produced

The Nazis produced 1,200 films. 44 of them remain prohibited and guarded by the German Government to this day.

by

In the Faculty of Information Sciences of the Complutense University of Madrid An optional subject is taught called History of informative and documentary cinema. A few years ago, the teacher who taught that class had the habit of giving his students fragments of ‘The triumph of the will‘, the documentary that Leni Riefenstahl directed about the Nazi party congress in Nuremberg, in 1934. She always added that she only showed those fragments because, if she put it in its entirety, she feared that we would want to join the party. ‘Triumph of the Will’ is one of the more than 1,200 films that the Ministry of Propaganda German, under the command of Joseph Goebbels, produced to spread Nazi ideals, anti-Semitism and to justify the Second World War. When the war ended, the Allies banned about 300 of them, and 44 are still on that list in charge of the German government. Why are these movies banned? Those forty-four were the subject of a documentary a few years ago, ‘Forbidden Films’which not only explained what kind of tapes they were and what they were about, but also asked whether they should no longer be banned and what legacy they might have left, 70 years after the end of the war. Your director, Felix Moellerproduced it in the face of disinterest of German youth about the history of the Nazis and the rise of the extreme right in Europe, and the documentary shows the reactions of different people when watching some of these films. Because the German government does allow their exhibition, but for educational purposes and with an expert in the room to explain and contextualize them. In the trailer you can already see some of these opinions, from those who are surprised because these films have good technical quality and are entertaining, to those who think that some of them should remain prohibited because they were, at the time, Nazi symbols, such as ‘The Jew Süss‘, which was probably the most successful of all the productions promoted by Goebbels. ‘The Jew Süss’ was the second film adaptation of the life of Joseph Süss Oppenheimer, financial advisor to the Duke of Württemberg during the 18th century and who was accused of fraud, bribery, treason and even illicit relations with several ladies of the court, and executed for these crimes. His story had been treated in books and even in plays that generally focused on it as a great human tragedy. But Goebbels saw that he could present Süss as a arrogant jew who infiltrated the Germans to take away what was theirs. He already had the most important piece in his cinematic anti-Semitic propaganda. ‘The Jew Süss’ was a great popular success. It was screened at the 1940 Venice Film Festival, receiving good reviews for its technical workmanship, reviews that did not seem to be aware of the ultimate objective of the film. Goebbels himself wrote in his diary about the film that it was “an anti-Semitic film of the kind we could only wish for. I’m very happy about it.” Good but dangerous movies In 1994, the film critic Roger Ebert wrote about one of those 44 banned Nazi films, ‘Triumph of the Will’, that “we would all have reflected on the received opinion that the film is good but evil, and that writing about it raises the question of whether quality art can be in the service of evil.” Ebert asked himself the same question with ‘The Birth of a Nation’, RW Griffith’s film that is considered one of the founding works of cinema and, at the same time, deeply racist. Those films, at the time, were not considered that way. Luis Buñuel himself stated in his memories that, in 1935, no one in Hollywood thought that ‘Triumph of the Will’ was dangerous because there were too many regional dances and too many songs for its propaganda message to be taken seriously. The Second World War drastically changed that perception, but until then, the productions of the Ministry of Propaganda Germans used entertaining stories to convey their ideals. They portrayed the British as cruel inventors of concentration camps or justified the invasion of Poland by showing the Poles persecuting the German minority living there. They could be full of stereotypes, historical manipulations and blatant attempts to “brainwash” their viewers, but they were well produced and shot and were very successful at the time. For all these reasons, they remain prohibited. But should they continue to be? In ‘Forbidden films’ there are scholars who claim that these films clearly show what should not be repeated in the future and that, therefore, their access to them should not be restricted, while former members of neo-Nazi parties point out another reason for them to be removed from the “black list”: “When something is prohibited, it becomes interesting. Prohibiting things makes them fascinating and taboo because if it is prohibited, it must be true to a certain extent.” Other Banned Non-Nazi Films Nazi ideological propaganda is the reason why these 44 films remain banned in Germany, which also has a great controversy over the passage to public domain of ‘Mein Kampf’but throughout the history of cinema there have been films that have also been included in “blacklists” for reasons that can range from accusations of obscenity to, directly, blasphemy. Or it could have happened to them like ‘The great dictator‘, the satire that Charles Chaplin made of Hitler and Mussolini, in 1940, and which was banned in Argentina precisely for that parody, since Germany had been an ally of Juan Domingo Perón. It was even on the verge of not being shown in the United Kingdom because, when filming was announced, the country was trying to appease Hitler in his expansionist desires for Europe. When it was released, however, the British were already at war with the Germans and there was no reason for its censorship. You don’t have to go to China or countries with fundamentalist regimes to find the most … Read more

The US consumed 60% of all the chips it produced to go to the Moon

by

In the context of the Cold War, developing an ambitious space program was more than just technological exploration and innovation: for the United States it meant demonstrating its hegemony over the USSR. And he took it very seriously: officially spent almost 26 billion dollars between 1960 and 1973 (the equivalent about $257 billion today). Before and after Apollo. Simply put, the Apollo program was colossal and it shows in both its achievements and its legacy. Because beyond the milestone of humanity’s arrival on the moon, the list of inventions he brought under the arm was impressive because either they are still used today or they laid the foundations for today’s technology. For example, although NASA did not invent freeze-dried foods, they did. gave them a twist to maintain its flavor and texture while reducing its weight. Also brought the refrigerated suits that are used today for people with multiple sclerosis and PBI as a star fireproof materialsomething they arrived at after the death of three astronauts in the Apollo 1 fire and which is today used in firefighter suits. Or the airless tires. If we focus on computing, the fly by wire It was a paradigm shift to embrace digital, the standard in today’s aviation. NASA changed the computer industry. And if food had to be lightened, stylizing the on-board computers was something providential. Plus, do it without compromising power. So they built the Apollo guidance computer with a promising but still little consolidated technology: integrated circuits with the first silicon chips. Yes, those that we have even found in the soup for decades. The Apollo program he did not invent the microchipbut it did make it possible have a huge supply. Much of the chip production went to NASA. In fact, in 1963 the Apollo project had already achieved take over 60% of US supply of chips. Bridging the distance, like what happens today with AI. The US army supported the proposal, which integrated chips into its missiles Minuteman II. The production contract fell into the hands of Texas Instrumentsforcing the industry to move from “artisanal” chip manufacturing to mass production. Towards total democratization. The combination between NASA and the Pentagon was the total catalyst for standardization and cost reduction. In fact, in 1962 a single microchip could cost at least 120 dollars. By ’68, prices had plummeted less than two dollars. This enormous need, together with the importance of their application in strategic sectors, caused both NASA and the army to demand absolute reliability of the chips from the companies behind them, such as Fairchild or Texas Instruments. This is, put them to tests like extreme temperatures or G-force. It was Moore’s law at its finest. NASA moved the industry forward a decade. The push from NASA and the Pentagon reduced the cost of microchips by 98% in less than 10 years. The result? That they went from cutting-edge technology to landing on more basic and modest electronics such as calculators. According to John Tylkoengineer and technological historian and current professor at MIT, if NASA had not existed we would still have integrated circuits and Moore’s Law would have been fulfilled… much later: “But perhaps we would not have had it in 1965. Maybe we would have had it a decade later.” In Xataka | Four astronauts are going to undertake an unprecedented journey to the Moon. They have no intention of stepping on it In Xataka | We have been deceived by the distances of the Solar System: the closest neighbor to Neptune is Mercury Cover | Flickr

Now they have woken it up and it is already surpassing the US in bullets produced per year

by

For much of the Cold War, Europe assumed that its industrial role in defense was secondary to American muscle, and that mass munitions production was on the other side of the Atlantic. Eight decades later, that logic starts to invest: not because the continent is fully rearmed, but because a single European company It is already capable of manufacturing more bullets in a year than the entire US military industry. The geopolitical trigger. The turn of American policy under Trump, with insinuations as extreme as possible annexation of Greenland and one increasing pressure for Europe to assume its own defense, has reopened a question that for decades seemed unnecessary: ​​whether the continent would be capable of arm and defend yourself without the United States. The response of analysts and policy makers is affirmativebut with important nuances, because replacing the US military umbrella (from personnel to equipment and critical capabilities) would have an estimated cost of around a billion dollars and would require years of industrial and strategic transformation. The awakening I remembered a fact the wall street journal that we recently told: after decades of underfinancing and fragmentation, the European defense industry is experiencing its greatest acceleration since the Cold War, driven by the war in Ukraine and a massive increase of military spending. The production of drones, ammunition, armored vehicles and ground systems has been shotwith new companies emerging in record time and large groups expanding factories and workforces, supported by a political and financial environment that just five years ago would have been unthinkable. This rearmament has turned Europe into an industrial actor much more dynamic, although still uneven according to sectors. Money changes the balance. Another fact: Europe spent around to 560,000 million dollars in defense last year, double that of a decade ago, and its investment in equipment is on track to reach 2035 about 80% of that of the Pentagonwhen in 2019 it did not reach 30%. This change not only brings operational autonomy closer, but also threatens to reduce the weight of American manufacturers in a market that today contributes up to 10% of your incomefueling a slow but perceptible shift towards weapons produced on the continent itself. Rheinmetall Panther KF51 Advantages and successes. In some areas, Europe is no longer just defending itself, it is surpassing the United States. Companies like Rheinmetall will soon be able to produce more 155mm artillery ammunition than all American industry togetherwhile the continent dominates the manufacturing of battle tanks, ships and submarines that are successfully exported around the world. Names like that of the leopard tankEuropean shipyards and the rise of drone manufacturers in small countries like Estoniaassets that illustrate a solid and increasingly competitive industrial base. The great lagoons. Despite progress, they persist critical deficits that limit real independence: Europe lacks, for example, its own stealth fighters, and depends on the United States for what is called satellite intelligence, anti-missile defense, military cloud computing and very long-range missiles. Not only that. How we countstill tied to maintenance and updating of American systems such as the F-35 or the Patriot. These gaps explain why many countries continue to purchase weapons outside the continent, even as they declare their intention to strengthen strategic autonomy. Fragmentation, the great brake. More than the lack of technology, one of the main obstacles is the political and industrial dispersion: Each country wants its own plane, tank and ship, diluting investments, delaying programs and making production more expensive. This fragmentation slows down rearmament, forces us to resort to external suppliers (like South Korea in the case of Poland) and makes it difficult for Europe to act as a coherent bloc capable of responding quickly to a major crisis. Autonomy yes, but gradual. In summary, experts agree that Europe can arm and defend himself by itself, but not immediately, but progressively. Projects for long-range missiles, satellite constellations and greater industrial integration are already underway, with countries such as France and the United Kingdom trying to reduce key dependencies. However, a significant degree of American supportwhich makes this billion dollar career in a hybrid something different than a sudden break with Washington, something more like a slow and complex transition towards a more self-sufficient European defense. Image | 7th Army Training Command In Xataka | Germany is experiencing a new “industrial miracle” that it already experienced 90 years ago: that of weapons In Xataka | 100 years later, Renault is on the verge of producing war machinery again: military drones together with Turgis Gallard

Funko literally produced more dolls than it could afford. And now it faces the biggest crisis in its history

by

It seemed that this moment would never come, but it did: the Funko Pop They are in crisis. In popular culture everything is cycles, and if now it is an inevitable topic in the conversation the “superhero fatigue“, after having lived through years in which it seemed that there was going to be nothing but superheroes in the cinema, now it is the turn of the Funko Pop. All after an overwhelming success, which has turned these dolls cut from the same pattern into inevitable passengers in any conversation about the pop panorama. The data. The company recognized in its last quarterly report that there are “substantial doubts” about its ability to continue operating for the next twelve months. Funko carries $241 million in total debt while maintaining just $39.2 million in cash reserves, a ratio that puts the company on the brink of the financial abyss. In the second quarter of 2025, Funko lost $41 million, and although the third quarter showed an improvement with losses of less than one million, these contrast with the $8.9 million profit in the same period just a year earlier, in 2024. The reasons. Sales fell from 292.8 million to 250.9 million year-on-year, a 14% drop that originated mainly in the US market. In 2023, the company destroyed between 30 and 36 million dollars in excess inventory, literally sending millions of figures to landfills because it was cheaper to eliminate them than to pay for storage. The crisis has multiple culprits: the Trump administration’s trade tariffs have hit toys with the nature of Funko hard: cheap items made abroad. But the fundamental problem is structural: overproduction. Funko has systematically and for years produced more than the market has been able to absorb, believing that demand would be infinite. This has led to the company’s debt growing from 182.8 million at the end of 2024 to the current 241 million, an increase of 32% in less than a year. The signs told us. There were different crises that made it clear that problems could come for Funko Pop. In 2021, the pandemic led to a boom and the company achieved record sales of one billion dollars, an increase of 58% over 2020. But like the entire economy that emerged during the pandemic, it was temporary. The post-pandemic drop (losses in the fourth quarter of 2022 of $47 million) should have served as a warning. Then, in 2023, the massive destruction of inventory confirmed that Funko Pop was generating material beyond its capabilities. 40 different Grogu dollsIf nothing woke us up before, it should have been a warning to sailors. And what about collectors? The company crisis is not just a problem of corporate mirage: it is the collapse of a dangerous aspect of collectingwhich is done by mere accumulation of assets that it is believed that it is going to revalue in the future. We have seen exclusive figures for the San Diego Comic-Con that They were resold for 200 or 500% above their original price (and the same phenomenon repeated at the recent Comic-Con in Malaga). And we have seen sets reach impossible prices (especially mythical isWilly Wonka quele in 2022 which reached $100,000). Now, second-hand sales platforms show Funkos that sold for $200 languish at $10. Even discontinued figures can be found at bargain prices, all due to overproduction, which made the “exclusive” or “limited release” label lose its value. There are those who compare what is happening with the phenomenon of Beanie Babies, highly coveted a couple of decades ago by collectors in the United States, and whose bubble ended up exploding. Plastic mountains. AND eye on environmental impactwhich goes beyond a few (many) collectors with shelves full of products that have lost their value. The aforementioned between 1.4 and 3 million vinyl figures that were sent to landfill They were only the first phase of mass destruction. The material Funkos are made of, PVC, can remain in landfills for centuries because it is not biodegradable. And hundreds of millions of units are produced every year, which in the United States are deposited in landfills perfectly legally (in countries like France, companies were prohibited from destroying unsold non-food merchandise, forcing them to donate or recycle). Header | Photo of Z Graphica in Unsplash

There is more renewable electricity in the world produced by coal

by

Ten years ago, coal lit half planet. Today, it is solar panels and wind turbines that illuminate statistics. In the first half of 2025, the renewables not only covered all the increase in global electrical demand: they exceeded it. A global sorpasso. The report, prepared by Emberanalyze data from 88 countries that represent 93% of global electric demand. Its conclusion marks a before and after: solar and wind energy grew so much that they compensated all the increase in global electrical consumption and still generated surplus. However, there is an even more important point that is that coal generation fell worldwide. Carbon participation fell to 33.1% of global electric mix, while renewables rose to 34.3%. For the first time, the coal was behind. The descent was especially clear in China and Indiawhere coal has always dominated and, therefore, that descent is noted. On the other hand, both in the European Union and in the United States a small rebound was observed, caused by hydroelectric drought and the Gas increase. Renewable energies produced more electricity than coal for the first time recorded in the first half of 2025 | Ember Radiography of the change. The transition is not a statistical anecdote, but a structural phenomenon. World demand increased 369 twh (+2.6 %), moderate growth that was widely covered by solar and wind expansion. On the one hand, the sun remains the most dynamic source on the planet. The solar generation grew 31%, reaching a global quota of 8.8%. However, this is because China It was the great enginecontributing 55% of world solar growth, followed by the United States, the European and Indian Union. On the other hand, the wind keeps the pace. The wind generation increased by 7.7%, to represent 9.2% of the global mix. Although Europe and the United States suffered adverse weather conditions, China increased, registering a 16% increase in their wind production. The money also changed sideways. The other great indicator that this change is structural is in the markets. According to the International Energy Agencythe global investment in energy will reach 3.3 billion dollars, a fairly striking figure. Only ten years ago, renewables were seen as An idealistic bet: faces, intermittent and subsidy dependent. Today they are the new center of financial gravity of the energy system. The proportion of clean investment against fossil went from 2 to 1 in 2015 to 10 to 1 in 2024, a change that reflects a collective market decision. However, not everyone is invited to the party. Emerging markets and developing economies barely receive 15% of world investment In clean energy, despite the fact that its electric demand is the one that grows the most. In addition, they are still trapped between high financial costs, fragile networks and regulatory uncertainty. As Ember warnswithout international financing and technological cooperation, the global rhythm towards zero net emissions could be stopped before achieving the objective. China drives the global transition. Behind the world sorpasso there is an undisputed protagonist: China. Not only leads the production of clean energy, but also the industry that makes it possible: panels, turbines, batteries and smart networks. Its industrial policy has made the country what some analysts describe as an “electrostate”capable of dominating the energy value chains of the 21st century as it dominated the manufacturing. In just six months, China installed 380 GW of new solar capacity – more than all the total capacity of the United States – promoted by a wave of projects prior to new price standards. Thanks to this, its mixture Electric is already renewable 24%, and the emissions of the electrical sector fell 1.7% in half a year. Global challenges. According to Emberthe electricity grid is already the main obstacle to renewable expansion. Solar and wind production increases faster than lines and storage grow. In countries such as Spain or Germany, specific cuts have been registered in solar parks by network saturation. In Japan, operators reduce solar generation on weekends to avoid overloads. This forced disconnection –The call Curtailment– shows a paradox: we have more sun than cables. To the saturation of the networks is added the inequality of access to capital. While China and other economies install renewable gigawatts every month, Africa and Latin America are still waiting for sufficient investments. Hence the urgency of new global mechanisms to channel green capital towards emerging economies and ensure that the transition is truly global. An irreversible turning point. Just a decade ago, coal generated twice as much electricity than renewables. Today, clean energy has surpassed the most polluting source and dominates the growth of the electrical system. China leadsIndia accelerateEurope It adapts and the United States It stops. Prices fall, investments grow and emissions begin to stabilize. The energy transition is no longer a matter of political will: it is an economic law. The turning point is not in the future: it is happening right now. Image | Freepik and Pexels Xataka | In his career for the total domain of the solar panels, a rival has come out: the Spanish Perovskita

China is at the gates of overcoming Taiwan in number of chips produced. Sounds very intimidating but it is not so much

by

China will surpass Taiwan in 2030 in the production capacity of semiconductors. This is indicated by a recent Yole Group report that highlights how the efforts of the Asian giant will soon be rewarded. At least in the quantity section. Not so much in quality. Chinese-Taiwan tension. China has one especially delicate relationship With Taiwan, and that shows in the chips race. TSMC is the jewel of the Taiwanese crownabsolute protagonist in the semiconductor sector. No one produces more and better chips, and the restrictions that affect the People’s Republic of China (China) do not affect the Chinese Republic (Taiwan). China, however, has been investing in its own continental companies and manufacturing plants (“Foundries”), and that is giving results. The data. According to this study, the production capacity of semiconductors in continental China plants will represent 30% of the world total quota before the decade ends, when in 2024 it was 21%. Taiwan currently is the market leader with a 23%share, while China is already second with the aforementioned 21%. Behind are South Korea (19%), Japan (13%) and the US (10%). Big Fund. Beijing put years ago its plan to be a “complete nation” in the field of semicoductors. This is: not depending on anyone. To do this, he created the so -called Investment Fund of the Integrated Circuit Industry of China, popularly known as the “great background” or “Big Fund”. The economic support of this body has allowed SMIC and Hua Hong Semiconductor – two of the main manufacturers of Chinese semiconductors – to flourish especially. Chinese manufacturers evolve. The domestic plants of continental China have been growing in relevance, and They have invested significantly in expansions that allow working in chips for sectors such as automotive or generative artificial intelligence. All this makes the panorama for semiconductors in China improve, but only in a section. Good for quantity, bad for “quality”. The problem of these semiconductor plants is that they use less advanced photolithographs ranging from 8 to 45 Nm. Although these types of chips remain perfectly valid for industries such as automotive, IoT devices or appliances, they are not for advanced AI chips, which are in which TSMC dominates. The great Chinese promise, in trouble. SMIC, the main Chinese semiconductor manufacturer, has been trying to make the leap to a 5 Nm photolithographic node, but this technology He is choking. In fact, his 7 nm node already had Notable problems In performance per wafer, and failing to take that step is for the moment a negative note in that remarkable advance in production rhythms. And while his rivals for all. TSMC and Samsung have already overcome that photolithographic node and are going at full speed to start the mass production of 2 nm chips. It is expected that TSMC achieves it this year and that Samsung does it in 2026. Taiwan in fact is Testing your lithography A14 (1.4 Nm), which will enter large -scale production in 2028. Image | Xataka with chatgpt In Xataka | ASML’s new lithography team divides chips manufacturers. TSMC considers not using it until 2030

The number of smartphones produced by each technological company in the world, illustrated in this graphic

by

The world of technology is fierce. Although in almost all segments we have several brands in Liza, it is one or two that lead. We see it on video games with Nintendo and PlayStationin Nvidia graphics cards or on televisions with Samsung and LG. In the world of mobiles it is not different and, although there are multitude of brandsthose that are distributed by the cake are Apple and Samsung. It is something that It was not always like thatand in this graph prepared by Visual Capitalist We can see the evolution of mobiles produced by the different manufacturers in the last decade, as well as those that survived and those that remained on the road. Dance of two. Although the graph, which reflects the data of Trendforceleave out Many Chinese giantswhat is clear is that the global market is dominated by two players: Apple and Samsung. It is estimated that, between the two, more than 40% of the world smartphones market dominated, highlighting Apple in Income and Samsung in total market volume, and in the Visual Capitalist graph, what we see is not the total market, but the evolution of the units produced by the selected brands. That is the reason why we do not see others like Xiaomi or a huawei that now sells, above all, in China, but for a while He played the reign to Apple and Samsung. Apple Samsung 2015 215.3 million 321.5 million 2016 225.5 million 309 million 2017 225 million 312 million 2018 200.5 million 292.6 million 2019 190.4 million 287.5 million 2020 214.6 million 276 million 2021 239 million 272.8 million 2022 225 million 245.4 million 2023 222.4 million 227.55 million 2024 222.5 million 225.8 million The ones we lost. But, although the graph is not complete, it is interesting for a reason: it allows us to see the evolution of many historical brands outside the two largest today. Thus, we can see how Nokia in 2015, already low Microsoft’s mantle, It was small compared to what it wasbut he kept planting. The same with Sony and, to a lesser extent, Asus and HTC. Nokia and Sony are still there, although with a volume very far away they handled, but the biggest batacazo without counting a Blackberry which was lost in 2018 was LG. The South Korean occupied a privilege position until it vanished in 2021, when they decided abandon completely The smartphones business. Google Sony Nokia LG 2015 – 29.5 million 30 million 66.5 million 2016 450,000 16.4 million 15 million 74.7 million 2017 3.65 million 13.5 million 14.8 million 56.1 million 2018 4.55 million 6.95 million 14.3 million 39.3 million 2019 4.75 million 4.2 million 9.5 million 33 million 2020 4.05 million 2.85 million 6.7 million 30.2 million 2021 6.45 million 2.7 million 3.3 million 3 million 2022 8 million 2.6 million 3.1 million – 2023 10.3 million 2.8 million 780,000 – 2024 10.5 million 2.45 million 160,000 – Google. It seemed that Asus was going to have his time, especially in a few years in which they innovated with their Reversible Chamber Systems – The Zenfone Flip– And some phones like the Zenfone 10 that bet on gross power in a contained size when The rest of the market was going to huge diagonalsbut the adventure did not curdle. Like that of a Sony converted into a niche brand with its Ultrapanoramic screens and powerful recording and editing tools, but that produces fewer units. In the graph we can see a very different story, that of Google. The company has been supporting others such as Samsung, HTC or Asus since 2010 to create His Nexusbut in 2016 they made the leap to their own mobiles with the Google Pixel. That first Pixel was revolutionary in the Android market and, although they have not opted for power, they have been consistent when creating mobile phones with very Good camera systems and one Applied to photography. They have also relied to being the entrance door to New Android versions of each yearand in the graph we can see how they go from having a marginal position to be one with increasing presence. Also in advertising, with series such as Last season of ‘You’ In Netflix in which the characters use brand devices. And the Chinese? They are the great absent of this comparison. Taking data from 2023, Xiaomi shipment about 146.1 million smartphones worldwide, which represented a slight annual decrease in global computing, but a light Growth in a premium segment in which they want to strengthen. Oppo (including Realme and OnePlus) sent about 100 million units and from Huawei there are no data, but after years of sanctionsin 2023 and 2024 They returned strongly to the Chinese market. In fact, although the figures say that the iPhone 15 It was the best -selling mobile of 2024 and Samsung also appears well stopped on the list, last year The great victory went to Chinawith its main brands rising in a spectacular way. And you have to wait for 2026 to see the full photo of 2024. In Xataka | The long goodbye of Huawei in Spain: of strategic partner to Technology Non Grata

Who produced the key matters of the world after World War I, in a 1927 graphics

by

The end of the Great War He left a totally devastated Europe. France, Italy, the United Kingdom and Germany lost between 25% and 30% of their national wealth and basic agricultural and industrial infrastructure was very damaged. After a first period of recovery just after the end of the war, there was a situation of hyperinflation, monetary depreciation, debt payments to an US that claimed his money and a break in international trade. However, in mid -1920, an economic recovery was lived, and a series of graphics published in 1927 reflects that moment of fleeting splendor just before the Great Depression and of the Second World War. And why not say it, they were a valuable tool if someone with expansionist ideas He threw the glove. Happy twenty years. After the World War IUSA lent money to France and the United Kingdom to rebuild. Germany was punished He pays a rate to those same countries, but when the US claimed the money, the system broke. Germany had no money and France and the United Kingdom needed German funds to pay Americans. However, the Dawes Plan To give a respite to the German economy, so everyone’s debt relaxed and began the “happy twenties.” It was an economic recovery period in which the countries involved reached some stability and, above all, an industrial rebirth. It continued depending on American money and we already know how the decade ended with the breakage of the stock market, but at least allowed European nations to be repurchased in a way. Hickmann Atlas. No levels prior to the Great War were reached, but at least the production and export of raw materials resumed. Beyond Europe, there were many other countries that had been oblivious to the conflict and followed their own path. In 1927, the Austrian publishing house G. Freytag & Berndt published the universal geographical and statistical Atlas of Hickmann. It is a very interesting document because it reflects that panorama of the mid -20s and offers many, many statistics, graphs and maps that are a reflection of the economic and productive state worldwide. We can consult the 80 pages on the web David Rumsey Map Collectionbut from Visual Capitalist They have compiled the most interesting maps in terms of production and raw materials. Land use. The pages dedicated to ‘Produktion’ show precisely that: the most powerful countries in certain types of interesting resources at the time. The first cover the use of the Earth and the graph is divided into: Acherland: Cultivation lands or farmland. Wald: forest. Wieen und Weiden: Praderas and grasslands. Unproduktivland: unproductive land. There are countries like Spain that are very balanced, with large cultivation surfaces and practically identical proportions of the rest, but also striking cases. For example, according to this Atlas, France is the country that, with 56%, more arable land has. They captured that Finland had the largest amount of forests, covering 61% of their territory (in 2021 estimated That was more than 73% and British India was the one that had the most won, followed by the US. And the worst? Norway, with 70% unproductive land. Agricultural production. In Produktion III and IV they focused on land production, and for the Austrians, the US was an agricultural power plant. They were the ones that most wheat, barley, oatmeal and corn produced (by far). The Soviet Union led in Centeno and Germany, obvious, in potato production. Argentina was the second in production of corn and Spain the third in barley. Who had less grain, mattered. Whose? From Argentina, Canada, the United States and Australia, and the great importing countries were the United Kingdom, Germany and Italy. As for wine, France was the spearhead, followed by Italy and Spain. In beer, the United Kingdom marked the pattern, followed by Germany. In that graph, Spain does not appear. In other resources such as Café, Brazil is a lot of difference from Colombia, El Salvador, Venezuela or Guatemala. And China also makes an appearance as a power in the production of tea and rice. Textiles and natural resources. As for textiles, it depends a lot on it. The United States led cotton production, followed by the British and China Indies. Japan and China were silk powers; The Soviet Union and the Philippines were of the hemp culture; The USSR and Poland led the linen, and the hops was a thing of Great Britain and the United States. The oil is a barbarity and, perhaps, the fact that puts us most into perspective with what they thought a century ago. In the Atlas, they indicate that the United States produced about 753,000 barrels in 1923. One hundred years later, US production was 21.4 million barrels … a day during the last quarter of 2023. In tobacco, salt, oil, rubber or paper, Spain has little to say, but where it stands out is in Mercury, very close to Italy and a lot of distance from the United States or Mexico. Mining. Produktion VII and VIII reflects the production of metals, gems and minerals, with South Africa leading the production of gold and diamonds and Mexico that of silver. The United Kingdom had the leadership of gas, but the absolute protagonist in the Serurgy after World War I, and something that would be key to the second, was the United States, leading coal, iron and steel. Cataclysm. The photo for some countries was really hopeful, but only two years after the publication of Hickmann Atlas produced The collapse of the NYSE. This caused the bankruptcy of banks, a reduction in production, protectionist measures and a break in international trade. The US was no longer to lend money to anyone, which caused a worldwide deflation. Europe, which was already indebted to the eyebrows, also suffered this recession, devaluing its coins and causing a new crisis. If a new volume of Hickmann’s work had been published years after the great depression, the situation of the graphics would have been very different. There were some visual … Read more

Intel has produced 30,000 wafers in its Uve High-NA teams

by

Joseph Bonetti is one of Intel’s engineers who defend that this company is about to be competitive again in the semiconductor manufacturing industry. This statement of yours a few days ago expresses your vision very well: “Intel leaders, Board of Directors of Intel and Donald Trump administration, please, They do not sell or give control From Intel Foundry to TSMC just when Intel is taking the technological front and starting to take off. It would be a terrible and demoralizing mistake. “ Although he does not expressly mention them, Bonetti suggests between the lines when he speaks of “the technological front” that Intel will take advantage of his experience with the teams of extreme ultraviolet lithography (UVE) and High Opening to recover leadership in the production of integrated circuits that lost many years ago. These machines produced by the Dutch company ASML are the most advanced semiconductor manufacturing equipment that currently exists. AND Intel has two in the testing phase in its Hillsboro (USA) plant. Next stop: 1.4 Nm The main chips manufacturers on the planet are beginning to gradually try the new ASML photolithography equipment, but Intel was the first company that was done with them. In fact, at the end of February 2024 his engineers concluded successfully The process ‘First Light’which is nothing other than the first phase of the installation and calibration of these machines. Just then they began to do the first tests with them. The 14A lithography (1.4 Nm) will be the first one in which Intel will use the Uve High opening equipment of ASML The 14A lithography (1.4 Nm) will be the first one in which Intel will use the UVE High opening equipment of ASML. His Roadmap It does not reveal the exact moment in which this integration technology will be ready, but it is reasonable to assume that this moment It will arrive in 2026 Because in 2027 the 14A-E lithography will be prepared, which will be nothing other than a review of the original 14A integration technology. Anyway, Intel’s current itinerary does not conclude with this node. Keyvan Esfarjani, which is one of the top responsible for the subsidiary of this company that specializes in the manufacture of integrated circuits, confirmed During the Intel Foundry Direct Connect event of 2024 that the production of chips in the 10A node (which will presumably be equivalent to the 1 Nm lithographs of its competitors) will begin at the end of 2027. It makes sense if we are in mind that in 2026 this company plans Have prepared the 14A node, although, yes, the manufacture of 1 NM semiconductors on a large scale will arrive later (possibly well entered 2028). Anyway, if what we want is to take the pulse at the current moment of Intel the news is promising. Last Monday this company confirmed that it has already prosecuted 30,000 wafers in its EUV High-Na Twinscan Exe: 5000 teams. And he has done it in a quarter. This performance would be modest if we were talking about fully implanted commercial technology, but it is promising if we consider that Intel and ASML engineers are still mired in The test and development phase of semiconductors with the new haute opening equipment. In fact, it is currently reasonable to anticipate that Intel will be the first chips manufacturer that will place integrated circuits produced with this technology, which could give it a very important competitive advantage. Image | ASML More information | Reuters In Xataka | Bill Gates has radiographed Intel. And his diagnosis is overwhelmingly accurate

Half of all the frozen semen produced by Spanish men comes out in a single city: Granada

by

Neither Madrid, nor Barcelona; Neither Valencia, nor Seville: the place in Spain where more semen is donated the most It is Granada. And it is by far margin: of the 56,700 donations of male gametes between 2018 and 2023, 23,096 were made in this province. Practically half. Is something that was already knownbut Ana Requena It has just updated the data And it’s really surprising. Because if the question is “What is happening in that city?” The answer is not only curious … it is very interesting. Granada, national semen champion. It is true that obtaining reliable data is complicated. Above all, because (although clinics and hospitals are obliged to turn their data in assisted human reproduction information system) we have not managed to have a centralized record. However, in this case the reliability is the least: we talk about such a brutal difference that we can give it for good. Granada is the queen of the semen of Spain and is something completely recognized in the sector. But … why? The person responsible for this has names and surnames: Ceifer Biobanco, a private semen bank that was founded in the city almost 30 years ago and is a national reference. In fact, he works with about 500 reproductive centers in the country. That is key. Because, as explained at Eldiario.es Juan José Espinósthe president of the Spanish Fertility Society (SEF), having an authorized center to collect semen is not easy: “In the same way that most assisted reproduction centers collect ovules, there are few authorized for semen of donors.” “There are more donors where more promotion is made and concentrated in places where there are specialized banks,” Espinós explained. So it is not because the Grenadians are extremely fond of this? Yes and no. As Juan Pablo Ramírez explained a few years agomanaging director of the company, although Donor’s profile has been changing over the years (and older men, workers and parents have been incorporated), “students continue to assume 80% of the total donations.” That is one of Ceifer’s keys: that Granada is the student city per hintomasia. A city of about 250,000 inhabitants that has a university of 80,000 students (and that is only a part of its training offer). But, without a doubt, it is a management success. After all, Ceifer also has venues in Seville and Córdoba, others of the two leading cities in donations. And it is not easy either. As they explainedonly 10% of those who are interested end up being accepted. To the age requirements (less than 50 years), we must add a personalized interview with a psychologist and a whole battery of medical tests that discard hereditary diseases and ensure the quality of the semen. So yes, Granada is at the top. And it seems that it will continue to be a long time. After all, the two cities that follow it from afar are also feuded by Ceifer. Who was going to tell us that the geopolitics of the semen was going to talk about the importance of having long -standing institutions attached to the field? Image | Jorge Fernández Salas | Manuel Medina In Xataka | Reproductive Wars: When will we stop needing women to have children?

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.