States

60 years ago a student wanted to study the mountains of the United States. Unknowingly felled the oldest known tree

by

At a glance ‘Prometheus’ It was a twisted, rugged, whimsically shaped pine tree that stood on a Nevada mountain. Nothing to do with gigantic sequoias of Redwood National Park, also in the USA, where specimens of more than 100 meters high with bases that are around 30 m in diameter. That, of course, at first glance. Although its size was not striking and it barely stood out in the grove in which it sprouted, ‘Prometheus’ was a tree of almost 5,000 yearswhich made it one of the oldest in the world. Why do we talk about him in the past tense? Very simple: because in the 60s a student who was especially diligent with his research felled it with permission from the authorities. With you, the Pinus longaeva. Its name may not be as well known as that of the redwoods, the baobabs or the Douglas firstrees that have been fascinating humanity for centuries due to their colossal dimensions, but the bristlecone pines (Pinus longaeva) are just as amazing. Not because of its size, but because of its age. Located primarily in the higher altitude mountains of California, this species has managed to survive for several millennia. As? Its growth is very slow and they usually sprout separately from each other, which allows them to adapt to harsh habitats and withstand fires better. The key to its longevity however lies in its “architecture” and adaptations. As remember from the US National Park Service (NPS), the roots of the Pinus longaeva They only nourish the part of the tree that is directly above them. If that root dies, it only affects its section of the tree. Hence, it is not unusual to see specimens with dry bark on one side and that, however, continue to grow healthily. an old acquaintance. In Wheeler PeakNevada, stood years ago a magnificent specimen of Pinus longaeva. Its height was nothing out of this world, but it was so twisted and had such an ancient appearance that mountaineers in the area They baptized him ‘Prometheus’. Seen in perspective, the nickname is still ironic. In the classical mythology Zeus imposed a horrible punishment on the titan of that name for giving humanity the gift of fire and metallurgy. At Wheeler Peak the ‘Prometheus’ that grew rooted to the mountain ended up perishing precisely because of the efforts of a university student to understand the geology of the region. To understand it you have to go back to summer of 1964when Donald R. Currey, a graduate student studying the ice age of eastern Nevada, had an idea: To better understand the formation of glaciers, he decided to extract samples from the oldest trees that grew in the region. It wasn’t anything groundbreaking. The dendrochronologythe discipline that is responsible for studying climate patterns by analyzing tree rings, dates back to the beginning of the 20th century. In fact, the idea of ​​obtaining samples from the logs sounded so reasonable that authorities raised no objections when Currey asked for permission to study them. The great unknown. In theory, what Currey proposed was to use a drill bit to remove small samples of the trunk, a kind of cylinders from the trunk. pencil size that could later be analyzed in the laboratory. It came with the different rings and their characteristics being appreciated. When it was ‘Prometheus’ turn, something went wrong. Or so it is believed, since more than six decades later it’s still not entirely clear what exactly happened at Wheeler Peak. Some accounts claim that Currey’s drill bit broke while the geologist was trying to make his way through the dense pine wood, so he requested help from the Forest Service. To solve it, the workers opted for the most radical solution: they took out the chainsaw and cut down the tree. Other versions claim that Currey did not know how to work with such a complicated specimen or that there was simply no error and from the beginning he needed a complete cross section to study the trunk. Regardless, there are two clear details. First, that was the end of ‘Prometheus’. Second, Currey did not work as foreigners. He had permission from the Forest Service. And the surprise came. It was not necessary to cut ‘Prometheus’ in two to intuit that it was a very ancient tree. If Currey looked at this pine and others in the area it was precisely because he assumed that they were old enough to give him a broad ‘snapshot’ of the climatic events that had occurred in the region. The surprise came when he took the piece of wood to his laboratory. As ancient as I suspected ‘Prometheus’ to be, one thing is clear: Currey fell short. When he started counting growth rings, he added neither more nor less than 4,862. Given the harsh conditions in which the pine grew, which could have influenced the formation of the layers, the experts ended up concluding that its age was most likely closer to 4,900 years. That is to say, the ancient tree already appeared on the Nevada mountain when the pharaohs reigned in ancient Egypt or Hammurabi ruled in Babylon. The oldest in the world? Although environmental awareness in the 1960s was not the same as it is today, the mistake was considerable. Especially since it was the Forest Service itself that made it possible. The age of ‘Prometheus’ is in fact so astonishing that the NPS itself recognize which at the time was considered “the oldest tree ever dated.” It even surpassed the famous tree ‘Methuselah’other Pinus longaeva of California that is around 4,850 years old. Today that title is in question. Especially after a theoretically even older tree was discovered in 2012, another bristlecone from more than 5,000 years. The US authorities recognize in any case that it is “very likely” that there are other, even older, undated specimens of the same species. “The bristlecone pines of the Great Basin are notable for being the oldest non-clonal species on the … Read more

It is already looking for other bases in the United States (and even abroad)

by

The pace of SpaceX launches It’s already dizzyingbut Elon Musk’s company assures that this is nothing. In the future, they hope to make many more releases. In fact, its most ambitious goal is to make more than a thousand launches a year with its famous Starship. Today, they only have two launch platforms adapted to this ship. in your Starbase base. That, logically, would be very short for them at that rate. This is why they are already looking for new launch locations. Many in the United States, but possibly some abroad as well. An ad in X. The news has been revealed through SpaceX’s X (formerly Twitter) account. After a publication by a user speculating about the possible purchase of land to expand its launches, the company not only has not denied it, but has gone further. This user was talking about some land in Louisiana, but SpaceX has announced that they are also considering buying outside the United States. What is known so far. Beyond that speculation from a tweeter, what we do know is that SpaceX is modifying three platforms in the area of ​​Cape Canaveral, Florida, to be able to launch Starship from there. This is the place from which a good part of NASA’s ships are launched. However, there was no space available for the Starship launch. With this decision by SpaceX, its search for new spaces is clear. Although it seems that that is just the beginning. Be careful with the bureaucracy. Buying land abroad to launch ships into space is not so simple. As explained in spacethe United States government welcomes space launches under the framework of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). Based on this, American companies that want to fly from foreign soil have to overcome a series of bureaucratic procedures, which are expedited if the country in question has already signed something known as Technological Safeguards Agreement. This agreement derived of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), which emerged in 1987 to ensure that missile technology did not end up in the wrong hands. Now, it is used to ensure that countries where space launches are carried out comply with a series of guidelines that do not endanger either the missions or the United States. Candidate countries. There are some countries that have already signed the Technological Safeguards Agreement with the United States. Some examples are Brazil, Norway, New Zealand, Australia and the United Kingdom. Therefore, if SpaceX wants to launch in foreign countries, these would be the easiest options. In fact, the American company Rocket Lab It already launches from New Zealand without any problem. Step by step. Before talking about thousands of launches a year, we will have to see how the Starship evolves. Its 12th flight, in which version 3 will finally be tested, is scheduled for May 19, local Texas time. If this goes well, SpaceX will be closer to the Moon with its Starship and, logically, will also take another step towards the normalization of commercial flights of this ship. Only many years later will that massive shipment to space arrive. They are right to be proactive, but there is still a long way to go before they really need those launch bases abroad. Images | SpaceX In Xataka | In 2018, Elon Musk put his own car into orbit. Eight years later it is still circling the Earth

In the war of humanoid robots, those from the United States dance and those from China work by the piece. It is not a technological issue

by

The United States and China are fighting a technological battle with two very clear strategies: one visible and the other invisible. The invisible is that of the artificial intelligence, the fight between models and the basic technological development. The visible one is the creation of data centersthe development of next generation networks and robotics. Because it is the robots that are at the center of that technological race between the two powersbut while one country shows them jumping, the other is making them work. The difference is not technology or money: it is state support. However, as with so many things, there is a trick to it. Priority. China has put robotics at the center of its technological development program for the coming years. The new Five-Year Plan, the roadmap in which the country points out the objectives that it will try to achieve over the next five years, robotics is in a privileged place next to the development of the chip ecosystem or the 6G networks. This is a state issue, a national priority that marks a deliberate shift from assembly line robotics, the ‘simple robots’ of traditional automation, to one with built-in artificial intelligence and a greater range of functions they can perform. Humanoid robotics is not new and, in fact, Boston Dynamics is the company that has been demonstrating its products for years. But while the demonstrations by American companies consisted of making their vehicles dance or do somersaults, humanoid robotsChina has been showing them at sporting events and in impressive showsbut it is also putting them in front of stores. to work. There are already stores in Beijing that are operated by humanoid robots. They are independent, serve users and do not need human supervision (unless they are like this japanese robot). They are also turning them into guides in museums and stores, but beyond that public-facing work, there are important groups that are incorporating humanoid robotics into their workforce. An example is CATL. The electric vehicle battery giant began deploy humanoid robots at its Zhengzhou plant. Their task is one considered high risk for human workers: connecting high-voltage battery plugs on an assembly line. The robots are made by a startup called Spirit AI and feature a vision-language-action AI model. According to the company, they are having 99% success in connections, they triple the work that a human can do and, obviously, they do not need breaks. But it is not only private companies that are deploying this technology. The State Electricity Grid Corporation has intended 6.8 billion yuan, about 1 billion euros, to acquire 8,500 robots with AI. The intention is to deploy them in 26 regions to inspect and maintain power lines. It has a trick. Returning to the comparison with the United States, there is something that stands out: the valuation of the companies. While Chinese powers like Linkerbot are valued at 6,000 million dollars, the American Figure is valued in 39,000 million. The key is that Figure has shipped far fewer units to the market, something largely dominated by Chinese companies. Analysts expect both countries to develop markets of similar size, but China currently leads by far in the early commercialization of humanoid robots. Now, not all the mountain is oregano and, in the last report of the International Federation of Robotics highlights that, although China is dominating the deployment of robots globally (humanoids and non-humanoids), the mass market will still take several years to arrive. According to that document, there are more than 150 humanoid robot developers currently operating in the Chinese market, a market that will represent in 2025 more than 85% of the 15,000 humanoid robot installations worldwide. USA represents 13%. However, what the IFR also says is that much of that deployment remains limited to demonstrations or pilot projects, not a replacement as such for the human workforce. That is to say, there are companies that are already using robots on a large scale (the examples of CATL and the State itself), but within the figures that are used to talk about this Chinese dominance also include those pilot programs or robots that are dedicated to playing sports and dancing, as in the United States. Need. In any case, there is something undeniable: China is betting very hard and very quickly on robotics, be it humanoid or that of the ‘robodogs’ that are already using in military forces or in divisions of firefighters. And the reason is that the country is facing a precipice: that of the demographic pyramid. The accelerated aging of its workforce, together with new generations that are not willing to work for a decent wage, are accelerating the implementation of robots to improve productivity and efficiency in various sectors. China is not the only one. Japan is also experiencing with robotics in day-to-day jobs because it faces the same problem of population aging. And Samsung, part of a South Korea that is also experiencing a demographic crisis, has already indicated that it has a great plan underway to automate its factories with humanoid robots controlled by a central AI. In Xataka | In China they are not satisfied with creating advanced robots: a company has developed a head that gestures like a human

The low cost companies of the United States are already suffering from the new oil crisis

by

2.5 billion dollars. That is the figure that low-cost airlines demand from the United States Government in order to continue operating in the country. The rise in fuel prices has reached such a point that a handful of companies are beginning to see the wolf’s ears. And that wolf is called: bankruptcy. 2.5 billion dollars. The Association of Value Airlines, made up of Allegiant Air, Avelo Air, Frontier Airlines, Spirit Airlines and Sun Country (all low-cost airlines operating in the United States), have asked the United States Government to create a liquidity fund of $2.5 billion to pay for the fuel they need to offer their services. At the meeting, they assure from Reutersairline executives, Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy and Head of the Federal Aviation Administration Bryan Bedford met. 111 dollars. It is the average ticket price offered by the low-cost airlines that attended the meeting. A figure that, they say, is impossible to maintain if the price of fuel continues to increase. And, according to his calculations, those 2.5 billion dollars It will be the increase in prices at the end of the year that they will have to assume if the market continues to be as volatile as it has been until now. According to their calculations, the rise in the price of oil has been such that it is forcing them to pay for fuel at twice the price they normally did. This puts their operations at risk to the point that, they say, the profit margin is so narrow that it puts the viability of the companies at risk. Ravine. Neither the White House nor federal aviation officials responded to questions from Reuters but by then it was already known that talks had been initiated to provide $500 million to Spirit Airlines. The airline, however, ended up bankrupt this weekend. The company, they explain in BBChad operated in the country for more than 30 years but since the hardest years of the Covid-19 pandemic, it was going through severe financial difficulties. The rise in fuel prices has been the last straw that has ended up leaving passengers on the ground. The Secretary of Transportation of the United States, Sean Duffy, has assured that the company already had serious problems before the country launched its first attacks against Iran. Now, 17,000 workers have lost their jobs overnight. It’s not the only one. Although the Spirit case has been the most striking (its business became such that in 2014 Morgan Stanley pointed it out as the airline with the greatest potential for its investors). but he withdrew his support in 2023), this airline has not been the only one in which bankruptcy due to the enormous cost of fuel has weighed on the heads of hundreds or thousands of workers. Latvia has had to rescue Air Baltic with a loan of 30 million euros and airlines such as Lufthansa or SAS have had to cancel thousands of flights to try to contain the hemorrhage. In the case of Lufthansathe company has focused on short-haul flights where profit margins are narrower, canceling more than 20,000 of them before the end of the year. For its part, SAS canceled more than 1,000 flights only last April. A warning (with buts). Michael O’Leary, CEO of Ryanair, has also not missed the opportunity to attack his rivals. In The Spanish They report that O’Leary predicts the bankruptcy of two or three European companies before the end of the year if the oil crisis continues. For the manager, WizzAir and Air Baltic would be the main candidates. However, some analysts have pointed out that they consider that the risk of reaching this point is lower among European companies. They point out that in the United States the strength of long-haul airlines is still very high and that, unlike in Europe, low-cost airlines have much less business. What they do not rule out, of course, is that flights will continue to be canceled en masse. less margin. The airline problem low cost It is similar to that of the gas stations serving cheap fuel. In both cases, very narrow profit margins are played in exchange for adding a large number of operations. However, the increase in the cost of fuel kills its business because it places its rates at the prices of its rivals. premium. In the case of airlines, as in the case of gas stations low costhave the added problem that fuel stock is usually small. Furthermore, in the case of aviation, variations in its price tend to be more damaging because its refinement and storage is so expensive and complicated that stocks are usually very small. Photo | Forsaken Films In Xataka | Ryanair asks to suspend the new EU border control system: many are missing flights due to the queues it generates

Tim Cook has been a wonderful CEO for Apple investors. For the United States, not so much

by

Filling the void left by a myth like Steve Jobs seemed like an impossible mission, and although Tim Cook has been a radically different CEO than his predecessor, his career has been equally prodigious. At least in financial terms, because with it Apple has become a four trillion dollar titan. That’s one way to look at it. There is another. Financially impeccable. Over the past fifteen years, this logistics genius has refined operational efficiency and managed to turn every iPhone into a ticket printing machine. An amazing fact: With Tim Cook, Apple’s value has grown by 682 million dollars on average per day for every day of the last three decades. The business runs like clockwork, but behind that economically impeccable facade there is an uncomfortable paradox. The factories do not matter, but the processes. Cook’s management has shown that to achieve maximum profit margins it is not enough to create iconic products: you must master the supply chain. And to achieve this, Apple preferred to own processes rather than factories. She delegated all production risk to external suppliers while she developed new hardware products and especially services that expanded the ecosystem and maximized profit. China as a great ally. The pillar of this entire strategy was unusual. Since arriving at Apple as vice president of operations in 1998, Cook opted for the massive scale and cheap labor of mainland China. This allowed Apple to manufacture in massive volumes and at a very low cost, but in doing so signed a blood pact with Beijing. Educating your rival. By fully focusing the manufacturing process on China, Apple invested billions of dollars in training millions of workers. The transfer and transfer of technical knowledge has been of such magnitude that it has elevated China’s economic and technological status compared to the West. Flexible principles. This relationship with China has also been controversial due to how the company has been folded to the demands of the Chinese government in the geopolitical sphere. The App Store removed thousands of applications following direct orders from Beijing, but even more revealing has been the iCloud data transfer of Chinese users to servers operated by a Chinese state-owned company. There is a moral duality that inevitably raises suspicions. Remembering Jack Welch. In The New York Times they remembered to Jack Welch, a manager who was described as “manager of the century” after his management at the General Electric (GE) company. Like Cook, Welch was a manager with a spectacular financial record. He achieved staggering annual returns, but over time he was shown to have turned GE into an overleveraged company that was about to collapse in the 2008 crisis. Hero or villain. Cook has systematically ignored a great existential risk: if the tension of the trade war between the US and China ends up exploding, the impact could be terrible for the North American economy. The threat that China ends up attacking Taiwan could come true and in that case Cook would be remembered as the CEO who handed over the technological sovereignty of his company to his country’s biggest geopolitical rival. It is true that Cook takes time reducing Chinese dependence in the manufacturing processes at Apple, but it is also true that “the damage has been done” and the transfer of knowledge has been enormous. Ternus and a very heavy legacy. Cook’s successor will be John Ternusbut your room for maneuver will be very limited at the moment. Tim Cook in fact is not retiring completely and will become CEO and supervise the management of his successor. That makes it difficult to chart a new course for Apple if that is what Ternus is proposing, which also seems unlikely. The iPhone has changed all of China. The truth is that every step that Cook took to reinforce his commitment to China It made undeniable financial sense. and generated huge sums of money for all of the company’s investors. That does not reflect the other reality, because the iPhone has contributed definitively for China to become the giant it is today. In Xataka | Apple has been giving in to China for years, but this time the price to pay is much higher. Your AI is at stake

China has almost closed the AI ​​gap with the United States. And he has done it with all the sticks in the wheels

by

It is difficult to go into detail about the number of dances in which the United States and China are immersed at the moment. The technological war is the umbrella under which the trade warthe attempt of military conflict in the South China Seathe robot racethat of the energy and that of artificial intelligence. Everything is related to each other and, although the United States has exercised an aggressive technological blockadeStanford University is clear that it has not been of much use. And they are clear that the AI ​​gap between the powers is “practically closed.” The report. When a new model or version of AI is presented, those responsible show graphs and tables in which they comment on how good their product is. It is something that always has to be taken with a grain of salt because the idea is to make your product look good – it would be necessary to do more – and, for this reason, an external analysis is needed to show us the complete photo. In this sense, the annual report from Stanford University (in its ninth edition) is one of the best thermometers for taking temperature in the state of AI. One of the conclusions of study is that the Chinese models are very close to the American ones. If at the beginning of the AI ​​boom those from the US set the tone with an abysmal difference, at the beginning of 2025 the distance was greatly reduced to the point that DeepSeek-R1 equaled the best American models on several occasions. Since then, the absolute top model is that of Anthropic, but currently only with a 2.7% advantage over the best Chinese model. Different approaches. In fact, in the graph with this specific analysis you can see how the distance between the two is closed as the performance of the Chinese models increases exponentially in a very short time. And something that the study highlights is that, although the United States continues to lead the battle because it is the one that produces the most top-level AI models and with the most important patents, China leads in volume of both models and production of those patents. Also in other sectors, such as AI in robotics, for example. sticks in the wheels. And the most notable thing is that China has achieved this evolution without having the best tools. As a result of the technological and trade war, it is known that the United States has done everything in its power to prevent cutting-edge technology will reach the hands of the Chinese industry. For years they prohibited American companies (which are the ones that control the AI leader like NVIDIA or AMD) sold their higher-end platforms to Chinese companies, but also They shorted the European ASML and the South Korean Samsung and SK Hynix. Because the US has the aforementioned NVIDIA and Intel, but ASML is the one that manufactures the most advanced machines for making chips, Samsung is one of the world’s leading foundries and leader in high bandwidth memory along with SK Hynix and then there is the Taiwanese TSMC as the largest foundry on the market. Although the US has more recently shaken hands with China in this regard, there are still restrictions on Chinese companies accessing the latest technology. Counterproductive. However, through innovation, government support and a little bit of smuggling, gray market and reverse engineering, companies like SMIC -the Chinese foundry- or Huawei They have managed to develop their advanced equipment and chips. The US has tried to put all the pieces in the wheels of the Chinese industry, but as some reputable voices in the chip sector have pointed out, this has only served for China to directly and advances its technological sovereignty program. That is to say, the vetoes that had such a hard impact at the beginning have served to light the flame of technological development. Huawei is the best example of this, since was ostracized five years ago and recently showed that not only has he recovered, but he has returned in better shape than ever, even becoming one of the main drivers of AI for Chinese industry. Approach. Something that the Stanford AI study also highlights is how the two countries are approaching this segment of AI. And we talk about money, of course. While private investment in AI in the United States reached almost $286 billion, in Europe The investment was almost 21,000 million and in China it was only 12,400 million. This is tricky, since it involves private financing (and this year among just a handful of American companies 650,000 million dollars will be melted) and the state support from the Chinese government should not be underestimated, but beyond investment, American companies have focused on creating the most powerful models regardless of the price while the Chinese approach is to make a Cheap AI to be almost transparent to the user. The goal in both cases is mass adoption, but here the cheaper the product and better integrated into everyday platformsbetter. Taiwan. There are other adjacent topics. For example, China has the energy for the AI ​​erabut The US has the data centers. According to the report, there are more than 5,400 data centers in the American country, which is more than ten times the amount that any other country has, but all this with a curious counterpoint: it is a Taiwanese company that manufactures almost all of its artificial intelligence chips: TSMC. The company is expanding with foundries in the US, but although a conflict that will break those relationships is not in sight, it is evident that depending on a foreign country is not the best strategy for technological independence. That is why they are injecting a lot of money so that Intel be the great foundry, but the reality is that it is still very far from TSMC and, although the US is making attempts with native companies such as Applied Materials, the main partners continue to … Read more

Europe cannot be a “technological vassal of the United States”, and the CEO of Mistral is clear about the path

by

Mistral is emerging as the pillar of European artificial intelligence. A few weeks ago we said that the French startup had raised another 830 million dollars to create AI data centers in Europe. Arthur Mensch is the CEO of the company and, for some time now, he is establishing himself as one of the powerful voices within the initiative of European technological sovereignty. His new warning is that Europe cannot be a “vassal state” of the United States and he has published a roadmap so that Europe leads AI. It won’t be easy. European swerve. There are those who complain that everything cannot be politics, but really politics is something that permeates many layers and the European turn in search of technological sovereignty has a lot to do with this. It is something that has coincided with the return of Donald Trump because Europe has realized that, between threats and the “I invaded Greenland”, can’t trust his ally. With American technology companies very involved in the ideology set by their Government, there is a demand for sovereign European alternatives that do not depend on American Big Tech nor how they may process your sensitive data. What happens with rockets, satellites, chips and even with Microsoft Office. And AI is no exception. Measures. That’s right where it comes into play. Mistral. As the greatest exponent of European AI (within the Generative AIsince we also have the suite from the Spanish Freepik as one of the most important companies in this field), Mistral and its CEO are voices with a certain weight when it comes to talking about what seems to be the only topic of conversation in recent months. And Mensch has clear that Europe cannot be a “vassal” of US technology companies. For this reason, they have published “European AI: a roadmap to lead it”, a long document in which it urges the institutions of the European Union to speed up procedures and permits to take advantage of its single market position of more than 450 million people and combine the talent of different countries at the service of AI. From European AI, of course. The premises are clear: Attract and retain talent. Unlock the full potential of the single market. Embrace European AI on all economic fronts. Empower Europe with critical infrastructure for AI. 80%. Each of the measures has a series of points that detail what the optimal way to proceed would be (according to Mistral) to achieve European leadership and stop depending on foreign technology. And one of the points to keep in mind is that Europe has the possibility of commanding, but it faces a devastating fact: 80% of the digital infrastructure continues to depend on non-EU providers. To put it down: if a ministry needs an office suite, turn to Google or Microsoft. If a hospital needs an AI, goes to ChatGPT or Huawei. If we limit ourselves to AI, Mistral estimates that only 20% of EU companies have adopted AI and that only 11% of SMEs take advantage of its potential. slap on the wrist to regulatory Europe. What they point out is that this situation makes us vulnerable to extraterritorial controls that put the strategic autonomy of the member countries in check. They defend that this roadmap is not a theoretical exercise, but rather something practical that is based on three key principles: Action over theory. Unity against the fragmentation of each of the governments. And the most important: the speed is questionable. We must find quick ways to attract talent and capital so that the most innovative in Europe are not left behind, trapped in regulations that take time. Ambition. They warn that it is something with potential not only for Mistral, but for the entire ecosystem, an ecosystem in which Mistral is already very, very well positioned. Part of the 830 million they have raised will go to their facilities near Paris where there will be 13,800 NVIDIA GB3000 chips (You can’t become independent from NVIDIA…), but it won’t be the only one. By 2027 they hope to have a €1.2 billion facility in Sweden with 23 MW of computing capacity. In total, they hope to achieve 200 MW of capacity by the end of next year. It is very, very far from China and, above all, from the United States, but although the distance is enormous, it is an important step. The B side of the matter. Now, everything has a twist, and the twist of this enormous amount of money is that this round is not venture capital, but debt financing. The main French banks have lent this money to create data centers and, while the risk capital is not returned, the debt is, and with interest. It doesn’t matter if Mistral’s move turns out well or not, even if the AI ​​bubble bursts: the banks that have lent the money expect to receive it with the aforementioned interest regardless of how business goes. It is an added pressure for the company, but also a sign that they trust in what they are building. In Xataka | ChatGPT’s milestone is not being a good AI: it is having become one of the biggest attention grabbers in history

Europe fled from Russia’s gas to fall into the arms of the United States. The Third Gulf War proves that it was a trap

by

Behind troop movements and sea blockades for the Third Gulf Warthere is a much quieter script twist that is shaking the foundations of the continental economy: false European security. A problem that comes from the other side of the pond. After the energy crisis due to the Ukrainian War (still valid), Europe thought it had solved its great energy vulnerability by changing the gas that arrived through Russian gas pipelines for liquefied natural gas (LNG) that crossed the Atlantic in ships from the United States. The idea of ​​the European Union was to bet its imports on Washington to diversify sources and avoid future geopolitical blackmail. However, the American lifeline has turned out to be punctured. With the global market in maximum tension due to the war in Iran, the US is not guaranteeing European supply and makes gas subject to trade wars and political whims. The real Achilles heel. Europe now depends on the United States for two-thirds of its LNG imports, according to the center for economic studies Bruegel. As global supply falls due to the conflict, Asian buyers — who traditionally sourced from the Gulf — are competing aggressively for flexible gas ships. The result is a bidding war to the highest bidder: according to Bruegelseveral shipments of American LNG have already been diverted from Europe to Asia in the midst of the conflict. At the diplomatic and commercial level, the situation with our “savior partner” is enormously unstable. In the midst of this crisis, Donald Trump has come to criticize European allies, urging them on social networks to “get their own oil,” according to Bloomberg. As if that were not enough, political friction over the conditions of the trade agreement between the EU and the US has caused senior US officials to threaten retaliation, casting serious doubts on Washington’s previous commitment to sell $750 billion in energy products (including its precious LNG) to the European bloc. The price of the “green illusion”. The impact of this imbalance is being brutal for European pockets. According to the Financial Times Based on data provided by the European Commission itself, the bill for EU fossil fuel imports has increased by 14 billion euros in just 30 days of conflict. Gas prices have experienced a rise of 70%, while oil prices have become more expensive by 60%. This puts in front of the mirror what in Euractiv have baptized as “the green illusion” of Europe: a glaring structural failure in the energy transition. Despite having invested nearly one trillion euros in renewable energy, the European Union’s energy dependence on imports remains at 60%, practically the same figure as in 2004. An ineffective design. The reason for this price contagion lies in the very design of the European electricity market. By operating with a marginalist system, the most expensive technology (usually gas) is the one that sets the price of electricity for everyone, as explained in Strategic Energy. In countries heavily dependent on gas to generate electricity, such as Italy, gas sets the price 89% of the time, exposing citizens directly to international volatility. However, there is hope if you do your homework. In Spain, the enormous growth of wind and solar energy has caused the gas only mark the price of electricity 15% of the hours, much better shielding the country against these external shocks. In fact, it’s not all bad news: solar electricity generation has saved the EU from spending 2 billion euros in fossil fuel imports only in the first 20 days of March. And now what? It doesn’t look like we’ll get a break anytime soon. The crisis will not be brief, as the European Commissioner for Energy, Dan Jørgensen, has strongly warned. who has made it clear thateven if peace were declared tomorrow, prices would not return to normal in the foreseeable future. The European Commission is already finalizing a “toolbox” with emergency measures that will suddenly return us to the scenarios of 2022. On the table in Brussels is the possibility of recovering taxes on extraordinary profits that fell from the sky (windfall tax) for energy companies. Drastic measures in sight. Brussels also foresees drastic measures to contain demand based in the well-known 10-point plan of the International Energy Agency. This would translate into recommendations to Member States to encourage teleworking, reduce speed limits on motorways and promote both public transport and car sharing. At the strategic level, to stop the bleeding in LNG prices and prevent the US from playing against Europe with Asia over shipments, the think tank Bruegel proposes a radical solution: that the EU act as a bloc and coordinate its gas purchases directly with large importers such as Japan and South Korea to avoid a bidding war. The invisible problem. To understand the complete picture, we must talk about the great bottleneck that almost no one talks about: concrete and copper. European renewable deployment is colliding with a lack of capacity in electricity networks. According to a report from the climate think tank Emberat least 120 GW of planned renewable energy projects in Europe are at risk simply because the grid cannot support them. The logjam is monumental, with almost 700 GW of renewable projects stuck in connection queues awaiting permits across European countries reporting this data. And this is not just a problem of the macro plants of large corporations; It directly affects the average citizen. According to calculations in the same report, 1.5 million European homes could face delays in being able to connect the solar panels on their roofs due to obsolete distribution networks that do not have the capacity to take on the energy. A chronic gap. The underlying problem is a chronic gap in the system itself. As pointed out EuractivEurope has changed how it generates its electricity, but it has not electrified its real economy. Cars continue to burn oil, heavy industry continues to use fossil gas and the general electrification of the economy has been stagnant for ten years. Europe has spent … Read more

The United States had not manufactured its most critical uranium for 20 years. He has just resurrected his production with an old metallurgy trick

by

In the hills of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, lies a place that carries the weight of contemporary history in its foundation: the Y-12 National Security Complex. According to the files of the US Department of Energy (DOE)these facilities were born in 1943 as a vital cog in the Manhattan Project. However, for more than two decades, the halls of its most advanced nuclear processing sector had remained in a prolonged dormancy. Today, that industrial silence has been broken. The United States has just ended a long gap in its domestic processing capabilities. The milestone that marks this rebirth is as visual as it is forceful: the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has successfully manufactured its first “button” of purified enriched uranium, an achievement that opens a new era in the American nuclear deterrent. In short. From the NNSA have confirmed the restart of uranium purification at the Y-12 complex. It is not a sudden step; This achievement comes months after, in September 2025, the start of the project will be authorized electrorefining. This is the first authorization of its kind since the opening of the Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility 15 years ago. More in depth. The new process allows installation slam the door definitively on the old Y-12 plants. For years, uranium processing depended on complex chemical treatments that were inefficient and, above all, posed greater risks for workers. The new era abandons these legacy systems in favor of much cleaner and safer technology. A strategic milestone. According to the statement from the NNSAthis purified uranium is a critical material that will support unavoidable national security missions, from the production of nuclear weapons to providing the fuel needed for the reactors of the United States Navy’s aircraft carriers and submarines. This effort is not a coincidence, but respond directly to the security and defense guidelines promoted under the mandate of President Donald Trump. Added to this military strategy is a pressing need for independence of resources. In November of last year, the US Geological Survey (USGS) added uranium to its final list of 60 critical minerals. This government directive has a clear objective: to shield the country against the risks of interruption in global supply chains. The “magic” of electrorefining. The secret behind this renaissance is called electrorefining. Although it may sound like science fiction, it is based on well-established commercial processes commonly used to purify everyday metals such as aluminum, titanium or copper. The method was originally developed by the prestigious Argonne National Laboratory and later perfected by the Y-12 development team itself. A simple process (at first glance). To understand how it works, the magazine Science Direct explains it in a simple way: The process uses an electrolytic cell where two electrodes are immersed in a chemical solution. One of them acts as an anode (where the impure recycled material is placed) and the other as a cathode. Through a controlled electrical reaction, metal ions travel to the cathode, where the pure metal is deposited, while the impurities fall to the bottom as an “anode sludge.” The result: An astonishing 99.9% purity. The format: An NNSA spokesperson He explained that the process It first generates “purified uranium crystals,” which are then melted in a furnace to create the compact, secure, high-purity uranium “buttons.” Additionally, Nikolai Sokov, senior researcher at the Vienna Center for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, explained that this innovative technology allows recovering and recycling uranium from various byproducts. Along the same lines, this method drastically reduces the waste generated compared to old chemical treatments. The weight of history: environmental debt. No story about the Y-12 complex would be complete without looking at its darker side. The background documents of the US Department of Energy rreveal the heavy inheritance of the Cold War. During the 1950s and 1960s, facilities used massive amounts of mercury for lithium separation. The ecological toll was devastating: an estimated 700,000 pounds (more than 317,000 kilos) of mercury were lost in the buildings and the surrounding environment. Today, to contrast technological advancement with the mistakes of the past, the top priority of the Environmental Management (EM) program at Y-12 is the cleanup of this mercury. He DOE informs that it is being built the Outfall 200 Mercury Treatment Facility. Scheduled for 2027, this plant will be capable of treating up to 3,000 gallons of water per minute. This vital infrastructure will allow older, more contaminated facilities (such as Alpha-2 by 2029 and Beta-1 by 2030) to be safely demolished without mercury ending up in the nearby Upper East Fork Poplar Creek. A process of metamorphosis. Audrey Beldio, NNSA Principal Deputy Administrator for Production Modernization, summed it up forcefully in the statements. project startup: “Electrorefining revolutionizes the processing of enriched uranium.” With uranium flowing again into Y-12, the United States is not just abandoning aging infrastructure. It is sending a clear message to the world: after twenty years of lethargy, the US nuclear sector has taken a leap towards a future where technological efficiency, the safety of its workers and the reliability of its arsenal are once again the spearhead of its defense policy. Image | HeUraniumC Xataka | While the West does not decide on nuclear, China already has a reactor 100 times more efficient than traditional ones

If Apple is forced to choose between the United States and China, Tim Cook is very clear about which one he will choose

by

Tech CEOs are on tour, and they’re pointing east. a few days ago, Lisa SueAMD boss, went to visit samsung for the first time. The result is a contract for the South Korean company to manufacture the next-generation memory for the American company’s AI platform. For his part, Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, was traveling through China. And, after all the pressures from Donald Trump For Apple to manufacture in the United States, Cook is clear about one thing. China is Apple’s base. The best. believe me. Tim Cook has transcended. Although it seems that he has little left in the position (at some point he will have to retire and John Ternus aims to be the successor), Cook has become an almost political figure. This is demonstrated in his travels through other countries or in the United States itself. His trip to China has consisted of several phases. He first visited the Apple Store by Taikoo Li, but the highlight was the trip to Beijing to meet with the Minister of Commerce. One of the points of the meeting was the bilateral relationship between the two. Because Apple is a huge customer for the Chinese technology industry, but China is also a safe asset for Apple. So much so that, as reported by the state portal Xinhua, Cook stated that “China is the most important production base for Apple, as well as its main source in the supply chain.” China’s pressure. The visit occurred at a time when things are as they are between China and the United States, but also with Apple. The details of the commercial and technological war between the powers are something that we have covered almost daily, but with Apple there is also a mess created due to the commissions in the App Store. China has demanded greater flexibility from Apple on store restrictions and Apple’s response is a reduction in commission from 30% to 25%. It’s just a little bit of giving in and a show of goodwill on Apple’s part, but China continues to ask that they loosen control over the App Store, which translates into allowing more third-party payment options to cut what they consider like a monopoly. Come on, Apple, in the eyes of Chinese regulators, still have homework. And the pressure from home. But at the same time that Cook’s visit to China takes place and it is declared that it is the great base of the company, something is moving. On the one hand, India wants to become the new China, and in 2025 Apple achieved a milestone: that one in four iPhones are assembled in India. Assembling is not the same as manufacturing, where China continues to lead the way. And the United States wants to turn the tables. Within its protectionist policies, Donald Trump’s government is trying to get its technology companies to create value on homeland. Intel’s billion-dollar rescue It was an example of the extent to which the US wants its technology to be manufactured in its territory and the truth is that it is bearing fruit. Apple or NVIDIA already have some assignments for Intelbut these incentives are also encouraging foreign companies such as SK Hynix, Samsung or, above all, TSMC those that are taking over the Americans in their territory. Many millions at stake. But despite the demands and demands, a powerful gentleman is a gift of money, and China is a huge market with great potential. It is evident that we can think that “what is Cook going to say in China, which is wonderful, of course”, but we must not forget that this is a company that, like all others, seeks the greatest benefits. And China not only has the capacity to meet Apple’s needs in terms of device manufacturing: it is a market to exploit. A few weeks ago we echoed how the company’s sales marked the best quarter since the first of 2022ending years of declines in Chinese territory (where Huawei has been making a strong comeback), but it’s not just Apple that is pursuing entry into China. NVIDIA has spent months putting pressure on his government to let them sell the H200s in China. Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA, commented that the Chinese cake is one of 50,000 million dollars and publicly asked the US government to stop being jealous and start collaborating in the name of capitalism. Cook has had a similar message on his trip to China, one supported by Li Qiang, Prime Minister of China who pointed out that if industrial issues are politicized, “the supply chain becomes a weapon, costs will only increase for companies and the momentum for development will be weakened.” In the end, they have gone to puncture where it hurts: the pocket. Images | Tessa Bury In Xataka | The decline of “Apple culture.” Blind devotion has evolved into critical enthusiasm

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.