table

In its goal of reaching the Moon in 2030, China has hit the table: it has demonstrated the potential of its technology

by

The race for the human return to the Moon has officially entered a new operational phase with China successfully executing the first “lit” flight of its heavy rocket new generation: Long March-10 (LM-10). A test that has not only validated its propulsion capacity, but also certifies the safety of its future crew in the most hostile launch environment. Where. This milestone, achieved since Wenchang launch pad (Hainan), places the Chinese lunar program on a firm and technically verified trajectory to meet its strategic objective: putting humans on the lunar surface before 2030. The litmus test. The essay recently made marks a turning point, since, unlike the tests static or scale models from previous yearsthis has been a real flight with ignition. The LM-10 took off in a prototype configuration with the goal of achieving the maximum dynamic pressure (Max-Q). In aerospace engineering, Max-Q is the critical moment during the climb where the aerodynamic forces on the vehicle structure are most violent. It is the “worst scenario” possible for an emergency that could threaten the safety of the crew, and it is precisely at that moment that the abort command was sent to the Mengzhou manned ship (the successor of the Shenzhou). In Xataka In silence, China is making giant strides in a race that until now it was not leading: space. There are differences. What distinguishes this essay from those carried out by other historical powers is the sophistication of the subsequent sequence. At first, the Mengzhou capsuleseparated from the rocket and activated its escape enginesmoving away from the “danger zone” at high speed, validating its ability to save the crew in extreme aerodynamic conditions. On the other hand, as the capsule descended toward a controlled splashdown, the first stage of the LM-10 rocket was not jettisoned. For the first time in a test of these characteristics in China, the stage continued its ascent briefly and then executed a controlled descent and landed in the sea. A success. This success simultaneously validates the structural integrity under maximum stress, the compatibility of the interfaces between rocket and ship, and the partial reusability of the system, a technological advance that brings China closer to the operational efficiency of companies such as SpaceX with Artemis. All this within a context where China and the United States ‘fight’ to see who is the first to return to the Moon. A change of concept. Wenchang’s success is just the tip of the spear of a much more complex system known as the CMSA’s “Earth-Space Transportation System for Manned Lunar Flights.” This architecture moves away from the “one giant shot” concept and opts for a two-launch and orbital rendezvous scheme. The three pillars. The first of them is the Long March-10a colossus approximately 92 meters high capable of placing about 70 tons in low Earth orbit and about 27 tons in lunar transfer orbit. The most interesting thing is that its modular design and the recovery capacity of the first stage are fundamental for the economic sustainability of the program, since the entire structure is recovered for subsequent tests and missions. The second pillar is Mengzhouwhich is designed for deep space missions and is larger and more capable than the current Shenzhou. Its development, which began conceptually around 2017-2018, has culminated in a modular vehicle capable of supporting atmospheric reentry at lunar return speeds. The third is a dedicated lunar landing module known as Lanyue waiting in lunar orbit. {“videoId”:”x96edv6″,”autoplay”:false,”title”:”China’s space suit to go to the Moon”, “tag”:”China”, “duration”:”64″} Roadmap. This includes two separate launches of the LM-10: one to transport the Lanyue module and another for the crew on Mengzhou. The final objective is that both vehicles will perform a meeting maneuver and docking in lunar orbit before the taikonauts descend to the surface. Chronology of ambition. The path towards this 2026 flight has been methodical, characterized by a strategy of “short but quick steps” that began in 2013 with the first discussions and the development of prototypes. It was in 2020 when an 8-day orbital test flight was made using a Long March-5B and that validated the capsule’s heat shield and recovery systems. Finally, it was this month of February when the flight occurred with an abortion in Max-Q and recovery of the stage. If we look to the future, before the end of 2026, “zero altitude” abandonment tests and complete tests of the Lanyue lunar landing module are expected, all aimed at meeting the 2030 launch window. A duel of titans. The comparison between the United States and China is practically mandatory in these cases. While the United States relies on the raw power of the SLS Block 1a 98-meter and disposable colossus, China is committed to operational efficiency with the Long March-10. And although the Chinese rocket is a little less powerful, its design incorporates a reusable first stage, which reduces costs and is closer to the sustainability model that SpaceX has popularized in the West, contrasting with the immense expense per launch of the American system. On the other hand, NASA has opted for a hybrid and complex scheme: it launches the crew in the Orion capsule with the government SLS rocket, and then docks in lunar orbit with the Starship HLSa commercial lander from SpaceX. In contrast, China has chosen a more pragmatic “distributed architecture”: it will carry out two separate launches of the LM-10, one for the Lanyue lunar landing module and another for the crew on the Mengzhou spacecraft, which will meet directly in lunar orbit. In Xataka Starlink’s dominance in space begins to move: another company already has permission for a constellation of 4,000 satellites On their calendars. The US program, depending on multiple commercial suppliers and disruptive technologies (such as Starship’s in-orbit refueling), faces highly complex logistics that have accumulated delays for the Artemis III mission. In contrast, China’s centralized and vertical model maintains a firm and predictable roadmap to the year 2030. In this way, we are seeing two titanic powers with two different … Read more

Gemini 3 has left all its competitors behind. It’s Google’s definitive punch to the table: Crossover 1×32

by

Three years ago, panic on Google. The launch of ChatGPT made Google will declare a “code red” before an AI model that proposed a clear revolution and a clear threat to the search business. Sundar Pichai began to make moves, but the truth is that the first movements with Bard They were disastrous. There were more problems and blundersbut since then Google’s trajectory has been spectacular, and its AI models have not stopped achieving success. We saw it with Gemini 2.5 Pro and with Nano Bananabut now they have proven it again with Gemini 3which has managed to become the model with the best features in most areas, at least according to the benchmarks offered by the company. It is somewhat surprising, especially considering that OpenAI seemed to have controlled the market with a ChatGPT that continues to be more popular but is little by little being cornered by the competition. In fact Google seems to be doing everything right lately in this area. DeepMind is the great reference for “serious AI”and Google’s enormous resources—which has its own cloud, its own chips, and its own model—point to a bright future for this company. We talk about all of this precisely in this episode Crossover 1×32 in which we review those hesitant beginnings of Google and how the company has managed to get rid of its fears to bet everything on AI. That in itself is surprising, because that bet is also risky for them. Exciting times! On YouTube | Crossover

AI needs 650 billion a year to sustain itself. The problem is who will put them on the table

by

Those responsible for the JPMorgan banking entity they have done numbers. For AI companies to achieve a 10% return on their capital expenditure In 2030, they will need to collectively earn $650 billion. That’s like saying that the 1.4 billion iPhone users will pay $400 a year to use those models. It’s not impossible, but certainly it doesn’t seem simple. Many use it, few pay. Above all, because today the number of paying users is very small. According to the data from the consulting firm Menlo Venturestoday 1.8 billion people use AI around the world, but only 3% of them (54 million) are paying customers of some subscription. ChatGPT as an example. OpenAI esteem that in 2030 that percentage will rise to 8.5% for its user base, which they project will be 2.6 billion a week. That is to say: 220 million people will be subscribed to one of ChatGPT’s payment plans, which will probably have different prices than the current ones in 2030. They do not seem sufficient, at least a priori, to make the firm profitable as promised. Advertisements. It is more than likely that the advertisements they end up being the other great resource to earn revenue from AI models. Although Sam Altman indicated in the past that advertising would be “the last resort” to monetize, recent data reveal that those ads are about to be part of the user experience on ChatGPT. A very risky bet. JPMorgan’s estimate points to a future in which billions of people will pay a lot of money a year to use the best AI. Apple account with 1 billion subscribers to its services, Netflix with 300Spotify with about 280and Google account with 150 million subscribers on Google One alone. It is evident that there are many users willing to pay for services that are useful and entertaining. The question is whether AI will be for so many people. And AI companies, of course, are confident that they do. The non-surprise of the bubble. In The Economist indicate that a potential explosion of the AI bubble already it’s not going to surprise anyone. The curious thing is that there is no excessively notable concern for the consequences. In recent years the economy seems to have recovered surprisingly well from disasters such as the European energy crisis after the start of the Ukrainian War or the tariffs imposed by the US. Recessions, this economic newspaper points out, they are becoming rarer. Everyone has jumped on the bandwagon. Mass vulnerability exists, however. Stocks today represent 21% of Americans’ economic wealth —more than in the dotcom bubble—, and investment in AI companies is responsible for half of the increase in that wealth over the past year. And therein lies the danger. Recession in sight? People have earned more money and saved less: if the bubble bursts in a similar way to what it did with dotcoms, The Economist believes that net worth will fall by 8%. That in turn would cause a notable decrease in consumer spending. It is estimated that the US GDP would decline by 1.6%, enough to push the country into recession. The difference with dotcoms. In this case that global recession It might not be so deep for a clear reason: the root would be in the investment markets, and therefore it could be overcome with a little more room for maneuver. Central banks could cut interest rates to boost consumption, a good thing on that front but dangerous for vulnerable economies. The shock wave of the explosion. If the bubble bursts, what could also occur is a painful reconfiguration of global trade. Lower US demand would reduce its trade deficit, but would worsen the excess China production capacity. By not being able to sell (as much) to the US, it would flood other markets with its products, which would probably cause some protectionism in Europe and Asia. The world is preparing for the stock market crash, but not so much for the economic and geopolitical consequences that will follow. In Xataka | OpenAI has no problem inflating the AI ​​bubble – it has a problem with it bursting too soon

Europe had been asking for a big hit on the table for some time. Revolut just gave it a huge valuation

by

Revolut was born in London as a fintech focused on digital payments and today it has become one of the most watched companies on the European financial landscape. It has already exceeded 65 million customers worldwide and its ambition is to reach 100 million, with its sights set on becoming the first global bank born from technology. Not only does it add users, it also builds physical structures: Spain was the country chosen to install its first ATMs with own brand. Now, he has added one more element to his story: a valuation of $75 billion. The operation validated by some of the largest funds in the world. The sale of Revolut shares was not carried out by traditional banks, but by some of the most influential investment funds in the technology sector, such as Coatue, Greenoaks, Dragoneer and Fidelity Management & Research Company. They were joined by names linked to large companies such as NVentures, NVIDIA’s investment fund, as well as Andreessen Horowitz, Franklin Templeton and T. Rowe Price. According to Bloombergthis operation has placed Revolut as the most valuable startup in Europe. It also allowed employees to sell shares, something Revolut has already offered on five occasions. A valuation that does not leave the stock market. Revolut remains a private company, so its shares are not available on public markets and its valuation is not set on the stock market. It is estimated from the price that investors accept when they buy a package of shares in operations like this: that price is taken as a reference to calculate how much 100% of the company would be worth. On this occasion, Revolut has made it easier for employees and existing shareholders to sell part of their stakes, while incorporating new investors into the capital. The result is a valuation that, as we say, sets the bar at 75 billion dollars. Revolut remains a private company, so its shares are not available on public markets and its valuation is not set on the stock market. Although it is still private, Revolut does publish figures that explain part of the investment enthusiasm. In 2024 it recorded $4 billion in revenue, with a growth of 72%, and $1.4 billion in profit before taxes, an increase of 149%. In 2025, the pace continues thanks to the performance of its business division, which already moves 1 billion annually. In addition, the company has made relevant regulatory progress: it has the final banking authorization for its next launch in Mexico, it has a banking incorporation license in Colombia and is preparing its arrival in India. Spain as a pilot bank. The Spanish market has become one of Revolut’s strategic laboratories. Here it inaugurated its first ATM network in Europe, with 50 machines installed and plans to expand to 200 next year. At the same time, it is exploring its entry into private banking by hiring specialized profiles. According to Expansionthe project is in the initial phase, but marks a symbolic step: it no longer competes only in mobile, but also in segments reserved for traditional banking. Europe gains visibility, but the United States sets the pace. That Revolut is the most valuable startup in Europe, as Bloomberg points out, demonstrates the moment that the technology sector is experiencing on the continent. Even so, the comparison with the United States remains significant: Reuters puts OpenAI at $500 billionabout 6.67 times above Revolut. There, the most notable startups come not only from fintech, but also from aerospace, autonomous vehicles, blockchain, design or productivity. Europe, on the other hand, has concentrated its progress mainly on fintech, quantum computing and corporate software. The $75 billion valuation does not automatically make Revolut a global bank, but it does send a clear message: large international funds are willing to back a model that mixes technology, financial services and international ambition. The next step will be to sustain that growth while obtaining key licenses, such as the one it is seeking in the United Kingdom. What is happening with Revolut shows that Europe can generate relevant players, although it remains to be seen how far they can go in a field historically dominated by American banking and technology. Images | Revolut In Xataka | A few weeks ago Amancio Ortega collected 1,552 million from Inditex: he just invested them in the second largest purchase in its history

If with the Fujian it sat at the US table, the images of the next aircraft carrier place China in another dimension: the nuclear one

by

Last week China announced its first 100% national aircraft carrier hitting the table and making it very clear what its naval aspirations are. Now the appearance of new images from the Dalian shipyard has revived one of the most significant naval movements of the 21st century: China’s advance towards an aircraft carrier that places it at an unknown level. The strategic leap. We are referring to what aims to be the first nuclear-powered one, provisionally known as Type 004. He visible discovery of a structure reminiscent of a reactor compartment (similar to those found on US supercarriers) suggests that Beijing is taking the definitive step towards a capability that until now only the United States and France have. The transition is not symbolic, but structural: A nuclear aircraft carrier offers virtually unlimited autonomy, massive electrical power for advanced sensors, and sustained ability to operate further from shore, an essential element for a China that aims to project power beyond its immediate periphery. The Fujian catapult. The recent entry into service from Fujianits first aircraft carrier with electromagnetic catapults had already marked a break with the It was STOBAR.but Type 004 represents a technological leap even greater by integrating nuclear propulsion with the most advanced launch ecosystem that the Chinese navy has. Even so, Chinese naval planning appears to bifurcate: as it builds this ambitious vessel, reports indicate who also works in another conventional aircraft carrier improved, a sign that Beijing wants a combination of mass and elite to accelerate its naval transformation. On new aircraft carrier under construction Comparative architecture. The reason why Type 004 arouses so much attention is that, in its designconcentrates the synthesis of global trends: a helmet inspired by the lines of the American Ford, EMALS catapults similar to the North American and French ones, and a deck capable of operating from J-35 stealth fighters even naval drones GJ-11 or airplanes AEW&C KJ-600. The satellite images reveal a deck under construction that will include two catapults in the port area (in addition to two in the bow), matching the layout of American ships and surpassing the capacity of Fujian itselfwhich only has a catapult in the oblique section. Extra ball. The vision of the program is clear: provide the Type 004 with a heaviest air wingvaried and technologically complex, optimized for sustained operations and for air and maritime space control roles beyond the Chinese coastline. The parallel development of a possible “Type 003A” conventional (cheaper, faster to produce and based on an already dominated architecture) demonstrates how China combines disruptive innovation with industrial iterationensuring sufficient volume to saturate any attempt at regional containment. If nuclearization provides range and resilience, the simultaneous construction of conventional ships ensures pace and fleet density. Unlimited energy. Plus: its function is not only to move aircraft further, but to serve as an energy platform for a set of emerging weapons that would transform naval warfare. Official voices, such as Professor Liang Fang of the National Defense University, they claim that the future Chinese nuclear class could carry directed energy weapons (including high-power laser weapons and the long-awaited electromagnetic cannon or rail gun). These weapons are not mere futuristic add-ons: they require colossal amounts of energy and an electrical stability that only a naval nuclear reactor can offer. He rail gunbased on the acceleration of metal projectiles to hypersonic speeds using electromagnetic fields, is a system that the United States abandoned due to costs and technological maturity, but that China continues to develop as part of its strategic disruption. And more. Its appeal lies in exit speedthe lack of explosive and the possibility of devastating kinetic impact at low cost per shot, although its electrical consumption is gigantic. The convergence between nuclear aircraft carriers and electromagnetic weapons aligns with the plans already outlined by figures such as Admiral Ma Weimingresponsible for the PLA’s electromagnetic program, and represents a clear attempt to turn a flagship into a technological node capable of challenging US naval dominance in emerging domains. The operational dimension. TWZ analysts recalled that the future Type 004 air wing combines aviation advanced manned and drones large in size, creating a hybrid system Designed for offensive projection and situational awareness over an extended range. The integration of stealth drones like the GJ-11, heavy AEW&C aircraft like the KJ-600, and fifth-generation J-35 fighters would allow China to adopt an operating model closer to the American one: extended air-to-air combat, persistent surveillance, distributed electronic warfare, and deep strike capability. Added to this are the new amphibious ships Type 076 (also equipped with electromagnetic catapults to launch drones) that would complement the aircraft carriers with saturation functions, regional air control and operations support directed towards Taiwan or the South China Sea. The result is, a priori, a navy that, although still inferior in number to the eleven American supercarriers, closes the gap with a unprecedented speed. China and the new balance. In summary, Type 004 symbolizes a decisive strategic shift: China is no longer just modernizing its fleet, but aspires to equal the autonomy, technological capability and global reach of US aircraft carriers by combining nuclear poweredelectromagnetic weapons, high energy lasers and a new generation embarked aviation. The visible integration of the reactor module in Dalian confirm that Beijing seeks to operate a type of super aircraft carrier capable of sustaining prolonged ocean missions and powering futuristic systems that could redefine naval warfare. At the same time, the parallel development of another conventional model demonstrates a dual strategy that seeks volume and sophistication at the same time, quickly reducing the gap with the US Navy. In other words, China is moving towards a maritime architecture based on abundant energy and dominion of the electromagnetic spectrum, a change that forces us to completely rethink the global competition for control of the seas. Image | x, x In Xataka | The Fujian is officially China’s largest power catapult: Beijing already has a button to challenge the US Navy In Xataka | China has just tested the … Read more

They sit at the table of the giants

by

He BYD test track in Zhengzhou It has a 29-meter interior dune certified by Guinness, a 70-meter pool for its amphibious cars, layouts off-road and an impeccable asphalt circuit to step on the accelerator. All designed to impress. And it works. More than a hundred journalists from America, Europe, the Middle East and Africa were summoned to witness an exhibition of strength. There were no big product announcements. The message was different: BYD no longer plays in the league of aspirants. He sits at the table of the giants, he knows it and enjoys it calmly. If the circuit was the muscle, Stella Li was the brain exposed to the media. During the session with three dozen international journalists, the Xataka Legend 2025 He responded bluntly about tariffs, global strategy, competition with Tesla and the future of the combustion engine. And it did so from a position of unprecedented confidence: BYD has sold more than 3.7 million “new energy” vehicles (NEV) as of October 2025. It is the world’s number one in BEV and PHEV combined. In September, it reached third place in global automobile sales – all technologies included –, only behind Toyota and Volkswagen. “Our growth is not a coincidence. We are a technology company that manufactures cars, not the other way around“Li emphasized during his previous speech. BYD employs more than 120,000 engineers and files dozens of patent applications every day. Europe, tariffs and the factory that changes everything When asked about European tariffs – which penalize Chinese electric companies – Li was direct: “The Hungarian factory will be operational at the end of this year. The impact of the tariffs will be zero in the short term. We will be a European manufacturer.” It was a response loaded with symbolism. BYD does not avoid the trade conflict but neutralizes it with local investment. And it is not the only front. Li confirmed that after Hungary will come plants in Brazil, Türkiye and other strategic markets. The lesson is clear: BYD builds where it sells. But Europe will not be just battery and volume. Li announced that YangWang, BYD’s luxury brand, will arrive in 2026, although without specifying models. “We want to bring premium PHEV technology to the market,” he said. “We are still defining which model will be first, but it will be something that the competition cannot ignore.” The veiled reference to the German BMW-Mercedes-Audi trident did not go unnoticed. One of the most interesting revelations of the session was BYD’s dual strategy in Europe. The brand started with a 100% electric bet (BEV), but now openly embraces PHEV technology as a workhorse. “In China, more than 50% of NEV vehicle sales are PHEVs,” Li said. “In some cities, it exceeds 60%. Consumers choose technology DMi because it is better: electric autonomy for everyday life, a combustion engine for long trips, and lower fuel consumption than any conventional hybrid.” The technology that changes the rules DMi 5.0 technology allows consumption of 2.6 liters per 100 km and combined ranges of up to 2,100 km with a single tank and one charge. In Europe, the Signal 6 DMi offers 1,500 km. “It is the perfect solution for markets where charging infrastructure is still limited,” he added. Is the combustion engine going to disappear? “Not in the next few years,” he answered without hesitation. “But in the future. Once more people experience DMi or BEV, the fate will be clear.” Asked about Tesla and the race for world number one, Li avoided the confrontation: “We are not obsessed with rankings. Tesla focuses on pure BEVs, we offer more options. “We believe in coexistence, even cooperation.” In fact, BYD already supplies batteries to other manufacturers. “We are not just a car brand,” Li recalled. “We produce batteries for energy storage, electronic components… You use BYD products in your daily life without knowing it.” That diversification is your secret weapon. The usual thing is to depend on external suppliers, but BYD controls the entire value chain: Blade batteries, motors, electronic platforms, semiconductors… Vertical integration as immunity to supply interruptions. Regarding the brutal price war in China, Li was cautious but realistic: “The competition is bloody. But BYD does not compete only on price. We compete on technology, experience, ecosystem.” How many Chinese brands will survive? “Too many are competing now. I don’t know how many will be left. But I know that competition makes us better.” The issue of national competition is not trivial: there are a brutal number of brands and it seems unlikely that all of them will have a place in a future that points to consolidation thanks to mergers, acquisitions of smaller ones and perhaps others that cannot survive directly. The record that is not just marketing If there were any doubts about BYD’s ambitions in the premium segment, the YangWang U9 Xtreme put them to rest. The electric supercar reached 496.22 km/h on the ATP Automotive Testing Circuit Papenburg (Germany) in September, becoming the fastest production car on the planetdisplacing Bugatti. Driving it in Zhengzhou, although limited to a maximum peak of 160 km/h for safety, was brutal. Total silence, instant thrust, space launch feeling. It is a car that It has a profit above its own sales: It serves to demonstrate that BYD can manufacture whatever it sets its mind to. A few years ago BYD manufactured cheap cars of dubious quality, today they are behind that missile called YangWang U9 and its record: it is the fastest production car in the world thanks to its 496.22 km/h. Image: Xataka. Among all the technologies on display, one stood out for its potential impact: Flash Charging, BYD’s ultra-fast charging infrastructure. With a voltage of 1,000 V and batteries integrated into the stations, the system promises up to 2 km of autonomy per second of charging. And in five minutes, 400 km. “Recharging will be as fast as refueling,” Li promised. Of course, with double hose. And here comes the play: BYD will install … Read more

A very rare element of the periodic table is unleashing a new geopolitical battle with China: Germanio

by

China has been weaving, little by little, a network of power around critical minerals: first Rare earthsafter Copper And now Germanio. Although its name barely says anything to the general public, this metal is essential for the defense industry – from the night vision systems of the fighters to the satellites – and for the optical fibers that support the Internet. Today there is almost no market, its price has been quintupled in two years and the origin of the collapse has a clear name: Beijing. The origin of the crisis. Two years ago, China announced controls At the exit of Germanio, Gallium and Antimony in response to the restrictions of the United States and the Netherlands on advanced semiconductors. However, the real blow arrived at the end of 2024: Germanio’s exports collapsed, leaving merchants without supply. Terence Bell, from Strategic Metal Investments, I recognized Financial Times That had been able to buy a gram six months. “The situation is desperate,” he said. Aaron Jerome, from Lipmann Walton & Co, described a devastated market: “Before we could buy 100 kilos; now we are lucky if we got 10, and the triple price.” And Christian Hell, from the Tradition Commercial House, added to the same medium that the demand was “for the clouds” and that he received desperate consultations of companies from the United States and Europe. The figures confirm the collapse. According to a Policy Accelator Silverado analysis cited by Financial Timesbetween January and July of this year, Germanio imports to the United States from China fell 40%. The result has been an unprecedented price escalation: just $ 1,000 in 2023 to almost $ 5,000 in September this year. This is the highest level registered since 2011. A strategic role. The importance of Germanio is not in its geological rarity, but that it is very difficult to extract, since it is obtained as a zinc and coal byproduct. In addition, its use in defense is irreplaceable for thermal image systems in fighters, drones and satellites. In the civil sector, it is used in optical fiber, solar panels and chips. “Finding substitute materials is complicated, because it would imply a complete redesign and a loss of unacceptable precision in military applications,” explained the analyst Caroline Messecar in Financial Times. For these reasons, According to estimates from the Fastmarkets agencyworld demand is around 180-200 tons per year of Germanio. One more piece of a much wider board. In Beijing they have converted critical minerals into geopolitical weapons. At the end of 2024, They prohibited export from Gallium, Antimony and Germanio to the United States, and shortly after added Scandio and Disposioessential in chips, telecommunications and storage. The strategy behind the Asian giant is to monopolize the control of the entire chain. To name a few examples, China has 4% of world copper reserves, but controls 49% of the global refining. “More than accumulating raw materials, China is building an intentional bottleneck in the supply chain,” My partner has detailed in Xataka. The same goes for the Tungsten, where it controls 83% of the world supply and tightened the export controls in February 2025, What fired prices 55%. In simple words: Beijing seeks to be essential. It controls the most valuable link – the defendant – and with it conditions global access to strategic metals of the 21st century. However, its power is not absolute: it depends on importing concentrates from countries such as Chile, Peru or Mexico. If any of those partners change position – Mexico, for example, 50% tariffs have already imposed Chinese products in 2025-, Beijing risks a cut of vital supplies. In addition, this control strategy has a price: Chinese copper foundations work with negative margins and some have had to close. A movement to counterreloj. Before the blockade, Germanio’s great consumers try to move quickly. On the one hand, in the United States, defense giant Larkheed Martin signed in August a direct agreement with the South Korea Zinc to ensure supply, something unpublished so far. Lightpath Technologies, with government support, works in optical alternatives, although its director Sam Rubin warns in ft: “No one is going to redesign an existing system until it is inevitable.” On the other hand, the options are scarce. Umicore in Belgium and Teck Resources in Canada produce some Germanio, but insufficient. Germany He already warns thatif the crisis lasts, its automotive industry could stop part of the production in a matter of weeks. The European Chamber of Commerce has even asked Beijin to release supplies for chips factories. The historical supplier, Russia, has also been out of the board. For years it was one of Germanio’s main sources for the West, thanks to its production associated with zinc and coal mining. However, international sanctions for the Ukraine War cut that flow almost completely. Moscow continues to produce, but its exports are now directed to China and countries that do not participate in the sanctions, According to FT. For the United States and Europe, that means having lost another supply route in the worst possible time, which has further reinforced Beijing’s domain. Looking to the future. In Germany, a group of researchers from the Technical University of Freiberg Work in a method surprising: extract Germanio from plants after fermentation processes for biogas. At the moment, they only achieve some milligrams per liter, but they aspire to reach a gram, which would open the door to a sustainable and local production. From anonymity to key element. Germanio has become a symbol of a new era: that of minerals as strategic weapons. As Financial Times has pointed outdemand does not stop growing while the offer narrows. And the lesson is clear: in an electrified and militarized world, who controls critical minerals will control power. Image | Freepik and Unspash Xataka | Nickel’s paradox: West needs it more than ever for electrification, but China and Indonesia have market dominance

put on the table activate section 301

by

Brussels pointed high again: a fine of 2,950 million euros to Google for its advertising business. The European Commission did nothing but reinforce its firm regulator profile in a sector that has been under its magnifying glass for years. On the other side of the Atlantic, The reaction seemed sung. The president had made clear that I saw these sanctions as a direct attack on American companies. That same day he fulfilled his promise: he raised the tone and turned the European file into a issue of political and economic tension. Trump chose an unusual way to answer: threatened to start an investigation under section 301, A reserved mechanism to serious commercial disputes that can lead to tariffs. It was not just criticizing Brussels, but making it clear that the White House was willing to climb the conflict. It is an online threat with a commercial policy marked by unexpected turns, and although it remains to be seen, the message has not gone unnoticed. The Google case becomes another front in the tense transatlantic relationships The Brussels fine It did not arise from one day to another. The European Commission has been investigating Google since 2021 for possible dominant position abuses in the digital advertising sector. The file concludes that the company favored his own ads ecosystemfrom its Doubleck server to its ADX exchange, relegating competitors and hindering the access of editors and advertisers to other platforms. The regulator gave the company 60 days to present a compliance plan and warned that, if not convincing, the option of demanding structural measures is reserved. For Teresa RiberaExecutive Vice President for a clean, fair and competitive transition in the European Commission, the file against Google reflects Brussels’s commitment to a more open advertising market. The curator defended the fine and warned that the company must present a convincing solution if it does not want to face more severe measures. “Today’s decision shows that Google abused his dominant position in advertising technology harming editors, advertisers and consumers. This behavior is illegal according to the EU antitrust standards. Google must now present a serious remedy to address their conflicts of interest, and if it does not, We will not hesitate to impose solid remedies. ” Google’s reaction soon arrived. Technology rejected the Brussels ruling and announced that it will resort to European courts. The message was transmitted by Lee-Anne Mulholland, Vice President and Global Chief of Regulatory Affairs. “The European Commission’s decision on our advertising technology services It is wrong and we will resort to it. It imposes an unjustified fine and demands changes that will harm thousands of European companies, since it will be more difficult to obtain benefits. There is nothing anticompetitive in providing services to buyers and advertising sellers, and there are more alternatives to our services than ever. ” The sanction announced by Brussels adds to three other fines imposed on Google in recent years: 2,420 million in 2017, 4.3 billion euros in 2018 and 1,490 million in 2019 (The latter finally annulled). All are part of a reinforced surveillance strategy on large digital platforms. The trial on possible remedies will begin on September 22, 2025. The United States has no legal capacity to directly reverse a sanction issued by a foreign regulator. American companies operating outside their borders must comply with local standards, and refuse to pay a fine would be a risky movement that could lead to blockages, new sanctions or even its exclusion from the market. The case of Google is registered precisely in that context: a global company subject to the rules of the European Union. As we say, what Trump proposes is to resort to section 301, a tool of US commercial legislation that allows us to open research on foreign policies considered discriminatory. Through this procedure, Washington can impose tariffs, fees or other commercial measures. It is a diplomatic and economic route that does not erase the European fine, but sends a signal and increases the tension. Trump accompanied his warning with an extensive message in Truth Social in which he insisted that Europe is attacking the technology companies of the United States and that the White House will not allow these measures to be answered. Its publication combined criticism of the European Union with a specific example: the fine of 17,000 million dollars that Apple had to pay in the past. “As I said, my administration will not allow these discriminatory actions to remain. Apple, for example, was forced to pay a fine of 17,000 million dollars that, in my opinion, should not have been applied. They should recover their money! We cannot allow this to happen to the brilliant and unheard of US creativity and, if it happens, I will be forced to initiate a procedure of section 301 to annul imposed on these contributing US companies. ” The pulse for the fine to Google occurs when Brussels and Washington They try to consolidate a more stable commercial framework. Trump’s warning adds pressure. If the investigation under section 301 thrives, could unleash a new stage of commercial tensions between both blocks. The next steps draw an uncertain scenario. Brussels will examine Google’s proposals to correct the conflicts of interest detected and does not rule out demanding drastic changes, including a partial divestment of your advertising business. The company, on the other hand, already prepares its resource and anticipates a long legal battle. To this panorama is added the threat of Washington: start section 301. Images | The White House | Pascal Bullan | Greg Bulla In Xataka | OpenAi has just sent a message to its competition: if you do not have 100,000 million, or try it

The state of the ISS is so alarming that the United States and Russia have sat at the table for the first time in eight years

by

You have to look back until October 2018 to find the last time that NASA’s top people and her Russian counterpart, Roscosmos, the faces were seen. The launch of the Crew 11 mission has served as an excuse for them to meet again. A meeting to save the furniture. The new general director of Roscosmos, Dmitry Bakanov, traveled for the first time to the United States last week to witness the launch of the SPACEX CREW-11 MISSIONin which two American astronauts, one Japanese and a Russian one flew to the International Space Station. Bakanov took advantage of the trip to meet with NASA’s acting administrator, Sean Duffy. On the table, the future of a space station that ages by leaps and bounds and The road map for withdrawal in 2030. NASA and ROSCOSMOS are needed. In a global context where war and other geopolitical tensions have affected almost all areas of cooperation, the International Space Station and the exchange of seats in Crew Dragon and Soyuz ships remains one of the few bridges standing. But this has been the first high -level meeting in almost eight years, especially since the previous Chief of Roscosmos, Dmitry Rogozin, adopted a belligerent rhetoric against his US partners. According to the Russian state agency TassBakanov and Duffy agreed to extend the shared use of the International Space Station until 2028, as well as a joint process for exorbitation in 2030. “The conversation was quite well,” Bakanov said. The US agency Associated Press He says that both leaders pointed out the need to maintain cooperation in space despite their “strong discrepancies” on Earth. They also agreed to seek the approval of their respective presidents for future joint projects, including lunar and exploration of deep space. The ISS falls apart. This “we have to talk” is not accidental. It occurs at a time when the state of the International Space Station is a matter of “deep concern”, as noted by the NASA Aerospace Security Advisory Panel in April. The Committee described the coming years as “The riskiest period“Of the ISS in all its existence. One of the most serious and persistent problems are Air leaks in the Russian module Zvezdafirst detected in 2019. Despite the multiple attempts to repair them, the module continues to lose air, a qualified problem with the highest level of risk of NASA. To this we must also add other ailments of a structure with almost 30 years components. Lack of spare parts for critical systems, space costumes with technology from the 70s that have caused several incidents, and constant problems with bathroomsamong other headaches. Pension plan. The common denominator of these risks is a huge budget deficit. No government wants to allocate more money to the International Space Station when the priority is to finance future lunar missions and commercial stations. More than a shy thaw, the meeting between Bakanov and Duffy represents the imperative need to jointly manage the last years of the ISS, the largest symbol of international cooperation outside the earth. One of the Keys to this approach It is the contract of almost one billion dollars that NASA awarded Spacex to develop a ship that tow the station towards a safe reentry on the Pacific Ocean. Before Spacex, the ISS partners had considered using Russian progress ships for this task, an option that Roscosos seems to have put back on the table. Be that as it may, the retirement of the ISS already has its date insured by the end of this decade. Image | ROSCOSMOS In Xataka | NASA’s Security Committee has launched a forceful warning on ISS: it is in very poor condition

Nothing already starts sitting at Apple’s table. At least if we look at the price of your last phone (3)

by

Nothing Phone (3) will have a departure price that starts from 799 euros, a significant difference if we look back with the Phone (1) of 2022. Our partner Ricardo Aguilar could try it in Londonand although he highlighted its multiple and interesting facets such as the new Glyph Matrix, its transparent and alternative design already marks the house, and the peculiarities of its software, there is also a conversation that we have not been able to overlook: the price jump and what this means for the future of the brand. Different, but not in price. When Carl Pei founded nothing in 2021his speech was crystalline: “We want to make exciting technology again.” This is a declaration of intentions and, in my opinion, quite successful, especially if we take into account the short – but intense – travel of the brand. The firm began to be based on a basis that surely you have also thought: the smartphones have become bored. After the launch of his first terminal, Nothing made it clear that we do not have to go through the 1,000 euros ring to find an exciting phone to use and solid specifications (although signatures like Xiaomi have also reminded us of it excellently all these years). The Nothing Phone (1) arrived for 469 euros with a clear proposal: good technical file, differential design and accessible price. A rebel telephone that directly challenged the status Quo de Cupertino and the rest of the sector giants. A fast climb. However, Nothing seems to be testing its users about their prices tolerance. The trajectory of its devices to date regarding the price says it all: the Phone (1) started in 469 euros positioning as a premium mid -range, the Phone (2) It rose to 649 euros, already entering high -end territory, and now the Phone (3) reaches 799 euros, practically at the most expensive flagship door on the market. In just three generations, Nothing has traveled 330 euros on the rise, a climb of 70% that places it to stone shot of an iPhone 15 or a Galaxy S24 (mobile phones of last generation, everything must be said). OnePlus syndrome. The parallelism with the previous business adventure of Pei is inevitable. OnePlus began in 2013 with the motto “Never Settle” and a OnePlus One at 299 dollars that promised flagship specifications at the price of mid -range. Pete Lau and Carl Pei then sold the concept of “Flagship Killer”, the mobile that would wobble Samsung and Apple from below. Seven years later, the OnePlus 9 Pro cost 909 euros, little less than a iPhone 12 Pro. The brand had completed its transformation: as an affordable disruptor to a premium player. Nothing seems to follow a similar road map, even with a higher climbing speed. Range fragmentation also reproduces this strategy millimeter. OnePlus created the Nord series to maintain a medium -end presence while raising the prices of its main series. Nohing has done the same: Phone for the high range, Phone ‘A’ For the medium-high, and CMF For cheaper devices. This segmentation allows to maintain the narrative of “accessibility” while the original positioning is progressively abandoned. The first and true flagship. Nohing justifies the price jump with undeniable technical improvements. The Phone (3) incorporates the Snapdragon 8s Gen 4, a completely redesigned cameras configuration, or the innovative Glyph Matrix with circular micro-read screen. It also maintains distinctive elements such as its transparent design and a software experience that effectively differs from the rest. For Nothing it is The first and true flagship. The crossroads of identity. Nothing is at a turning point. He has demonstrated technical capacity to create competitive and visually distinctive products, but with his main range of devices he faces the risk of being trapped in anyone’s land: too much face to be the rebel alternative, too much niche to compete face to face with Apple and Samsung. The market has already seen this film with OnePlus, which after years of innovation and price escalation, It ended up being absorbed by OPPO and losing much of his original identity. Having an already defined and consolidated strategy, Pei abandoned OnePlus with the desire to direct a more creative approach in Nothing. In fact, the devices that until now has launched the company are the clearest example of that yearning for wanting to flash in a predictable industry and with symptoms of continuity. And now what. The market response to Phone (3) seems to be decisive for the future of Nothing. The firm maintains that it is its first and true flagship, with very complete specifications and a price that is still slightly below the proposals of the high range of Apple or Samsung. The success of this terminal can determine if the direction that Nothing has chosen has been the successful. Although well, everything must be said that It is not the only market in which you have set foot. Cover image | Nothing In Xataka | If the question is how good a European mobile can be, the answer is the Fairphone 6

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.