spent

Iran has spent decades excavating its “missile cities.” Satellite images have just revealed that they are a death trap

by

For years, Iran has shown the world tunnel videos endless tunnels dug under mountains, with military trucks circulating between missiles lined up as if they were cars in an underground subway. It was understood that many of these facilities extend kilometers underground and are part of one of the military fortification programs. most ambitious in the Middle East. What almost no one knew until now is to what extent this gigantic hidden labyrinth could become a key piece of the current conflict. The cities, but with missiles. Yes, for decades, Iran has excavated an extensive underground base network known as “missile cities”, complexes hidden under mountains and hills intended to protect its enormous ballistic arsenal against air attacks and guarantee the regime’s retaliation capacity even in the event of open war. There are numerous videos Officials released in recent years where we could see long tunnels illuminated by artificial lights, windowless corridors and convoys of trucks loaded with missiles ready to move to the surface, an entire military architecture designed to hide thousands of short and medium range projectiles away from spy satellites and enemy bombers. Some installations even incorporate silos dug into the rock or mechanical systems on rails to move missiles within underground galleries, a perfectly assembled choreography reflecting a strategic project conceived to ensure arsenal survival Iranian in a protracted conflict. The images that reveal the paradox. However, the war has begun to show the unexpected reverse of that strategy. Recent images from space have revealed Smoldering remains of destroyed launchers and missiles near the entrances to several underground complexes, a sign that systems hidden underground are becoming extremely vulnerable at the moment when they must go outside to shoot. It makes sense. American and Israeli surveillance planes, armed drones and fighters They patrol constantly over the areas where these facilities are located, observing the entrances to the tunnels and attacking the launchers as soon as they appear on nearby roads or canyons. In other words, what for years was a system designed to hide mobile weapons It thus becomes a relatively predictable pattern: tunnel entrances, exit roads and deployment areas that can be monitored from the air and destroyed as soon as activity is detected. From strategic refuge to death trap. They remembered in the wall street journal A few hours ago this change has revealed a structural problem in the very concept of missile cities. Underground complexes are very difficult to destroy from the air, but they are also fixed installations whose location is known by Western intelligence services. In practice, this means that much of the arsenal remains stored in specific places while enemy planes continually fly over the airspace, waiting for the moment when the launchers come out to act. Many military analysts summarize the dilemma in a simple way: What was previously a mobile and difficult to locate system is now concentrated in fixed points, which facilitates its surveillance and reduces its capacity for surprise. Commercial satellite images themselves show destroyed launchers As soon as they left the mouths of the tunnels, fires were caused by leaked fuel and access to facilities bombed with heavy ammunition. Missile base north of Tabriz in Iran. The image on the left belongs to February 23, the one on the right from March 1 after the first attacks The air offensive against underground infrastructure. As the first week of war approaches, the military campaign has begun to focus increasingly on these infrastructures. They told Reuters that the first phase of the attacks focused on destroying visible launchers and surface systems capable of firing at Israel or US bases in the region, while the second stage aims straight to the bunkers and buried warehouses where missiles and equipment are stored. Israeli aviation, with American support, has attacked hundreds of positions and has managed to drastically reduce the number of launches, while an almost constant air offensive that hits targets continues. both in Iran and Lebanon during the same missions. The stated objective is to progressively degrade Iran’s ability to launch ballistic missiles and drones until it is completely neutralized. Missile base north of Kermanshah in Iran. The image on the left belongs to February 28, on the right it belongs to March 3 A gigantic arsenal underground. The actual scope of these facilities remains difficult to determine. There are military estimates that place the Iranian arsenal before the war between about 2,500 and up to 6,000 missilesstored in different facilities throughout the country, many of them excavated under mountains or in remote areas of the territory. Despite the attacks, Iran has managed to launch more than 500 missiles against Israel, US bases and targets in the Gulf since the start of the conflict, although many have been intercepted and the pace of salvos has decreased rapidly. That drop suggests that attacks on launchers and storage centers are beginning to erode the country’s ability to respond. The strategic dilemma. The result is a strategic paradox that is just beginning to become visible. Missile cities were designed to protect the core of Iranian military power and ensure its ability to retaliate, but in a scenario where the enemy dominate the air and watch constantly the entrances to these complexes can become choke points for the arsenal itself. Iran has spent decades excavating these underground bases with the intention of making its missiles invisible. But satellite images of the war are showing something very different: that this labyrinth of tunnels, designed as a shelter, can become one of its greatest vulnerabilities when the launchers are forced to surface under the look constant flow of planes, drones and satellites. Image | X, Planet Labs In Xataka | We had seen everything in Ukraine, but this is new: neither drones nor missiles, bulldozers have reached the front In Xataka | You’ve probably never heard of urea. The missiles in Iran are destroying their production, and that will affect your food

China spent 10 billion on oil it did not need. With Hormuz blocked, the puzzle finally makes sense

by

As the West panics over the possibility of the barrel break the $100 barrieran eerie calm reigns in Beijing. The Asian giant observes the crisis with the coldness of someone who has already done his homework. During the last few months, the world has been debating the excess oil supply, but the real winner of this war crisis is not firing missiles, but has been filling its storage tanks for years in the most absolute silence. World geopolitics has been blown up a few weeks before the expected summit between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping. As reported Nikkei Asiathe coordinated airstrikes of the United States and Israel (dubbed “Operation Epic Fury“) have culminated in the assassination of the Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Tehran’s response has been a rain of missiles and drones on American allies in the region. The immediate impact has been felt in the water. The Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 million barrels a day flow (20% of the world’s oil supply), is blocked de facto. As detailed Bloomberg, Rates to hire a supertanker on the route from the Middle East to China have skyrocketed by 600%, reaching $200,000 a day (or 525 Worldscale points for a Suezmax). Besides, France 24 points out that insurers They have increased war risk premiums between 25% and 50%. As reported cnnBrent crude oil jumped 6.5% in the early stages, touching $82, driven by fear of prolonged logistical disruptions. Bob McNally, president of Rapidan Energy Group, warned the US chain that closing Hormuz would cause an immediate global energy crisis. China’s exposed vulnerability On paper, the Donald Trump administration’s offensive should be an absolute nightmare for Xi Jinping. As explained The TelegraphAmerican military adventurism is exposing the gigantic energy vulnerability of China, the largest oil importer in the world, which buys three-quarters of the crude oil it consumes abroad. Washington’s strategy seems clear: suffocate the “rebellious” suppliers that supply the Chinese industrial machinery at bargain prices. Earlier this year, the military capture of Nicolás Maduro has established what some analysts They already call the “Donroe Doctrine”. Trump has been explicit in his goal to control oil. If the United States manages to add Venezuelan production to that of Guyana and its own, it would de facto control 30% of the world’s reserves, according to JP Morgan. This movement cuts supply to China in the bud, evaporating imports that represented around 4% of its maritime purchases. according to data from Kpler collected by The Financial Review. However, Washington’s optimism collides with geology: the infrastructure is so in ruins that loading a supertanker today takes five days and the crude oil arrives so “dirty” that the Chinese and Indian refineries themselves have canceled orders, according to a Reuters investigation. Refloating this industry will cost 10 billion dollars annually for a decade, as Francisco Monaldi calculatesdirector of energy policy at Rice University. For its part, the current blow to Iran. From Chosun Daily details that China bought 80% of Iranian maritime exports last year (about 1.38 million barrels per day), which represents 13.4% of Beijing’s total maritime crude oil imports. As he points out Institute for Energy Research (IER) United States, cited by the same mediumChina has used the heavily sanctioned and cheap oil from these countries to cement its manufacturing competitiveness. Losing Iran and Venezuela would force Chinese refiners — especially the independent ones in Shandong, known as “teapots” — to look for much more expensive substitutes on the open market, threatening to import inflation and slow their economic growth. The master plan in execution If Western analysts expected to see China cornered, they were wrong. Beijing foresaw this scenario of isolation and has been executing a four-pronged master plan for years that today allows it to cushion the blow of Hormuz. While in 2025 the world feared a global oversupply, China dedicated itself to massive purchasing. Last year, China spent $10 billion buying an extra 150 million barrels that it didn’t immediately need, absorbing more than 90% of crude oil storage measurable globally. Supported by a new Energy Law that obliges the public and private sector to maintain reserves, Beijing today has strategic reserves equivalent to at least 96 days of imports, according to The Telegraph. Under the banner of national security, China is investing $80 billion annually in its state oil fields. In March 2025 they reached a production peak of 4.6 million barrels per day and they completed the drilling of the deepest oil well in Asia (10,910 meters). Its goal is not financial profitability, but pure autonomy. With Iran and Venezuela under fire, China has simply turned its head toward Russia and Saudi Arabia. According to oil price, Chinese refineries are absorbing record amounts of Russian crude oil (more than 2 million barrels per day in February 2026), taking advantage of the fact that India has given in to pressure from the US to stop buying from Moscow. Simultaneously, Saudi Arabia has cut the official price of its crude oil Arab Light to five-year lows to gain market share in Asia, which has led China to order between 56 and 57 million Saudi barrels by March. China’s definitive move is to abandon the oil board. As analyzed by Professor Hussein Dia in The ConversationChina’s massive commitment to electric vehicles (50% of new car sales last year) and renewable energy is a national security policy. How they collect in The Telegraph, The new five-year plan (2026-2030) seeks to peak oil consumption by accelerating the installation of solar and wind parks (430 gigawatts added last year alone). Unlike the ships in Hormuz, sunlight cannot be blocked by the US Fifth Fleet. The diplomacy of silence and the illusion of OPEC+ In the face of Khamenei’s assassination, the response of the Chinese Foreign Ministry has been one of calculated coldness. They condemned the act as “unacceptable” and a “violation of sovereignty,” but, as pointed out Chosun Dailythey carefully avoided directly mentioning Donald Trump. From Nikkei Asia explains this pragmatism: … Read more

Sam Altman has spent his entire life saying one thing and doing exactly the opposite. And this time it didn’t even take 48 hours.

by

A Mecano’s great song —I know, this is very Kiss FM—he said that ‘the face you see is a Signal ad’. And in case any of our painfully young readers don’t know, Signal is a brand of toothpaste. And if there is anyone whose face is exactly like that, it is Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, who with a perfect and convincing smile tries to convince the world that his company is just as perfect and convincing. For many people, today is not the case. what has happened. These days we have seen how the US and its Department of Defense (or War, as they like to call it now) have decided that if any AI company wants to work with them, they are going to have to let them use the AI ​​as they see fit. That we have to massively spy on people? He spies on her, totally, we have already done it. What should we tell AI to develop lethal autonomous weapons? Well too. Anthropic stands. But lo and behold, precisely the company that was working with the Pentagon He said that oranges from China. Anthropic, which had been collaborating with the Government for months—Claude was used for the arrest of Nicolás Maduro—, has made it clear that there are red lines that he will not cross. If Anthropic doesn’t want to, let OpenAI do it. At the Pentagon they have threatened to turn Anthropic into a pariah company, but at the moment they have not made any official move. What has happened is that the US Government has decided to change its technological partner. OpenAI has replaced Anthropic and appears to have reached an agreement to work with US defense and security agencies. Sam Altman seizes the opportunity. This has been indicated by Sam Altman, who in an ad on Twitter (I still resist calling her “X”) explained that her company had agreed deploy their models on the US War Department’s classified network. The curious thing is that this agreement establishes the same red lines that Anthropic had: no espionage on American citizens and no autonomous weapons. In the official announcement they even highlight that their agreement “has more safeguards than any previous agreement for classified AI deployments, including Anthropic’s.” There is, for example, one more requirement: that their models not be used for “social credit” systems with which citizens are rated based on the information collected from them. But. Although both Sam Altman and the company’s blog appear to place limits on the War Department’s use of its AI, the terms of that agreement contradict Altman’s claims. The announcement mentions a specific paragraph of the agreement that explicitly states the following: The War Department may use the AI ​​system for all lawful purposes, consistent with applicable law, operational requirements, and well-established security and oversight protocols. “The AI ​​system will not be used to independently direct autonomous weapons in any case where human control is required by law, regulation or Department policy, nor will it be used to make other high-risk decisions that require approval from a similarly competent human decision-maker.” Mass spying on American citizens is legal in certain scenarios as part of the Patriot Act that was passed after the 9/11 attacks, and that would allow AI to process data and communications collected by mass surveillance systems. Jeremy Lewin, a State Department official, has indicated that this agreement “flows from the pillar of ‘all legitimate use’”, and points out that what Altman proposes regarding red lines is not as clear-cut as it seems. Internal protests. Last Friday at 5:01 p.m., Anthropic was due to accept the Pentagon’s terms, but it did not do so. During that morning, several OpenAI and Google employees showed their support for the ethical and moral positioning of the rival company, and almost 800 of them (681 from Google, 96 from OpenAI) signed an open letter entitled “We will not be divided.” Altman says one thing, does another. In an interview with CNBCSam Altman said on CNBC that despite all the differences he has with Anthropic, “I trust them as a company, and I think they really care about safety.” On Thursday, the CEO of OpenAI sent an internal statement expressing his desire for “things to de-escalate between Anthropic and the Department of Defense.” The message came to nothing less than two days later, when he announced the agreement with the same Department. Altman says one thing, does another. In an interview with CNBCSam Altman said on CNBC that despite all the differences he has with Anthropic, “I trust them as a company, and I think they really care about safety.” On Thursday, the CEO of OpenAI sent an internal statement expressing his desire for “things to de-escalate between Anthropic and the Department of Defense.” The message came to nothing less than two days later, when he announced the agreement with the same Department. The world against OpenAI. Many have ended up criticizing OpenAI’s way of acting on social networks. On Reddit they appeared several messages that encouraged users to “Cancel ChatGPT” with thousands of positive votes and also thousands of comments in which the tone was indignant with the way in which OpenAI and Sam Altman have taken advantage of this circumstance. We have seen critical movements in the past —Facebook, Netflix—, but it usually happens that after these first moments, companies end up recovering from the criticism and even come out stronger for a simple reason: Human beings have very bad memories. In Xataka | OpenAI has a problem: Anthropic is succeeding right where the most money is at stake

Valladolid and León have been longing for a highway that connects them for more than 25 years. 75 million will be spent to build 10 kilometers

by

Valladolid and León are linked by 142 kilometers and a claim. Specifically, converting the N-610 secondary road into a two-lane highway in each direction. The project has received a small but important push. One that should culminate in the construction of a dozen more kilometers in a project that has been talked about for more than a quarter of a century. What’s new? That the Ministry of Transport and Sustainable Mobility approved last Tuesdayprovisionally, the connection between Villanubla and La Mudarra to continue advancing in the construction of the A-60 highway, which should connect Valladolid with León, currently separated by a national highway. Of course, the approval given by transport does not guarantee that these 10 kilometers will be carried out because, for the moment, any affected neighbor can present the appropriate allegations or observations in relation to the expected expropriations that are going to be carried out. To do so, interested parties have 30 business days. A new step. If consolidated, what will be built will be a 10-kilometer stretch between Villanubla and La Mudarra, a connection close to the Valladolid airport where, until now, the A-60 highway ends on its exit from this city. The project has an estimated budget of 74,750,633.16 euros. There seems little progress but if we take into account what has been done so far, the qualitative leap is more than evident. And right now, There are only 45 kilometers built of the more than 120 kilometers through which the highway is expected to run. That is, with those 10 kilometers, we would be close to reaching half of it and would represent around 10% of the total work. A 20th century project. The issue is especially painful for the neighbors because the project has been on the table for more than a quarter of a century. To find its origin, we must go back to 1997 when it was approved for the first time to deal with the matter in the Cortes. However, it was not until 2002 when the first procedures began, as stated in Europa Press. This last section, in fact, has been frozen for years and is now beginning to be processed urgently. In Valladolid newspaper They point out that the first time the papers were put on the table for these 10 kilometers that separate Villanubla from La Mudarra was 2017. However, the passage of time has caused the deadlines to expire, so it was not until the end of 2025 that a push was given again to the construction of this new section. The current situation. Right now, covering the distance that separates Valladolid and León represents an inappropriate expenditure of time for the distance that separates them. The short route is the N-610 highway, a secondary road with 142 kilometers that requires almost two hours of travel. There are also no better alternatives to reduce the time one needs. If you want to take a highway, there are not many options. The most obvious requires you to go from Valladolid to Tordesillas, there take the A-6 and then connect with the A-66. In this way, the driver is already forced to get closer (very close) to the two hours and add another 40 kilometers to the trip. Of course, the roads are safer. Security issue. Obviously, the construction of a highway between Valladolid and León would have an immediate impact on the security of the region. According to data from the DGT collected by Valladolid newspaper, In 2024, the N-601 recorded 41 accidents as it passed through Valladolid. That is, almost one accident per week was recorded. That year, nine deaths were recorded before the end of 2024 and in 2023 another 11 people died. Until now, the prevention plans for these accidents have focused on adapting the road to the large volume of traffic on it, with the 2+1 lane projection which should alleviate traffic jams in some points, especially those generated by heavy transportation. Photo | In Xataka | Spain built its roads thinking it was a hot country. Now that’s a problem

China has spent 2025 putting things into orbit. Now they have gone further by launching a reusable space plane

by

Where I said ‘Mars’, I say ‘Moon’. For years, Elon Musk and SpaceX have maintained that colonize Mars It was humanity’s next great leap. While others (and NASA itself) considered the Moon still interesting, SpaceX looked down on her. Until recently, whenThe company has taken a step back recognizing that colonizing the Moon is easier than Mars. And of course, on the other side of the world we can have an explanation: China has the Moon in its sights. And they have just done another test with their mysterious reusable ship. The test. Last Saturday, and in the most aseptic way possible, China launched a reusable spacecraft. This was confirmed by the state news media Xinhua through an release Which leaves more questions than answers. Officially, we only know that, from one of its multiple launch bases, the country launched the vehicle on the back of a Long March-2F rocket. Mission? “The experimental spacecraft will carry out technological verification of reusable spacecraft, providing data and technical support for the peaceful use of space.” What technologies? Why do you want to know that, good night. TOP SECRET. This vehicle it’s not new. In fact, this would be the fourth trip since 2020 of an experimental ship whose characteristics are being kept in a state of absolute secrecy. On the first trip, this model would have been orbiting the Earth for two days. In 2022 it was launched again and returned in 2023 after 276 days going around. And in September 2024 there was another launch that returned after 268 days. As we say, the secrecy is total, so we do not know what type of vehicle it is, but there has been speculation that it may be the answer to the X-37B robotic vehicle of the United States Air Force. Neither Reuters nor Xinhua comment that it could be the Shenlong, the Chinese ‘Divine Dragon’ which is the competition of the aforementioned X-37B. Because if we talk about reusable rockets like SpaceX’s Falcon, China also has an answer: the LandSpace. They don’t stop throwing things. Beyond the reusable ship, China has gotten right into the space race. Like Europeis another of the countries that seeks space sovereignty, and one of the toughest tests was carried out at the beginning of December. To test the overload capacity of its systems and analyze whether they can handle several missions at the same time, in early December, China completed four space missions in four days. In total, there were 80 orbital launches in 2025, surpassing the previous record of 68 launches and achieving with this proof of this something only within the reach of the current SpaceX. And it seems that 2026 has started as last year ended. Target: Moon. Among China’s medium-term objectives is to take astronauts to the Moon before 2030. They want to compete against the NASA and its Artemis mission for establish a research base on the satellite while they finalize the building your own space station. The Moon has become that last piece of cheese on the plate, but instead of giving it up, the great powers want to get hold of it. Reason? Its great value to carry out experiments to expand sovereignty on other planets, but also with regard to resources that can be exploited and sent to Earth refers. Image | Baijiahao In Xataka | We have not known for 10 years what the US fighter jets saw in the sky. Until a Chinese copy has appeared

The US spent $600 billion building its highway network. It’s less than what big tech companies are going to spend on AI this year

by

The irruption of ChatGPT in the technological panorama in 2022 marked the starting signal in the AI ​​race; a race in which, year after year, large technology companies continue to increase their spending without stopping. 2026 has just begun and, far from letting it go, the big tech They have put their foot even further on the accelerator. All but one. walk or bust. We already know the planned capex for 2026 of the main technology companies, that is, what they plan to invest in capital expenditures. amazon: 200,000 million Alphabet: 175-185 billion Goal: 115-135 billion Microsoft: 140,000 million Apple: 13,000 million If we add it up taking the highest figures they have given, it is 673,000 million dollars, if we take the lowest figures it would be 643,000 million. In any case it is outrageous. In 2025 the figures were already dizzying and we are talking about an increase of around 60%. There has come a point where we have to stop and ask ourselves: How many zeros does that have? (yes twelve). Context of this madness. Here are a few comparisons to put this figure in context. It is superior to Sweden GDP in 2025 (662,000 million), that of Israel (610,000 million) and that of Singapore (574,000 million). As pointed out this user in Xexceeds what it cost to build the entire US interstate highway system (about 634,000 million) and is a quarter of the entire global military spending in a whole year. It’s like spending $1.2 million per minute for an entire year. It doesn’t make any sense. The market response. The fear of a bubble was noted after the announcements of the different companies, causing sharp falls in the stock market despite the fact that all of them have made profits (some breaking records). amazon fell 12% after announcing a capex of 200,000 millionmuch higher than forecasts Alphabet (Google) achieved record revenues, but it was not enough to convince the markets and its shares fell 10% in the following days Goal also announced record revenue and they had a 10% increase. However, days later things changed and they fell 8%. Microsoft fit the strongest blow, with a drop of 18%. Additionally, they revealed that 45% of their cloud business contracts are for OpenAI and the market does not reward dependency. Apple was the winner, with an increase of more than 7% since they announced results. The declines have been corrected in recent days and all companies have seen their value stabilize, but the message was clear: investors fear that this level of capex is far ahead of the ability of AI to generate profits in the short term. Where are they going to get the money from? It’s the big question. As stated in Financial Timescompanies must choose between reducing shareholder returns, using their cash reserves, or borrowing more money. In the case of Amazon, estimates point to a cash flow of 180 billion, Alphabet 195 billion and Meta 130 billion. The threat of free cash flow falling into negative territory is there, so we can expect them to issue more debt and stop share buybacks. Think different. Then we have Apple, which announced revenues of 144 billion in the last quarter, boosted by sales of the iPhone 17 during the Christmas campaign. Its capex is a fraction of what other companies have spent because Apple doesn’t build data centers, it outsources them. He agreement with Google to use Gemini can be interpreted as They have lost the AI ​​racebut in the context of a possible bubble it is a masterstroke: Google is the one who assumes the brutal spending on infrastructure and who is exposed to the bubble, while they benefit from their technology and see how the market rewards them for spending less. In Xataka | What have Apple and Google agreed on for the new Siri? Nobody knows because Google doesn’t even want to mention it. Image | Photo of Adam Nir in Unsplashedited

This year more will be invested in data centers than what the US spent to reach the Moon

by

We are witnessing live a technological race that is no longer measured only in announcements or demonstrations, but in tangible investments that grow at a speed that is difficult to ignore. In the United States, and also in other regions, large companies are allocating increasing amounts of money to build and expand the infrastructure that supports the current deployment of artificial intelligence services and the expansion of computing capacity that these companies pursue. Some speak of excessive enthusiasm and even a possible bubblebut the money already invested is part of the economic reality of the sector, while the projected figures point to an even larger scale. The question, therefore, is not whether the bet exists, but how big it really is. The numbers. If the first step is to assume that the investment exists, the second is to quantify it precisely. Data collected by The Wall Street Journal They suggest that Meta, Amazon, Microsoft and Alphabet (Google) could concentrate a joint expenditure of up to $670 billion in 2026 aimed at artificial intelligence infrastructure. We are talking about capital outlays associated with data centers, hardware and capacity expansion, not just “brick”. When a single annuity reaches that order of magnitude, the conversation shifts from expectations to measurable economic consequences. Dollars are not compared. What the analysis proposes is not a direct equivalence between amounts spent in different times, but rather a way of measuring the economic weight of each effort in its own historical context. Instead of adjusting old figures to current prices for inflation, the article uses the percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) as a common reference for separate projects over time. That shift in focus shifts the conversation from absolute money to relative magnitude within the U.S. economy. And it is precisely there where the investment associated with artificial intelligence acquires a historical dimension that is difficult to ignore. The investments. Among the great economic milestones that are often used as historical references in the United States, there are episodes as different as the Louisiana Purchase, the railroad expansion of the 19th century or the construction of the interstate highway system, all of them with different relative weights within the economy of their time. Using that same metric, this effort has been estimated around the following magnitudes: Louisiana Purchase: 3% of GDP Railway expansion: 2% of GDP Interstate highways: 0.4% of GDP Apollo Program: 0.2% of GDP As we can see, the planned investment in artificial intelligence infrastructure is around 2.1% of GDP. It’s not the same, but. Historical parallelism functions as a scaling tool, not as institutional equivalence. The large projects with which the current moment is compared were, in many cases, public initiatives financed directly or indirectly by the federal State, while investment in AI infrastructure corresponds mainly to corporate spending. That distinction is important, however, from a strictly economic perspective, the relative size of the effort remains comparable. The State does not pay the main bill. That the bulk of investment is private does not mean that the public sector remains on the sidelines. It’s no secret that the U.S. government influences the pace and shape of deployment through regulatory decisions, permitting, energy planning, and federal land use for new data center infrastructure. This set of levers is not a substitute for corporate capital, and at the same time it fits with a broader strategy aimed at preserving American leadership in the global race for AI. Historical comparison. This ends up pointing out something deeper than a simple number: it indicates the type of priority that a society decides to give to certain technologies at a specific time. When investment in AI infrastructure reaches a relative weight comparable to that of major American economic milestones, reading transcends the technology sector and enters the strategic realm. Images | POT | freepik In Xataka | Daniela Amodei, co-founder of Anthropic: “studying humanities will be more important than ever”

We thought that the 72 billion that Meta spent on AI in 2025 were outrageous. It was just the appetizer

by

The big tech companies They are spending a lot of money on AI infrastructure and, far from slackening, the figure is only increasing (and not a little). In the case of Meta, the company planned to spend $66 billion in 2025, but in October they had to correct the figure to $72 billion. 2026 has just begun and the figure they have just given is directly insane. Doubling down, literally. Between 115,000 and 135,000 million dollarsthese are the figures that Meta handles for the year 2026. It is almost double what they spent in 2025, a figure that, as we said, they had to correct towards the end of the year, so let’s not rule out that it ends up being more. The spending will mainly be intended to “support the efforts of Meta Superintelligence Labs”, that is, to build more data centers. Which by the way, more than 6 million dollars have been spent on advertising campaigns to convince us that data centers are cool. Record results. The fourth quarter of 2025 has been very good for Meta. Revenue grew 24% compared to the same period of the previous year, reaching 59,000 million dollars and a net profit of 22,800 million dollars, figures that exceed forecasts. According to its CEO, the good results are thanks to the implementation of AI in its advertising services. Recovering confidence. In the previous quarter, the huge spending on AI generated many doubts among investors and, although the results were also good, shares fell up to 8%. This time it has been different and, although spending will skyrocket even more, shares are up 10%. It seems that they trust Zuckerberg’s direction again. Where is the ceiling? It is difficult to know, but what we do know is that since 2023 it has been increasing exaggeratedly. And not a little. According to Meta datain 2023 they spent 28 billion dollars, in 2024 they rose to 39 billion and in 2025 to 72 billion. The jump has been getting higher and higher with each year, I wonder when they will let off the accelerator. All for AI, but without AI. All the big technology companies are spending a lot on AI, but what is striking about the case of Meta is that has not yet launched its new models. To put it in context, Meta’s expected spending is higher than Google’s in 2025, but Google has Gemini while Meta has promises. After the fiasco of Call 4Zuckerberg set himself as a target Completely remodel your AI department. It was spent a fortune in hiring new talentscreated a secret laboratory next to his officeha cut the Metaverse department (also with layoffs) to move resources to AI. The ambition is huge: creating superintelligence. At the moment, what we know is that they are preparing a language model called Avocado and another for image generation that they call Mango. They better measure up, otherwise They will always have the public. Image | Unsplash, Meta In Xataka | Three years after the metaverse fiasco, Zuckerberg has another burning nail for Meta: digital glasses

Data centers are so important that Meta has spent millions on advertising to change our perception of them

by

Meta has spent 6.4 million dollars on an advertising campaign between November and December of last year to convince the American public of the benefits of its data centers, according to the New York Times. The ads, aired in eight state capitals and Washington, DC, featured idealized images of American towns revitalized by these facilities. exists an increasingly significant social rejection on the installation of data centers dedicated to AI, especially due to the impact they have on the excessive consumption of basic resources like light and water. And of course, first we have to convince that they are key so that Meta and the rest of the big technology companies can continue with their operations. The Goal campaign. According to the media, the ads featured emotional stories about Altoona (Iowa) and Los Lunas (New Mexico), two locations where Meta operates data centers. With guitar music and shots of farms and football fields, the videos promised jobs and prosperity. “We are bringing jobs here, for ourselves and for our next generation,” the voiceover said. According to Michael Beach, CEO of Cross Screen Media, Meta “could have purchased these ads with the goal of influencing political decisions and reaching legislators.” Ryan Daniels, spokesperson for Meta, limited himself to say to the NYT that the company pays the full costs of the energy used by its data centers, without commenting on the advertising campaign. Meta is not alone. Just like account NYT, Amazon is funding a similar campaign in Virginia through Virginia Connects, a nonprofit created by the Data Center Coalition. From the Financial Times they point In addition, other operators such as Digital Realty, QTS and NTT Data are also acting more intensely to defend the construction of new facilities. Endurance. In the United States, social rejection has caused the cancellation of multimillion-dollar projects in Oregon, Arizona, Missouri, Indiana and Virginia. Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen explained He told the NYT that the issue has become “a priority on Capitol Hill” when his voters began to complain en masse about electricity bills. Just like share The media, this month, Van Hollen presented a law to regulate the energy consumption of data centers. Even President Donald Trump spoke out on the matter: “The big tech companies that build them must pay their own way,” wrote a few weeks ago on Truth Social. electricity bill. Data centers have become critical infrastructures for the development of artificial intelligence, but there is increasing social tension over their installation. In October, Bloomberg counted that in the last five years the wholesale price of electricity in areas near large concentrations of data centers in the United States had increased by up to 267%. In Baltimore, residents paid $17 per megawatt-hour in 2020; In 2025 that figure reaches $38. On the other hand, the medium demonstrated In their research, 70% of the points where electricity price increases were recorded were less than 80 kilometers from data centers with significant activity. From Bloomberg they estimate that the energy demand of these facilities in the United States will double by 2035, becoming the largest increase since the 1960s. The situation in Spain. Our country is also experiencing a boom in the construction of data centers. The Community of Madrid, paradoxically the region with the greatest energy deficit in Spainconcentrates a good part of these projects and is expected to reach a power of 1.7 gigawatts in 2030. The consulting firm CBRE pointed out in a report that “there is no investor, operator or large technology company that does not have in its strategic plans to establish its data center project in the Iberian market.” Madrid, together with Barcelona, ​​already competes with cities such as Milan, Zurich or Berlin, although still far from the leading European group in terms of power capacity formed by Frankfurt, London, Amsterdam, Paris and Dublin. What awaits us. According to Bloomberg, the forecasts they point because data centers will consume more than 4% of the world’s electricity in 2035. If these facilities were a country, they would be fourth in energy consumption, only behind China, the United States and India. Meanwhile, big technology companies are already exploring solutions such as modular nuclear reactors (SMR) to power your facilities, or send data centers to space. Cover image | Mark ZuckerbergGoal In Xataka | “The assemblies are not going to be done by AI”: we talk to the kids who have become carpenters, truck drivers and tinkerers

We have spent 30 years forgetting how things are made. Now China has the keys to the matter and the West is in panic

by

For the past three decades, Western democracies have operated under an intellectual mirage. Elites, blinded by a neoclassical bias, assumed that control of intellectual property, financial instruments, and software code constituted the pinnacle of value creation. In this worldview, physical processes—the “dirty work” of mining, refining, and manufacturing—were considered low-margin commodity services that could be outsourced to low-cost jurisdictions without strategic risk. As Gillian Tett explains in his Financial Times columnthis cognitive bias allowed China to dominate global supply chains with little protest. The material deterioration of the West. The essence of the current problem is defined by investor Craig Tindale in his essay “The return of matter”. In it he argues that the West has suffered “strategic disarmament” by dismantling its national productive economy in favor of quarterly financial efficiency. As Tindale details, he fell into the “raw material paradox”: believing that possessing the raw mineral is equivalent to possessing the usable material. While the West possesses vast geological deposits, China has monopolized the “Midstream,” that is, the heavy industrial capacity to refine, smelt and purify these materials into useful forms. Without this capability, a lithium mine in Australia or a copper mine in Arizona are simply quarries for a Chinese smelter; They are not strategic assets for the West if Beijing has the keys to access them. The data is there. The data of the Chinese industrial domain are, as investor Craig Tindale describesoverwhelming and unprecedented in history, consolidating what he calls “processing sovereignty”: Gallium: China controls approximately 98% of global production, a material that is essential for AESA radars, 5G networks and the semiconductors of the future. Rare earths: The Asian giant dominates 90% of chemical separation capacity – the true technical “separation wall” – and more than 90% of the production of NdFeB magnets, vital for electric vehicle engines and defense systems. Graphite: Control more than 90% of the production of graphite anodes, the indispensable component of virtually all lithium-ion batteries. Magnesium and Polysilicon: Your control extends to 90-95% of magnesium casting (key for aluminum alloys) and 95% polysilicon necessary for solar energy. As Tett points outwhile the West became obsessed with software and services, China was quietly building the physical infrastructure that today gives it a massive competitive advantage in the race for artificial intelligence and the energy transition. This physical reality is what has forced the Trump administration to try to redraw the energy map by taking Venezuelan crude oil, desperately seeking to regain control over the “matter.” The electric wall of AI. This physical reality has revealed that the race for Artificial Intelligence It’s not just a question of code or chips. The digital leadership of the West is now encountering the physical limit of cheap energy. Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft, and Jensen Huang, director of Nvidia, agree that the biggest current problem is not the excess of chips, but lack of electricity to connect them. On this board, China has gone from being a dependent petrostate to becoming the first “Electrostate” in the world. Beijing now produces 2.5 times more electricity than the US and builds 74% of all current solar and wind projects on the planet. By investing massively in electrification, China is expanding an infrastructure that could give it a definite advantage in the AI ​​race. The Venezuelan trap. Against this backdrop, Donald Trump’s administration has accepted the importance of physical matter, but seems determined to fight with tools from the last century. The taking of Venezuelan crude oil seeks to consolidate the reserves of Venezuela, Guyana and the United States are under US influence, which would represent close to 30% of the world’s oil reserves. according to a JPMorgan report. However, Venezuelan oil alone cannot solve the AI ​​problem. As Gillian Tett warnswhile Washington asks the world to buy 20th century infrastructure (fossil fuels), Beijing offers 21st century infrastructure (renewable energy and high voltage networks). In addition, Venezuelan crude oil is “mortgaged”: The country owes up to $60 billion to China under the oil-for-loans model, and its infrastructure is in ruins. The skills gap and the clash of “clocks.” Rebuilding industrial sovereignty is not just a question of money. The West has closed its heavy industrial capacity for thirty years, causing a “human bottleneck”. Metallurgists and process engineers who know how to adjust an unstable furnace or a chemical separation train are retiring without relief. Tindale further postulates a conflict of time horizons. The “Western Financial Clock,” which requires quarterly profits, has destabilized the “Industrial Clock” (which requires decades of investment) and the “War Clock” (which requires immediate reserves). While China’s clocks are synchronized by the state, the West remains trapped in short-term financial efficiency. Towards a rematerialized sovereignty? The JPMorgan report suggests that the US has won the short-term battle for Venezuelan crude oil. But, as Gillian Tett concludesrisks losing the global strategic war for the energy that will power AI. Tindale’s thesis is blunt: a civilization that financializes everything ends up sacrificing the material base that keeps it independent. If the West does not rebuild its foundries, refineries and factories, it will renounce the material sovereignty that sustains democracy, becoming a simple “quarry” rich in resources but poor in capacity in the face of a rival that already holds the keys to the physical world. Image | freepik Xataka | Venezuela has something much more valuable than oil and the US knows it. The big problem is that he doesn’t know where he is.

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.