” way to say goodbye to the world. Green-Wood Earrings. We mentioned it before. In a world accustomed to living with its back on death, it is not common to find cases like that of Green-Wood, a huge cemetery of almost 200 hectares located in the western part of Brooklyn that has been arousing public curiosity for weeks. Recently media like CBS News, New York Posts or even The Wall Street Journal They dedicated extensive reports to it due to the decision of its managers to bet on a new (and controversial) service: the “terramation”. Put that way, the term may not be understood very well, but that changes when you use its most common synonym: “human composting.” If everything goes according to plan and the New York State Cemetery Board gives it the green light, New York families will be able to do so there starting next year. They won’t be the first. The “terramation” has already some time available in other parts of the US and there are other countries that have also approved it, like sweden. Last (and ecological) goodbye. When a person dies, the most common thing is that their body ends up in a coffin and rests underground or in a pantheon. It is also common (increasingly) that the deceased leave a record of their wish to be cremated. Burials and cremations, however, are only two of the ways in which we can say goodbye to this world. During recent years there have been developed alternatives much less popular (and with a legal framework that is sometimes more complicated), but which generate increasing interest. For example the “ecological burials”in which we seek to reduce as much as possible the contaminating footprint of the funeral. As? Avoiding the use of chemicals for embalming or coffins made with non-biodegradable materials. The idea is simple: make it as easy as possible for nature. Another option is the “aquamation”a cremation method based on water and alkaline chemicals. one step further. The “human composting” system like the one Green-Wood wants to incorporate goes one step further. The corpses are placed in special containers in which the natural degradation process is accelerated. Thanks to a regulated flow of air, temperature and humidity, as well as organic material, the microbes do their job and the body decomposes in just a few weeks. “They remain in a capsule for 40 days, a time during which, thanks to a gentle rocking, it becomes earth,” clarify from Green-Wood. If remains such as bones remain after this process, they are treated separately to add them to the final result: a kind of human ‘compost’ that can then be distributed throughout a garden or in which, for example, a seed can be planted to remember the deceased. The same thing that many families do with ashes, only after a more natural and ecological process. At least that’s how its promoters defend it, they insist especially in its environmental sustainability. What advantages are those? The underlying philosophy is the same as that of “ecological burials”, in which embalming and coffins are usually dispensed with, but with an extra advantage: since there is no burial, it does not need the space that a traditional burial requires. And that is not a minor detail in cemeteries like Brooklyn. Cremation also has that advantage, but there are experts who warn of its ecological footprint: during incineration, certain toxins are released into the atmosphere, in addition to a notable amount of CO2. “A 2021 report indicates that the impact on the greenhouse effect of a cremation, taking into account electricity consumption, transportation and the resources used, as well as natural gas, is about 430 kg of CO2 equivalent,” note professors Sandra van der Laan and Lee Moerman in an article published in January in The Conversation. “According to the same report, each standard burial in Australia is responsible for the emission of about 780 kg of CO2 equivalent.” Environment… and something more. Beyond its greater or lesser attractiveness in ecological terms, “human composting” offers another great advantage: costs and space. three years ago Guardian already reported that the promoters of “terramation” in the US offered the service for $7,000, not very different from a traditional cremation or burial, although in the latter case another crucial cost is added to the embalming and coffin: that of the land. Plots in cemeteries are a scarce commodity and this translates into both a logistical and cost problem. “Burial is increasingly inaccessible for many. It is expensive and cemeteries are running out of space, especially in urban areas,” warn Sandra van der Laan and Lee Moerman. Its analysis focuses on Australia, but is transferable to other countries. A scarce and “valuable” resource. “While many Australian cemeteries now have a limited term of use for plots (25 years in most cases, renewable up to 99), the space is still valuable,” warn the experts. They are not the only ones who point out that handicap. In a report recent for TWSJ On Green-Wood, Tom Fairless recalled that the Brooklyn Cemetery is running out of space. A prospect that is unlikely to improve as the baby boom cohort ages, passes away, and creates greater demand for funeral services, … Read more

Duolingo was the fun, brave company we loved that taught us languages. Today it is sinking in the stock market

Most people never manage to turn their ideas into business successes. Luis von Ahn (Guatemala City, 1978) has achieved it twice. The first, when he created reCAPTCHA and sold it to Google in 2009 for a small fortune. The second, years later, started from a much simpler concept. Learning languages ​​was a painso von Ahn wanted to turn that into just the opposite: something fun. This is how it was born Duolingoa company that taught how to speak languages ​​with a strong component of gamification. You already had to go to an academy or spend long periods of time in online courses: you could learn words, phrases and pronunciation through small tests when you were on the bus or waiting in a queue. Duolingo achieved the most difficult thing: making us like each other (and fall in love) Learning with Duolingo was fun and comforting. The small rewards worked and turned it almost into a video game that little by little more people became fond of. The snowball got bigger and bigger and Duolingo became one of those companies that already seemed likeable at first. It seemed that everything it did was done well, and little by little the company took important steps to become the giant it is today. The certifications arrived who wanted to rival the famous TOEFL exams, their platform for schools, and more and more languages. Some, like japanesewere a challenge. Others, like the Klingon or the high valyriumwere above all a diversion that consolidated the fun and cool image of the company. Then things started to get interesting because Duolingo wanted to not only teach us languages ​​to speak, but also programming languages. He was encouraged to want to serve as a tool so that the little ones They learned to read and write. And for the young and not so young, Duolingo wanted to become private mathematics teacherof music or even chess. All of this ensured that over the years Duolingo managed to solidify that company image that Not only did he solve real problems, but he did it in a friendly, friendly and fun way.. In 2021 the company decided go public and after a couple of relatively calm years, the shares began to rise in value significantly. Everything seemed to be going great for the company. And then everything went wrong. AI has mortally wounded Duolingo, but not because of what we think When OpenAI presented GPT-4o in June 2024, many of us saw the future. One in which you no longer typed on your computer or on your mobile screen: it was enough to talk to him. That promised to transform many segments and kill some others, and among those threatened were companies like Duolingo. At the time it wasn’t so obvious, but when we saw that kid solving a math problem With the help of AI, it was not difficult to imagine that education, as we had known it, could have an expiration date. Curiously, that didn’t seem to affect Duolingo too much. The company continued to grow, but then two things happened. First and foremost, a major blunder. Luis von Ahn advertisement in April an “AI First” vision in which I would bet on artificial intelligence as a new great tool for your growth. The message sounded like “let’s do without the human being,” and although von Ahn tried to clarify things, the damage was done. After that, the debacle. Duolingo shares began to plummet. But the thing didn’t end there. The second of those turning point events occurred in August, when GPT-5 demonstrated that one could build a custom Duolingo for, for example, learn french in a fun way. People stopped being in love with Duolingo and they began to criticize her precisely because of what had made her succeed. There was too much gamification and, as i said a user on Reddit, “for me the reward for learning a language is learning the language.” Source: Cinco Días. Stocks continued to fall almost steadily. These days Duolingo presented financial results, and the curious thing is that although they were good, they were not good enough for Wall Street. The firm reached 135 million active monthly users (50 million use it daily), 20% more than in the same period of the previous year. It also rose 34% in paying users. Although one would think those numbers were fantastic, they also warned that the forecasts for the fourth quarter were not so optimistic. Result: new stock market debacle. So much so that the shares have plummeted 64% since reaching their highs on May 1, just after the “AI First” announcement. Since then, Duolingo’s drift has been worrying, and the coming months will undoubtedly mark its future even more. The company is in a difficult moment, and the rise of AI may end up causing those experimenting with their chatbot to realize that starting to learn languages ​​​​is as easy as telling ChatGPT “I want to practice my English with you a little. Correct me when I say something else and suggest small exercises” out loud. That is the great challenge for Duolingo going forward. In Xataka | How to practice languages ​​using artificial intelligence

These are the most loved and hated millionaires, explained in a graphic

The most famous billionaires are not just business leaders, they have also become In media figures. Names that resonate in all homes and even influence In the political sphere. But there is something that clearly differentiates them: not all of them enjoy the sympathy of 99% of the world population that is not millionaire. While some generate admiration and respectothers generate very obvious opinions and levels of distrust and rejection. A survey Made by Reuters and Ipsos He asked 4415 American adults his opinion about some of the most outstanding millionaires of the Forbes Millionaires List. Some showed favorable opinions about them, others clearly unfavorable and others simply shrug because they had no idea who those gentlemen were. The portal Visualcapitalist He has collected all this data and has represented them in a much more enlightening graph that shows that, Being rich and famous does not guarantee to be popular Among your neighbors and countrymen. Warren Buffett and Bill Gates: Population favorites The Nonagenarian Inverter Warren Buffett, known as the “Oracle of Omaha”, leads the list of billionaires with greater popularity In the United States. His Austera and close personalityhas made 52% of the interviewees have a favorable opinion about the veteran millionaire. Only 26% of those who recognized him showed a negative opinion about him, and 18% recognized not knowing who that person was, despite having the fifth greatest fortune in the world. Buffett has been able to win the support of society Thanks to your simple lifestyle, your responsible investment approach and your commitment to philanthropy. Despite its imposing fortune of 165 billion dollars, its image transmits humility and common sensewhich makes it a reference well seen by many. For its part, Bill Gates is the great surprise of the table, occupying second place in terms of popularity, with 49% positive opinions. This perception has improved significantly from Gates left Microsoft’s direction And he put all his endeavor in philanthropy Through the Gates Foundation. However, with 43% of unfavorable opinions, its rejection index remains elevated. Gates has managed to position himself as a leader who seeks global solutions for problems Like public health and Climate changebut those causes have also put him in the spotlight of conspiracy theories The most diverse. That has made Microsoft the founder loved and hated almost in equal parts. For better or worse, Gates is one of the most popular millionaires in the world. Only 5% of the interviewees claimed not to know who that man was who claimed to have a assets of 108,000 million dollars. Musk, Zuckerberg and Bezos: Famous, but hated Despite being in the top 3 ofThe greatest fortunes in the world According to the Forbes list, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg face the challenge of being widely recognized, but very little dear. You can’t have everything. Elon Musk, with a fortune of 357,000 million dollars, has 39% favorable opinions. However, your participation in the Government Efficiency Department (Doge), in charge of saying goodbye hundreds of thousands of federal officials have won all A animated wave that has left him with 55% of unfavorable opinions. However, Musk is not the only one has not managed to connect With public opinion. Jeff Bezos also records 55% of unfavorable opinions in the survey. Unlike Musk, Bezos only awakens sympathies between 29% of respondents. The rest of the interviewees missing to complete 100% of the bar of Bezos sympathies and hatred I simply did not know who it was, although most likely they have ever bought in their online store or seen a series on their video platform. In the case of Mark Zuckerberg, the figures are not encouraging. Despite having experienced A complete image change To tune with the rest of the members of his generation, the founder of Facebook stands as the billionaire with the highest percentage of rejection of the list. His image has been damaged by scandals related to Users privacy and the Influence of social networks In society, which has made its popularity fall leaving 64% of unfavorable opinions. Definitely, Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t like. Millionaires that neither fu nor fa Despite being key figures in the technological world, billionaires such as Steve Ballmer, former Microsoft ex-care; Larry Ellison, founder of Oracle; And the co -founders of Google, Larry Page and Serguéi Brin, are not as recognized by the general public as Elon Musk or Bill Gates. In fact, 65% of respondents He doesn’t know Steve Ballmerwhile Page and Brin They could walk quietly through a shopping center and 69% and 72% respectively of the people with whom they were crossed would not recognize them. However, among those who do recognize them, the perception is very divided. For example, Larry Ellison has only 13% of favorable opinions, while Steve Ballmer has a modest 16%. It is probably because they have not seen their Microsoft marketing campaigns in the 90s. This contrast shows that, although They founded influential companies And their contributions have revolutionized entire sectors, the lack of media exposure and polarization in public opinion makes them less relevant characters at the popular level. Reuters data reveal that the perception that Americans have about their richest billionaires not only depends on the size of their fortunes or that of their companies, but also measured by their personal decisions. On the other hand, those who maintain a low profile, such as Larry Page, Serguéi Brin and Larry Ellison, seem to live in a limbo of popularity, in which they can enjoy all the Advantages of being centimillonario, Without the inconveniences of being so recognizable like Elon Musk or Bill Gates. In Xataka | They are founders and ultra -ups, but they have not always driven luxury supercoches: a review of the cars of the Tech millionaires In Xataka | How much money you need to be among the richest 1% in SpainHow much money you need to be among the richest 1%in Spain Image | VisualcapitalistFlickr (Billionaires Success)

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.