ten

Tesla’s solar roof was going to revolutionize this segment. Ten years later it pivots to manufacture lifelong solar panels

by

A decade ago Elon Musk seemed capable of anything, and many of us believed that had another revolution in his hand with Solar Roofthe Tesla solar roof that revolutionized conventional installations to camouflage them with the roofs of our houses. Their goal was to install 1,000 of these solar roofs every week by the end of 2019. The reality: there are about 3,000 solar roofs in total, and the company has decided to pivot to survive. Now it is a much more conventional company that may achieve the success that its original version never came close to. Promises and realities. The deployment of the “solar roof” proposed by the Tesla subsidiary It has been an operational failure. In 2016, the promises of performance combined with sustainable design and architecture (tempered glass tiles that generated light) were very striking. Ten years later, the product represents a residual fraction of Tesla Energy’s income, and the company has decided to surrender to the evidence. They will do what others were already doing: manufacture traditional solar panels mounted on existing roofs. Complex installation. Tesla’s big mistake was not in the panels themselves, but in the physics of the construction itself. A conventional roof is installed in a couple of days, but the Solar Roof required weeks of work for an ultra-skilled workforce. Being made up of hundreds or thousands of small individual tiles, installers had to make multiple electrical connections in an environment exposed to environmental conditions. Costs skyrocketed. Thus, a single failure could render an entire section unusable, and to make everything perfect the installation costs were high: about $106,000 before incentives, when putting solar panels on a conventional roof costs about $50,000 less. Payback is achieved in about 15-25 years, compared to 7-12 for conventional panels. In a lawsuit from several clients was revealed that in some cases the price of the installation ranged from 72,000 to 146,000 dollars. Difficulties everywhere. These types of projects proved to have many obstacles. For example, the different geometries of the roofs or their shadows. There was also the fact that Tesla tried to control the entire installation process with its own personnel, but labor shortages were a bottleneck that delayed deliveries. A reasonable (but late) decision. In early 2026 Tesla launched its new solar panel, the TSP-420which makes use of a new optimization system based on 18 energy zones. Among other things, this panel solves a problem that affected the inverter architecture of Solar Roof panels. It is a much more reasonable strategy, especially since it is much more profitable and faster to install a standard panel on a roof than to do so with Solar Roof’s original proposal. It is curious that the power generation business has not worked out for him, but yes do it that of storage with their Powerwall. Musk once again promises the (perhaps) impossible. At the Davos conference, Elon Musk announced that Tesla had as its objective create 100 GW per year of solar panel manufacturing capacity in the United States. For this purpose, the purchase of solar panels and cells is proposed. worth 2.9 billion dollars to the Chinese company Suzhou Maxwell Technologies. Too many promises. The goal seems once again exaggerated. Global solar installations in the United States in 2023 reached 32 GW, and Musk aims to reach 100 GW by the end of 2028. He would have to triple the total installed capacity that there was three years ago, and do it at a frenetic pace without any problems. We have heard this story before. The challenge seems too colossal even for the tycoon, and reminds us of the promise that he himself made in 2016. It was then that he assured that his solar roof would end up costing less than conventional roofs with traditional solar panels. He also said that the SolarCity Solar Gigafactory would produce 10 GW per year. Neither of those two promises came true. In Xataka | Mexico has a brutal potential for solar energy: at the moment it has begun to exploit it with agrovoltaics

“We overestimate what will happen in the next two years and we underestimate what will happen in the next ten”

by

Bill Gates, on AI: “We overestimate what will happen in the next 2 years and underestimate what will happen in the next 10” There is a phrase that Bill Gates often repeats with the conviction of someone who has already seen how the world made mistakes when judging a technology: “We overestimate what we can do in one year and underestimate what we can achieve in ten.” Although it may fit in a time of uncertainty and technological leaps like the one we are currently experiencing with AI, it is not actually new. It appeared in his book ‘Path to the future‘and recovered it in ‘Source Code: My beginnings’. However, the co-founder of Microsoft does not use it to show off that he has succeeded in his technological commitment to desktop computers, but rather to ask for a little calm and perspective in the face of the most disruptive technological moment since the arrival of the personal computer that he lived in first person. a déjàvu technological. Gates has spent months dedicating a good part of his interventions to cooling the collective panic around the arrival of AI. In one of his interventions to promote his latest book, the millionaire intervened in the Jay Shetty podcast and took the opportunity to send a reassuring message: we already experienced something similar when Windows arrived, and then there were also those who thought that the world was ending. Since he left the helm of Microsoft in the hands of Steve Ballmerhas continued to advise its management team, including those responsible for the alliance with OpenAI. According to collected Business Insiderboth CEO Satya Nadella and the Microsoft management team turn to the founder as an advisor in the face of relevant strategic changes for the company. That low-key but influential role gives him a different perspective on the current AI revolution. For this reason, he insists that society’s fear of this new technology follows the same patterns that it already experienced in the early years of Microsoft. AI is an opportunity, but also a risk. In his annual letter The Year AheadGates described AI as a technology with “no upper limit” to its capabilities, leaving it in a full of opportunitiesbut also of great risks that must be managed. In that same publication he assured that “of all the things that humans have created, artificial intelligence is the one that will change society the most.” The millionaire identifies two major threats for the next decade: the use of AI by malicious actors and the emergence of AI in the labor market. Among the dangers that he cites with most concern is the use of this technology to design weapons with a comparable scope to that of the COVID-19 pandemic. Work, the great battlefield. One of the effects of AI that Gates analyzes in more detail is what it will have on employment. Assumption It is not catastrophicbut direct: technology will allow the economy to produce more goods and services using less labor. He points out that AI is already doubling the software developer efficiencywhich makes programming cheaper and alters labor demand in that sector. Gates also points out that AI will affect less expected industries, with medicine and education in the spotlight. He does not present it as an inevitable threat, but as a wake-up call to adapt before change arrives without warning. Optimism with nuances and a commitment to act now. In his analysis of 2026, the technology magnate insists that the decisions made in the coming years will determine whether AI becomes a factor of shared progress or an additional source of inequality and social suffering. Staying true to his phrase, Gates assures that the time to act is now, not when technology is already uncontrollable and its effects irreparable. What makes his vision different is the balance that proposes an intermediate place between catastrophism and blind euphoria. Gates learned this concept forcefully in his first years at the helm of Microsoft: consider the worst and best scenarios, because you cannot be so optimistic as to think that everything will always turn out as planned, nor be so pessimistic as to believe that everything will be an absolute failure. In Xataka | Bill Gates had a tendency to procrastinate until he found an infallible remedy: Japanese companies Image | Flickr (Governor Tom Wolf)

The CNMV has tested AI to invest in the stock market for ten months. The conclusions are very revealing

by

In recent months there has been a recurring discourse that we see on social networks and that sell us again that “get rich quick” message. That message is “use AI to invest in the stock market.” The interesting thing comes when we see how the CNMV has published a study in which it has precisely attempted to analyze that premise. Although this organization warns of the risks of investing with AI, there is another important message in the conclusions: LLMs are not bad investors per se. They are bad at following vague instructions, which is just how most people use them. The CNMV study. Two researchers from the CNMV, Ricardo Crisóstomo and Diana Mykhalyuk, have published a study methodologically serious (but imperfect) and very interesting: they used four AI models for ten months live, from April 2025 to January 2026. They chose ChatGPT, Gemini, DeepSeek and Perplexity as models. The process was simple but demanding: each month they asked each model to identify the five stocks in the Ibex35 index with the best expected performance (to buy) and the five with the worst expected performance (to sell short). Then the real result was measured at the end of the month, and here there was no historical data selected just because: the real market was the only arbiter of all the functioning of the models. The models evolved. One of the most significant aspects of the study is that its creators recognized a methodological problem that was difficult to avoid: during those ten months, the versions of the four models were updated several times. The Gemini of April 2025 was not the same than that of January 2026for example, and that could influence the results. The researchers commented that it was impossible to know with certainty whether an improvement or deterioration in performance was due to the prompt strategy, market conditions in that period, or simply because the model changed. The prompt is everything. Three were also tested prompt types very different, and that gave rise to conclusions that were neither alarmist nor did they create false expectations: they were “it depends.” Thus, their results showed that everything depended on the type of supervision that these models had: If the LLMs were asked generic questions such as “What stocks should I buy?”, they failed repeatedly. There were computational errors, incorrect interpretations and also the famous hallucinations of chatbots. Curiously, the only one that made a profit was ChatGPT. The problem is that people who use AI to invest probably use this mode of action. But if prompts prepared with iterative reviews and human supervision at each step were used, Perplexity achieved a monthly return of 3.5% on the IBEX35. Gemini and ChatGPT also improved their behavior if given more precise instructions, and DeepSeek was the worst ranked overall. There is another finding: when models receive official regulatory documentation or business results reports, their predictive accuracy improves significantly. The LLMs they reason better on concrete and verified facts than generating analysis from scratch on information that they themselves search for on the web. financial hallucinations. The CNMV study points out that financial markets are especially demanding for AI models because they require complex processes. They have to retrieve and collect information dynamically, they have to reason in multiple steps, they have to be numerically precise, and they have to know this market, and all in real time. Chatbots are trained to generate “convincing” textsso the incentive here is that the investment recommendation “sounds good” even though it is completely wrong. The confidence with which AI models present incorrect financial analysis is proportional to the risk they pose to those who use them without checking whether what they say makes sense. In short: do not trust AI to invest right off the bat. The Reddit user’s experiment was equally striking, but hardly conclusive. Source: Reddit. The Reddit experiment. A Reddit user named Blotter-fyi rode in November from 2024 a platform called Rallies.ai which gave several AI agents access to real-time financial data and money to make stock market operations. Four months later, with the S&P index down 7% since the start, five of the models are outperforming that index, although only two have positive returns in absolute terms. The author himself was the first to warn that four months are insufficient to reach a conclusion: it could be luck, the market or simply the prompt. Nof1’s experiment was fascinating, but it made it clear that AI models don’t typically make money investing in crypto. Source: Nof1. Nof1 and crypto fascination. Another particularly striking experiment was the one that the company nof1.ai made with its Alpha Arena. He put six AI models to compete, gave them 10,000 real dollars each and gave them two weeks to trade cryptocurrency derivatives without human intervention. The most striking result was not who won, but who lost: GPT-5 ended with more than 25% losses and Gemini with close to a negative 40%. Meanwhile, the Chinese models Qwen and DeepSeek dominated in terms of good performance. They iterated with other models, 32 in total, and of all of them only six achieved a positive return: the rest lost money. Grok-4.20 was the big winner ahead of GPT-5.1 and DeepSeek v3.1. Maybe you shouldn’t just let AI invest for you. The conclusions after these experiments are clear. Four months of a model outperforming the S&P index in a bear market does not prove that AI is a good investor. Only in that specific period, with that specific marketthat model made decisions that turned out to be less bad than those in the index. To see if this makes sense takes years, multiple market conditions, and many instances of the same experiment running in parallel. The same happens with Nof1 – especially short – and with a more serious and methodical process like that of the CNMV, which was also surrounded by events whose impact on the final result was uncertain. Faced with so many unknowns, the conclusion seems clear: … Read more

Ten years ago, Bnext was the great hope of fintech. They ended up crashing

by

Founded in 2016 by Guillermo Vicandi, Bnext It was born as a fintech alternative to traditional banking. In fact, their visible heads assured that it was not a bank, despite offering an account and card. The growth was as fast as the fall. After the collapse of its cryptocurrency, The app announced its closure on April 13. What was Bnext. It was not a bank, that’s what its creators constantly said. It was an electronic money entity (EDE) alternative to traditional banking. In practice, it offered what a bank offers: account, card, loans, insurance, currency purchases, investment plans. The difference was the model: Bnext always acted as an intermediary, connecting the user with the best products on the market through a single app. No offices, no paper, no queues. The golden age. In 2019, Bnext was one of the most visible projects on the Spanish fintech scene. became the fintech that grew the most in Spainwith more than 156,000 registered users and more than 100,000 active clients holding a Bnext VISA. Your second round of financing It closed with 22 million eurosthe highest figure seen in Spain (in 2019) since the Valencian Hawkers raised 55 million euros. That same year, they partnered with giants like MyInvestor to offer financial products. The stumble. Bnext’s first setback comes a year later, in 2021, after its landing in Latin America. Its partner, Cacao Paycard, did not obtain authorization to operate from the National Banking and Securities Commission (CNBV), which translated into a fine of 2.6 million Mexican pesos (about 150,000 euros at the current exchange rate) to Bnext for misleading communication. There was no plan B. Bnext had to cease operations in Mexico, close all its accounts and lose more than 230,000 clients who had trusted the company prior to the sanctions. Meanwhile. In Spain, alternatives like Revolut were growing like wildfire, and Bnext was beginning to run out of oxygen. In 2021, they decided to ally with Algorand, a blockchain firm that became one of the company’s main shareholders. After the alliance they announced their own token: B3X. The play didn’t go well. On March 1, 2022, it was launched to the public with a starting price of two euro cents. Today it cannot even operate from the app, since the service has been dismantled. Its price before the debacle: 0.00006 US cents. What happens to Bnext users. Bnext accounts and cards have already been canceled and the product is no longer marketed. No payments, transfers or receipts can be uploaded. Payroll cannot be received The balance of the account may be requested during a repayment period of 20 years Cryptocurrency management is referred to Onyze… via email User data will be deleted in accordance with the GDPR You will no longer have access to the marketplace services Bnext was once the great hope of Spanish fintech. Now rest in peace. What will become of the company. The company gives the finishing touch to its app, but does not completely cease its operations. “The fintech business and market has changed considerably, and with this, we have had to pivot our value proposition. After several years offering products to the end consumer and in an increasingly competitive environment and with more complex regulation, we have decided to take a step towards the future, focusing on helping companies launch their own payment products.” Guillermo Vicandi, CEO of Bnext. Bnext closes as a neobank, but pivots towards financial infrastructure services. In Xataka | Europe had been asking for a big hit on the table for some time. Revolut just gave it a huge valuation

In Spain we love to have dinner at ten at night. To our biological clock and our heart, not so much

by

Eating dinner at 9 or 10 at night is something that is quite normal for Spaniards, but seen by foreigners, it is something that shocks them quite a bit as it is so different from the customs of other countries. And although our normality is to eat at three in the afternoon and dinner at ten at nightthe reality is that our biological clock is not designed to digest large amounts of food when the sun has already set. Time matters. Although in recent years we have been obsessed with looking at the ingredients of what we eat or the amount of calories it contains, the reality is that science gives more and more importance to consumption. This is where chrononutrition comes from, an emerging discipline that studies the relationship between circadian cycles and our diet, and that little by little is seeing that eating late dinners has a direct impact on our metabolic health. our quality of sleep and our risk cardiovascular. The biological clock. Our body works like an orchestra perfectly synchronized by circadian rhythmsand leaving them has serious consequences. We see it, for example, with the famous jet lagthe time change or even when we go to bed at a time that is not ours. The result is that the body has to recover again and has important effects, such as great fatigue. In the case of eating at odd hours, especially at dinner, we are desynchronizing the peripheral clocks that the cells of organs as important as the pancreas or liver have. And this results in a drastic worsening of glucose tolerance and also insulin secretion. Its effect. And it has consequences, since when we eat dinner close to our biological bedtime, that is, when the sun is setting, the body reduces the consumption of nocturnal fats and there is also a large release of cortisol, which is the stress hormone, and the release of melatonin, which is essential for falling asleep, is delayed. This is something that became clear in a 2025 meta-analysis, where it is detailed that eating after nine at night worsens the rhythms of neurotransmitters such as serotonin and dopamine, which not only has a metabolic impact, but also an emotional one, increasing the risk of depression. The Spanish case. If we focus precisely on our country, we have as a reference the study led by the ISGlobal institute that analyzed to 100,000 participants of the NutriNet-Santé cohort. Here it was concluded that dining after 9 pm is associated with a greater cardiovascular risk, especially impacting the risk of cerebrovascular disease in women. In the case of weight. If you want to lose weight, dinner time also has a lot of influence, as noted in a study by researcher Marta Garaulet that showed that people who eat later at midday lose less weight than those who eat early, even when they consume the same calories and expend the same amount of energy and sleep the same amount. Added to this are studies in Catalan adults that associate the delay of the first meal of the day with a higher BMIwhile extending overnight fasting is related to a lower BMI. Beyond the scale. Although we may keep in mind the impact on digestion, the reality is that studies suggest that having late meal times is related to poorer quality of sleep. This was seen in the United States, where science pointed out that in middle-aged women it has been proven that bringing dinner time closer to bedtime prolongs the time it takes to fall asleep, therefore shortening the effective duration of rest. And as we already know, having poor quality sleep generates many other problems, such as a worse cardiometabolic profile, which generates a true vicious circle. Its nuances. Logically, having a late dinner alone does not explain the state of health of the Spanish population, since the context has a lot of influence. This is where the traditional Spanish Mediterranean diet comes in, which makes dinners later meals, but also much lighter, leaving the main energy weight for the midday meal. That is why you should keep in mind that a late, copious and ultra-processed dinner followed by a trip straight to bed is not the same as a light dinner accompanied by some physical activity before going to sleep. Even so, science suggests that, if the objective is to reduce metabolic risk, improve carbohydrate metabolism and lose weight, the winning strategy involves advance dinner time and maintain a longer overnight fasting window. Images | Eiliev Aceron Shane In Xataka | Healthy obesity does not exist: why “being fat but fit” is nothing more than a myth

Agricultural costs have doubled in the last ten years

by

At first glance, we would say that this is good news. This 2025, Spanish agricultural income has set a historical record and has been put at 41,262 million of euros. It is a robust trend: agri-food Spain is on the way out. And yet, between 2020 and 2023, 130,730 farms disappeared. That is, 12.4% of them have evaporated. It’s not magic, it’s the costs that, in ten years, have doubled. Is things that bad? It depends on when we compare ourselves. If we compare with 2022, when the entire universe conspired to break all historical cost records As far as I’m concerned, the situation is pretty good. If we compare with 2025, the situation is quite complicated. And not only because of the generalized increases that have been accumulating, but above all because the cost structure has exploded. The changes that the sector has undergone in ffertilizers, energy, machinery or labor They make the mere hypothesis of returning to a situation similar to that of a decade ago sound like science fiction. But let’s talk about the costs. The figures are from the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Yeah We take previous prices as a reference Due to the escalation of costs, the data for the end of 2025 already indicates it as the third most expensive year in the series. And they had not yet started the bombing of Iran. The dreams that, after the crisis of 2022 and the consequences of the war in Ukraine, everything would return to its place, have been pulverized. Let’s do a review: fertilizers have increased by 74%, agricultural diesel by 68%, electricity by 53%, feed by 31.7%, machinery by 5.5%, seeds by 3.2 and salaries between 4.7 and 7.6%. Fertilizers alone already represent between 15 and 30% of the total production cost. And, despite everything, the sector does not stop making money. As I said, Spanish agricultural income reached 41,262 million euros. 12.9% compared to 2024 and, clearly, the highest figure in history. To a large extent, this It is explained by the rains of the year last (between 10 and 20% more were produced) while prices remained the same and consumption grew by 5%. But also to something much more structural: the number of agricultural holdings is reducing, but the number of useful land is not (a drop of 12.4% compared to 1.6%). To give us an idea, right now Spain has less than half as many farms as it had in 1989. The accumulation figures. In global terms, only 6% of farms have more than 100 hectaresbut that 6% concentrates 58% of useful agricultural land and 30% of production. Progressively, as agricultural entrepreneurs retire without relief or bankruptcy, the giants acquire more and more land, completely reorganizing the Spanish countryside. These giants have more room for negotiation downwards (with suppliers) and upwards (with distributors). Furthermore, they have the financial and productive capacity to diversify more and, therefore, weather storms better. However, as we have seen in recent yearsit has consequences. More than it seems. Image | Chris Ensminger In Xataka | In California, the funds discovered that there is no investment more profitable than farmland. Now it’s Spain’s turn

A century ago Denmark built an island to defend its capital. Now it is full of tourists and is sold for ten million

by

The world has started 2026 slope of an island linked to the Kingdom of Denmark, but Greenland is not the only island dependent on Copenhagen that makes headlines. In it Øresund Strait There is a small Danish island that in recent weeks has also sparked interest due to its history, status and (above all) ownership. His name is Flakfortet and in this case, unlike Greenland, there would be no problem with Donald Trump controlling it. Of course, first you would need to go through the cash register and pay 10 million euros. The reason: Flakfortet is actually an old military fortification built on an artificial island and in private hands that has just gone up for sale. What has happened? that the Danish real estate market has incorporated an unconventional piece: a maritime fort built on an artificial island. That’s what they advertise on their page. Lintrup & Norgarta Danish firm specialized in real estate that for a few weeks advertise the sale of the Flakfortet fortress, located in the Øresund Strait. The property is offered for 74.5 million of Danish crowns, equivalent to about 10 million dollars. “The island has modern facilities and historic structures and is visited by thousands of people each year,” highlights the agency. The announcement has attracted the attention of media outlets such as the German newspaper Bildthe specialized medium Yacht or the Danish public broadcaster TV2which specifies that the complex reaches 30,000 square meters (m2) and there are around 10,000 built. Among its facilities, the island includes a large marina and a heliport. But what is Flakfortet? A vestige of the First World War. And a huge and picturesque reminder of the turbulent start of the 20th century. Flakfortet is a maritime fortress built on Saltholmrevan artificial island built from tons and tons of stone, concrete and sand in the Saltholm Strait. In fact, it is located between saltholm island and Copenhagen. Flakfortet was not the result of a whim or megalomania. It was promoted at the beginning of the 20th century, after the Defense Agreement of 1909 with which an attempt was made to improve the fortifications (land and sea) that protect Copenhagen from enemy attacks. To be more exact, his works were developed between 1910 and 1916. And what was it used for? The idea was to shield neighboring Copenhagen by sea. Hence, Flakfortet was projected as a true fort, capable of hosting around half a thousand soldiers and equipped with powerful cannons. Danmarks Nationalleksikon remember which in its day was equipped with howitzers, half a dozen cannons and anti-aircraft artillery. However, its role during the two great conflagrations of the last century was rather modest. In fact, the outbreak of the First World War in 1914, with the project still uncompleted, frustrated the plans to equip it with modern howitzers. In the 40s it was occupied by the Wehrmacht and in the 50s it returned to Danish hands, although without much success. At the end of that same decade it closed as a naval anti-aircraft fort and during part of the 1960s it hosted the HAWK 541 Squadron of the Danish Air Force. Over time it was rented to the Copenhagen Sailing Union and was converted into a marina in the 1970s. And in recent decades? His military past is behind him. After the Danish army decided to abandon the fort the weapons were dismantled and the casemates abandoned. As the 20th century progressed, the soldiers gave way to sailors who arrived aboard sailboats, tourists and history lovers fascinated by the fortification’s past. The next major chapter of his chronicle was written in 2021, when Denmark sold the island to Malmökranen AB, a Swedish company that acquired it for around 400,000 euros. It may not seem like a lot of money, but the company had to invest significantly more to remodel the facilities and modernize its services, which includes a restaurant, a desalination plant that supplies the island with drinking water, and generators. These improvements, added to a ferry service that connected the island with Copenhagen and the interest aroused by the fort’s military past, explain why Flakfortet attracted up to 50,000 visitors in high season. Good business, right? If we ask Malmökranen right now, the business seems to involve more the sale of the island than its direct management. And it’s not something new. In 2015 the complex already looked for a buyer without much success. More than a decade later, its owners have decided to try again, asking for even more money for facilities that have a port and heliport. The agency in charge of the sale wait that the island will attract the interest of specialized investment firms or millionaires looking for a “secluded and quiet” property. Nor do they rule out that the Danish State itself decides to recover Flakfortet because it considers it “a critical infrastructure” and its location. If it is finally an individual who takes over its reins, they should keep in mind that they cannot do whatever they want with the old fort: since 2002 It is considered a historical monument, so any significant work must have the OK of Heritage. The island must also remain open to the public. Images | Wikipedia and Google Earth In Xataka | China has been dumping tons of sand into the ocean for 12 years. And now we are seeing islands emerging in the middle of nowhere

Ten years ago, we were afraid of fast charging. The 10,000mAh batteries are going the same way

by

The world of smartphones is divided in two: a Chinese market betting on gigantic silicon-carbon and some “traditional” manufacturers who do not dare to take the leap. This weekend, the controversy was sparked by YouTuber Marques Brownlee, after publishing a video that has surpassed one million views in less than 24 hours. what has happened. “The problem with smartphone batteries”is the title of a video that has spread like wildfire among the community tech. In it, he explained some of the problems that silicon-carbon batteries supposedly suffer from, a technology that China is betting on to boost the capacity of its phones. above 10,000mAh. The problems. Silicon-carbon batteries are not a new technology, but they have been starting to be implemented in smartphones for just two years. During this time, there are several concerns on the table. Possible swelling due to the expansion of silicon: with each charge, a battery contracts and expands. Silicon can triple its volume, generating greater internal stresses in the battery. At the same time, there are fears that this expansion-contraction cycle could cause cracks and leaks in the battery. Need for reinforcement in battery compartment (such as small steel cages) to contain swelling. Long-term reliability not yet demonstrated in smartphones. Yes, but. Concerns about whether silicon-carbon batteries are safe or not are legitimate. Just as, back in the day, we were worried that a mobile phone with “fast” charging like the OnePlus 3 in 2016 (those times when Dash Charge was 30W) could explode. Today there are already mobile phones with 120W. The first commercial mobile phone to incorporate this type of battery was the Honor Magic 5 Pro in its Chinese version. No cases of the slightest problem have been reported to date in its more than two years of life. Manufacturers do not go crazy. Manufacturers are more than aware of the possible dangers that these types of batteries can have, and equip their phones with specific chips to control the charge in real time if excess heat is detected. Some brands, like Honor, go so far as to create microscopic tunnels in their batteries so that lithium ions can reduce chemical friction. Because yes, although carbon silicon batteries are called that, they are not made of pure silicon, they are a natural evolution of lithium batteries themselves. It’s not that easy. The next challenge after the introduction of silicon-carbon batteries has been to take advantage of their ability to store greater energy in a smaller size to achieve barbaric capacities: 7,000mAh, 7,500mAh, 10,000mAh. Energy densities notably higher than those that large manufacturers, such as Samsung, Apple and Google, currently mount in their high-end phones. Here an extra degree is added to the uncertainty: not only do we have more modern and not so tested batteries, but we also have capabilities that make their behavior even more unpredictable. Go deeper. The war for high-capacity batteries adds, apart from doubts about their reliability on the part of some manufacturers, logistical and economic challenges. They are more expensive batteries, and some manufacturers They are not taking them out of China yet. for that same reason. Added to this is that although the spec sheet tells us about milliamp hours, the main measure to determine the energy capacity of a battery is watt hours (Whr). Europe does not like batteries with more than 20 Whr, and they require longer and more expensive transport and authorization protocols. If the RAM crisis threatens to skyrocket the price of smartphones, thinking about incorporating significantly more expensive batteries does not seem like a viable plan to maintain the current margins of large manufacturers. Image | Apple In Xataka | We already know why mobile phones with 6,000mAh are not arriving in Europe: there is a clear person responsible

In Tokyo there is a bookstore with only one book in the catalog. It has been open for ten years and works

by

In an alley in the Ginza district of Tokyo, a small white-painted room houses what could be considered the most radical bookstore in the world. Morioka Shotenopened in May 2015 by Yoshiyuki Morioka, reverses the commercial logic of the book: while the Japanese publishing industry produces approximately 80,000 new titles each yearthis establishment only sells one, which is renewed every week. It is not performance. Morioka Shoten It is a business that works, selling multiple copies of a single work for six consecutive days. The interior is unusually bare for a bookstore (concrete walls, a piece of furniture used as a counter, a cable telephone) and serves as a canvas for displays inspired by the current book. It is a bit the absolute opposite of Amazon: from infinite offer to minimalism in choice. How it works. Each title remains on display for exactly six days, from Tuesday to Sunday, accompanied by artistic installations, objects or photographs related to its content. The space functions simultaneously as a gallery and a point of sale. The location of the project reinforces this symbolic dimension: the Suzuki Buildingbuilt in 1929 and protected as historic architecture, housed between the 1930s and the end of World War II the offices of Nippon Kobo, the publisher that produced the magazine ‘Nippon’, which many consider foundational for the modern Japanese publishing industry. The context. The opening of Morioka Shoten in 2015 comes at a critical time for the industry. Two decades earlier, in 1995, Amazon had begun operations, and the domino effect was inevitable: American independent bookstores went from more than 7,000 stores in 1994 to just 1,651 in 2009, a reduction of 76%. The physical bookstore model seemed obsolete given the speed of the Internet and recommendation algorithms. Morioka Shoten proposed just the opposite: concentration, deliberate scarcity and time to focus on a single work. The philosophy of issatsu, isshitsu. The Japanese expression issatsu, isshitsu It means “a room, a book.” For eight years, Yoshiyuki Morioka worked as an employee in second-hand bookstores in the Kanda neighborhood, a traditional bibliophile district in Tokyo. He later opened his own independent bookstore in Kayabacho, where he organized author presentations that multiplied sales. The question that it was done was: why maintain hundreds of works if the optimal experience was produced with just one? The Takram design studio developed the store’s visual identity based on a sketch by Morioka himself: a rhombus that condenses the double metaphor of the project, simultaneously representing an open book and a single room. The resurgence of indie. The proposal is part of a broader recovery of independent book trade. In 2015, a curious phenomenon occurred in the United States: American indie bookstores. They began to multiplyup to 49%. The study cited factors such as the feeling of community, the work of booksellers as curators and the capacity of bookstores as meeting points. The pandemic accelerated the trend: since 2020 The sector grew by 70%, in 2024, 323 new stores were inaugurated and in 2025, more than a hundred additional stores were opened in the first months of the year alone. Quality over quantity. The commercial results of the experiment confirm the viability of the model. Morioka Shoten has sold more than 2,000 works since its inauguration. The weekly catalog has ranged from comics by Tove Jansson to botanical photographs by Karl Blossfeldt, novels by Mimei Ogawa and short stories by Hans Christian Andersen, spanning fiction, non-fiction, manga and illustrated books. In an era that offers immediate access to millions of titles, abundance generates paralysis when it comes to decisions. From that point of view, Morioka’s radical limitation does not restrict, but liberates. In Xataka | The 24 most beautiful bookstores in the world

The director of Sirat criticizes commercial cinema. But meanwhile, four out of ten directors film once a decade

by

Oliver Laxe’s statements comparing commercial cinema to “bimbo bread”, especially pointing out the contradiction of making films for Netflix. have generated an unexpected controversy in the Spanish audiovisual sector, relativizing the extraordinary career of ‘Sirat’. The film not only got five statuettes at the European Film Awardsbut it has also received eleven Goya nominations and two Oscar nominations. The debate arises at a significant moment: a study by the European Audiovisual Observatory reveals that four out of every ten European directors and screenwriters who released a feature film in 2015 did not sign another one during the following ten years. A complicated metaphor. Oliver Laxe conceded an interview with The World in which offered his diagnosis on the crisis of youth attendance at the theaters: “It is our fault and our responsibility that young people do not go to the cinemas. They have been given fodder, bimbo bread and their palates are accustomed to sugar and processed foods.” The food metaphor did not stop there. Laxe went on to argue that when these viewers are offered “a rye bread or a pure cereal,” the palate is not prepared, although he insisted that “the sensitivity is there.” The filmmaker, whose film has exceeded three million euros at the Spanish box office and has attracted precisely a young audience, closed his reasoning with a resounding statement: “Having very political proclamations, but then making a movie with Netflix seems like a pure contradiction to me that nullifies your speech.” The accounts don’t work out. The answer did not take long to materialize. Jota Linares, a filmmaker from Cádiz who has often filmed for Netflix, replied in the SER questioning Laxe’s analysis. Linares challenged the simplification of the problem: “I will tell you what allows me to continue maintaining political ideas and express them freely despite having directed series and films for Netflix: my social class.” And he added: “I assure you that, due to my social class, I would be incapable of supporting myself by making only auteur films spaced over time for about two or three years. It doesn’t work out for me, although I see that it does for you.” Finally, he concluded that “you don’t hack the system from within with a six million euro movie with thirty publicists working at your feet. No, dear Oliver. That’s being at the top of the mainstream.” ‘Sirat’s’ money. The contrast between both positions reveals broader tensions in the sector. Laxe speaks from a relatively privileged position, since his film had the financial backing of Movistar Plus+ and is now enjoying an international campaign that has taken him to the Oscars. Linares, for his part, represents a silent majority of filmmakers who fight to get each new opportunity. Precariousness as a backdrop. The debate takes on a more urgent dimension when confronted with the data that published El País based on the study of the European Audiovisual Observatory. The research, which analyzes the careers of 38,762 professionals, covering some 30,000 projects, provides revealing figures: 40% of those who released a feature film in theaters during 2015 did not sign another film again in the entire subsequent decade. At the same time, more than half of the films released each year are debut films. The report’s conclusions leave no room for doubt: there is “an impressive turnover and great precariousness.” Cinema versus television. The document also shows a growing separation between film and television. Only 11% of directors and scriptwriters worked in both formats between 2015 and 2024, dismantling the idea of ​​fluid transfer between screens. On television and platforms, 85% of screenwriters and 91% of directors active in 2015 continued working later, compared to the 60% that disappear from theatrical cinema. “The majority survive poorly. Those who endure have family financial support behind them,” explained director Cristina Andreu in 2021. Little seems to have changed since then. Structural contradiction. Can the industry demand “rye bread”, as Laxe says he does, when the system expels 40% of its creators after a film? Is it fair to hold the public responsible for having a palate “accustomed to processed” in an ecosystem where professional continuity is more the exception than the norm? Laxe himself acknowledges that ‘Sirat’ was considered “a suicide” during the search for financing. If even an ultimately successful project faced that initial diagnosis, what happens to proposals from filmmakers without a safety net? The tension between the discourse of cinematic quality and the precarious reality of European production raises uncomfortable questions about who can afford to cultivate discerning palates. When, furthermore, the system itself does not guarantee anything. In Xataka | Many agree that ‘Stranger Things 5’ lowers the quality of the series. But that doesn’t change Netflix’s ambitious plans.

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.