problem

AI has allowed developers to program faster than ever. That’s turning out to be a problem.

by

Whoever has tried it knows it. Programming with AI can be wonderful. Especially if you have (almost) no idea about programming. This is where generative AI models have seen their first and probably only revolution. The developers were the first to be able to embrace this new technology. The appearance of GitHub Copilot in 2021 It showed us that it was no longer necessary to chop so much code, because the machine was already doing it for you, and since then the advance of generative AI in the field of programming has been overwhelming. The question is: has it been positive? The answer is not at all clear. It is evident that AI has allowed: That millions of people who were not programmers could turn their ideas for applications and games into a reality. That millions of professionals can save time by not having to write repetitive code (boilerplate) to focus on other more important and productive parts of your work The industry, of course, has been especially insistent with this vision of the transformation of this segment. Satya Nadella (CEO of Microsoft) and Sundar Pichai (CEO of Alphabet/Google) already boasted months ago that about 25% of the code generated by their companies is generated by AI. Meanwhile, Jensen Huang went further and made it clear that At this point no one should learn to program anymore because the AI ​​would do it for us. These are very forceful statements, but behind them lies another reality: that All that glitters is not gold in the world of AI for programmers. At MIT Technology Review they have spoken with more than 30 developers and experts in this field and have reached interesting conclusions. AI is a better programmer than ever. At least, according to the benchmarks In August 2024 OpenAI made a unique launch: presented SWE-bench Verifieda benchmark intended to measure the ability of generative AI models to program. At that time, the best of the models was only capable of solving 33% of the tests proposed by that benchmark. A year later the best models already exceed 70%. Current ranking of the best models according to the SWE-bench Verified benchmark. Several already pass 70% of the tests. Source: SWE-bench. The evolution in this area has been dizzying and we have witnessed the birth of that new modality programming called “vibe coding” and all the big ones have developed powerful programming tools to take advantage of the pull. We have OpenAI Codex, Gemini CLI, or Claude Code, for example, but they have been added startups like Cursor either Windsurfing who have also known how to take advantage of this fever for programming with AI. All of these tools promise basically the same thing: that you will program more and better. Productivity theoretically skyrockets, and while more code is certainly being written than ever thanks to AI, programmers They have gone from writing their own code to reviewing what machines generate. Recent studies reveal that veteran developers who believed they had been more productive actually they weren’t. Their estimate was that they had been 20% faster by being able to move forward without blockages, but in reality they had taken 19% longer than they would have taken without AI, according to the tests carried out. There is another problem too: code quality is not necessarily goodand as we say, developers must review that code before being able to use it in production. In the latest survey from Stack Overflow, one of the largest developer communities in the world, there was a notable fact: The positive perception of AI tools had decreased: it was 70% in 2024, and 60% in 2025. There are limitations, but even so everything has already changed Those interviewed by MIT Technology Review generally agreed with its conclusions. Generative AI programming tools are great for producing repetitive code, writing tests, fixing bugs, or explaining code to new developers. However, they still have important limitations, and the most notable is his short memory. These models are only capable of handling a fraction of the workload in professional environments: if your code is large, the AI ​​model may not be able to “consume” it and understand it all at once. For small projects, great. For large developments, probably not so much. The problem of hallucinations also affects the code, and in repositories with a multitude of components, AI models can end up getting lost and not understanding the structure and its interconnections. The problems are there, and they can end up accumulating and causing exactly the opposite of what they wanted to avoid. Several experts, however, explained in that text how it is actually difficult to go back. Kyle Daigle, COO of GitHub, explained that “the days of coding every line of code by hand are likely behind us.” Erin Yepis, an analyst at Stack Overflow, indicated that although this unbridled optimism towards AI has fallen somewhat, that is actually a sign of something else: that programmers embrace this technology, but they do so assuming its risks. And then there is another reality. One that is repeated day after day and that seems undeniable. The AI ​​we have today is the worst of all those we will have in the future. It may not be tomorrow or next week, but it is clear that the AI ​​you program will end up getting better and better. And there may come a point when those limitations disappear. Whether they do it or not, what is clear is that AI has changed programming forever. Image | Mohammad Rahmani In Xataka | OpenAI has turned ChatGPT into mainstream AI. In the business world the game is being won by its great rival

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

by

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

The runaway price of RAM threatens more expensive phones than ever. And that’s not even the biggest problem

by

Neither the car nor the house, the new indicator that someone is good pasta is the RAM memory that you have available. The RAM crisis is extremea price increase planned for 2026 that will hit the entire industry. Such is the seriousness of the matterthere are already those who predict that the manufacturers of telephones are considering returning to figures of the past: the 4 GB of unified RAM for smartphones of the next year. Samsung has doubled the price of DDR5 RAM after running out of stock, a movement that completely threatens the entire smartphone industry. And no, RAM is not just an element to ensure the fluidity of the mobile phone and efficient multitasking: RAM is a pillar on which the advancement of technology itself depends. How to know the components of your PC (RAM, Graphics, CPU…) and the state they are in The rise in prices. In just six months, RAM prices have skyrocketed between 100% and 400%. Giants like Samsung and SK Hynix are allocating around 40% of its resources to supply RAM to Stargatethe OpenAI infrastructure. Consequence: the RAM market has entered a valley of scarcity. The 4 GB of RAM. There are clear pillars for not recommending a phone even to my worst enemy: That it does not have good update support. That has a processor that can’t handle basic apps. That has less than 6 GB of RAM There are already those who predict that 4 GB of RAM will return in 2026a significant leap back even for entry-level devices, where 6GB of RAM was starting to become the standard. What they didn’t tell you about RAM. Advances in RAM go far beyond basic performance in multitasking and everyday apps. RAM memory is one of the vital organs of any smartphone, and the advances in it are what have allowed us, today, to have smartphones that are much more capable than those of years ago. Local AI processing– Without sufficient RAM, it is not possible to run local AI models. He iPhone 15 is the best example. Photographic quality: functions such as processing HDRcomputational zoom, and even the processing of the photograph itself (subsequently processed RAW data) depend largely on the mobile phone’s ability to move all that data in RAM. Exactly the same applies to video recording. Multi-window and multitasking: Multitasking is not just about not having a heavy game crash while you browse in Chrome. It’s that Google Maps can run in the background without slowing down your phone, that YouTube can run in mode PiP (window), that your keyboard is capable of managing translations and corrections in real time in any heavy app, etc. Gaming experience: We usually focus on CPU and GPU when thinking about a mobile phone capable of running a heavy game, but RAM is essential to avoid microcuts, speed up loading times despite having open apps, and ensure that the game will not close in the middle of a game. The consequences. We have been complaining for the last few years that there is hardly any real progress in smartphones and that, perhaps, we are close to their peak. But there are nuances in this interpretation. We have never had humble mobile phones with AI implementation, the ability to move triple A games on budget devicesand such a positive experience in practically any product range. The RAM crisis is a major brake on the advancement of upcoming proposals, and may make it more than likely that some 2026 phones will end up performing worse than their predecessors. There is no solution in sight. DDR5 RAM, although it has been on the market since SK Hynix released it in 2020is not common in entry-level proposals. DDR4 RAM is still the standard here and, unfortunately, so is its price. has been increasing by close to 200% in recent months. More expensive RAM, more expensive mobile phones or mobile phones with less RAM. Image | Xataka In Xataka | How to know how much RAM you have and what type it is, in Windows, macOS and GNU/Linux

Europe is the world leader in heat pump manufacturing. The only problem is that Europeans don’t use them

by

Not to get grandiose, but Europe has never had so many renewables underwayhad never made so much clean technology and never had talked so much about energy independence. And yet, winter has arrived again and the ritual is always the same: turning on the heating still means burning imported gas. Although if we reach this point it is not for lack of alternatives, because they are there. The problem is much more mundane: in much of the continent, heating with electricity it’s still more expensive than doing it with gas. The energy shock that changed everything. A recent EMBER report has detailed how Europe abruptly lost access to cheap Russian gas and had to replace it with much more expensive liquefied natural gas in a highly volatile global market. The result was an unprecedented price shock: an accumulated extra cost of 930 billion euros during the energy crisis. More on fossils. Far from being a problem caused by the green transition, the document indicates that the impact was concentrated precisely in the sectors most dependent on imported fossil fuels. Energy-intensive industries reduced production and, in many cases, never returned to pre-Ukraine war levels. This reading coincides with that presented by researcher Jan Rosenowwho rejects the idea that dismantling climate policies would make energy cheaper. The problem, he maintains, was not going too fast, but rather having delayed electrification for decades and having kept gas as the pillar of the system. Here the central contradiction emerges. According to EMBERheat pumps are a mature, efficient and strategic technology: they produce between two and three times more heat than a gas boiler for each unit of energy consumed. Even if that electricity came entirely from a gas plant, the net fuel savings would still exist. However, in practice, the technological advantage is diluted in the bill. In most EU countries, electricity costs 2 to 4 times more than gas for the end consumer. The average electricity-gas ratio in the EU is 2.85, and in some member states it exceeds 4. The problem: the pricing structure. As pointed out in the consultancynon-energy costs —taxes, tolls and public policy surcharges— can represent up to three quarters of the final price of electricity, while gas maintains a much lower tax burden. The result is an obvious distortion: the most efficient technology appears expensive and the most polluting technology appears affordable. You save but not. For an average home, this anomaly has a direct effect, since changing systems reduces energy consumption, but it does not always reduce the bill. And when that happens, adoption slows down. Furthermore, the data confirm that this is not a cultural or climatic issue, but rather an economic one. In countries like the Netherlands, where electricity is only slightly more expensive than gas, heat pump sales are soaring. On the other hand, in Germany, Poland or Hungary —where electricity can cost more than three times as much as gas—, adoption is much lower. The lever that remains to be activated. Solutions exist and many are immediately applicable: transferring the costs of electricity policies to public budgets, reducing electricity VAT, taxing fossil gas more coherently or implementing specific rates for heat pumps. From there, technological deployment is no longer a promise, but a reality. In fact, Europe leads the global heat pump industrywith manufacturers such as Bosch, Vaillant, NIBE or Danfoss, and with industrial projects that already operate on a large scale. These are not prototypes or pilots, but rather functioning infrastructure. Real limits and tensions. None of this eliminates obstacles. Europe still need gas to stabilize its electrical grid. The infrastructures are stressed, the flexibility of the system is insufficient and any cold winter can send prices skyrocketing again. Added to this are the physical frictions of the transition. The massive expansion of offshore wind in the North Sea is generating unprecedented conflicts between countries due to the so-called “wake effect”, which reduces the production of neighboring parks. Electrification is not only a matter of political will, but also of technical coordination and supranational planning. The anomaly that Europe has not yet corrected. Europe already has the technology, the industry and the climate goals. What it has not yet corrected is a basic anomaly: fiscally penalizing electricity while de facto subsidizing fossil gas. As long as that distortion persists, heat pumps will continue to advance more slowly than data, engineering, and economic common sense would allow. As the EMBER report concludeselectrifying heating is not a green whim, but a strategy for energy security, industrial competitiveness and price stability. The transition is not about inventing new machines, but about deciding which energy is made cheaper and which is left behind. And today, in Europe, that decision continues to be reflected—very clearly—in the invoice. Image | freepik Xataka | While the US and China dominate different sectors, Europe leads an unexpected leadership: heat pumps

All tech companies are putting AI in all their products. The problem is that nobody wants them

by

It’s been a year and a half and it seems like 10 have passed. In May 2024, Microsoft announced the launching Windows Recallan artificial intelligence option that allowed us to remember and recover things we had done on our PC. It seemed like an interesting idea, but soon he was criticized his approach to privacy and security and the company had to delay it and then relaunch it without making too much noise. That was one of those AI features that promised to transform our PC experience, but three years after the launch of ChatGPT, one thing is certain: AI has not meant no revolution. Not at least on the PC, we insist. Microsoft, of course, has not stopped adding more and more AI functions to Windows 11. We have co-pilots and theoretically revolutionary functions to bore, and that obsession with putting AI even in the soup has been demonstrated with the legendary Notepadwhich has gone from being a minimalist app to one that is losing focus. Microsoft’s reasons are legitimate: they have invested a real fortune in AI and they will want to take advantage of it. Surely the intention was good (at least, in part) when it came to offering new ways of working and enjoying our PC. The problem is that good intentions have caused just the opposite of what Microsoft intended. Instead of us wanting to use Windows 11 more and more, is making us want to use it less and less. We have seen it with renewed interest for some Linux distributionsbut also with the appearance of an app that is exclusively dedicated to eradicating Windows 11 any trace of AI functions. AI fatigue The same thing is happening with AI browsers. Comet, Day and Atlas They are two striking proposals for this integration of AI functions, but neither of them seems to have caught on, and Microsoft Edge – which of course has integrated Copilot – has not proposed any change in trend either: the browsers we want to use, at least for the moment, continue to be the traditional ones, without AI. And there is the key. In what We users have not asked for so much AI. That is precisely the great criticism of these industry efforts to boast that their products have AI. Those two magic letters no longer get expectations. What they are starting to get is rejection. Firefox is the latest example. Mozilla has just appointed a new CEO, and in its first public statement it pointed out its intention to transform Firefox into a product in which AI was the central axis. The users of this browser – and I count myself among them – are not at all clear, and the unified response message has been clear: “Firefox does not need AI, but rather listen to its users“. What has happened and is happening with Windows 11 and Firefox shows that we are entering a new stage in which AI no longer excites, but rather fatigues. It’s everywhere: The list is of course much longer, and in many cases there is another added problem: that AI is the excuse to raise prices. Microsoft is here again a notable example with Microsoft 365but we have also seen it in Adobe, which He raised the price to his customers right off the bat because now they could enjoy an AI that they had not asked for. It’s happening everywhere because the promised AI revolution still hasn’t happened. There are, of course, areas in which it has proven to be transformative—programming is the clear case—but in many others that acronym has lost its meaning. The industry’s commitment to making this work is logical: companies have invested hundreds of billions of dollars invested with the idea that this was going to explode… and so far it hasn’t. But they continue to fill everything with AI. And as often happens, that’s the bad thing. It tires you a lot…And if we haven’t asked for it, even more so. In Xataka | Adobe has presented itself as the champion of copyright in the AI ​​era. Now we know that maybe not so much

Ukraine’s biggest problem is not Russia. There are three European countries trapped in a perverse mechanism: type C accounts

by

Europe faces a decision that goes far beyond an accounting discussion and that defines its strategic credibility: what to do with the more than 210,000 million of euros of Russian assets frozen since the beginning of the invasion of Ukraine. The problem is twofold, because it is not just about figures, but about what comes after activating the operation. The European crossroads. Yes, because the question is not only whether that money should be used to support kyiv at a critical moment, but whether the European Union is capable to take the risks political, legal and economic implications of doing so. As Washington presses for a quick exit to the conflict and reduces its financial support, Brussels finds itself caught between the urgency of avoiding a Ukrainian defeat and the fear of unleashing a russian retaliation that directly hits several of its Member States. Putin clearly. Statements this week by Vladimir Putinloaded with contempt for European elites and confidence in a protracted war, are not simple rhetoric. Moscow makes it clear that it is not contemplating real concessions and that it considers the use of its frozen assets as theft that demands a response. That response would not be symbolic, but surgical: selective seizures, accelerated nationalizations, endless litigation and the use of the Russian financial system as a weapon. The message, a priori, is unequivocal: if Europe crosses the line, Russia will not only punish Ukraine on the battlefield, but also European countries that still have exposed economic interests within their territory. The real blockage. I remembered this morning the financial times he crux of the whole situation. Although the debate is presented as a struggle between hawks and cautions, the real blockage comes from a handful of countries specific, with Belgium, Italy and Austria at the head. It is not a question of ideology, but of direct vulnerability. Belgium hosts Euroclear, the warehouse that guards most of the frozen Russian assets, and fears becoming the first target of retaliation judicial and economic. Italy and Austria, for their part, maintain banks and companies with billions trapped in Russia, benefits included, which they cannot repatriate. For these countries, authorizing the use of Russian money is not an abstract foreign policy decision, but rather an immediate risk to their financial and corporate systems. Type C accounts: the ace of Moscow. At the center of this fear are the calls type C accountsthe mechanism created by Moscow to withhold dividends, interest and assets from Western companies. That money, formally owned by European and American companies, is under Russian control and can be frozen, redistributed or directly transferred to the state budget with a simple decree. For the Kremlin, these accounts are a retaliation tool fast and effective, far superior in agility to slow Western judicial processes. For Europe, they are an invisible chain that binds entire governments when making strategic decisions, because any false step can translate into lost billions and internal political crises. Germany pushes, Europe hesitates. Germany has become the main political engine of the plan to use Russian assets, convinced that without that money there is no realistic way to support Ukraine for another two years without skyrocketing the European debt or depending on impossible unanimity. Berlin insists that the risk must be shared among everyone and that failure to act would send a devastating sign: Europe is not capable of defending its own security. However, this logic collides with the reality of countries that feel that the risk is not distributed, but rather concentrated in their national balance sheetsits banks and its courts. A (bad) peace as a threat. This financial blockade occurs in an even more disturbing context: European fear to an imposed peace on terms favorable to Russia. For many capitals, an agreement that consolidates Moscow’s territorial gains would not only leave Ukraine defenseless, but would force Europe to prepare for a scenario direct confrontation in the medium term, with longer borders, a strengthened Russian army and a weakened European deterrent. In this framework, the frozen Russian money stops being a tactical lever and becomes a strategic investment: either it is used now to support Ukraine, or it is paid for later in the form of massive rearmament and risk of war. The final dilemma. In short, the European Union has frozen Russian assets to prevent them from returning to Moscow without reparations, but now it must decide whether it dares to give the next step. Without that money, Ukraine could run out of liquidity in a matter of months, losing all negotiating power and forcing a deal from weakness. With him, Europe is exposed to reprisals, litigation and immediate economic losses, concentrated in a few countries that are currently holding back the decision. The crossroads are clear: assume the political and financial cost now, or accept that the fear of type C accounts determine European security policy. Not only the future of Ukraine is at stake in that election, but also Europe’s ability to act as a coherent geopolitical actor when your own interests are at risk. Image | RawPixel In Xataka | A missile has been bombarding Ukraine’s defenses for weeks. What no one could imagine is that he is not Russian: he is from the West In Xataka | A day later the satellites leave no doubt: Russia fortified a bridge, and a Ukrainian drone made science fiction a reality

The Basque Country and Navarra exported 35,700 qualified professionals who would like to return. The problem is how and where

by

Companies argue that one of their main problems when it comes to filling job vacancies is find qualified workers. However, the data suggests that these qualified profiles are forced to leave the country for find better opportunities jobs outside Spain. In fact, a recent study by Artizarra Foundation and Deusto Business School puts precise figures on this mismatch between the situation of qualified talent and its reality. Thousands of professionals trained in Spanish universities and with consolidated careers outside the country they would be willing to return, but the system does not offer them a complete attractive setting to return to. The talent that left. According to the reportmore than 42,000 young people between 25 and 40 years old, trained in universities and higher educational centers in the Basque Country and Navarra, currently work outside their territory of origin. These are not profiles in transition: they are highly qualified professionals, with training in engineering, STEM disciplinesbusiness management or research. However, the key data from this report is the return intention of these professionals. More than 85% of the participants in the study affirm that they would like to return if they found working and living conditions comparable to those they have achieved abroad. If this scenario materializes, the study estimates that up to 35,700 qualified professionals could be recovered. A career developed abroad. Six out of every ten professionals consulted have already accumulated more than six years working in other countries, which implies that they already have consolidated professional trajectories there, competitive salaries and international work experience that is difficult to replicate in the short term. From an economic point of view, its impact is relevant. We are not talking about talent in training, but about already qualified personnel, with high technical knowledge and productive capacity that have been trained in public schools and universities in Spain, but that Spanish companies have not known how to retain. This lack of job opportunities is the key to their departure. Ability to train talent, not to retain it. The contrast appears when crossing the data from the Deusto Business School report with the Cotec Foundation Talent Mapwhich analyzes 55 indicators on talent creation, attraction and retention. In its latest edition in 2023, and maintaining the same territorial framework as the Deusto study, the Basque Country reaches 66.4 points, well above the national average (49.1 points) and only behind Madrid (67.7 points). The conclusions drawn from these data are clear. The Basque Country stands out for the quality of your higher educationtechnical qualification and productive environment. The educational system works well in training talent. The problem comes when that training period ends and that talent compares what you find in your country with what is offered outside. They do not return for the same reason they left. The reasons for the flight of talent are recurring: better salaries, greater professional projection, access to cutting-edge projects and, in the case of scientific profiles, more opportunities to develop a stable research career. As and how they point According to the authors of the Deusto Business School report, these factors do not disappear when the return of that talent is considered. On the contrary. Accumulated experience raises expectations and makes those reasons more visible. The study by Artizarra and Deusto identifies barriers that go beyond employment and connect with structural problems common to an entire generation. Return yes, but where. The price and conditions of housing is one of the main reasons that slows the return of this talent. Returning implies assuming high prices, both for rent as for home purchaseand face it with salaries that do not always compensate for the difference compared to other European markets. For those who have already built a life outside, the opportunity cost is high. The second major barrier to return is the quality of employment. Not so much the absence of work for these qualified profiles, but the difficulty for local companies to match salaries, professional autonomy and recognition of talent. The comparison with international markets is inevitable. A paradox that remains open. The study data supports the spirit of this talent to return because it has not separated itself from its territory and maintains its roots. Most want to return. However, as the authors of the study point out, the biggest problem is an environment that allows doing so without giving up professional and life expectations. From an economic point of view, recovering part of those 35,700 profiles would be an investment that is difficult to match for a labor market that affirms that the shortage of skilled labor It is the stone that prevents them from moving forward. As Joe Biden once said: “Pay Them More“. In Xataka | Spain has such good nurses that it exports them to other countries. The problem is that public health needs 100,000 Image | Unsplash (Philipp hubert)

The European Bizum wants to be working next Christmas, but first a problem must be resolved. One of power sharing

by

“Wow, but if it gives me the option to pay with Bizum, how cool.” That was my expression a few months ago when in an online purchase the online store offered me to pay directly like this. No debit or credit card, no Google Pay. With a Bizum. The instant payment system that is triumphing in Spain is so good that What we want is for it to work further. And that is precisely what the banking entities of the European Union want, who saw a “European Bizum” as a great idea. There’s just one problem. Who will control it. The European Bizum is approaching The European Central Bank he has been fighting for five years for that application that does the same as Bizum but throughout Europe. There was a major power struggle here with two large factions. On the one hand, the consortium Spain-Italy-Portugal. On the other, that of France-Germany-Belgium-Holland, who wanted to impose its own Bizum, called Wero. Fortunately, in recent months we have seen how the positions of both consortiums have become closer and the unification now seems almost definitive. This is what they indicate in five dayswhere they quote “market sources” who talk about the agreement being signed in early 2026. The European Bizum should start operating at the end of next year if everything goes as expected. This system may not be a new application, as requested by the French and German entities, but rather a system that interconnects existing ones. It is a somewhat more confusing solution but also more practical, because users will not have to change apps. For example, a Spanish user will be able to send a Bizum to a German at no cost, and the German will receive that money in his Wero app in a way that is transparent to him. The European banks participating in the negotiations have reached an agreement to establish a new company that will be the owner of this interconnection technology. There was talk of applying certain commissions, “but it was finally rejected in favor of a multilateral network.” Power distribution And there is the new challenge: Who is in charge in this new society? The distribution of power is now the great unknown, and there are several options. On the one hand, each national platform receives practically the same participation. On the other hand, the distribution should be made based on the volume of each country and then corrected. The Bizum model seems like it can also be applied to that pan-European solution. It is interesting to realize that as explained in the economic newspaper, the owners of Bizum are 22 Spanish banks, among which the participation varies: Caixabank: 25% Santander: 21% BBVA: 18% Sabadell: 12% Other minority banks such as Unicaja, Bankinter or Cajamar have lower participations, but Bizum’s statutes establish that no bank can have more than 25% participation. Do we need a digital euro? Europe has been looking for a solution for some time that would allow it to mitigate its dependence on the two great giants of electronic payments: Visa and Mastercard. The European Payments Initiativecreated in 2020 by 16 banking entities, had precisely the objective of creating a European interbank network that competed with these platforms and with others such as PayPal. And little by little it has been proven that Bizum was precisely a great candidate to achieve this. The application, with more than 30 million users in Spain, has not stopped growing in benefits and alliances like the one a year ago they signed with Revolut. There are still other obstacles in the creation of this European Bizum. For example, building a common deposit guarantee fund to deal with large US entities. It does not seem that this is going to be a major impediment to the implementation of the pan-European alternative, and that makes us wonder what happens now with the digital euro. The European Central Bank (ECB) has been designing the design of this digital asset for years. There have also been important movements in that sense, and if the European regulations are approved in 2026, there will be a pilot starting in 2027. The EU seems to want to be ready for a possible first broadcast in 2029. However, that European Bizum will theoretically solve part of what the digital euro wants to achieve, so does it make sense? It is very likelyespecially since the digital euro is a legal tender issued by the ECB. It is not just a way to transfer money, but a digital form of official money itself. Both alternatives can coexist, and this European Bizum may be the best way to promote the use of the digital euro. In Xataka | The Treasury confirms it: payments for dinner and gifts to your friends through Bizum do not go to the Tax Agency

You feel like going to Sri Lanka because you saw it on Instagram. The problem is that the person who recommended it to you was an AI

by

The image is familiar. A young woman smiles from a beach with turquoise waters. In the following publication, he appears walking along a cobblestone street in Marrakech. Below, he poses at a luxury hotel in the Maldives. The skin is perfect, the body responds to the prevailing canons and the text accompanies with inspirational phrases about traveling, discovering cultures and “living in the moment.” Nothing seems out of place. Until you discover the reality. That traveler has not flown, she has not walked those streets or tried the food she recommends. It doesn’t exist. She is an influencer generated by artificial intelligence and is part of a phenomenon that is growing quietly: the normalization of artificial profiles that influence the real decisions of millions of people. A silent, but massive boom. In the last two years, Instagram and other social networks have been filled with virtual influencers: characters created with generative AI who pretend to be real people and publish travel content, lifestyle or fashion, the best known case in Spain is Aitana Lopez. Some indicate it more or less clearly in their biography; others do so ambiguously or almost invisibly. However, what is interesting here is how the examples multiply in the tourism sector. Sena Z has been presented as “the first travel and hospitality influencer created with AI”, It’s a collaboration between the luxury group Cenizaro Hotels & Resorts and the technology firm Bracai. Sena publishes cultural recommendations, messages about sustainability and photographs from exotic destinations. Another notable case is Emma, ​​the official influencer and chatbot of the German National Tourism Office. Emma not only publish content on Instagrambut answers questions in more than 20 languages ​​from the official website of the organization. As explained from the entity to the Washington Postits creation is part of a strategy to “stay at the forefront of digital innovation.” Other profiles are added to these profiles, such as Radhika, Emily Pellegrinior corporate avatars like Samathe Qatar Airways virtual stewardess who appears both on the airline’s website and on social networks, publishing as if she were living real experiences. These are not isolated experiments. As detailed by The New York Timesairlines, tourist offices and brands are increasingly turning to these avatars because they are cheaper, faster and completely controllable. An AI influencer does not get sick, does not get tired, does not age and does not generate personal controversies. Inexperienced influencers. The question is inevitable: what happens when the experience is not real? Just look through these profiles to see it: they recommend destinations, restaurants and cultures that they have not experienced. Even so, they generate engagementaccumulate thousands of likes and comments, and influence travel decisions. From the brands’ point of view, the appeal is evident. According to data collected by the New York mediacreating an advanced avatar can cost between $5,000 and $15,000, compared to traditional campaigns that easily exceed six figures. In addition, content can be produced without travel, without filming equipment and without negotiating with human talent. However, for real creators, the impact is already being felt. Human influencers cited by the same medium explain that brands are reducing payments, eliminating extras and offering less advantageous collaborations. AI thus becomes a new direct competition within the creative economy, a sector valued at more than 200 billion dollars globally. Is someone regulating it? While Technology advances quickly, regulation tries to catch up. Going home, in Europe, the clearest answer comes through the Artificial Intelligence Regulations (AI Act). Article 50, which will come into force in August 2026establishes transparency obligations for providers and users of AI systems. Among them: Report when a person interacts with an AI system. Mark content generated or manipulated by AI (text, image, audio or video) in detectable format. Force deepfakes and AI-generated texts that report on matters of public interest to be declared, unless there is human editorial review. The European Commission has already started the preparation of a Code of Good Practices for the marking and labeling of content generated by AI, with the participation of experts, platforms and civil society. The goal is to facilitate compliance before the law is fully applicable. However, many virtual profiles do not clearly indicate either their artificial nature or their commercial links, leaving the user in a field of ambiguity. Unreal bodies, algorithmic authority. Beyond destination promotion, most AI influencers share common traits: eternal youth, slim bodies, perfect skin and a total absence of imperfections. This phenomenon coincides with the return of Y2K aesthetics and extreme thinness on social networks, a trend that has been linked to a decline in body diversity. The most notable case was due to advertising campaigns with models generated by AI, like Guess in Vogue. Mental health experts warned that constant exposure to unreal bodies can aggravate self-esteem problems and increase risk of eating disorders. The difference, they point out, is key: while traditional retouching started from a real body, AI creates bodies that have never existedimpossible to achieve even in theory. This logic has been taken to the extreme with phenomena such as the Miss IA pageantwhere artificially generated models compete showing bodies without pores, without age and without history. According to plastic surgeonsmore and more patients come to consultation with images created by AI asking for impossible interventions and pointing out the risk of frustration, obsession and psychological damage. The underlying problem: we no longer know what is real. All of this occurs in a broader context: a crisis of visual confidence. As my colleague in Xataka has analyzedthe massive generation of hyperrealistic images has broken a chain that for centuries seemed solid: if something was seen, it had probably existed. Today, that presumption has disappeared. Seeing is no longer equivalent to knowing. In this new scenario, we not only doubt whether an influencer has really traveled, but also whether the image itself corresponds to something that happened. The consequence is a permanent suspicion that affects memory, attention and the way we relate to digital reality. The technical solution—seals, metadata, … Read more

The big problem with putting solar panels on crops is shade. The University of Jaén has found a solution

by

In search of fulfilling the decarbonization goalswe are filling the field with solar panels. Giants like China can do it combining other activities well, but in the case of smaller countries, things change. Spain is an examplewith a field irrigated by crops that is also being plagued by panels. Now, a research team from the University of Jaén has found the key to continue deploying solar panels without interfering with crops. A panel with minimal shading that does not compromise its energy generation. The agrovoltaics. Different reports have pointed out how the temperature will increase by 1.5 to 3.2 degrees If we continue the same as until now. For this reason, the European Union marked the milestone of 30% of its energy comes from renewables by 2030 to, in 2050, achieve climate neutrality. Wind is important, but what almost all countries are embracing is photovoltaics. The price of the plates has fallen to the ground thanks to the China overproduction and it has begun to be deployed massively. The problem is what we mentioned: it takes up a lot of space, which opens a direct conflict with the farmland. There, agrovoltaics is becoming established as a solution to place panels that do not interfere with the cycle of some crops, and mixes with beekeeping and the livestock. But if we want to continue expanding photovoltaics, panels that provide less shade are needed. Panels and photosynthesis. That is where the solution devised by the University of Jaén comes into play. In a study Published in Science Direct, researchers detail a technology that allows a panel to efficiently generate electricity, while allowing crops to receive enough light to perform their optimal photosynthesis cycle. To do this, the team has taken into account two technical parameters: the average visible transmittance and the average photosynthetic transmittance. In practice, they indicate the amount of light useful to the plants that reaches them after passing through the panel, and they point out that different studies estimate that, for most crops, the minimum value should be around 60%. In that spectrum, plants produce normally. Status of the “transparent” panels“The photovoltaic industry has been working on this for some time. There are two approaches: Non-wavelength selective panels: They are those that absorb a large part of the solar spectrum and achieve transparency by reducing the color of the material or leaving gaps between the cells. With them, transparency is not adequate. Wavelength Selective Panels: They are those that absorb, above all, ultraviolet and near-infrared radiation, but allow a large part of the visible light to pass through. It is what the plants need and, in this case, the transparency of the panels is greater and more suitable for crops. RearCPVbif. In the two groups the industry is testing very different technologies, from polycrystalline silicon to organic cells and color-sensitized panels, but the Spanish team’s approach is somewhat different. The semi-transparent photovoltaic modules They are the STPVs, but what is proposed by the University of Jaén is a system called RearCPVbif, or “Bifacial Rear Concentrator Photovoltaic.” Unlike conventional semi-transparent designs, this technology concentrates and redirects reflected light towards the back of the bifacial cells, generating an increase in electrical production without reducing optical transparency, which is what allows light to reach the plants. It is an STPV, but with rear optical concentrators. In statements to PV-MagazineÁlvaro Varela-Albacete, co-author of the research, points out that STPV technology is being underused and that, with these rear concentrators, there is “a substantial increase” in energy generation without compromising optical transparency. “And how much is the transparency factor? 60%, according to the study, so it would be suitable for most horticultural crops. Next steps. In the study they also mention that they have taken into account that a crucial aspect for agricultural viability is thermal behavior, indicating that, in their tests, the cell temperature was below 70 degrees. This is important so that the panels do not create a “greenhouse” that affects crop patterns. And most importantly: this technology has already attracted attention. Numerous promising studies are published throughout the year, but their application is not always clear. In the case of this ReadCPVbif technology, the co-author of the study, Eduardo Fernández, points out that they are already engaging in conversations with different organizations to accelerate the development of the technology. Now, the route hour includes an evaluation of the benefits for crop growth, with different test campaigns on real crops. In any case, it aims to be a particularly relevant technology in the intensive horticulture that occurs in regions of Spain such as Almería, where apart from the sea of ​​plastic, also the photovoltaic sea is rising. If the two things can be combined, it would be a great step for both sectors. Images | University of Jaen, Σ64 In Xataka | Almería has been Europe’s great “sea of ​​plastic” for years. Now it wants to be another sea: that of solar panels

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.