thought

Ryanair thought it could build loyalty with a subscription service. Until you’ve remembered what your real business is

by

“It has cost more money than it generates” With a brief note and the statements of Dara Brady, CMO of the company, Ryanair has confirmed the closure of Prime, the membership program that sought to retain its customers with advantages that have generated greater costs for the company than benefits. The subscription service of the company has not lasted even a year before its cancellation. Surgical. A test, some results eight months later and a decision: close Prime. Ryanair has confirmed that it is closing its subscription program just eight months after it was launched on the market in a decision that is as firm as it is clean. Subscribers will maintain their benefits but those who had not signed up until last Friday, the 28th, will now no longer be able to do so. They report on the company’s website that customers will maintain their benefits “of exclusive savings on flights and seats for the remaining 12 months of membership.” However, the company’s Prime program already has its days numbered. two million. It doesn’t seem like much for a company like Ryanair, but it speaks volumes about the rigorous cost control that the company manages. The statement includes the words of Dara Brady, CMO of Ryanair, who points out that the program has collected 4.4 million euros in subscriptions but that the benefits delivered are greater than six million euros. That is, in the eight months in which the service has been active, the company has lost less than 250,000 euros per month in the new program. Doesn’t seem like much for a company that has obtained 2,540 million euros in the first quarter of 2025. What did they offer? In its announcement last March, Ryanair offered the following benefits For your subscribers: Priority sale on selected flights Exclusive discounts for some flights Free seat selection for the member and one companion To access these benefits, the client had to pay 79 euros per year. According to the company’s accounts, seat selection alone already amortized the investment from three flights a year. With four flights made per year, we would be amortizing 26 euros on average. The subscription extended for a maximum of one year or 12 flights per year. In addition, I had travel insurance to cancel flights due to injuries or illnesses, the delay of other flights or theft of luggage. Of course, those over 70 years of age were excluded from sickness coverage. Unattractive. “With more than 207 million passengers this year, Ryanair will remain focused on offering the lowest fares in Europe to all our customers, and not just this group of 55,000 Prime members.” The closing of the press release published by the company is a clear confirmation of what happened. The most attractive thing that Prime offered was that the customer could choose (and save money) in the choice of seats but it did not even guarantee that two passengers (one being “non-Prime”) could travel together. It is an incentive that has not been attractive enough for a company where the customer looks for the cheapest way to travel and chooses to add services little by little, depending on how much money you are willing to pay. Nothing premium. Ryanair’s test has convinced the company that it has no room to delve into policies that bring it closer to premium or higher-cost companies. Many of the airlines with higher prices offer cards or loyalty services to keep their customers retained, but this way of acting has not caught on among the Irish company’s customers. The reasons are obvious. When someone chooses Ryanair it is because they expect the lowest possible price for a short flight. And you are willing to sacrifice by traveling with less luggage or accepting 100% digital boarding. You either take it or leave it. And Ryanair knows that the customer will leave it when the competition offers that same flight at a cheaper price. On the other hand, customers who are loyal to higher-cost companies obtain other advantages that do receive greater attention on flights of higher cost and time. For example, loyalty cards companies like Iberia They allow access to VIP lounges or priority boarding, secondary values ​​for those who aspire to travel through Europe at the lowest possible price. To this we must add that the high price paid for the ticket ends up subsidizing these companies for the economic effort they have to make to deliver the benefits to their customers. Photo | Markus Winkler In Xataka | Now we know why Ryanair charges its passengers for everything: it is the key to having a profit of 2,540 million euros

Data centers consume a lot of water, but it is probably less than we thought. It’s a book’s fault

by

We can criticize the AI ​​boom for many reasons, but there is one that deeply affected society: the environmental impact, more specifically water consumption of each interaction with the AI, necessary to be able to cool the servers. The problem is realbut everything indicates that it has been magnified and the origin would be a miscalculation in a popular book. the book. It is ‘Empire of AI’ written by Karen Hao and which we already talked about in Xataka. After interviewing hundreds of former employees and people close to the company, the author constructs a detailed and highly critical account of OpenAI, more specifically its CEO Sam Altman. Among the criticisms of this ‘AI empire’, Hao mentions the excessive water consumption of AI, going so far as to state that a data center would consume 1,000 times more water than a city of 88,000 inhabitants. The criticism. Andy Masley tells it in his newsletter The Weird Turn Pro. According to their calculations, in reality 22% of what the city consumes or 3% of the entire municipal system. Furthermore, Masley states that the book confuses water extraction (temporary withdrawal that is returned to the network) with real consumption. The calculation error. The author herself has responded to the article de Masley citing the email he sent to the Municipal Drinking Water and Sewage Service of Chile (SMAPA), from whom he requested information on the total water consumption of Cerrillos and Maipu, the towns he used to make the consumption comparison. The problem is that Hao requested the amount in liters, but they responded without specifying the units and everything indicates that they were actually cubic meters, hence the large discrepancy. The author has consulted again with the SMAPA to clarify this information. It seems that, indeed, there is an error. Estimates. How much water AI consumes has been a recurring question in recent years. In September 2024, a study published by Washington Post He calculated that, to generate a 100-word text with ChatGPT, 519 milliliters of water were needed. The calculation was made taking into account the total annual consumption of data centers and the type of cooling used. It’s truly outrageous. What companies say. AI companies are not very transparent regarding the water and energy consumption of their data centers. The big technology companies give the total annual consumption data in their sustainability reports. We know that a large part of the consumption goes to data centers, but it is not possible to know the real consumption of each search. Google has been the only one that has published specific energy and water consumption data from its AI. According to the company, the water consumption for each Gemini consultation was 0.26 milliliters, or in other words, about five drops of water. We cannot extrapolate this data to all data centers or all companies, but it does seem that previous estimates are quite exaggerated. Water controversy. All of this doesn’t mean there isn’t a problem with water and AI. In fact, the Cerrillos data center where the alleged calculation error is It was never built because the Chilean justice system paralyzed it. due to the climatic impact it was going to have, especially in the context of drought in which the region found itself. Data centers need a lot of water, so much so that initiatives are emerging to cool them submerging them in the ocean. The other problem. Water is just one of the problems data centers face, energy demand poses an even greater challenge. In 2024, Data centers already accounted for 4% of total electricity consumption in the United States and in the surroundings of some of these beasts the electricity bill has risen 267% in recent years. Big tech is already warning: there is no power for so many chips and they are being raised since create nuclear power plants until take their data centers to space. Image | Google In Xataka | What is happening in the US is a warning for Spain: data centers driving up electricity bills in homes

We thought smoking was no longer fashionable among Gen Z. Until Sabrina Carpenter and Jeremy Allen White arrived

by

For decades, the cigarette starred in some of the most iconic images in popular culture. In the imagination of journalism, that reporter from the last century always reappears leaning over his typewriter, surrounded by wisps of smoke while writing an urgent chronicle. In television fiction, that scene evolved into Carrie Bradshaw typing on her Mac with a half-consumed cigarette butt in her New York apartment. And in the cinema, the cigarette was almost a visual code: from the dark seduction of Humphrey Bogart to the melancholic aura that enveloped so many classic characters. Smoke, more than an accessory, functioned as a symbol of charisma, mystery or vulnerability. All of that seemed to be extinguished with the advance of anti-smoking laws. The terraces they cleared themselves of smokeHollywood moderated its use and audiovisual culture stopped associating the cigarette with glamour. The gesture was relegated to a stale past, linked to the strong smell of bars before the ban. But something unexpected has happened: the cigarette has returned. And it has done so hand in hand with the only sector capable of resurrecting what seemed forgotten: celebrities. The visible return of the cigarette to pop culture. The warning signal came from the mecca of cinema. According to a report from the anti-smoking organization Truth Initiativehalf of the movies that debuted last year included cigarettes, cigars or tobacco. In addition, it detected a 110% increase in representations of tobacco in programs aimed at young people between 15 and 24 years old, and a quadrupling in the most viewed series. The figures confirm the obvious: the cigarette has regained prominence. And, to give a couple of examples, it is being observed in music: Sabrina Carpenter appears in the video clip for Manchild smoking and posed for some photographs wearing a corset made from packets of Marlboro Gold. In cinema, films like Saltburn, Materialists or Oppenheimer They have returned tobacco to an almost omnipresent place. Fashion has not been an exception either, during New York Fashion Week, models they smoked on the catwalk as another accessory. And there is still something else, I couldn’t forget about social networks. The Instagram account @cigfluencerscreated in 2021, publishes images of celebrities smoking and has accumulated more than 80,000 followers. The cigarette as a symbol? The most curious thing about this phenomenon is that it is not mass tobacco consumption that is returning, but rather its aesthetics. That nuance is essential to understand what is happening. The point is that the cigarette returns as part of the revival Y2K and aesthetics indie sleaze and heroin chicthat mix of grunge, decadent glamor and soft rebellion that dominated the 2000s and that today inspires fashion, music and social networks. In this framework, the cigarette functions as a retro accessory, a vintage gesture that provokes more visually than addictively. This aesthetic dimension also operates as a narrative tool. In a report for The New York Times point out that the cigarette re-emerges as a symbolic resource on screen: Dakota Johnson smokes in Materialists to underline the emotional emptiness of his character; Jeremy Allen White, in The Bearuses smoke to intensify his melancholy; Sabrina Carpenter holds a makeshift mouthpiece in an ironic tone. According to the medium, the cigarette does not get in the way of the shot: it fills it with aura, drama and texture. And the fundamental question, does it have attraction for young people? There is a component of minimal rebellion. According to the BBCsmoking functions as a gesture of light transgression within a generation accustomed to self-care, permanent surveillance and implicit norms of well-being. The aesthetics brat popularized by Charli XCX It combines hedonism, irony and a touch of nihilism: a perfect territory for the cigarette to recover its provocative role, more suggestive than dangerous. Hence, the great paradox when observing the real behavior of Generation Z. While they watch celebrities smoke on screen, young people consume less and less substances. Already we have explained in Xataka how they are succeeding coffee raves —alcoholic-free daytime parties, where you dance with a cappuccino in hand—, and Tinder registers a boom in dry datingwith one in four young people preferring alcohol-free dating. In other words, cool aesthetics no longer have anything to do with actual habit. Should we worry? The problem appears when cultural trends intersect with health data. The WHO remember that tobacco It kills more than seven million people a year and that there is no safe level of exposure. EPData confirms that its global consumption has fallen from 32.7% in 2000 to 22.3% in 2020, but institutions like the CDC —cited by Wall Street Journal— warn that repeated exposure to tobacco images increases the likelihood that young people will start smoking. In fact, the BBC collected testimonies from American doctors who already observe cases of young people who, after normalizing vaping, have switched to cigarettes because “it gives more credibility” or is “more aesthetic.” Constant exposure to so-called “digital smoke”, pointed out by the Spanish Association Against Cancercan normalize a habit that seemed on the way to disappearing. However, a study carried out by Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) showed that Tinder profiles of smokers receive between 29% and 52.7% less matches. Young people do not want to date someone who smokes, but they do want to consume – from a distance – the aesthetics of cigarettes on screens. The contradiction is clear: in the video clip it adds glamour; In real life, it reduces romantic interest. Fad or cultural turn? Perhaps the cigarette has not completely returned: perhaps its ghost, its iconography, its gesture has returned. Aesthetics are back, not addiction. The smoke, not the habit. But while celebrities hold it up as if it were just another jewel in the photo, health organizations remember that tobacco continues to kill half of those who don’t quit. And although on the screen it is pure aesthetics, in real life it is still a tangible risk. The cigarette, that old protagonist of classic cinema, today experiences its … Read more

We thought we’d seen ‘Doom’ running on all types of devices. Until someone tried it with a ticket printer

by

We’d seen ‘Doom’ run on almost every device imaginable: from a Texas Instruments calculator until a modified pregnancy test, passing through the Touch Bar of a MacBook. The community has been proving for years that if something has a screen and some kind of processor, someone will try to run Doom. We thought the bar couldn’t be raised any higher, until someone decided to do it in an unexpected place even for this challenge: a ticket printer. Beyond the technical, this challenge has something almost philosophical: it is not about seeing if ‘Doom’ works, because we know that the game can run on very limited hardware. The question is whether we can do it on devices that, in theory, were not designed for that. Closed devices, with a very specific function, that suddenly become small gaming platforms. This transformation of the everyday into something unexpected is what keeps alive the question “what if you can also execute it?” A printer with the soul of a computer. The device chosen by the channel Bringus Studios It is not a conventional ticket printer. It is a solution created for small businesses, capable of printing receipts and running typical point-of-sale terminal applications from the same computer. That integration explains why it includes an embedded operating system, USB ports, its own connectivity and even an original Windows 7 Pro Embedded sticker. For those who used it back in the day, it was simply a point of sale terminal. For those who find it today, it is much more than that. When the creator decides to open the machine, the exterior appearance gives way to a metal structure more typical of an industrial computer than a receipt printer. Under the cover appear screws, SATA cables, internal USB ports, a motherboard and even a small integrated speaker. There are hardly any concessions to the design, everything is ready to function for hours in a commercial environment. Instead of a peripheral accessory, what you find is a complete computer, hidden under a functional and robust chassis. Play Doom on a paper screen. Once it was discovered that the machine could behave like a complete computer, the next step was inevitable: running ‘Doom’. The content creator turned to software rendering, adjusted the brightness and contrast to suit thermal printing, and turned the paper into the game’s visual output. Each frame was printed as a monochrome image, creating a sort of roll-up screen at its feet. The result was neither comfortable nor efficient, but it was extraordinarily ingenious. Too hot for a normal game. The system was capable of printing ‘Doom’, but was not prepared to do so for minutes at a time. Many scenes generated a lot of black, causing the thermal head to get hotter than intended. There came a point where the printer would pause printing or output messy and unintelligible sequences. The author used an external fan to prolong the session, while the paper piled up on the floor and the behavior of the game became so unpredictable that one almost had to play by pure intuition. The experiment did not end with Doom. When testing ‘Half-Life,’ the result was different: the game’s visual style seemed to fit better on thermal paper and produced clearer images. The author began to print scenes that did allow hallways, doors or characters to be distinguished with a certain clarity, to the point of wanting to save them. He even replicated one of the classic moments of the game, the microwave in the laboratory, and confirmed on paper that the pot ended up exploding. Despite the lag of several seconds between what was happening in the game and what appeared on paper, the scenes were still legible enough that I wanted to keep them. It was no longer just playing, it was documenting it. What started as a simple printer ended up being a reminder of why this challenge continues to fascinate so many people. It doesn’t matter if the result is impractical, illegible or full of paper: the important thing is that it worked. The game was run, the printer printed the images and it was demonstrated that even a routine device, designed to work silently behind a counter, can end up becoming an experiment worth telling. Images | Bringus Studios In Xataka | The Internet has been filled with videos with the new trailer for ‘GTA VI’. The only problem is they have all been made with AI

We thought this bug was a pig. Now we know that it was two meters tall, weighed a thousand kilos and was a killing machine related to whales.

by

Almost 200 years ago, a paleontologist found some completely improbable bones. They thought about it a thousand times, tried to find some sense in it; but everything ended in the same delirious image: that of a huge pig with the capacity to destroy everything in front of it. And that’s what we called him for decades: the ‘pig from hell’. What we have just discovered, two centuries later, is that we know almost nothing about them. Now they are even more terrible. But what really is a ‘hell pig’? It is the popular nickname by which entelodonts are known; an extinct family of large prehistoric mammals that lived about 30 million years ago. The bug was described for the first time in the 1840sbut it was in the early 20th century that paleontologists assumed it was closely related to pigs or peccaries. It was not something irrational: on a strictly physical level, entelodonts looked very similar to modern-day pigs. Two meters tall, weighing more than a thousand kilos and jaws capable of crushing bones, but pigs nonetheless. With “crushing bones” we are falling short. Recently, a team from Vanderbilt University could examine in detail the teeth of these animals and, thanks to three-dimensional models of dental microwear, they have managed to turn around everything we thought we knew about the role of these animals in North American ecosystems 30 million years ago. Your conclusions they leave no room for doubt: “the largest specimens were capable of crushing bones with an efficiency similar to or even greater than that of lions and hyenas.” Luckily, they weren’t very smart; And, according to the researchers, “it has a brain-body relationship similar to that of reptiles, so they were very unintelligent creatures.” A complex story. At first, experts thought that this monstrous animal was a born hunter. Then, partly because of this familiarity with pigs, they came to the conclusion that they were omnivorous animals, capable of eating small animals and carrion. Now, thanks to this team, we know that they were most likely at the top of the food chain of their ecosystems. This, in fact, raises the possibility that different species (or subspecies) occupied different ecological niches. However, there are curious things. To begin with, entelodonts have nothing to do with pigs. In fact, they are closer to whales and hippos than anything else. But, above all, it shows us the difficulties we continue to have in understanding our past. Little by little, we are understanding that if our way of looking at the past conditions the futureour ability to understand what the world was like 30 million years ago will radically change many things we think we are. And the best thing is that, even though I get melancholic and retrospective, everything we know makes it clear that the “pig from hell” is more infernal than ever. Image | Carnegie Museum of Natural History In Xataka | The deaths of cows, reindeer or rhinos are not a mystery: they are the consequences of a curse, that of “large animals”

We thought Stanford, MIT, and Harvard were leading in AI. There is a Chinese university that surpasses them all

by

To the northwest of Beijing there is a university campus that is not only the most prestigious in the country, it is also one of the most influential universities in the world in science and technology, even surpassing institutions of the stature of MIT or Stanford. It is called Tsinghua and some of the most important technological projects of the moment are being developed there. Change of focus. Tsinghua has been in operation since 1911, although it was not until 1952 when it became a polytechnic university. Among its former students there are figures of the stature of Nobel Prize in Physics Chen-Ning Yang and President Xi Jinping himself. From its inception, Tsinghua’s focus was the training of Chinese students who were going to continue their studies in the United States. Today that approach has completely changed. In the midst of an AI career, there is a nationalistic spirit and students tend to stay and develop projects in their native country. Leaders. They count in Bloomberg that Tsinghua University stands toe-to-toe with the best universities in the world. According to the US News rankingis the best university in the world in engineering, chemical engineering and electronic engineering; has second place in civil engineering and nanotechnology; It is third in materials science and fourth in computer science. There it is nothing. Intellectual property. Tsinghua is also the university with the most papers on AI among the 100 most cited and leads in patent registration, outnumbering MIT, Stanford, Princeton, and Harvard combined. According to LexisNexis data analyzed by Bloomberghave registered 4,986 patents on AI and machine learning in the last 20 years. In 2024 alone they registered 900 patents. However, according to the Stanford AI Indexthe most influential patents remain in American hands. Startups. The university not only focuses on training, it also has a startup incubator called X-Lab from which at least 900 startups have already emerged since it was created in 2013. They are currently very focused on projects related to artificial intelligence. The founders of startups such as Moonshot AIthe creators of the model Kimi K2either Sapient Inca startup that develops “hierarchical reasoning models” based on how the human brain works. They affirm that it is the way to achieve AGI, a different approach to that pursued by companies like OpenAI with LLM or WLM (world models). that LeCun recently defended. Chip war. Efforts are also being made in Tsinghua to give China a boost in the technological war with the United States. The clearest example is the chip created by a group of university scientists and it is 3.7 faster than NVIDIA’s A100. Not only that, the chip, called ACCEL, is also much more efficient. At the moment its mass production has not been achieved, but the innovation is there. Image | Tsinghua University In Xataka | Four decades ago, China decided to invest in training millions of engineers. Today that plan gives it an advantage in the race for AI

When we thought we had seen all kinds of rehearsals for an invasion, China makes science fiction: robots taking over an island

by

At the end of 2024, several military studies from Beijing were published outlining six different scenarios if future unification with Taiwan goes awry. So we tell that the Second World War I advised against all them because, in essence, there was talk of an invasion of the island. From then until now so much China as Taiwan have carried out all kinds of drills under the war scenario background. What you haven’t seen until now is that China has a plan B: robotic wolves. Mechanized herds. This week and through images and videosChina has shown to the world a new generation of autonomous combat systems in an exercise that simulated an invasion of Taiwan. On the landing beach, the traditional “human waves” of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) were replaced by swarms of machines: suicide drones and well-known robotic quadrupeds like mechanized wolves. These units, developed by the state-owned China South Industries Group Corporation (CSGC), represent the first attempt to convert amphibious operations into a scenario dominated byor artificial intelligence. The broadcast images State television CCTV showed these metal “wolves” running across the sand ahead of human troops, detecting obstacles with LiDAR sensors, thermal cameras and autonomous navigation algorithms. Wolf specification. Of 70 kilos of weight and capable of carrying 20 more, these robots were divided into attack, transport and reconnaissance variants, managing to reduce the time between detection and destruction of the target to less than ten seconds. In fact, in one symbolic sequencea single human operator simultaneously directed nine robots and six drones from a 3D interface, while the devices cleared barbed wire and trenches for infantry. @elsa50356 “Breaking from China! The PLA’s latest amphibious landing drills—drones take the lead, and robotic ‘wolf packs’ rush the beach! The future of warfare is here!” 🚀🪖 #PLADrills #ChinaMilitary #Drones #RobotArmy #MilitaryTech ♬ 原创音乐 – Elsa Swarm intelligence. The training, called “Landing Operation in Taiwan” was part of an assault test coastal exercise carried out by the PLA 72nd Division, under the Eastern Theater Command, the unit operating in front of the Taiwan Strait. For the first time, quadruped robots performed as a spearheadfollowed by waves of FPV drones bombing simulated enemy fortifications. In total, the attack cycle was cfour times faster than that of a conventional square. This deployment is part of the EPL’s strategic shift from mass doctrine (the so-called human wave tactics) towards what Beijing calls “smart sea and land tactics,” a doctrine that prioritizes automation, cooperation between unmanned systems and data-driven decision making. The buts. However, the exercise itself revealed vulnerabilities: these wolf robots They lack armor, are easily detectable in open fields and one of them was destroyed by light fire. Chinese analysts they recognized limitations, but they stressed that the goal was not perfection, but rather to demonstrate that the army is willing to progressively replace human soldiers with swarms of coordinated machines. Ukraine in the shadows. The Chinese Army has incorporated direct lessons from the Ukrainian war into its maneuvers, where drones have redefined tactical and logistical effectiveness. According to Chinese military media like Daiwanthe PLA is applying the knowledge extracted from that conflict in its ground training, anticipating a future where hundreds of robots advance at 30 or 40 km/h in coordinated waves. The parallel is clear: if Ukraine demonstrated that a cheap drone can destroy a tankChina wants to prove that a network of smart machines can break coastal defenses in a matter of minutes. The current exercises, which until recently were limited to traditional landings, are already a general rehearsal of algorithmic warfare, where the human decision is reduced to an initial order and autonomous systems execute the rest. Strategic competition. Plus: The accelerated development of these systems occurs while the United States reinforces your deterrence strategy in the Indo-Pacific. According to the CIAan eventual Chinese invasion of Taiwan could occur before 2027, and the Pentagon has designed the so-called hellscape strategy: Saturate the strait with thousands of drones, submarines and unmanned vehicles to slow down Chinese forces and buy time for reinforcements to arrive. Beijing, aware of this, is creating units specialized in war against swarms, equipped with software capable of detecting, tracking and attacking targets without human intervention. Companies like Norincoanother state giant, have presented vehicles like the P60powered by the DeepSeek AI model, which can recognize targets, avoid obstacles and operate in logistics support or combat missions. A future of machines. He China’s advance towards an AI-powered war demonstrates both its technological ambition and its practical limitations. The images of robots breaching simulated beaches are as revealing as their failures in the face of enemy fire. However, beyond immediate effectiveness, Beijing’s message is unequivocal: the future of the war in the strait of Taiwan will be decided by the speed of the algorithms, not the number of soldiers. In that race, China seeks to transform mechanized warfare in smart warreplacing brute force with computational precision. The question is no longer whether robots will be present in the next invasion, but how many will be able to think, coordinate and eliminate before the first human makes landfall. Image | CCTV/China In Xataka | Less than 150 kilometers from Taiwan, the US does not stop accumulating missiles. It’s the closest thing to preparing for war. In Xataka | China has asked Russia for an airborne battalion and training. That can only mean one thing: they are preparing a landing

We have returned to an era that we thought forgotten. That of the nuclear threat of the US and Russia launching their reply: Poseidon

by

In recent days all roads trace a common landscape: from Moscow exhibit and test “superweapons” that defy traditional categories (autonomous nuclear torpedoes, nuclear cruise engines, and indefinite-range missiles) while in Washington the political and media reaction accentuates a dynamic action-reaction that could return the world to an (il)logic of open competition between nuclear powers. Someone should stop it. Poseidon. He Russian Poseidon has returned to the forefront as the epitome of the hybrid between a fantasy factory and a real military program: an unmanned, reactor-powered underwater vehicle, conceived to transport a nuclear warhead to coastal targets or naval groupings, operate at great depth and high speed and (according to the official Russian narrative) bypass conventional defenses. The impact figures published in Moscow (speeds between 60–100 knots, operational depth ~1,000 m, “megaton” capacity that some sources stretch up to 100 Mt) feed the symbolic dread. However, analysts remember physical limits and Soviet precedents that qualify both the real effectiveness and the plausibility of “tsunami” type effects capable of sweeping away cities. In practice. Thus, the majority agrees that Poseidon It is best described as a capability designed for political and strategic cost: suitable to reinforce a “second strike” or to be used as a system of intimidation, not necessarily as an everyday weapon in an escalated conflict. Burevestnik and a persistence. We told it last week. Along with the torpedo, Russia has shown the Burevestnik (a nuclear-powered cruise missile that promises essentially unlimited range) and other platforms that the Kremlin lumps together under the label of “invincible weapons.” These initiatives obey a logic of modernization that combines technological ambition, industrial vulnerabilities (sanctions, reliability problems) and media staging: the public demonstration of tests does not detonate charges, but announces theoretical capabilities and forces adversaries to regroup resources and doctrine. Continuity with the Soviet tradition of studying large-scale underwater effects and the historical experience with essays they show that ideas can persist even when physics and engineering limit their real usefulness. Washington’s response. The political reaction in the United States, personified by presidential statements about “restarting testing” and public instruction to military departments, has been immediate (and disorderly). The announcements arrive in a critical moment (with the New START treaty close to expiration and with China throwing uncertainties about its own nuclear growth) and can be read as strategic messages, instruments of pressure and, sometimes, as gestures directed at the internal public. One thing remains clear: Trump’s formulation was more than ambiguous and it is not clear whether it refers to nuclear detonations (critical/non-critical), increased testing of delivery systems, or increased sub-critical experiments and simulations. There is no doubt, this ambiguity is dangerous because conditions perceptions and responses international without the technical and legal scaffolding that a decision of shock would demand. Burevestnik How “nuclear” is prescribed. On TWZ Several experts consulted describe the practical path to resume nuclear detonations: The president can order actions, but execution requires the involvement of specific agencies (Department of Energy, NNSA and national laboratories), budget authorization from Congress and logistics focused on the Nevada National Security Site as the only realistic site for contained underground testing. In any case, the deadlines they are long: A “simple burst” could be organized in months, a useful instrumented test would require 18–36 months, and a new design development program would take years. Furthermore, the cost would be high and would most likely provoke retorts from Russia, China and others, reigniting a cycle of arms races that post-Cold War agreements had managed to tacitly contain. Technical dimension. The technical usefulness of returning to explosive tests to maintain the national arsenal is, obviously, discussed: US laboratories maintain that, thanks to advanced simulations, subcritical experimentation and vast historical data, the reliability of nuclear warheads can sustain without detonations. The tests would serve, in theory, to validate new designs and increase confidence in specific features. In practice, they would reopen the door to developments that amplify offensive capabilities and complicate the balance of terror, in addition to generating environmental and proliferation risks. The media theater. Plus: not everything is technology. There is a strong performative component. Putin and the Russian media apparatus have known convert essaysimages and statements in one power narrative which includes synchronies with popular culture (television series) to magnify its psychological impact. In Washington, the improvised communication from social networks it has a similar but less institutionalized effect: statements without clarifying technique or procedure can be interpreted as a political will to rupture and push allies and adversaries to take asymmetric measures. Geopolitical consequences. The costs of a back to testing are not limited to budgets: there is talk of reactivation of the nuclear race, of degradation of international trustor the erosion of regulatory regimes (the CTBT and the verification architecture), in addition to a probable expansion of arsenals by China and other actors who do not participate in treaties today. Added to this is the risk that the US internal debate (political polarization, legislative pressures and the dynamic of “showing” without a technical roadmap) will generate hasty decisions. Worse still, the media normalization of “anti-coastal weapons” or “Frankenstein” torpedoes may facilitate usage doctrines that lower the threshold for tactical uses of nuclear weapons, an especially dangerous prospect. Uncertainty. In summary, the news of the last days They are, more than anything else, a warning: we are witnessing the sum of three processes (modernization and Russian technological experimentationpoliticization and theatrics of deterrenceand American answers marked by tactical uncertainty and political haste) that, together, fuel a dangerous inertia. The question is no longer just whether Poseidon either Burevestnik are fully operational, it is whether the international community, and especially the capitals with decision-making power, will recover the technical prudence and diplomatic rigor necessary to contain the escalation. Image | US Space Force, Russian Defense Ministry, Los Alamos National Laboratory In Xataka | Last week, Russia launched its fearsome Satan II nuclear missile, Putin’s “invincible weapon.” It came out regular In Xataka | There is something more disturbing than “a Chernobyl”: it … Read more

If you thought the AI ​​bubble was worrying, it’s because we hadn’t entered its next phase: debt

by

Big technology companies have issued $75 billion in bonds and loans between September and October 2025: Meta leads with 30,000 million. Followed by Oracle (18,000 million in bonds plus a loan of 38,000 million). And Broadcom (27 billion). The figure is equivalent to what these three companies used to borrow in an entire year. Why is it important. The shift from liquidity to debt marks a turning point in the AI ​​race. For years, these companies financed their infrastructure with cash flows, but now they are resorting to debt: Debt not linked to bonds has gone from 15% to 30% of its capital. The money trail. Oracle has closed the largest syndicated loan (a joint loan by several banks to a single client) in its history: 38 billion for data centers. Meta, for its part, is allocating its 30,000 million to campuses in Virginia and Oregon. And Broadcom uses them to strengthen its semiconductor division and its network equipment. The threat. Paying the interest on all this debt now consumes 15% of these companies’ operating profits, compared to 10% a year ago. And the cost of borrowing has risen: corporate bonds are near their most expensive levels since 2022. If the energy bill rises by 20% – a more than likely scenario given the stress on electrical networks – or if AI does not generate the expected revenue, these companies could see their credit rating reduced and trigger a chain crisis. Yes, but. Large investors continue to buy these bonds, attracted by returns of 6%. Money flows because official interest rates are at 3.75%so lending to these technology companies seems like a good deal. The problem is that any sudden change in rates can make these bonds lose value. And fast. At stake. Debt finances the AI ​​revolution, but also makes it more fragile and technology companies continue to increase their investment. If inflation returns or profits fail, the same debt that accelerates innovation could become a liability. Investors, meanwhile, continue to win; but they assume the risk of the storm. In Xataka | Apple is resisting the push for AI PCs because AI PCs have caused complete indifference Featured image | Towfiqu barbhuiya

We thought dinosaurs were on the verge of extinction before the meteorite. we were wrong

by

The most emblematic mass extinction in Earth’s history without a doubt occurred up to 66 million years ago. It marked the end of an era like the Cretaceousand with it, the disappearance of dinosaurs that were not birds. But what was that extinction really like? This is the big question that experts have asked themselves and that it is already beginning to have light. For decades the scientific community has debated whether dinosaurs were already in decline before they abruptly went extinct or whether they were wiped out while they were still thriving. This is where the new has had an impact published study in the magazine Science in which the Spanish researcher Jorge García-Girón from the University of León participates, who sheds light on this debate. Simply put, the research refutes the idea of ​​a prolonged decline and suggests that dinosaurs were diverse and divided into distinct ecological regions just before the asteroid impact. The fossils of the south. Much of the uncertainty about this issue comes from a bias in the fossil record. The only well-dated faunas that span the extinction boundary come from northern North America (in the famous Hell Creek Formation). This made it impossible to know whether the extinction pattern observed there was a global or local phenomenon. In this case, the research team focused on a fossil-rich unit much further south, in the San Juan basin of New Mexico, known as the Member Naashoibito. The age of this formation has been a matter of controversy for years and was often considered much older. But now by applying geochronology techniques with Argon dating and magnetostratiography, the study has finally achieved precise dating. The results are conclusive: the Naashoibito Member dates back to the latest Cretaceous, which corresponds to up to 66 million years. This means that the fossils found there, which include a variety of species, preserve some of the last known non-avian dinosaurs. They lived a maximum of 340,000 years before the asteroid impact and were contemporaries of the Hell Creek fauna. Separated by weather. This finding is crucial because, for the first time, it allows us to compare two different faunas from the same end of the Cretaceous. And the result refutes the idea that we had all about decline in our minds. And the study not only dates the fossils, but also uses powerful ecological models to analyze the diversity of terrestrial vertebrates throughout North America. The results show that, far from forming a homogeneous and cosmopolitan fauna, the dinosaurs maintained high diversity and clear endemism until the end. In other words, it can be said that the dinosaurs were “strong” and divided into distinct regional assemblages. In this case, the study identifies two clear bioprovinces in the north and south that remained stable during the late Cretaceous. What separated these faunas? The analysis suggests that the main factor was temperature. More than a simple geographic division, different dinosaur communities were adapted to different climates. For example, the data propose that warmer southern regions may have been more tolerable for sauropods, while colder, more temperate northern regions were more suitable for hadrosaurines. The conclusion. The sum of the evidence points directly to the fact that non-avian dinosaurs were abruptly annihilated at the end of the Cretaceous. They were not in a decline as was thought, so they did not have this factor on top of them that would already condemn them to extinction if the disastrous event on Earth had passed. Instead, it has been seen that its ecosystem was diverse and biogeographically compartmentalized. Extinction in this way was sudden and, as the later fossil record demonstrates, was followed almost immediately by the rapid diversification and rise of mammals. Images | Vaibhav Pixels In Xataka | A museum kept bones for 20 years that they thought were rubble. Now we know that Mexico had its own T-Rex

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.