public

the first public cemetery for dogs and cats

by

Spain is a country of pets. According to the first official census of pets, published a few weeks ago by the Government, 15.2 million live in our country, most of them dogs and cats. With these figures we better understand the pull of the ‘Pet Economy’ and that it becomes less and less rare to find services that until not so long ago They were almost unimaginable, like public cemeteries only for animals. The first opened in June 2024, in Malaga, and its last balance suggests that the service is increasingly in demand. Since 2024 it has already provided almost 750 services. June 24, 2024. That was the day that Málaga inaugurated its pet cemetery, a center managed by the City Council through the municipal company Parcemasa and which is located in the Málaga Cemetery Park (San Gabriel). In Spain there are other places designed for cremating, burying and saying goodbye to pets, but as they insisted in 2024 from Malaga yours has something special: it is the first of its kind of public and municipal nature. “This is a pioneering facility in Spain, since the rest of the similar facilities in other cities are private,” underlined in 2024 the City Council after remembering that the cemetery required an investment of almost 1.17 million of euros. The complex is made up of a 1,000 square meter building, a crematorium capable of holding animals weighing up to 200 kilos, gardens for depositing urns with ashes and another space for tombs. The figure: 748 services. In 2024, the cemetery made headlines for its pioneering nature. Today it is because of its volume of activity. On Sunday, coinciding with the second anniversary of the complex, the City Council launched a statement with the balance of its first 24 months of activity. And the data is surprising. Since 2024, the cemetery has provided 748 serviceswhich means a little more than one a day. In total Parcemasa has managed 673 cremations, the burial of 65 pets and the farewell of ten animals that were cremated and placed in urns. The majority of pets that passed through the center were dogs (504) and cats (213), although it has also worked with birds, rodents and a turtle. “Progressive increase”. Although the balance is curious, what is important is the trend. The City Council assures that it has perceived a “progressive increase” in the activity of the cemetery. In fact, only so far in 2026 has it registered 242 services provided either in the municipal facilities themselves or through the dozen and a half veterinary clinics in Malaga with which it collaborates. The services offered also include the collection and transfer of deceased animals, celebration of farewell events or even the support of a psychological team. Their rates range from 40 euros from a basic cremation to more than 900 that the most expensive service costs: burying a large pet (more than 30 kilos) for three decades in ‘The park of memory’. More than an anecdote. That the Malaga pet cemetery has managed more than 700 services in two years is hardly surprising. The first official census commissioned by the Government shows that in Spain there are more than 15.1 million animals of companionship, the vast majority being dogs (7.6 million) and cats (5.6 million). Andalusia, the most populated community in Spain, also leads the way in the number of pets, with around 3.3 million A concept: pet-economy. We Spaniards not only have more and more pets. We also generally spend more money on their care. And that is generating considerable demand for services related to pet-economy. A recent report by EAE Business School estimates that in our country pets generate a business of 5.77 billion euros per year and drive a sector that is growing at 8.3%, generating tens of thousands of jobs. With this data on the table, it is better understood that there are insurance companies and even venture capital funds that they start to get interested for animal care or that there are other cities in Spain interested in follow suit of Malaga and provide its own public cemeteries for dogs and cats. Images | Malaga City Council In Xataka |

OpenAI lost $38.5 billion in 2025, almost eight times more than in 2024. It will still go public

by

The well-known analyst Ed Zitron has leaked the audited financial statement of OpenAI for 2024 and 2025. The data is overwhelming and shows how the company, which lost $5 billion in 2024, lost almost eight times more in 2025: $38.5 billion. These colossal amounts do not seem to be an obstacle to the company’s new ambition: going public. It looks like a big hole… When analyzing the 2025 numbers, it is clear that OpenAI’s operating business is not the real cause of this hole in its accounts. Much of the net loss is due to the transition that the company made from an entity non-profit (non-profit) to a traditional business corporation (for-profit). By doing soUS tax regulations caused a loss of $41.55 billion due to changes in the value of convertible interests and stock options (warrants) that had been agreed with partners and investors. …but maybe it’s not. The fascinating thing about this situation is that although the data is worrying, it also contains a probable contradiction. OpenAI records this colossal loss of $41.55 billion not because business is bad, but precisely because it is worth much more than before. How do they explain in Financial Timesupon becoming a for-profithad to update all those “accounting promises” at a fair and reasonable value, which generated that notable negative impact on the balance sheet. The “real” loss. The leaked balance sheet explains that if this “technical” loss from revaluation and some other tax credits is discounted, the pure operating loss from its traditional commercial activity is around a much more acceptable figure and less than $8 billion. It is still a huge amount (in 2024, we repeat they lost 5.08 billion), but it changes the perspective. Investors still believe in OpenAI. These data may seem terrifying and should make investors flee. They are doing just the opposite because they firmly believe in the future of the company. A few months ago the company raised an absolutely astronomical investment round of 122 billion dollars to reach a valuation of $852 billion. At the moment the one that wins is Microsoft. The leak also shows who is currently the big financial winner of this AI fever: Microsoft. In 2025, OpenAI paid the Redmond giant a total of $17.2 billion to be able to use the computing capacity of its cloud infrastructure, Azure. The amount Microsoft paid OpenAI for licenses or services was ridiculous by comparison: $303 million. Source: Sherwood News. Revenue is growing. For investors, the metric that is sustaining optimism is the speed at which OpenAI has managed to grow its revenue. The company closed 2025 with consolidated revenues of 13.07 billion dollars, almost tripling the 3.7 billion in 2024. But what is really notable is the evolution of its annualized income (Annual Run Rate, ARR), which allows projecting what is expected to be earned at the end of the year. OpenAI started at a pace of $1 billion per quarter, and then accelerate and end up closing with a turnover of more than 2,000 million per month (per month!). The condemnation of everything free. OpenAI’s commercial strategy, however, may have been its great Achilles heel. The company has paid a high price for wanting to be the free AI of the end user. Keeping hundreds of millions of people querying for free on ChatGPT certainly has a huge impact on operating costs. That contrasts with Anthropic’s approach, which from the beginning focused on business users who pay in much greater proportion. This tactic has allowed the rival company to achieve something unusual: make money with AI. With small print, but they win it. And the IPO, what? The truth is that OpenAI has already sent the confidential documentation that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) needs to start the IPO process. That doesn’t necessarily mean such an IPO is near, but there’s a problem: Anthropic has taken the exact same step. If the company led by Dario Amodei comes forward in that appearance on Wall Street, it will be another reputational battle won just at the moment when OpenAI is generating the most doubts. In Xataka | Anthropic is at the most important moment in its history and has a warning: we must lift the AI ​​accelerator

1,900 years ago the Romans knew that going barefoot in a public bathroom was a bad idea, so they wore bathroom flip-flops.

by

The image above these lines illustrating the article belongs to the reconstruction of the Roman public baths in Bath, about 550 kilometers from one of the most prolific Roman sites: Vindolanda, also in Britain and next to Hadrian’s Wall. That’s where just found a fairly common item nowadays when we go to public bathrooms: bathing clogs, a kind of primitive bathing flip-flops. Of course, these are almost 2,000 years old. The Roman bathing slippers. The discovery dates back to between 140 and 180 AD. C. and is possibly the world’s oldest example of a shower shoe. The sole is a wooden platform with a leather strap on top to support the foot. Come on, a traditional flip flop, what the Romans called sculponeae. As explains Elizabeth Greene, an archaeologist at the University of Western Ontario, more than 5,000 Roman shoes have been found in Vindolanda and about 50 of them are bathing clogs. Most have platforms between 2.5 and 5 centimeters high and while some were smooth, others had geometric decorations or shapes. That they found so many clogs in that search implies that it was not something random, but rather the order of the day. And it makes sense: the Romans used these platform clogs to protect themselves from bathroom floors, slippery from steam and water, and hot from the heating system. hypocaust. Why is it important. Because Vindolanda It is UNESCO World Heritage and one of the most important Roman sites in Europe. The main reason why Vindolanda is a real treasure trove for archeology is that the organic remains of items such as clogs (made of wood and leather) have been moderately well preserved thanks to the layers of oxygen-free mud. On the other hand, it shows that preventive hygiene is not a modern invention: these primitive flip-flops constitute documented proof of the practice that dates back about 1,900 years, which is directly related to preventive medicine and the functional design of footwear. Context. The Roman baths were meeting places: whoever went there undressed and went from a cold room to a warm room to finally reach a hot room. When leaving, he finished with a cold water bath. To heat the rooms there was an underground oven that functioned as underfloor heating. Considering the estimated date of the clog, it falls within the period of the emperors Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius, when Vindolanda was an active military fort on the northern border of Britain. Who wore those bathroom clogs?. As a military fort that it was, what was abundant there were Roman soldiers and their families. However, the CEO of The Vindolanda Trust poses in the official podcast of the site a revealing question: why is there so little evidence that children used the bathrooms? (they have not found child-sized clogs), which suggests that access may have been conditioned by age, status or other social norms. It is known that at one time there were mixed baths, but it is most likely that men and women with children bathed at different times. The oldest bathroom flip flops ever known. It is true that there are much older samples of sandals, such as those of King Tutankhamun, from about 3,300 years ago; or those of the Etruscans of the 6th century BC But as nuance Elizabeth Semmelhack, director of the Bata Shoe Museum in Toronto, none of these were intended for use in bathrooms. In fact, the National Institute of Preventive Archaeological Research (INRAP) public in 2025 the discovery of two wooden soles of the sculponae type in Izernore (France), slightly earlier than those at Vindolanda, although the official source does not specifically associate them with use in bathrooms. It is in the specific application that makes the difference. In Xataka | The Romans found a macabre and sophisticated way to use perfume: breaking pigeons’ necks (made of glass) In Xataka | Almost 2,000 years ago a Celtiberian soldier visited the most remote frontier of the Roman Empire. Then he returned to Soria with a souvenir Cover | Diliff

Claude Fable 5 is the most powerful public AI model in history. Also the most expensive, exclusive and frustrating

by

When Anthropic presented Claude Mythos Preview two months ago, he did it with a singular message: it is so powerful that you will not be able to use it. That, of course, caused everyone to want access to it. Well: Anthropic has just introduce Claude Fable 5 and Claude Mythos 5its new AI models directly derived from that. There is good news, but also bad news. Like Mythos, but capped as a precaution. Anthropic already warned that Claude Mythos Preview was a spectacular tool for finding security vulnerabilities. That made it especially juicy for cybercriminals, so the company decided that only a few trusted entities (under its Project Glasswing) would have access to the model. That learning has now been applied, because in this announcement we have two different (and layered) versions of the model: Claude Fable 5: a model with all the capabilities of Mythos Preview, but with notable security measures that prevent it from being used for malicious purposes. As soon as the model detects that we are asking something “dangerous”, it avoids the question and even forces the use of an inferior model, Claude Opus 4.8. Clear examples: questions about cybersecurity or the development of biological weapons, for example. Claude Mythos 5: This version is somewhat less capable than Fable 5 in terms of cybersecurity, but will only be available to “a small group of cyber defenders and infrastructure providers.” It is the natural heir to Mythos Preview, and according to its creators it is even better than the original version. Claude Fable 5 / Mythos 5 simply sweeps the most demanding benchmarks on the planet. There have never been more powerful models. Anthropic’s internal testing shows that we are facing the most powerful AI models in history. In all benchmarks – including the new FrontierCode programming, much more demanding than SWE Bench Pro – the scores of Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5 are simply spectacular, well above those of their rivals. The jump from Claude Opus 4.8 is really surprising, but it leaves GPT-5.5 and Gemini 3.1 Pro far behind (they don’t compare with the recent 3.5 Flash). This is a brutal blow to Anthropic’s table, and we will see how both OpenAI and Google respond. Claude Fable 5 is amazing. Ethan Mollick, well-known AI popularizer, has had access to Fable 5 for a few days and is amazed by the experience. With this model he has managed to complete projects such as east of the isochronic map that previous models had never solved, and it has done it almost “the first time”. In one of the cases Fable 5 worked for 9 and a half hours straight to produce a code called Concord of data analysis. Their conclusions are compelling: Last year (when working with GPT-5 Pro) I called him “work with a magician”: you recite the spell and something happens. With Fable, the spell has become so powerful that I’m no longer sure I’m the wizard. I feel more like a patron. I describe what I want, pay for it and evaluate the result. The conspiracy takes place somewhere I can’t see, in hundreds of small decisions over which I never have a say. Work has gone from being a process to being a result. I no longer direct; charge. The criticism is unanimous. Andrej Karpathy, who recently signed by Anthropic, commented on X how this is a qualitative leap that for him is of the same relevance as the one that Claude 4.5 represented in November. That model began the overtaking of OpenAI: this puts it even further away (at least, for now). Other tweetersemployees or not from Anthropic, make it clear that this is an important leap in the capabilities of AI models. It’s only been a few hours since the launch, but everything points because we are indeed facing a notable leap in quality. Consume tokens like there’s no tomorrow. But in the face of that fascination, the criticism. Discussions on Reddit reveal how users who have started using it have quickly detected the problems associated with this release. The first of them: Claude Fable 5 burns tokens like there is no tomorrow. Its consumption is enormous, and the quotas for Pro and even Max accounts run out in minutes if we use the model intensively. If it already seemed to us that we were exhausting the limits of the free or quick payment accounts, with Claude Fable 5 that feeling worsens: Fable 5 is fantastic, but we can barely use it often with the Pro or Max plans because those dreaded messages about waiting X hours to continue using it quickly appear. Extremely cautious. Anthropic has been very serious about avoiding misuse of Fable 5, and as soon as it detects anything suspicious it “brakes” and “downgrades” the model so that at that moment the one that is activated is Claude Opus 4.8 (which is not bad at all). The problem is that users are detecting that the model takes completely harmless prompts as dangerous. Although in Anthropic indicate Although these security measures are activated in less than 5% of sessions, what users are detecting is that they are activated much more. Fable 5 can get silly. Not only that: Fable 5’s own design means that if it encounters a prompt that it detects as dangerous, the model tries to avoid the response and automatically reduces your capabilities (‘nerfing’) without you knowing. It gets a little sillier on purpose, so to speak. As Anthropic itself explains on the system card, We have implemented new measures that limit Claude’s effectiveness in requests related to the development of cutting-edge large-scale language models (LLMs) (for example, in creating pre-training pipelines, distributed training infrastructure, or designing machine learning accelerators). Using Claude to develop competing models already violates our Terms of Service, but enforcing this restriction through our security measures prevents giving an advantage to those users most willing to violate those terms. Unlike our cybersecurity, biology and chemistry interventions, and distillation attempts, … Read more

China is very clear about how to win the technology race over the rest of the world: with tons of public money

by

China has insisted on be the first world power. This declaration of intentions can be as empty as every January 1st when I say that this year I will begin to wake up at six in the morning to go out for a run, or the opposite can happen: they put all the means at their disposal to achieve it. In the case of the Asian giant, what is happening is the second. The Five-Year Plan is the roadmap that the Government sets every five years and that indicates the direction they should follow both public institutions and private companies to achieve the country’s objective. And with a defined objective, there is only one pending issue: the question of financing. And, in the case of China, that translates into a government impulse that other countries do not have. A competition at two speeds OECD stands for Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. It is made up of 38 States, including North Americans, some South Americans, many Europeans, Australia and Japan.

Anthropic has moved ahead of OpenAI in its race to go public. This is very bad news for Sam Altman

by

Anthropic confirmed on Monday which has formally registered its application for its long-awaited IPO. The operation may become the largest in the history of its type, and reminds us of another singular moment. In August 1995, Netscape went public and marked the beginning of the era of the Internet and dotcom fever. That turned out to be a bubble, but “good”. The question is if it will be repeated what happened then. The original Netscape moment. When Netscape went public, the company had only been on the market for 16 months and had not made a profit in all that time. It didn’t matter. The shares went on the market on August 9, 1995 with an initial price of $28. On its first day of trading, the value skyrocketed quicklyreaching a high of $75 before closing at $58.25. In December of that year it would reach its maximum value, $171 per share. The rest, as they say, it’s history. Netscape’s IPO sent the Nasdaq technology index soaring… until the dot-com bubble hit in 2000. Source: Reuters. Anthropic could break all records. Anthropic’s spectacular growth in recent months has made the company in the pretty girl of the AI ​​sector. The recent investment round has raised its valuation to $965 billionan incredible figure considering that the company is barely five years old. It has also overtaken OpenAI, whose valuation It is currently around $850 billion.. Both were moving to go public this year, but Anthropic has gone ahead again, something that at first glance seems like another victory against its main rival. What Netscape taught us. The explosion of Netscape in 1995 gave rise to fierce competition: companies promising gold and moro did not stop appearing, and the dotcom bubble grew. Too many companies managed to attract investment without a clear business plan and the situation ended up leading to the bursting of the bubble. A few companies survived and managed to become the great giants of today’s technology. good bubbles. That bubble could be described as “good” because although many companies failed, those that remained and those that were created later ended up leading this revolution called the internet. For many, the AI ​​bubble exists, but it is similar to the dotcom bubble in that: many companies could disappear if it bursts, but the final result, they say, will be positive for the evolution of our planet. But Anthropic is very different from Netscape. Although these IPOs present certain analogies, the situation of these companies is very different. Netscape suffered greatly to monetize its software and would end up in the hands of AOL in 1999 when its stage was closing. Anthropic has shown that its approach to businesses works, and in fact this past quarter it surprised by achieving profits (with small print) when everyone expected losses. And still, total uncertainty. Anthropic’s projection—like that of OpenAI—is spectacular on paper, but we are talking about companies that in recent years have not stopped burning money to achieve the most powerful models on the market. All technology companies have been devoured by the AI ​​fever, but today the only ones who win (a lot) money are those that provide components for AI infrastructure. Milestone. The bet is that this infrastructure will be necessary because we will all use AI models on a massive scale, but it is not at all clear that this expectation will be met. It may not, but Anthropic’s IPO will certainly mark a milestone in the dizzying growth of this segment. And victory for Amodei. This year we will likely see three historic IPOs. SpaceX seems to be the first in breaking records, but both Anthropic and OpenAI follow in their footsteps. That the company led by Dario Amodei has formally confirmed its preparation for that exit is a symbolic victory against its great rival, Sam Altman, who is also planning the IPO of OpenAI. In recent months Anthropic has managed to turn the tables, and has gone from being the pursuer to the leader of a race that certainly is not over yet. Image | Wikimedia In Xataka | Anthropic is one step away from being worth as much as Samsung. And what the market is buying is not Claude

Someone has gathered more than 13 million public contracts and has set up the Google of public procurement in Spain

by

Every euro spent by a State Public Administration must be traceable by citizens. We don’t say it, the law says it. But theory is one thing and practice another: if you try, you will discover that sometimes it is a long, tedious and sometimes almost impossible mission. Let me explain: when someone wants to know which company a public hospital or city council has awarded contracts to, the official search path forces them to go through different platforms ranging from Public Sector Procurement Platform state to autonomous regions such as those of the Community of Madrid, the Basque Country or Galicia, because there are CCAA (quite a few) that have their own system and do not publish in PLACSP. This fragmentation makes the search difficult, as details the Public Procurement Observatory. So an engineer has set out to solve it by building a search engine for Spanish public contracts. The “Google” of public contracts in Spain. jobsearch.com solves this fragmentation problem with a single search engine. It is an independent project that aggregates, cross-references and allows you to consult in seconds the public procurement information that the State publishes dispersedly on a long list of different platforms. More specifically, it draws from 10 official sources, including the State Platform (PLACSP), the Official Journal of the EU (TED), and regional platforms of Madrid, Catalonia, Galicia, Andalusia, the Basque Country, Asturias and the Valencian Community, plus data from the Commercial Registry. The result is a search engine with around 13.4 million indexed contracts, without advertising, without tracking and with open source available on GitHub. Behind the project, Gerard Sanchezprogrammer and founder of BQuant and professor at the University of Navarra and the UPF Barcelona School of Management. Why is it important. Public procurement is not trivial: in Spain it moved more than 113 billion euros in 2024, the equivalent of 10.92% of GDP, according to the OIReScon Annual Surveillance Report 2025the official supervisory body of the Ministry of Finance. Each year a sum of money is allocated through procedures that must be public and auditable. The reality is that this audit is very difficult without tools. A CNMC report of 2019 highlights that public procurement represents between 10% and 20% of Spanish GDP and that Spain is one of the European countries with the lowest participation of companies in tenders: only one company participates in one in three state contracts. With data access tools that facilitate transparency, competition could be increased and the cost for public coffers reduced. Context. In Spain there are several laws that require public contracts to be published: there is the Law 19/2013 on transparency, access to public information and good governance with a triple objective of increasing transparency in public activity, guaranteeing access to information as a right and establishing good governance obligations for public officials, but also the Law 9/2017 on Public Sector Contractswhich is a transposition of European directives on public procurement. So the problem is not that there are no regulations, but rather their application and the dispersion of data. As explains the Public Procurement ObservatorySince March 2018, it has been mandatory for the entire public sector to publish the information on their contracts in the PLACSP, but the tool is also a headache as thousands of entities upload information manually and with free-writing text, which constitutes a continuous source of error. PreciselyBuscalicitaciones.com detects and documents these inconsistencies. How it works. Technically, the project downloads and normalizes the open data that each of those 10 official platforms publishes in structured formats such as XML, JSON, CSV. Each record is crossed with data from the Commercial Registry to enrich the information of the successful bidder. The search engine offers three main modes of use: search for contracts by winning company, contracting body, CPV sector or free text of the contract; see the complete history of awards of any company by its NIF and consult a public registry of contracts with anomalous amounts greater than 1,000 million euros. Yes, but. The first major limitation is structural: it depends on the quality of the data published by official sources and that quality can clearly be improved. If the source data is bad, the aggregator inherits that error. And we have already seen that sometimes it is and that it is certainly anything but homogeneous. On the other hand, this is the first version of the project and it shows: It has flaws and the coverage is not complete. Navarra does not appear on the list and sources such as the Valencian Community do not have an aggregate amount available, the Basque Country only has an amount in 106,000 of its 651,000 contracts and Catalonia has two separate entries with different coverage. On the other hand, the independent and altruistic nature of this public utility resource also has its B side: long-term sustainability, given its great magnitude. In Xataka | Someone has passed 12,000 laws and reforms to source code and now searching the BOE is no longer an ordeal In Xataka | The “ChatGPT for lawyers” exists, it was born in Spain and has just reached a milestone: becoming a unicorn Cover | Mockuphone and Gemini

Anthropic says Claude Mythos is too powerful to go public. The question is if this is nothing more than “the wolf is coming”

by

Claude Mythos Preview It is the best AI model ever created. We don’t say it, Anthropic says it, but almost no one else can say it because only a select group of companies has access to said model. The cybersecurity capabilities of the model appear to be astonishingbut more and more experts say that although Mythos is better than its predecessors, it is not the revolutionary leap that Anthropic seems to propose. Is that way of launching the model just an effective way of creating hype? Beware the Anthropic speech. The well-known entrepreneur and analyst Gary Marcus recently gave three reasons why, according to him, the launch of Mythos is not as revolutionary as Anthropic wants us to see. I cited tweets from software engineers and cybersecurity experts who cast doubt on Anthropic’s claims. The company published a study on the capabilities of Claude Mythos Preview that seemed to make it an extraordinary tool for the field of cybersecurity, but at the same time it was so powerful that it could be very dangerous if it fell into the wrong hands. Isn’t that a big deal? Among Claude Mythos’ achievements, Anthropic highlighted how he had found vulnerabilities in Firefox 147. But in reality many of the flaws were basically variations of the same two bugs. If you removed them from the equation, Mythos’ effectiveness rate at finding new exploits dropped a lot, even below Opus 4.6. Anthropic did not hide that fact, of course, but it makes this capacity, for example, not seem so striking. An X user also criticized the use of Cybench as a cybersecurity benchmark when Opus 4.6 almost completely surpassed it. For him, the choice of some of the Anthropic tests was debatable because they were not a challenge to current models. Other models can do the same. The co-founder and CEO of Hugging Face, Clement Delangue, stated that Mythos was no big deal. Their argument: they had used small, cheap open models, isolated the relevant code from some examples of the vulnerabilities found by Mythos, and they found the same problems which had already detected the Anthropic model. According to the Epoch Capabilities Index, which measures the capacity of AI models by combining several benchmarks, the leap that Mythos has taken is striking and “departs” from the progressive line of its predecessors. Source: Anthropic. Observer bias. But here it should be noted that in those analyzes they knew where to look because Mythos had already found those problems. We are dealing with observer bias, and in fact the Hugging Face document makes it clear that they even gave him specific clues such as “consider integer overflow”) to find those bugs. And on this observation, another one: Hugging Face does not say that a small model can replace Mythos on its own, but that it can be very good by giving it the appropriate code fragment. Mythos seems more capable of blindly complex security breaches, but it is a huge model and that is why it has greater capacity. Or what is the same: Mythos is better because it has the size, design and resources to be better. Fear, uncertainty, doubt? The language used by Anthropic in this advertisement could be considered to some extent a clear use of FUD (“Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt” -> “Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt”) as a marketing technique. It is a resource that has been seen in the past, and for example OpenAI already said in 2019—years before the launch of ChatGPT—that GPT-2 was too dangerous for a public launch. Obviously it wasn’t, but that certainly served to create expectation about the true capacity of the model. It’s better, but it may not be revolutionary. The results of the benchmarks that Anthropic published already made it clear that although there are very notable jumps in some tests, in others the evolution is much less striking. Claude Mythos was not the best at everything, and now analysts appear who contrast that data with other metrics. For example, with the Epoch Capabilities Index (ECI) from Epoch AI, the startup that has one of the most reputable benchmarks of the industry. And according to this index, Claude Mythos is above his rivals, but not for long. The wolf is coming. The truth is that the launch of Claude Mythos Preview has been really striking and the documents that accompanied that document tell us about a really capable AI model. The problem is that it is impossible to verify it because only a few companies have access to it and can test it. Without that public availability the only thing we can do is trust (or not) what Anthropic tells us, and that is the point: it is not clear that we should do it. The company is interested in us buying this discourse, obviously, but without an independent analysis it is impossible to verify these statements. In Xataka | Anthropic has become the darling of AI and has sought a partner to guarantee its future. It’s not the one we thought

SpaceX is about to go public promising to bring AI to space. What really sells is satellite Internet

by

SpaceX has confidentially registered with the SECthe US regulator, its application to go public, in what could become the largest public offering in history. Why is it important. The valuation of Musk’s company exceeds one and a half billion dollars, and the objective is to raise between 50,000 and 75,000 million euros before the end of June. To put it in perspective: the IPO of the Arab oil company Saudi Aramco in 2019until now the largest in history, raised just over 25,000 million. Furthermore, this news has been presented as a milestone in space exploration, but if you read between the lines, the real story is different. Between the lines. The story that SpaceX is going to sell to Wall Street mixes rockets, Mars and AI. It is the perfect cocktail to attract capital in 2026, but analysts who have looked at the numbers and quote Reuters are a little cruder: the $1.5 trillion valuation is only supported by starlinkthe satellite Internet service that already has nine million subscribers and generated $8 billion in revenue in 2024 alone. SpaceX billed between 15,000 and 16,000 million dollars in 2025, with about 8,000 million in profit. Starlink accounts for the clear majority of that revenue and almost all of the margins. The orbital data centersthe great promise of the IPO, are still an unproven concept. As said market strategist Shay Boloor: “Starlink is the only reason this assessment is defensible.” The contrast. SpaceX was born in 2002 with a mission: to make humanity multiplanetary. Mars as a destination and reusable rockets as a means. That narrative has had to give some ground. And Wall Street, which has been buying anything with the word AI for years, hears that and opens its wallet. The money trail. This year, SpaceX absorbed xAI, Musk’s AI startup and now also the parent company of X. Musk paid $44 billion for Twitter in 2022 and since then, X and xAI are projects that consume a lot of cash, especially the latter. SpaceX’s IPO, according to The New York Timesis proposed among other things to pay the debt that Twitter incurred when Musk bought it and to finance xAI’s data centers. In other words: the jewel in the crown finances loss-making companies. The big question. Can SpaceX trade at $1.5 trillion with markets shaken by war? The Nasdaq just suffered its worst week in almost a yearwith the war between the United States and Iran in the background and oil skyrocketing. Some bankers have pushed SpaceX to keep between 15,000 and 20,000 million in cash before exiting. For what may happen. The moment of debut can be decisive for the worse even if the fundamentals are great. What is certain is that if the operation goes ahead, Musk, who owns about 42-44% of SpaceX, will almost certainly cross the threshold of a trillion dollars of personal wealth. He would be the first billionaire in history. In Xataka | Seven of the ten largest fortunes in the world in 2026 are due to AI: this illustrative graph makes it very clear Featured image | SpaceX

subsidies, taxes and public transport

by

Were you thinking of getting gas this week? Everything indicates that it is best that you do it as soon as possible. Since last February 28, when the United States attacked Iran, the pieces began to move. Hormuz was put at risk, oil and gas rose and service stations were already beginning to charge more money for a liter of gasoline. Since then, an idea has been floating around: can the Government do something about the rise in gasoline? The facts. Only a few hours had passed since first American bombing when the most cautious began to fill the tanks of their cars. Of course, the fear of a general increase in gasoline was already floating in the air. Just a handful of days later, has been confirmed. And although the average price of gasoline has not yet reached 1.60 euros/liter, a good number of gas stations already show much higher prices. Especially in the big cities and in the big corridorswhere replacement is more common, prices have risen more strongly. A solution? At the moment, the Government has not made major statements about what measures may be applied if the price of fuel becomes too expensive. The Minister of Economy, Carlos Body, for the moment he has limited himself to saying who are considering applying “a shield for our citizens and companies.” The statements do not say much and it has not been clear if it is about trying to lower the price of fuel for final consumers, if only lowering the price for transporters or, if necessary, applying other types of alternative measures such as lowering the price of public transport. As was already done in 2022. Help with the purchase. The most obvious measure that the State can apply if necessary is a purchase subsidy. In fact, gas stations, aware that this could make them advance the money as happened four years ago, They have been warning the Government that they would be against. However, its activation in 2022 left some doubts: Aid to public transport. In parallel with aid for the purchase of fuel, the Government tried to promote the use of public transport with very substantial price reductions. The use of this means of transportation skyrocketed. Renfe even spoke of an increase in travelers of between 25 and 40% and 1.5 million requests for new free passes. Measures that, due to their application, also had their shadows: And measures that have been extended over time. One of the problems that the Government has is that aid for public transport has been extended over the years. More or less reluctantly, some autonomous communities have maintained the reductions in the price of season tickets. Aid that was also extended to bus services. By 2026, the Government announced a single pass for all of Spain. For 60 euros (30 if you are under 26 years old) you can use the entire medium-distance network, Cercanías, Rodalies and buses (in which the State provides the service). That is to say, there is little room to propose something much cheaper without putting the viability of the service at risk. Taxes? It is another possibility but it seems very complicated for this to be applied. On a liter of gasoline, there are two types of taxes that the Government can reduce to lower the price of a liter of fuel: the Special Tax on Hydrocarbons and VAT. Right now, each liter of fuel is taxed by a general and regional section (which is linear) in the Special Tax on Hydrocarbons, remaining as follows: Unleaded gasoline 98: 0.504 euros/liter. Unleaded gasoline 95: 0.473 euros/liter Diesel: 0.379 euros/liter. To the price, after applying the tax and the cost at which the company wants to sell, 21% VAT is applied. The problem is that these types of measures are considered ineffective for public coffers (lower collection) and The European Union has been demanding from Spain for some time that raises the price of diesel. A measure that would involve eliminating the current bonus that this fuel has in the tax outlined above and that has been repeatedly ignored from our country. Photo | engin arkyut In Xataka | There is a hidden war to sell us the cheapest possible gasoline. One that Ballenoil and Plenergy already dominate

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.