paying

China is taking away all its scrap paying up to five times more

by

The scene seems like something out of an industrial espionage thriller, but it takes place in broad daylight. As anticipated Financial TimesChinese buyers are making appointments in the parking lots of stores like Home Depot in the United States to discreetly purchase lots of scrap metal valued at more than $20,000. This is the front line of a silent war for global resources. According to this same media, Asian intermediaries are sweeping up American scrapyards and paying up to five times the usual price, snatching the material from local recyclers. The director of a recycling company in Texas sums it up bluntly: “it’s a secret war that no one talks about.” Why so much interest in residual remains? The answer lies in the metal that makes them up. As explained The Conversation, Tungsten – whose name means “heavy stone” in Swedish – has the highest melting point of all known metals, reaching 3,422 °C. Furthermore, its extreme hardness and resistance to thermal shocks make it an absolutely irreplaceable material for manufacturing everything from aerospace technology to armor-piercing military ammunition. Market strangulation. China currently controls almost 79% of global tungsten production. As detailed in an analysis by expert John Connortension erupted in February 2025, when Beijing tightened its export controls in retaliation for US tariffs, cutting its shipments to the West by a drastic 40%. The economic impact of this decision was devastating. The restriction caused a strangulation of the market and a brutal increase in prices, which shot up 557% to reach $2,250 per metric ton. The great paradox is that, while the global shortage of virgin tungsten is caused by Beijing’s quotas, it is China itself that hoards recycled American scrap—such as worn-out industrial drill bits—to take it back to Asia through third countries such as Canada or Dubai. Industry analysts warn of imminent danger: If China officially reopens its doors to direct imports of scrap metal, the result will be a disaster for supply in the rest of the world. The global board. Today, almost absolute control of these supply chains gives China immense commercial and geopolitical power. This dominant position allows Beijing to use critical technologies and materials—so-called “bottlenecks”—as a lever of international influence that it can pull at will. Faced with this drain on resources, the debate has reached the highest levels. The report of Financial Times collect voices within the recycling industry and the US Congress demanding an immediate ban on the export of tungsten scrap to China to protect national security. However, the United States faces a temporary impasse: the country currently lacks the processing capacity necessary to convert all that exported scrap into useful finished products for its industry. In search of extraction. As Connor explainsthe solution inevitably involves diplomacy and investment abroad. The expert points out that Kazakhstan, which has the largest reserves of tungsten outside China (estimated at about two million tons), has become the center of the US strategy, attracting government-backed investments to develop local mines. But the race is head to head and Beijing has not sat idly by. In fact, China has already moved ahead in the Central Asia region, having started commercial production at the gigantic Boguty mine in Kazakh territory. At the same time, new Western actors are trying to close the gap. The financial portal Trading View informs that companies such as the Canadian mining company Allied Critical Metals are committed to revitalizing historic European projects, such as Borralha in northern Portugal. The company has a clear objective: to start the production of tungsten concentrate before the end of 2026 to meet the urgent demand in the West. Industrial ingenuity versus dumping. The middle The Conversation provides a historical parallel extremely interesting: during World War II, faced with the critical shortage of molybdenum caused by attacks by German submarines on maritime convoys, engineers from the British company Vickers managed to innovate by recycling the metal directly from mining drill bits. Today, that same logic applies to tungsten, which has a very high recycling rate of 42% globally. In Western markets this figure shoots up to an impressive 70%, driven precisely by the need to compensate for Chinese dominance over the primary mineral. In addition to technical innovation, state protection strategies gain prominence. In March South Korean Sangdong mine opened; Once at full capacity, this facility could produce more than 80% of the world’s non-Chinese tungsten. The most notable thing about this project is that the Seoul government has established a guaranteed minimum price for the mineral, thus protecting the operation from possible practices of dumping. Flooding the market to artificially depress prices is a tactic China has used successfully in the past to bankrupt Western investors in the critical minerals sector. An imminent warning for the West. The clock is ticking and the consequences of inaction could be fatal. An imminent and dangerous reality stalks the West: the Third Gulf War has consumed munitions at a staggering rate and depleted US stockpiles of tungsten-dependent missiles such as the Patriot and THAAD systems. taking them to historic lows. Without a stable and massive supply to quickly replenish these arsenals, the US military risks a true military disaster should a larger conflict break out, such as a direct confrontation over Taiwan. As a final reflection, andThese restrictive tactics from Beijing should be read as a stern warning. The current tungsten crisis should force Western governments to wake up once and for all and “de-risk” (de-risk) urgently their supply chains. Only by building an independent industrial network can the Western world avoid making its security and economy dependent on the monopoly of a single country. Image | Unsplash Xataka | The US is withdrawing soldiers from Europe. His plan to reassure her is to leave something much more disturbing in front of Russia.

There is a division of Xiaomi that no one pays attention to. It is exactly the one that is paying for the party of mobile phones, AI and cars

by

Xiaomi is no longer just a smartphone company; It is a conglomerate of four large divisions that support and feed each other to compete in an increasingly aggressive market. The surprise is that financially the division that generates the least attention is the one that is paying for the other three. The results for the first quarter of 2026 They make it clear: boring business is pure profit. Four companies in oneto. Xiaomi’s current structure settles in four large pillars that are also notably different from each other. Smartphones with the brand that ended up becoming popular globally remain critical to preserving the user base. Then there are internet services (advertising, Mi Cloud), which complete the Apple-style mobile ecosystem. The electric car and AI make up another pillar that fascinates and demonstrates the firm’s ambition in these new areas. And finally there is the IoT division, which a priori seems the least notable, but is much more so than anyone would think. Services, services, services. As we said, mobile phones are Xiaomi’s hallmark, but its profitability comes hand in hand with internet services, which operate with an astonishing gross profit margin of 76.1%. As with Apple, here Xiaomi takes advantage of its almost 750 million active users with advertising, subscriptions and cloud services integrated into its HyperOS mobile operating system. It is a profitable vicious circle: IoT and mobile phones are Trojan horses that manage to put the user into a digital ecosystem in which they end up spending money. Blessed IoT. And despite the fact that it receives less media attention, the gross margin of the IoT division reached a spectacular 25.2% in the first quarter of 2026 according to the company’s financial results. This number is much higher than the 10.1% generated by smartphones, which have logically been punished by the memory crisis. In fact, the gross profit of the IoT division has been 6.2 billion RMB, much higher than the 4.5 billion of the mobile division. The latter bills much more, but it does not shine as much in those gross profits. Refrigerators triumph. The president of Xiaomi’s IoT division, Lu Weibing, explained that the role of this business is key in the Xiaomi group, because it is “a very important balancer” against the impact of the increase in memory costs in the rest of the divisions. Company officials expect this “cost supercycle” (or in other words, the memory crisis) to last until 2028, and that will continue to complicate the mobile division’s margins. Sell ​​less, but more expensive. The escalation of component costs has made Xiaomi make a drastic decision: sell less, but more expensive. The distributed smartphone units they fell 19.2%, but its average selling price reached a record figure of 1,310 RMB, 8% more than in the same quarter of 2025. Xiaomi has a 23.5% share of premium smartphones in mainland China, and makes it clear that the focus is now on super high-end mobile phones. “Premiumization” of the home. The strategy of selling more expensive is also being applied notably in the IoT division, which includes household appliancesand which has also adopted a “premiumization” strategy. Instead of just distributing third-party products, the company is developing its own high-end air conditioners, refrigerators and washing machines. This has allowed IoT gross margin to rise 5.1 percentage points in just one quarter. AI price war. The launch of its own AI model, MiMoit was already a surprise, but these days the firm has announced that cut the prices of its API by up to 99% (there are technical arguments) in order to compete with rivals like DeepSeek. This model is at the level of the best Chinese open models, but the company itself has not yet achieved the objectives they seek. As with other AI startups, the costs are massive, so this division of Xiaomi depends on the cash flow generated by the rest of the businesses. Cars impress, but they lose money. The division that brings together electric cars and AI did not have a good quarter and lost 3.1 billion RMB. The new Xiaomi Su 7 has been a success in number of reservations (80,000), but operating expenses for this part of the business have risen 45.8%, too much to be offset by the revenue growth of this division. Xiaomi is the new Samsung. Xiaomi He was born looking very similar (or aspiring to be very similar) to Apple, but currently its structure and strategy are much more similar to that of Samsung. Its advantage is that it currently has an ecosystem with more than 1.1 billion IoT devices that allow it to grow and invest in cars, AI or mobile phones. The problem is what happens if the cushion provided by the benefits of the IoT division deflates. In Xataka | Leica is teaching Xiaomi everything it knows: when the student no longer needs the teacher, the agreement will have fulfilled its function

In 1972 Italy wanted to put an entire city in a one kilometer building. Half a century later he is still paying the consequences

by

The same year that construction of the Corviale complex began, US authorities began demolition by Pruitt–Igoea gigantic public housing complex that had been presented just two decades earlier as the future of the modern city. The coincidence was almost symbolic: while one country demolished one of its great urban utopias, another began to build a new one. A city within a building. During the 1970s, Italy believed it could solve several urban problems at once. Rome was growing rapidly, peripheral neighborhoods were multiplying and public housing was facing increasing demand. The answer It was the Corvialea gigantic residential structure almost a kilometer long designed to house around 8,500 people. Its architect, Mario Fiorentino, did not simply imagine a block of flats, but a authentic linear city where streets would be corridors, squares would emerge from common spaces and daily services would coexist with homes. That vision was intended to demonstrate that architecture could reorganize urban life from its foundations. A utopia that was never completed. The problem appeared before the project was even finished being built. The company in charge of the works went bankrupt in 1982 and many of the essential elements of the original design never came to fruition. The famous middle floor used for shops, offices, services and community spaces was left empty and ended up being occupied by families looking for a place to live. What was to become the social heart of the complex ended up becoming a housing labyrinth improvised. Many of the planned facilities were also never built, leaving the infrastructure that was to turn the building into a self-sufficient city incomplete. When architecture conditions everyday life. Over the years, Corviale began to demonstrate that buildings are not simple containers where people live. Its long corridors, its few entrances, the complex interior circulation and the enormous scale of the complex began to influence the way in which the residents they were related to each other. The elevators are They broke down constantlyforcing thousands of people to travel long distances to enter or leave their homes. The centralized heating system caused conflicts between residentsirregular occupants and administrations on who should bear the costs. Some researchers even described the building as a small town whose governance problems were directly linked to its physical characteristics. From the symbol of the future to the symbol of failure. As the deterioration progressed, Corviale began to accumulate a reputation increasingly negative. For many he became the perfect example of the excesses of urbanism postwar monumental. Its critics described it as a concrete monster, a residential prison or an example of how certain urban planning ideologies had ignored people’s real needs. Illegal occupations, maintenance problems, the presence of criminal activities and institutional abandonment reinforced this perception. for years proposals arose to tear it down completely and replace it with smaller-scale traditional neighborhoods, connected by streets, squares and buildings closer to human dimensions. Giuditto Miele at the groundbreaking ceremony for the Corviale complex The battle to decide your destiny. However, Corviale was never demolished. Unlike many other large post-war European housing estates, managed to survive to demolition attempts. Part of the explanation lies in its increasing symbolic value. What for some was an urban failure, for others represented an unrepeatable piece of Italian architectural history. The building ended up getting heritage protection and became part of the national debate about what to do with the great utopias of the 20th century. The discussion stopped focusing solely on whether the project had worked or not and became a more complex question: how to transform such a gigantic structure without destroying it. Half a century of reforms to correct an idea. The last decades have been marked by an almost constant succession of regeneration projects. International competitions, neighborhood associations, architects and public administrations have tried adapt the complex to current needs. Some interventions have regularized occupied spaces, others have rehabilitated common areas and several seek to recover the pedestrian scale through new public spaces and green areas. No other residential complex in Rome has received public investment so intense and prolonged. The paradox in this case is more than evident: the building that was born to simplify urban life has become one of the most complex regeneration operations in the city. Consequences of a big bet. The story del Corviale It continues to fascinate because it transcends architecture. It is the story of a time that believed that social problems could be solved through great physical solutions and a city that continues to deal with the consequences of that bet. The building, by the way, still standinginhabited by thousands of people and subjected to continuous transformations. For some it demonstrates the limits of grand urban visions, for others, the ability of a community to adapt to an unfinished project. The truth is that half a century later, Rome continues to dedicate resources, time and energy to managing a structure designed to function as a complete city. And perhaps that is the clearest proof that Corviale never stopped being exactly that: a city enclosed within a building. Image | Wikimedia, Umberto RotundoAlessandro Pace In Xataka | In 1970 Japan built homes of the future where each capsule would be replaceable. Half a century later he discovered that no one knew how to repair them In Xataka | The incredible story of the tallest building on the planet that ended up becoming the largest swimming pool in the Soviet Union

The disastrous return of Amaia Montero with Van Gogh’s Ear is a good x-ray of the dangers of paying for nostalgia

by

Thirty thousand people have filled the BEC in Barakaldo for two nights to witness one of the most anticipated returns of Spanish pop. Amaia Montero returned to Van Gogh’s Ear almost twenty years later of his departure, on a tour called ‘So many things to tell’ and that promised to close a cycle (or open a new one). But these first concerts (especially the first one) have ended up being talked about for very different reasons than expected. The Ear, the return. When La Oreja de Van Gogh officially announced on October 15, 2025 that Amaia Montero was returning to the band, the tickets were sold out. in a matter of hours in numerous cities, and new dates were added due to demand. The tour consists of 16 stops that extend until November 2026 and include the Movistar Arena in Madrid (three nights), the Palau Sant Jordi in Barcelona and the Illunbe Donostia Arena. It is, right now, one of the most relevant pop phenomena of the year in Spain. How it started. The trigger It was an appearance that no one expected. in July 2024, by Amaia Montero at the Santiago Bernabéu during one of Karol G’s concerts to perform ‘Rosas’, the anthem from Van Gogh’s La Oreja. The reaction was enormous and shortly afterLa Oreja de Van Gogh announced the departure of Leire Martínez, the group’s vocalist for 17 years, from the band, alleging “different ways of living the group.” In October 2025, Amaia’s return was officially announced. 2026 is the year of the 30th anniversary of La Oreja and the 25th of ‘El viaje de Copperpot’, one of their most remembered albums. What happened in Barakaldo. On May 9, 2026, the tour started at the BEC and 18,000 people attended the first concert. Amaia appeared center stage on a raised platform, wearing a bright pink jumpsuit. He said: “I went down to hell itself, but with my scars, after fighting a lot, here I am.” However, despite good intentions, the chronicles they agreed in which Amaia was “out of tune and too tight to reach the high notes.” It especially went viral their performance of ‘Nothing Compares 2 U’the Prince classic popularized by Sinéad O’Connor and with which the band originally discovered her, but deeply out of tune. Amaia herself acknowledged on stage: “I do it terribly”. The amazing thing is that, as has also been saidAmaia “has had more than a year to prepare vocally” and despite this she showed “many technical deficiencies.” The group could have adapted the tonalities to their current voice, but they have not done so so that the songs are identical to how fans remember, and that is the problem. Second round. On May 10, in the second concert at the same venue, the setlist went from 25 songs to 22. ‘Nothing Compares 2 U’, ‘We’re all dancing to the same song’ and ‘The girl who cries at your parties’, the three songs that had generated the most problems the night before, disappeared. The presence of songs from Leire Martínez’s era was also reduced. Amaia was more confident and the elevated platform was reserved for ‘Mariposa’. The reactions of the fans. The acrimony with which Amaia’s return has been received has to do with the fact that the audience of La Oreja de Van Cogh is divided into two communities. The fans who came with Amaia, thirty-somethings who grew up with ‘Rosas’, ‘La playa’ or ’20 de Enero’, experienced the concert as the return of a diva and the disagreements were excusable. The fans who joined with Leire, on the other hand, listened to someone sing with obvious effort songs that his protégé performed for almost two decades with great technical solvency. A good part of the band’s fans (or ex-fans, at this point) think that there is a voice that has now been displaced, without a satisfactory public explanation and with an exit that It was tense: Amaia did not agree to share the 30th anniversary concerts with Leire, and the group chose to do without her. This has irremediably fractured the public, who in the case of the fans of the expelled vocalist, spread Amaia’s failures on social networks with particular viciousness. The comeback syndrome. Not all nostalgic reunions are a triumph. There are those that burst resoundingly because they try to revive an energy that responded to unrepeatable circumstances, but what they achieve is to make very clear just the opposite: that that energy no longer exists. The Sex Pistols on their 1996 tour is one of the most memorable cases for its self-awareness, but the drama dates back before: The Animals, Simon & Garfunkel or The Byrds in previous decades also failed when trying to win back their audience. The list of bands that recently crashed a reunion (not necessarily commercially, mind you) is endless: Jane’s Addiction, Guns’n Roses… The reason is always that the search for money is evident above the relationships between its members, sometimes very deteriorated. In this case, despite the fact that the economies of the band members They are very healthyfrom the videos we sense a certain suspicion and discomfort between the musicians and vocalist. Because that’s another: whether they succeed lyrically and commercially or not, what they won’t be able to escape is the evil tongues. As Leire fans know very well. In Xataka | The internal drama that Andy and Lucas lived through for years: story of a breakup that we are seeing live

Murcia has been paying the first “shadow toll” in Spain for 27 years. This year will end it

by

It was 1997 when Murcia approved the Law 4/1997, of July 24, on Construction and Operation of Infrastructures of the Region of Murcia. It might seem like a regulation more related to the infrastructures of the autonomous community, but far from it. Two years later, taking advantage of this text, the Murcia Government gave approval to the construction of the Aunor Highway (the RM-15 highway), granting the concession to a company owned by Sacyr and OHL. In October 2001, the toll road was already in operation. But on this toll highway there are no barriers or personnel to collect the corresponding amount. But yes, the people of Murcia pay for it. It is what is known as a “shadow toll” road. And in 2026 it will end. Goodbye to the first “shadow toll” in Spain Just like explains Sacyr on its websitethis Murcian highway is considered the first shadow toll highway in Spain. A formula unprecedented until then in our country. Operation is simple. The concessionaire company builds and maintains the road for the stipulated period of time. During the years that it is active, the control means certify the number of vehicles that pass on the road but the driver does not stop to pay at any time. At the end of the period stipulated in the contract (in this case, each year), the Government to which the highway belongs pay a variable amountdepending on the number of cars that have circulated through it. That is to say, the cost of traveling on the road does not only affect the driver’s pocket, it is all citizens with their taxes who pay the concessionaire company the amount corresponding to the number of vehicles that circulate on it. In this case, the concession for the RM-15 was 25 years. Therefore, next September the concession period will end and the Government of Murcia will have the opportunity to extend or terminate it and, in that case, take charge of the maintenance and operation of the road itself or contracting the services to a third party. This last option will be the one that comes out ahead, they explain in the local media as The truth. The Government of the Region of Murcia has put out to tender a contract for the maintenance of this road, along with other conservation actions and operations on other roads in the Mula Sector. The amount is 20 million euros and 20 companies have participated in the competition. With the end of this shadow toll, an annual payment of between 10 and 13 million euros per year ends, according to the media. In total, it is estimated that once the contract is finalized, between 305 and 312 million euros will have been paid to the concessionaire company. In its day, the highway was seen as a relief for the residents of the Northwest and Río Mula regions. He explained The truth that the road allowed greater access to the towns in these areas but, above all, it was a much safer alternative than the previous national highway, which crossed municipalities and made it “the most dangerous road in the Region of Murcia.” Photo | Google Maps In Xataka | If the question is how to get rid of tolls, the European Union has a clear answer: being an electric truck

Spotify and Apple Music have a problem with AI-generated music. And the real musicians are paying for it

by

Music generated by AI has flooded the large platforms of streaming without anyone having asked for it. Deezer says it detects 75,000 AI tracks uploaded every day, and the number is growing. Spotify has uploaded 75 million songs of that type in the last twelve months. And Apple Music recognizes that more than a third of everything that comes to it is “100% AI”. Why is it important. It is not only a quality problem for the catalog or the reputation of the platform, but also an economic problem. Spotify, Apple Music and most platforms operate with a proportional distribution model (pro-rata): each artist receives a percentage of the total pool royalties equivalent to your reproduction quota. The more AI songs that accumulate listeners (even if they are fraudulent, generated by bots) the more it dilutes what a real musician earns. Between the lines. Although more and more music of this type is uploaded, almost no one listens to it, at least on purpose (sometimes AI songs sneak into algorithmic discovery lists). The problem is not the demand, which does not exist, but the brutal and increasing amount that distorts the algorithms and erodes the income of real artists even though their songs are still the ones that people do want to hear. Someone is uploading music that no one asks for to collect money that they do not deserve because the listeners arrive via bots. And that is money that the real artist stops earning. The background. The most extreme case, at least documented so far, has been that of Michael Smith, an American businessman who between 2017 and 2024 generated more than 10 million dollars in royalties wearing Suno and other tools to create hundreds of thousands of songs and armies of bots to play them automatically. That was the first case of fraud streaming with AI criminally prosecuted in the United States. According to the accusation, it accumulated 660,000 views a day. One billion views and zero fans. Yes, but. The platforms are already facing this wave. Deezer has been the most aggressive: it has implemented AI automatic detection, excludes those songs from algorithmic recommendations and has demonetized 85% of its views. Bandcamp has outright banned AI-generated music. Apple Music has begun to roll out its ‘Transparency Tags‘ (optional for now), and Spotify has released a verification stamp ‘Verified by Spotify‘ to ensure there is a human behind every artist profile. The problem is that both Spotify and Apple have opted for voluntary systems: it is the labels and distributors who must declare whether they have used AI. Nobody who lives off fraud is going to do it. There is an important distinction: It is one thing for a musician to use AI as a tool within their creative process (to refine a lyric, generate a base, experiment with sounds…) and quite another for an entire song to come out of Suno or equivalent with a pair of prompts and without real human intervention. The platforms, at the moment, do not distinguish between one thing and another. And Spotify has also left a door open by noting that “the concept of artistic authenticity is complex and rapidly evolving,” which in practice means that AI artists could end up being verified one day. Featured image | Xataka In Xataka | Science has measured how music impacts us during exercise: choosing the right Spotify list is essential

Fed up with paying almost 8 euros for a Guinness, someone thought of setting up an index to find cheap beer

by

How delicious is that little beer that you drink right after leaving work or after a paddle tennis game and how angry it is when you find out that they have raised the price. Matt Cortland He paid €7.80 for a pint of Guinness in Dublin in March 2026 and didn’t like it one bit (the price, not the beer). So instead of criticizing the waiter or posting a review on Google complaining like some people do, he adopted another strategy that was slightly more laborious but much more effective (judging by its results): a very complete price index where he would know where to drink the best and at what price. Because revenge, like beer, is served cold. The project. Is called Guinndex and is independent of the very famous Irish beer brand. You go to the website, enter a pub, a city, a county or a postcode in the box and it returns pubs and the cost of a pint, as well as useful information such as its location or its score. Or you zoom in on the map to see with a traffic light map which taverns look cheaper than others. A good way to save if you travel to Ireland and fancy a pint of Guinness. In fact, it has very diverse rankings ranging from how long it takes to earn a pint (depending on salary) to pubs named after animals or the best pub names (praise be the “Hairy Lemon”). Today it has almost 6,500 registered pubs in the 32 counties of the country and almost 1,300 prices verified and rising thanks to anonymous contributions from users. The price index for Dublin. Guinndex Why is it important. Because the Irish Central Statistics Office stopped tracking the price of a pint since 2011, leaving a data gap of more than a decade in a country where Guinness is much more than a beer. And although Guinness is almost a religion in Ireland, it is the same everywhere: no one knows for sure if they are overcharging you compared to the standard price or how much extra. The Guinndex fills that gap with real, verified data, not estimates. Furthermore, it does so publicly and for free, so that it allows obtaining an objective reference so that consumers have information and can put pressure on prices. It’s the market, friend. On the other hand, and leaving aside the anecdote of finding where to drink cheaper, what it shows is relevant: that the cost of carrying out a complex idea has plummeted and streamlined so much that a single dev is capable of setting up a project of this magnitude in just 48 hours when before it took weeks of work, a certain budget and a team. Context. Matt Cortland likes AI, data and Guinness, as he himself admits on the project website. He is an American engineer based in London with strong ties to Ireland: his partner is irishlived and trained there with the George Mitchell scholarship and course the Creative Digital Media master’s degree from TU Dublin. He is not just a tourist they are trying to scam. The project came at a critical time: Diageo, the company that owns Guinness, had applied several price rises in a row and some pubs had taken the opportunity to inflate margins. If you’re not careful, you can pay up to €11 for a pint, although the average price in Dublin is €6.94 and €6.06 nationwide. How has he done it. With an AI agent named Rachel who looked human, understood Irish humor, and had a Northern Irish accent (after several tests, she concluded that this worked best), as its author tells. The task was simple and quick: call, ask the price of a pint of Guinness, say thank you and hang up. Few people discovered that it was a chatbot and there were all kinds of responses, even waiters who offered to buy him a round. During the St. Patrick’s weekend he called 3,000 pubs, answered more than 2,000 calls and more than a thousand pubs provided a price: he already had the Guinndex base. The technical stack was jack, knight and king: the Google Maps API, ElevenLabs for the voice and agent logic, Twilio for making the phone calls, and Claude for extracting Guinness prices from the transcripts. Cortland explains What cost him the most was time, since he only invested about 200 euros. The consequences. The most immediate impact is behavioral: Cortland account that the owner of a pub lowered the price of his Guinness by 0.40 euros and then updated the information in the Guinndex himself. When there is price transparency and it is available to everyone, it is capable of changing behaviors. However, the biggest consequence is the technological moment in which we live: three APIs, 200 euros and a weekend are enough to build a project from scratch, with real utility and that is already changing prices. The bottleneck is no longer money or infrastructure: it is knowing what problem is worth solving. In Xataka | Spain can tell itself as many times as it wants that it hates Cruzcampo. The figures say a very different thing In Xataka | We humans like beer. The big question is whether we like it enough to have invented agriculture Cover | Guinndex and Christopher Zapf

The world will run out of memory for AI chips until 2027. And cell phones and cars are already paying the price

by

The big bottleneck in the artificial intelligence industry has nothing to do with AI models, GPUs, or data centers. It has to do with memory, and for months we are immersed in a crisis of which now the manufacturers give us more information. Three companies—Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron—control 90% of global production, but current estimates indicate that between the three They can only cover about 60% of expected demand through 2027. That’s terrible news not only for AI, but also for everything non-AI. The era of memory scarcity. These three manufacturers have prioritized HBM production for AI accelerators because these memories leave better margins. The direct consequence is the shortage of DRAM memories, which are used in PCs and mobile phones, and since October 2025 we have seen how this market has skyrocketed in price. Betting everything on one segment has left the other dangerously neglected. Samsung will have new factories. According to indicate In Nikkei, Samsung plans to launch its fourth memory manufacturing plant in Pyeongtaek, South Korea, in 2026, although mass production will not begin until 2027 or later. Furthermore, not only memories will be manufactured in that plant. There is a fifth plant under construction on that same technology campus, but it will be dedicated to HBM chips and will not begin operating until at least 2028. The South Korean giant has another ace up its sleeve: the United States. HBM to power. SK Hynix is ​​the only one of the three that has a concrete supply improvement for 2026, because it has already started manufacturing HBM chips at its Cheongju plant in February. It is also accelerating construction of a plant in Yongin, near Seoul, with the goal of completing it by February 2027. Micron also asks for patience. Meanwhile, Micron, the American company, has the goal of starting production of HBM chips in Idaho and Singapore in 2027, and will build a factory in Hiroshima that will theoretically come into operation in 2028. It has also just purchased a plant in Taiwan from Powechip, but the chips that come out of it will not be available before the second half of 2027. This is not enough. The consulting firm Counterpoint Reserach estimates that in order to resolve the current DRAM crisis, an industry-wide production increase of 12% annually until 2027 would be required. However, current plans add up to a growth of 7.5%, which makes it clear that these expansions by these three manufacturers are not enough. For Counterpoint analysts, the consequence is clear: the balance between supply and demand will not be normalized until 2028. SK Hynix is ​​already talking about supply limitations for AI chips could last until 2030, and the truth is that all the forecasts only confirm that this problem will still last for years. We consumers pay the price. Memory is an absolutely transversal product that is everywhere. 80-90% of current memory chips go to computers, mobile phones and servers, and the rest to cars and industrial equipment. The most direct impact is already in the mobile market entry-level: memory already represented 20% of the manufacturing bill for one of these smartphones, but that figure is expected to reach 40% by mid-2026. That gives manufacturers few (or no) options, which will impact that cost on the price of these devices. And so with everything. IDC esteem that mobile sales will fall by 13% in 2026 due to this circumstance. The danger of cycles. The memory industry has a history of cycles in which the rise and fall of memory prices is traditional. In 2023 there was a collapse in prices after post-pandemic demand for PCs faded. Several manufacturers recorded historic losses, and learned the lesson of overproducing to meet demand. Now that we need more production, manufacturers are being much more cautious when it comes to increasing their production or investing in new factories. For them, by the way, the crisis is going great: Samsung has earned in three months of 2026 what it earned in all of 2025. China to the rescue. Although South Korea and the United States dominate global memory production, there are several Chinese manufacturers that are gradually gaining relevance. YMTC and CXMT They have been growing significantly in production for some time and that is making now have a golden opportunity to gain market share over competitors that they seemed unattainable. Image | Liam Briese In Xataka | The situation with RAM prices is so desperate that there are already those who build their own memory at home

They have kidnapped agents from Anthropic, Google and Microsoft for the sake of science. The three companies ended up paying

by

In some development teams it is already becoming common to rely on artificial intelligence agents to review incidents, analyze code changes and move through tasks that were previously left in human hands. The problem appears when these systems not only read information that may come from outside, but also operate in spaces where they coexist. sensitive keys, tokens and permissions. That is what recent research puts on the table: we are not simply facing a useful tool that can make mistakes, but rather an architecture that can also become dangerous if it is deployed without very clear limits. The alarm has been turned on Aonan Guan and Johns Hopkins researchers Zhengyu Liu and Gavin Zhong after demonstrating attacks against three agents deployed on the aforementioned platform: Claude Code Security Review, from Anthropic, Gemini CLI Action, from Google, and GitHub Copilot Agent, a GitHub tool under Microsoft. According to your documentation, The failures were communicated in a coordinated manner and ended in financial rewards paid by the companies, but what is relevant is that they point to a broader problem. This is how they managed to twist the agents from within The name that Guan gives to the discovery helps a lot to understand what this is all about: “Comment and Control.” The idea is simple to explain, although the substance is not so simple. Instead of setting up an external infrastructure to direct the attack, GitHub itself acts as an entry and exit channel: the attacker leave the instruction in a titlean incident or a comment, the agent processes it as if it were part of normal work and the result ends up reappearing within that same environment. Everything stays at home, and that is precisely the key to the problem. And that “everything stays at home” is not a minor detail, but the basis of what the research describes. The three agents share a very similar logic: they read normal content from GitHub, incorporate it as a work context, and from there, execute actions within automated flows. The clash appears because that same space not only contains text sent by third parties, but also tools, permissions and secrets that the agent needs to operate. The first case Guan details concerns Claude Code Security Review, an Anthropic GitHub action designed to review code changes and look for possible security flaws. Up to this point, everything is within what was expected. The problem, as the researcher explains, is that it was enough to introduce malicious instructions in the title of a pull requestwhich is the request that someone sends to propose changes to a project, so that the agent will execute commands and return the result as if it were part of your review. The team then managed to go a step further and demonstrate that it could also extract credentials from the environment. The interesting thing is that the same scheme also appeared in the other two services, although with nuances. At Google, Gemini CLI Action could be pushed to reveal the GEMINI_API_KEY from instructions snuck into an issue and its comments; In GitHub Copilot Agent, the variant was even more worrying, because the attack was hidden in an HTML comment that a person did not see on the screen, but the agent did process when another person assigned it to the case. In both scenarios, the background was the same again: apparently normal content that ended up twisting the behavior of the system until exposing credentials or sensitive information within GitHub itself. Guan assures that the pattern made it possible to leak API keys, GitHub tokens and other secrets exposed in the environment where the agent ran, that is, just the credentials that can later open the door to much more delicate actions. Who does this affect? Especially to repositories that run agents in GitHub Actions on content sent by untrustworthy collaborators and, in addition, give them access to secrets or powerful tools. The researcher himself clarifies that the risk depends a lot on the configuration: by default GitHub does not expose secrets to pull requests from forksbut there are deployments that open that door. And here another layer of the matter appears, less technical but just as important. As published by The RegisterAnthropic, Google, and GitHub ended up paying bounties for the findings, but none of the three had published public notices or assigned CVE at the time of that information. Guan was quite clear about this: he said he knew “for certain” that some users were still stuck on vulnerable versions and warned that, without visible communication, many may never know that they were exposed or even being attacked. So although there were mitigations and changes in documentation or in the internal treatment of reports, there was no equivalent public notice for all those potentially affected. Anthropic settled the case on November 25, 2025 and paid $100 Google rewarded the discovery on January 20, 2026 with $1,337 GitHub closed the case on March 9, 2026 with a payment of $500 What makes this case especially delicate is that GitHub does not seem like the end of the road, but rather the first visible showcase. Guan argues that the same pattern can probably be reproduced in other agents who work with tools and secrets within automatic flows, and there he mentions from Slack-connected bots to Jira agentsmail or deployment automation. The logic is the same again: if the system has to read external content to do its job and also has enough access to act, the field is fertile for someone to try to twist it from within. The conclusion that Guan reaches is not about selling a magic solution, but about returning to a fairly classic idea in security: giving each system only what is essential to do its job. If an agent reviews code, they shouldn’t have access to tools or secrets they don’t need; If you’re just summarizing issues, it wouldn’t make sense for you to write to GitHub or touch sensitive credentials. That … Read more

You can live without paying Google for more storage. The problem is not space, but Gmail

by

I know firsthand that the offers that Google launches for your One plan cheaper are attractive. Paying a couple of euros a month so that the company does not bother you with warnings that you have little storage left is perfectly valid and you immediately get 100 GB so you can use it however you want. However, although it may not seem like a big deal, it ends up being a small “phantom expense” that we can easily avoid if we change our spending habits a little. cloud storage. In the vast majority of cases, the main culprit that causes us to have consumed almost all of the 15 GB that Google makes available to us for free is email. And the good thing is that they exist ways to almost immediately empty our inbox and have that free storage back. Below these lines we indicate some recommendations that will help you. 10 GOOGLE APPS THAT COULD HAVE SUCCESSFUL The problem is in your inbox If you check what takes up the most space in your Google account, it is quite likely that you will be surprised: Gmail is usually the biggest storage hog. Other times, it is also Google Photos that gives the most trouble with this, but in the case of Gmail, emails with attachments accumulate for years, and most of them are perfectly expendable: automatic notifications, old invoices, newsletters that you never read, etc. If your work depends to a certain extent on being very aware of the email, as happens to me, you find thousands of emails of press releases, presentations and, in short, material that arrives, takes up space and you don’t open it again. The good thing is that Google gives you very specific tools to locate those emails that we do not need and delete them in bulk. Between that and some tips to filter your inbox, you will be able to empty a very important part of the free storage that Google gives you in a simple way. The starting point: Google’s storage manager Before you get to work with Gmail, there’s one place worth going first: Google’s storage manager, accessible directly from this website. You can also get to it by clicking on the storage tab in Drive and clicking on “Free up space”, an option included in the Drive, Photos or Gmail app. This page shows how much space you have occupied and offers two key sections: one with personalized suggestions to free up space (such as deleting spam emails, large files or heavy attachments, indicating how much can be gained in each case) and another with shortcuts to the specific management of Drive, Gmail and Google Photos. It’s a good way to get a general idea of ​​the picture before acting: at a glance you can see which service is consuming the most and where to start cleaning. How to find and delete what matters most in Gmail If you’ve noticed that Gmail is taking up quite a bit of your cloud storage, the next step is to take action. After having deleted the emails that the Google One system itself suggested in the previous step, you can continue on your own using advanced filters that Gmail offers you, going for the heaviest emails first. To do this you can start by writing in the Gmail search engine ‘larger:15MB‘ (without the quotes) and so you will see all the emails that exceed that size. You can adjust the number depending on what you want to find: larger:5MB, larger:10MBor whatever value you prefer. It is a quick way to identify the messages that take up the most space with minimal effort. It is one thing to identify them, and quite another to know if they are really important to you or not. Going one by one is a bit of a hassle, but for example it helps me a lot to know if the email is from a long time ago or not. That’s why I also use date filters. This way, if what you want is to go also old, the command before:YYYY/MM/DD shows messages sent or received before a certain date. You can even combine both commands to locate old and heavy emails at the same time. Another very practical option is to search directly by attachments. Wearing has:attachment larger:10M All emails with attachments larger than 10 MB appear in the search bar. If you want to tune more, filename:.pdf larger:5M specifically locates emails with PDF attachments that weigh more than that amount, and older_than:2y has:attachment Filter out those that have attachments and have been in your tray for more than two years. Attached files (photos, PDFs, videos, documents) are usually responsible for the storage filling up much faster than expected. Search your keywords Beyond the commands that Gmail offers you, you can also use searches that serve you personally. In my case, for example, when I have a long list of press releases that I have already read, I simply type ‘ndp’ or ‘press release’ in the search engine and I will easily have a whole long list of press releases waiting to be deleted. Then you just need to pull the trigger. Once you have identified all the emails you want to delete, click on the selection square in the upper left corner to mark them all, click on ‘Select all conversations that match this search‘ so you can mark them all and not just the first 50, and then pull the trigger. If you know exactly what you DON’T want to delete, you can move it to its own label or mark it as featured before mass deleting the rest. That way you don’t risk losing anything important. Don’t forget to empty the trash When you have identified and deleted all the emails, you will have to pay a visit to the trash. And the emails that you have deleted do not disappear immediately: they are sent to the trash, where stay for 30 … Read more

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

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

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

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