million

In 1802 someone proposed to Napoleon to unite France with England. Today the Eurotunnel invoices more than 1,000 million a year

by

“Bonjour mon ami,” said Graham Fagg. “Welcome to France”, replies Philippe Cozette. With these words an Englishman and a Frenchman greet each other. Both are operators of one of the most ambitious and spectacular infrastructures in the world. France and the United Kingdom have just been united by land. Specifically, the land lies 50 meters below the seabed. It is December 1, 1990 and the workers have found themselves in their excavation operations. Since work began in December 1987, it is the most exciting moment in the history of the Channel Tunnel. finally united The Eurotunnel is a 50.5 km excavation that since 1994 has connected buses and trains between the United Kingdom and France. The work runs for 38 kilometers under the sea and remains, to this day, the only land connection between the United Kingdom and Europe. More than 30 years after it was launched, the Channel Tunnel has a turnover of more than 1 billion euros a year. It is the magic figure that confirms why the investment has not only been profitable, but also why it is a project that has been talked about for hundreds of years. They explain in Reuters That the first time someone imagined a tunnel similar to the current one was 1751. The Frenchman Nicolas Desmarets, a French geologist, was the first to imagine the construction of a tunnel but no one bought the idea. Yes it would, they explain in MotorpassionNapoleon Bonaparte in 1802 when he gave his support to a project to dig a tunnel to the United Kingdom and launch a passage for horse-drawn carriages by the light of oil lamps. Evidently the project never went beyond paper because, in fact, throughout the 19th century projections were being made of what this step would be like to the point that, in 1866, the British engineer Henry Marc Brunel showed that the soil under water was composed of chalk (a type of limestone rock) that allowed drilling into the soil. In fact, these studies led him to create the gravity coring system, a working method that is still used today. However, it would not be until 1880 when the first steps on the ground would be taken. Progress that was initially successful but was completely suspended in 1883 when the works had already begun to enter the underwater zone. The reason given by the United Kingdom is that a tunnel could facilitate a potential invasion of the country from the continent. The argument carried so much weight that the project was frozen for almost a century. Winston Churchill advocated for it before the Second World War but no serious work was ever carried out to bring it forward. In fact, a system of hatches was proposed that, in the event of an emergency situation, would allow the tunnel to be flooded in case of fear of an invasion. This did not convince the military officials and the project remained suspended. It was not until the 1970s that the project was discussed again in much more serious terms. Along the way, all kinds of solutions had been proposed, including the possibility of creating an isthmus and that, through canals, allow ships to pass at the same time. In the end, the most logical solution was chosen: a railway tunnel between the United Kingdom and France. The agreement began to take shape in 1964 when technical studies began to make it viable. However, it would not be until 10 years later when work began. Some works that, in fact, barely lasted because the United Kingdom soon abandoned them due to the enormous cost of the project. Yet, The Eurotunnel had already started. And on January 20, 1986, François Mitterrand, on the French side, and Margaret Thatcher, for the British, announced the definitive construction of the tunnel. The decision maintained the idea of ​​previous decades of linking both countries with trains. Trains that, at the same time, allowed the transport of vehicles such as private cars. Thus, the tunnel now allows the transit of people with the one known as Eurostar, whose passengers travel by train, and a second train that allows the transfer of vehicles. It works through a system of three tunnels. Two of them perform round trip functions and the third is designed for their maintenance. The work, which began operating in 1994, now allows the passage of people and vehicles (including trucks) and is managed by Getlink (which was previously called Group Eurotunnel), a company that has the concession of exploitation by both countries as stated in the Treaty of Canterbury. This company benefits from the concession thanks to the passage of people and vehicles but also due to the interconnection of electrical energy on both sides of it. In fact, in 2025 turnover was close to 1.6 billion euros but almost 400 million euros came from Eleclink (the electrical interconnection between both countries) and Europorte (freight transport), the other two businesses that the company has associated with the exploitation of infrastructure. Photo | opihuck and Tambo on Wikimedia In Xataka | 125 kilometers of water separate 140 million inhabitants. China is going to solve it with a mega railway tunnel

The ambitious adaptation of a literary classic with 70 million copies sold comes to Prime Video

by

In 1993, Meryl Streep, Jeremy Irons and Antonio Banderas starred in the first adaptation of ‘The spirit house‘but Isabel Allende’s novel did not turn out very well, because the film left its Latin identity behind. Thirty-three years later, Prime Video premieres the first television adaptation in Spanish of the work, filmed entirely in Chile, with an Ibero-American creative team and Allende herself acting as executive producer. Published in 1982, the novel has sold more than 70 million copies worldwide and is considered a classic of 20th century Latin American literature. The Amazon adaptation was conceived by Francisca Alegría and Fernanda Urrejola, who co-wrote the pilot, who were later joined by Andrés Wood, director of ‘Machuca’ and the series ‘News of a Kidnapping’, who directed four of the eight episodes and served as co-showrunner. Isabel Allende herself and Eva Longoria are on the list of executive producers, in a proposal where Wood recognizes a very extensive female presence. The series follows the Trueba family through several decades of the 20th century in an unnamed South American country (although it is unmistakably Chile) undergoing profound political and social upheavals. At the center is Esteban, an ambitious, authoritarian and violent patriarch who builds his fortune by subjugating the peasants who work on his hacienda, Las Tres Marías. In front of him, Clara del Valle, a woman with supernatural gifts, who is gifted with clairvoyance and communicates with spirits, and whose sensitivity contrasts with the brutality of Esteban, whom she ends up marrying. The story unfolds through three generations of women, each facing power in their own way. The series is part of Prime Video’s commitment to Latin American content: according to data from Parrot Analyticsstreaming originals in Spanish and Portuguese grew 266% between 2020 and 2024, outpacing the growth rate of content in any other language. For this series, the platform is betting on a staggered premiere, with three first episodes available from this Wednesday, April 29, two new ones on May 6 and the three on May 13. It is a formula that Prime Video has used with other productions to keep the conversation active for several weeks, unlike the Netflix model. In Xataka | A porn video club in Valladolid in 1998: Prime Video gets naked with ‘Cochinas’

California wants to preserve mountain lion DNA, so it spent $100 million on a highway bridge

by

While for humanity roads are essential means of communication, for animals it is the opposite: a barrier that can be lethal. In fact, every year millions of animals die trying to cross roads that cut their habitats in half: we see the same thing in Iran with the Asiatic cheetah that in the India, where elephants are run over (although yes, with trains) is one of the big problems of its railway system. One of the solutions proposed by conservation biology are wildlife steps: an infrastructure, whether a bridge, tunnel or walkway, that allows animals to move safely through their domain by crossing roads or railway tracks. California just took this idea to another level with the largest structure of its kind ever built. The megastep for California pumas. It is about the Wallis Annenberg Wildlife Crossinga colossal plant bridge about 64 meters wide that crosses the US-101 highway as it passes through Agoura Hills, in Los Angeles. The structure has more than 11.8 million kilos of concrete, 82 bridge beams and more than 6,000 cubic meters of living soil to house more than 50 species of plants native to the region. The idea is to faithfully recreate the coastal sage scrub or coastal sage scrub, aromatic shrubs that are abundant in the area, but on one of the busiest highways. The project is a public-private collaboration that started formally on Earth Day 2022 and has cost $114 million. Its inauguration is scheduled for autumn of this year, thus becoming the largest wildlife crossing in the world. California Government Why is it important. The United States National Park Service has spent decades documenting that mountain lions in the Santa Monica Mountains are genetically isolated by roads and urbanization. And an isolated population is doomed: it does not have genetic exchange with other groups, there is endogamy, genetic variability is lost and the species loses its capacity to adapt. That is to say, the passage of US-101 not only kills animals by being run over, but it is also an evolutionary trap. That said, the bridge is not an infrastructure that will benefit exclusively the puma: it is also designed for red lynxes, foxes, coyotes, reptiles and a long chain of species whose mobility is essential for the ecosystem. Finally, the structure is framed within the California 30×30 objectivewhich aims to conserve 30% of the state’s coastal lands and waters before 2030, in this case connecting the protected spaces of the Santa Monica Mountains with the environment. Context. Wildlife passages are not something new: the first were built in the 50s of the 20th century, in France. In fact, Europe has been developing this technology for more than 70 years and has a long list of structures of this type. What is unique about this project is not so much the structure itself, but its scale and location: it is in a huge city and crosses a 10-lane highway where More than 300,000 vehicles pass through each daynot on a secondary road in deep America. However, there are already promising precedents such as the recently inaugurated Colorado’s Greenland Wildlife Overpass on I-25, connecting approximately 15,800 hectares (39,000 acres) of habitat for deer, elk, mountain lions and bears. Scientific literature also supports the bet: after analyzing 89 fauna passages in Europe, North America and Australia, this study published in Biological Conservation concluded that they are highly effective and that they reduce animal mortality due to roadkill by up to 90% compared to unprotected stretches. Other wildlife passes. Although the Wallis Annenberg Wildlife Crossing will be the largest in the world, there are other wildlife crossings (mainly in Europe) equally ambitious: Natuurbrug Zanderij Crailooin the Netherlands. At 800 meters long and 50 meters wide, it is the longest ecoduct in the world. Doñana National Park It has a network of wildlife crossings and ecoducts built specifically for the Iberian lynx, whose 80% of deaths occur due to being run over. On the A4 highway in the Lower Silesian Forest in Poland there are 15 ecoducts and wildlife crossings. It has been monitored for three years its use by wolves, ungulates and other carnivores. Veluwe ecoduct network in the Netherlands. Nine ecoducts in a natural area of ​​1,000 square kilometers, with almost 5,000 deer and wild boar crossings documented in a single year. Ecoduct on the Türkiye – Central Europe highway. It was built after multiple attacks by brown bears, achieving reduce collisions to zero. Yes, but. Despite its potential ecological value, the project has faced criticism for its high cost: It started with a budget of 92 million and in addition to being delayed, it will end up costing approximately $114 million. In addition, there are those who wonder whether a single structure is enough to save an entire population, suggesting that it is more necessary to implement smaller-scale but more numerous interventions rather than a single megaproject. From a strictly scientific point of view, the effectiveness of these steps is neither automatic nor guaranteed. A paper published in the Journal of Applied Ecology cautions that most available studies measure the number of crossings but not the actual impact on population viability, and that population-level effects remain difficult to quantify. Furthermore, design matters: those structures less than 20 meters wide are used noticeably less by animals. And if it has a bad location it can end up being useless. We will have to wait years of monitoring the Wallis Annenberg Wildlife Crossing to determine its effect. In Xataka | There are only 27 left in the wild and the war in Iran is their sentence: the drama of the rarest and rarest feline on the planet In Xataka | We have a serious problem with the extinction of bees. The United Kingdom wants to solve it with bricks Cover | California Government and Priscilla Du Preez 🇨🇦

Ryanair will cut 1.2 million seats in Spain but there is one region that will suffer more than the rest: Galicia

by

Ryanair will reduce seats, cancel routes and raise ticket prices. That is the strategy that the company envisions for Spain during next summer. And Eddie Wilson has confirmed a strategy that has been talked about since last October when the CEO of Ryanair already threatened to take more flights from Spain if the situation did not change with Aena’s rates. And one autonomous community is feeling it more than the rest. 1.2 million seats. That will be the cut that Ryanair has prepared for our country next summer. It is something that was already reported in October and was confirmed last Monday. Counterscheduling the distribution of Aena dividends among its partners, Eddie Wilson has taken the opportunity to point out that its activity will be reduced in Spain in just a few months. They do so because the Government takes advantage of “(Aena’s) monopoly position in Spain’s main airports, obtaining excessive margins of 60% at the expense of local economies, which depend on affordable air travel for tourism and employment.” Without a change in airport taxesRyanair confirms that it is withdrawing flights in our country and that it will replace seats in larger airports. The reason is the repeated one in the last months of this Government-Ryanair battle: They consider that Aena’s rates at regional airports are too high. Once again, regional airports. According to the company, Aena’s airport taxes in regional spaces are uncompetitive and a burden on tourism and the economy of these cities. This has caused, according to the company, its departure from the airports of Asturias, Valladolid, Jerez, Tenerife North and Vigo and its activity to be reduced by 79% in Santiago compared to the summer 2024 figures. Not only that, in addition to this cut in seats, Wilson has not hesitated to warn that if the price of jet fuel becomes scarce, the first victims will be the regional airports, prioritizing the large seats. What about Galicia? Although Ryanair claims that its departure is fatally damaging the less frequented Spanish airports, the truth is that not all of them are suffering the same fate. A good example is Zaragoza. Compared to 2024, it will have 45% fewer seats, three routes canceled and two others cut. Despite this, Aena data They say that in 2025 the number of passengers grew by 1.9% (especially on domestic routes) and that in 2026 it is growing by 2.6%. Photography is very different in Galicia. So far this year, A Coruña airport is the only one that has grown. Without Ryanair, Vigo is falling 3.4% this year but the most worrying thing is in Santiago. At this airport, Ryanair has cut its activity by almost 80% compared to the summer of two years ago. In 2025 it has already fallen by 14.3% and this year it is falling by 29.6%. The lower activity at this airport has caused flights in the region to fall by 6.9% last year and so far this year this has worsened to 15.5%. There is only one worse fact. From all regions, Galicia is the one with the worst figures. And so far this year, only Castilla y León has lost more travelers, with a drop of 18.6%. However, its volume of travelers is much lower than that of Galicia. In the first three months of 2025, 40,051 people moved by plane in the region, while this year 32,613 passengers did so. That’s a drop of less than 8,000 seats filled. In Galicia, however, so far this year 987,812 passengers have taken a plane, while in 2025 a total of 1,168,745 people had taken a plane. That is, in the first quarter of the year, 180,933 passengers have been lost in the first quarter of 2026. And more than 200,000 passengers compared to 2024 when more than 1,194,032 people moved by plane in the first three months of the year. Not only the rates. When Ryanair announces that it is leaving an airport, it usually points to airport taxes, but the reality is more complex. The truth is that the company has maintained some commercial routes with low demand because it had advertising contracts that supported its routes. Contracts that he has not hesitated to break, as in Vigowhen you have found more juicy economic incentives like those that have arrived from Morocco. It must be taken into account thatthe launch of the AVE to Galicia It has also been a hard blow for airline companies that have seen how part of their customers move to the train since it offers more affordable rates and travel times that, adding the waits at airports, are similar to those of the plane. In fact, companies like Iberia have also reduced their supply because demand did not compensate for the effort. Photo | Left Victorian and Simone Muzzi In Xataka | The new EU border system is leaving people without flights. Ryanair has a solution: close check-in early

the 170 million plan to revive Lemóniz

by

Seagulls and wild vegetation have been the only tenants of the immense iron and concrete skeleton built in the Biscayan cove of Basordas for decades. As detailed in a report the BBCit is a gloomy image composed of eight million cubic meters of cement and a thousand tons of iron; a giant that cannot be demolished that, more than forty years after its abandonment, finally has a destiny. But the monster designed for atomic fission will not produce megawatts, but fish. The historical turn. The Basque Government and the Atitlan business group will transform the old nuclear power plant in a macro fish farm. The Lehendakari himself, Imanol Pradales, presented the project, defining the ruins as “an uncomfortable and very complex inheritance” and “the scar of dark times”, as collected RTVE. Now, this industrial ghost is called to give birth, in the words of the Basque president, the first soles made in Euskadi. The magnitude of the project. The project has been named ‘Aquacría Basordas’. As detailed Deiawill require a public-private investment of 170 million euros over the next decade. The future aquaculture park will occupy an area of ​​46,600 square meters, will generate around 200 highly qualified direct jobs and, at full capacity, will reach a production capacity of 3,000 tons of fish per year. Forecasts indicate that the main works will start in 2027 and that the first soles will reach the market around 2030 or 2031. But why choose such an atypical environment? Already existing infrastructure and direct access to deep sea water have been key to identifying the failed plant as an “optimal” location for industrial aquaculture. However, Pradales warned that this will be “much more than a simple fish farm,” just as pointed out The Mail. The facility will have the scientific muscle of the Azti technology center, integrating artificial intelligence and advanced water recirculation systems (RAS) that will allow up to 97% of water resources to be reused. The business octopus. To understand the real dimension of the project, you have to look at both the offices of today and the trenches of yesterday. The one who will put the fish in Lemóniz is Sea Eight, the aquaculture subsidiary of the Valencian investment group Atitlan. How to uncover The Jumpthe president of Atitlan is Roberto Centeno, son-in-law of the owner of Mercadona, Juan Roig. In fact, Sea Eight is already a prominent supplier of sole for the supermarket chain. The advance of this business giant has been made, according to media reports such as The Economistignoring the local councils of Mungialdea and Uribe Kosta, which demanded a participatory process to decide the future of this very symbolic enclave. The million dollar question: isn’t it dangerous? The first reaction when combining the concepts “nuclear” and “power” is usually one of alarm, but we must be clear: there is no risk of radiation. As remembers the BBCLemóniz never received uranium or came into operation. However, the environmental controversy is served by other fronts. The NGO Greenpeace has demanded immediate withdrawal of the project. They argue that industrial aquaculture aggravates the pressure on the Cantabrian coast due to pollution by organic matter, use of antibiotics and eutrophication of the sea. In addition, they point out a biological paradox: the sole is a carnivorous species, which requires fishing for other wild fish to make its feed, pushing the oceans “towards collapse.” On the other hand, The Jump raises a worrying warning from FACUA Euskadi, which warned that the waters in the area have heavy metals “above the recommended thresholds”, coming from the sediment of the Urbieta reservoir and an old nearby landfill. Added to this is another complaint of Greenpeace: When the Basque Government assumed ownership of the land in 2018, it exempted Iberdrola (formerly Iberduero) from its legal obligation to return the cove to its original state, “saving” the electricity company about 17 million euros. The neighbors also have something to say. The concrete skeleton remains a thorny issue. As pointed out by BBC Through the testimony of locals like Valentín Elórtegui, the plant is “a taboo, something that no one wants to look at.” At street level, the scars of the families that were expropriated coexist with the irreverence of the young surfers who today catch waves in front of the atomic ghost at a point they call, precisely, “La Central.” And the weight of that taboo is measured in blood. Lemóniz’s abandonment was not an accident, but the result of an unprecedented social shock. As he relates RTVEthe works begun in the midst of Franco’s regime (1972) collided with incipient environmentalism and massive protests. ETA took advantage of the conflict and unleashed a campaign of terror, murdering five workers, including chief engineers José María Ryan and Ángel Pascual. The brutal tension in the streets—which also claimed the life of activist Gladys del Estal at the hands of the Civil Guard—forced the workers to flee, paralyzing the works until the government of Felipe González issued the definitive nuclear moratorium in 1984. The true mutation of Basordas. Pop culture has taught us to view the waters near atomic plants with suspicion. It is inevitable to remember Winksthe iconic three-eyed orange fish that Mr. Burns couldn’t eat in The Simpsons and that he tried to sell to the citizens of Springfield as an evolutionary miracle of his nuclear plant. However, in the rough waters of the Cantabrian Sea there will be no radiation or three-eyed fish; The Lemóniz sole will have the usual two. The true mutation in Basordas Creek is not genetic, but macroeconomic and historical. It is the transformation of a failed atomic megaproject promoted by a dictatorship, paralyzed by the blood of terrorism and environmental fury, which now ends up being resurrected as a lucrative and aseptic link in the immense supply chain of the supermarkets of our century. Image | Dummy Xataka | The most fascinating map you will see today: the entire electrical infrastructure of the planet, in an interactive infographic

The debate about whether the biggest pop star can be canceled is settled with a box office of 217 million in one weekend

by

97 million dollars in its first weekend in the United States. 217 million worldwide. ‘Michael’, the biopic of Michael Jackson that has taken years to reach theaters between lawsuits, reshoots millionaires and a third act rewritten from scratch, has just broken all records for musical biographical cinema. Critics destroy it with 38% on Rotten Tomatoes, but the public fills the theaters. Which, alone, says more about the state of popular culture than any analysis. Unexpected record. The initial projections The domestic opening grosses for ‘Michael’ were around $50-60 million, which would have already been a record in the profitable genre of biopics of pop artists. The final result (97 million in the United States and 217 globally) has far surpassed it. The previous record belonged to ‘Straight Outta Compton’, the biopic of rappers NWA, which opened with 60.2 million in its first week in the US. ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ premiered with 51 million, although it reached 900 globally. Criticism no. Something that had greatly dampened these expectations was the low critical ratingbut the CinemaScore score (the actual audience satisfaction index in the theater) was A-, very notable. The difference between critical opinion and commercial results reflects a reality we have already talked about and that has had another very recent example-type, ‘Super Mario Galaxy’. And like that one, this ‘Michael’ has a very clear type of audience in mind: the fans. A long way. ‘Michael’ has had one of the most complicated productions in recent Hollywood. With a budget of $200 million, making it one of the most expensive biopics in history, the film had a third act depicting Jackson’s 2005 sexual abuse trial and subsequent acquittal. Lawyers for Jackson’s estate discovered a clause in the 1993 agreement with Jordan Chandler, one of the children whose father sued the singer, that expressly prohibited his on-screen representation in any form. Production was halted and went through an additional 22 days of filming, which added $15 million to the budget. This is what causes the film to end abruptly on the 1988 ‘Bad’ tour, suggesting that the singer’s story will continue in a subsequent film. The question is how the producers will manage to tell the most problematic part of Jackson’s life. Who watches over the watchers. It is not the first time that Jackson’s heirs (who are not his living relatives, but a trust administered by executors that is currently considered one of the estates most profitable in history, above Elvis or Prince, and which functions for practical purposes as a company that exploits the “Michael Jackson” brand) is fighting a legal battle to control the story. The most revealing case is that of ‘Leaving Neverland’the documentary released on HBO in 2019 that collected the detailed testimony of those who claimed to have suffered sexual abuse by the singer when they were children. He estate sued HBO, alleging that the documentary violated a non-defamation clause included in a contract signed by the platform in 1992 for the broadcast of a Jackson concert in Bucharest. The litigation dragged on for years, until in October 2024 both parties they reached an agreement which included the removal of the documentary from all media platforms. streaming officials in the United States. As of today, ‘Leaving Neverland’ is not legally available on any streaming service. streaming North American (in Spain it can be seen on Movistar Plus+). The image of the star. Anyone might think that the fame that Jackson projects with all these legal conflicts is not the most appropriate for a biopic that also wants to safeguard a non-conflictive image. But fans should not be underestimated when they move en bloc: in 2019, when ‘Leaving Neverland’ aired, there were reactions that then seemed signs of a turning point in Jackson’s fame: stations around the world stopped broadcasting his music, Pepsi canceled licensing agreements, sales and streaming of his catalog fell 4%. However, seven years later, all is forgiven or, at the very least, forgotten: his catalog is worth $1.5 billion (Sony Music paid 750 million dollars for half of it in 2024). And at the time of his death in 2009 his heirs, the aforementioned estatereceived 500 million dollars in debts. Now the exploitation and image rights of the singer are valued at 2,000 million. History repeats itself. It’s a pattern we already know with other biopics: ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ avoided the most controversial aspects of Freddie Mercury’s life, including his hedonistic way of dealing with his sexuality. Elton John’s ‘Rocketman’ was a bit tougher and didn’t do as well at the box office, but it was still a considerable success, especially among critics. ‘Elvis’ avoided the many chiaroscuros in Presley’s life and triumphed in awards and the box office. The formula of the heir- or family-approved musical biopic, focused on music and celebratory versions of the artists’ lives, has proven to be more profitable than more cumbersome alternatives. Moral: there are cancellations… and cancellations. The figures of streaming of Jackson’s catalog fell for months after ‘Leaving Neverland’, but made a full recovery in 2020 and has been on an upward trajectory for years. ‘MJ the Musical’ has been on Broadway since 2021 earning more than a million dollars weeklywith imminent adaptations around the world. The Las Vegas show signed by Cirque du Soleil about Jackson has just extend your contract until 2030. The truth is that for an artist of this scale, cancellation operates in a different dimension. The cultural debate exists (and will continue to exist, with real accusers whose trial starts in November) but runs in parallel, without interfering with the economy of the phenomenon. It’s not that fans have forgotten about the controversy: it’s that there is a chasm between it and the market. In Xataka | The archive of disturbing paintings that Michael Jackson commissioned of himself

orders to undo the purchase of Manus for 2,000 million in the middle of the race for AI

by

The purchase of Manus seemed like a move already resolved for Meta. The American company had closed an operation valued at more than 2 billion dollars by an artificial intelligence startup founded by Chinese engineers focused on one of the most disputed fields of the moment: AI agents. Now, China has ordered the operation to be undone. The decision turns an acquisition that seemed on track into a much broader notice, with a central mystery: how to cancel a purchase that has already been completed and with part of the team already working from Meta offices in Singapore. Here is one of the keys to the case: Manus was not a typical Chinese startup when Meta bought it. The company had closed its offices in China in July 2025 and had moved its operations to Singapore, a more favorable place to access foreign capital and Western models. But Reuters gives us a very important clueAccording to their sources, this transfer was made without Chinese regulatory approval. Beijing’s decision may have many readings, but possibly the Asian giant is seeking to prevent American companies from acquire talentintellectual property and key AI capabilities linked to its technological ecosystem. It is a movement that fits into a broader context: as Washington tries to limit Chinese technology companies’ access to advanced chipsBeijing would be seeking to protect its own strategic assets. A week ago we found out that the operation passed into the hands of several Chinese agencies, including the NDRC, the Ministry of Commerce and the antitrust regulator, with tools ranging from foreign investment to export controls. Finally, the NDRC has taken the most forceful step: prohibiting foreign investment in Manus and requiring the parties to withdraw the transaction, although the official statement did not name Meta. To understand why Meta was willing to close a deal worth more than $2 billion for Manus, you have to leave the regulatory field and look at the product. Meta spends around 70,000 million of dollars annually in AI infrastructure without having managed to achieve Meta AI’s success as a consumer product. The problem was not so much having more powerful models as turning them into something useful and salable. Manus fit right in there: he didn’t train his own modelsbut it had developed a layer capable of orchestrating them, executing complex tasks and delivering results. Behind all this is a warning that goes beyond Meta and Manus. The relocation of Chinese technology companies to Singapore had become a way to operate with more flexibility in an increasingly tense environment. However, Reuters reports that Beijing is toughening its approach and no longer limits its analysis to where the company is registered. Factors such as the origin of the equipment, the location of the research or data flows become determining factors. And that changes the rules for anyone trying to go down that path. Now, Beijing’s decision leaves more questions than immediate answers. At the moment It is not clear how the annulment will be carried out of an operation that had already materialized and that involves a company structured outside of China. What does seem defined is the framework: artificial intelligence has become a strategic terrain where the control of talent and technology weighs as much as the business. And on that board, movements like Meta’s may be exposed to much broader regulatory reviews than companies had calculated. Images | Manus, Xataka with Mockuuups Studio | Mariia Shalabaieva | aboodi vesakaran In Xataka | China has banned another AI startup from exporting talent and research: little by little, it is “nationalizing” AI

There are people reselling tickets to the World Cup final for 2.3 million dollars. Great news for FIFA

by

It is still too early to know if the 2026 World Cup will be a success, a failure or will be added without pain or glory to the extensive chronicle of FIFA. What we can say at this point is that enjoying the tournament in situ it won’t come cheap. Especially if you aspire to see the final, which will be played on July 19 at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey. The cost of your tickets it takes months embroiled in controversy, but the debate has soured after some positions have come to light resale market for the price of a 200 m2 apartment in the center of Madrid. All with the veiled pleasure of FIFA. What has happened? That although there is still more than a month until the opening match, the World Cup in North America (to be played between Mexico, Canada and the USA) is already earning the dubious honor of being the most expensive of history. The fans screamed in the sky last decemberwhen the first tickets were launched, but the rates that were offered then seem like a ‘bargain’ when compared to those that are now being achieved in the purchase and sale market. In this secondary trade, channeled through FIFA, there are passes that are offered for the same What does a 200 m2 apartment in Madrid cost? Does it sell so expensive? Yes. The news has advanced it the Associated Press (AP) agency, but it comes with taking a look at the buying and selling platform of tickets hosted on the FIFA website to verify it. If we look for available passes for the final on July 19, we will see that there are people reselling them for more than two million dollars. To be precise, there are at least four seats on sale in the lower stand (behind the goal) for a whopping $2,299,998.85. Not all tickets cost the same, but resale prices are generally not affordable for everyone. The cheapest seats, 3rd category, are offered for $10,900. If you want a position with better views and more comfort, you can add a few thousand more to that figure and purchase higher category passes for $16,100, $33,800, $43,200 or even $207,000. The prize goes to the entries of 2.3 million and 991,500, which is what a seller asks for seats located in the front area. On Wednesday FIFA itself put up for sale a new block of tickets on its direct sales platform, where it was possible to find seats for the final by $10,990. Who controls these rates? Direct sale tickets are launched by FIFA itself, but things change when we talk about the secondary market. There, in the so-called “Resale/Exchange Market” the federation does not control prices, although it does take a considerable part of the business. For each transaction you pocket a commission which is divided into two parts. One, 15%, is applied to whoever purchases the ticket. Another, of the same value, is borne by whoever detaches from the entry for resale. As they explain in Guardianthat means that if one of the tickets that cost 2.3 million is finally sold, FIFA would deposit $690,000 into its account. But… How is that possible? In other editions of the World Cup, the resale price of tickets was limited at face value, but this time FIFA has changed the approach. The reason? First, adapt to the market of the host countries, especially the United States, which is the one will host more games of the tournament. Secondly, FIFA hopes that by channeling the buying and selling itself, the use of portals such as StubHub will be discouraged. “FIFA has established a ticketing and secondary market model that reflects standard ticket market practices for major sporting and entertainment events in host countries,” alleges in a statement cited by the Associated Press. “Resale facilitation fees are aligned with industry standards in the North American sports and entertainment sectors.” Is it an isolated controversy? The controversy has now arisen due to the prices that are being reached in resale, but the truth is that the cost of the tickets has been a matter of discussion since the first phase of sale, activated in December 2025. The focus has been on both the prices themselves and the system applied by FIFA in the sale, the ‘variable pricing’similar to dynamic rates. Consumer organizations like the OCU have already raised their voices for that same reason. For reference, in December tickets for the final were already being sold for prices ranging from 4,185 and 8,680 dollars. And this despite the initial promise to offer them for 60 dollars in the group stage. “They only exist as ridiculous green splotches on the edge of seating maps, little more than mirages of inclusion,” ironizes Bryan Armen, from Guardian. Does it only happen with tickets? No. The tickets are so expensive because, FIFA allegesare one of their main sources of income. However, passes to matches are not the only thing that is valued at a gold price. In recent days, another controversy has arisen around the celebration of the World Cup in the US that revolves around something that has little to do with sport: public transportation. The New Jersey rail operator has decided that those who want to buy round-trip tickets to travel from Manhattan to MetLife and watch the July 19 final there will have to pay 150 dollars. It is almost 11 times more than what the same service costs on a normal day, when it is around $12.9. Images | FIFA and Wikipedia In Xataka | Mexico City is already noticing the economic effect of the World Cup: it is losing homes and gaining Airbnb apartments

We have found the real kraken. It measured 19 meters and reigned in the seas 100 million years ago

by

The kraken has been in the ideology of myths for decades and was imagined as a gigantic sea monster capable of dragging ships to the depths with one of its tentacles. But the truth is that it was something completely mythological until now science suggests that in reality they did exist at some point in the history of our planet. When? If we wanted to see them, we would have to take a time machine and travel to about 100 million years ago, where colossal octopuses dominated the depths of the oceans, competing head-to-head with the large marine reptiles of the time of the dinosaurs. And just like points out the published study in Science This finding not only confirms the existence of these giantsbut forces paleontologists to rewrite what we knew about the food chain of the Cretaceous seas. How do we know? One of the biggest problems paleontologists face when studying cephalopods is that their bodies are soft. And, lacking an internal skeleton, it is extremely rare to find complete fossils of octopuses or squids and so the question here is obligatory: how do we know that this giant existed? The answer is in their jaws. Here the team of researchers did not find fossilized bodies, but rather 27 mandibles known colloquially as beaks and similar to those that parrots have. These were found in sites in Japan and Canada and through advanced digital prospecting techniques and analysis of the wear of these pieces, scientists were able to digitally reconstruct the owners of these lethal hunting tools. The species. The taphonomic analysis of these remains has allowed the identification of two main species: Nanaimoteuthis jeletzkyi and Nanaimoteuthis haggarti. But it is the latter that takes all the attention of science. The point here is that by extrapolating the size of the fossilized jaws and comparing them with the proportions of current cephalopods, experts estimate that N. haggarti It was able to reach a length of between 7 and 19 meters, which would far exceed the giant octopuses that are currently in the Pacific, which rarely exceed five meters. The food chain. Until now, the classic view of Cretaceous marine ecosystems placed large reptiles (such as mosasaurs or plesiosaurs) at the undisputed top of the food pyramid, relegating cephalopods to the role of simply being abundant prey. However, this published study changes the rules of the game. It is now known that these octopuses were not just food, but were great predators. Here the level of wear on their jaws has been key to seeing that they had an aggressive diet and that, therefore, they occupied a place at the top of the oceanic food web. The evolution. If we look back, in the Cambrian period we find the humble Nectocaris pteryxwhich was nothing more than a primitive cephalopod which barely measured a couple of centimeters and which serves as a baseline to understand where these animals come from. From here on, millions of years later, evolution had given these animals a large size and tools to become the “krakens” of the Cretaceous. Images | freepik In Xataka | We have stuffed the Gibraltar monkeys with Doritos. His solution has been to eat dirt as if it were omeprazole

In London someone has paid 310 million for the most expensive house in history. It is proof that the luxury market has no ceiling

by

In the world there are expensive houses (increasingly), very expensive houses and then houses within reach only of the greatest fortunes on the planet, like the one that has just been sold in London for a whopping 270 million poundsabout 310 million euros at the exchange rate. The figure is shocking in itself (it is the same that has been paid in other parts of Europe to build a stadium), but it becomes even more interesting when another detail is known: everything indicates that it is the most expensive home sold to date in an operation of that type, focused on a single residence. To get the keys, its new owner, an influential British businessman, had to beat three royal families from the Middle East. What has happened? that the real estate market premium has just reached one of those milestones that sound almost like science fiction, at least among ordinary mortals. The British press has revealed that a wealthy businessman in the country has closed the purchase of the most expensive home sold to date. And “more expensive” can be understood in a literal sense. Although it is not easy to talk about world records in a sector in which properties do not always go on the market nor are operations advertised, the Bloomberg agency slide which is probably the largest sale in history centered on a property of its type: a single single-family home. It is not crazy if you take into account that the transaction was signed for 270 million pounds, about 310 million euros. Some sources raise the figure to more than 315 million. What is the housing like? The property is called Providence House (formerly Gordon House) and is a huge 19th century mansion located in the Chelsea neighborhood of west London. The plot once housed the residence of the British Prime Minister Robert Walpolebut for years it has belonged to Nick Candya London businessman linked to the brick sector and the Reform UK party. Beyond its privileged location, in the heart of one of the most expensive cities on the planet, the house surprises with its figures: the house stands on a plot of two acres (just over 8,000 m2) with a lake and swimming pool and Georgian style decoration. Media like Financial Times they need which has a private cinema with IMAX screen, greenhouse and the second largest garden from the center of London. It is only surpassed by the one surrounding Buckingham Palace. Who bought it? The buyer is Sunel Setiya, co-founder of Quadrature Capitala trading firm that according to Bloomberg data obtained a profit of 411 million pounds in the financial year ending January 2025. Although with Providence House he has broken all the molds, this is not the first time that Setiya has made headlines for his taste for luxury homes… and his enormous generosity in paying for them. In his day he already paid 110 million pounds for a penthouse in One Hyde Park. And that the property, of around 1,300 m2lacked interior divisions and required works. The Times details which on this occasion has had to pay more than 31 million pounds for property tax alone. The operation certainly marks a before and after in the British real estate market. The most expensive house sold in the United Kingdom before Setiya took out his checkbook was the mansion known as 2-8A Rutland Gate, awarded in 2020 for £210 million to Hui Kan Yan, founder of the Chinese developer Evergrande Group. Click on the image to go to the tweet. And who sold it? Nick Candy, another British tycoon who shares Setiya’s taste for exclusive homes. In fact, he has a penthouse in the same complex that is also for sale for around £175 million. Nick and his brother Christian are known in the sector for the development of the complex One Hyde Parkmade up of 86 apartments and duplexes in the heart of Knightsbridge. Beyond their taste for luxury homes, Setiya and Candy are at opposite poles on an ideological level. The first (Setiya) is a important donor of the Labor Party and dedicates large sums of money through his company to fighting climate change. Nick Candy however is a prominent figure of Reform UK, Nigel Farage’s far-right party. Have there been more interested parties? Ideological differences do not seem to have been an obstacle to closing the operation. In fact, to become the new owner of Providence House Setiya had to prevail over three Middle Eastern royal families also interested in the luxurious London mansion. Given its characteristics (and amounts), the operation was carried out outside the market. The operation represents a lifeline for the luxury residential market in London, which, as remember Five Daysis not going through its best moment. According to LonRes, 2025 was the second time since 2011 that no sales of more than £50 million were closed and in February transactions worth five million (or more) suffered a year-on-year drop of 55%. The puncture coincides with a tax change that directly affects properties. Image | Jaanus Jagomagi (Unsplash) In Xataka | If the question is whether house prices will rise forever, London has the answer. And it is a warning for Madrid

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.