turned

Collapsing fiber prices in Spain has turned out very well for Digi. And still the accounts don’t work out

by

Digi continues with its unstoppable pace until it aspires to become in the third Spanish operator. What might have sounded utopian not so many years ago is getting closer to becoming a reality. The new milestone for the Romanian operator is in its volume of fixed broadband clients. For the first time, they have surpassed Vodafone. The numbers. According to Expansion dataat the end of 2025 Digi has achieved a historic result. For the first time, it has reached Vodafone Spain in volume of fixed broadband customers (mainly fiber). Not only were the data spectacular in terms of volume, Digi attracted almost twelve times more users than Vodafone throughout the year. A difference in acquisition that shows the sustained growth of the Romanian operator. Far from the giants. Both Telefónica and the MásOrange group remain unbeatable, doubling the numbers of Digi and Vodafone in Spain. Despite this, Digi has become the third operator by clients in the residential market, since within Vodafone’s figures there is a significant weight of corporate business. Digi’s strategy. Prices, prices and prices. Digi’s strategy is to offer a quality service at the lowest possible price. And this works. Your Trojan horse is cheap fiberalong with mobile lines at a very reasonable price. A low cost strategy that has led it to be the absolute king in portability, something that has led its competition to sink their prices with fees aimed at directly fighting Digi. Yes, but. Despite its fantastic numbers in customer volume and portability, Digi reported 33 million in losses in 2025. The aggressive pricing strategy together with a large investment means that the operator’s profitability remains negative. Despite this, it is expected that in 2026 Digi will study big plans, like going public. Meanwhile, investment in fiber deployment, network leasing and infrastructure will continue to make it difficult to make enough money while preserving current prices. Image | Digi In Xataka | Digi wants to become one of the largest teleoperators in Spain. And that is why it has gone from 4,000 to 10,000 workers.

Microsoft wants Copilot to do more complex tasks. To achieve this, it has turned to Anthropic AI

by

For a long time, when we talked about artificial intelligence at Microsoft, there was one name that came up again and again: OpenAI. The relationship between both companies was decisive for the takeoff of ChatGPT and also for the launch of Copilot. But the AI ​​board is moving quickly. New models, new players and increasingly intense competition are pushing large technology companies to diversify their bets. In that context, Microsoft’s latest move is understood. The advertisement. Microsoft has decided to integrate Anthropic technology within Copilot, the assistant that is already part of tools such as Outlook, Teams or Excel within Microsoft 365. Among the new features is coworka tool based on Anthropic technology aimed at facilitating tasks within the work environment. But that’s not all: Claude’s models will also be available within the Copilot chatbot alongside the more advanced OpenAI models, thus expanding the capabilities of the assistant without depending on a single artificial intelligence provider. From asking for something to delegating work. Microsoft explains that Cowork is designed to go a step beyond the classic model of an assistant who answers questions or writes texts. The idea is that Copilot can take care of entire tasks within Microsoft 365. When the user makes a request, the system converts it into a work plan that runs in the background. To do this, it uses data from Outlook, Teams or Excel. From there, in theory, you propose actions, ask for clarification if needed, and allow the user to review or approve each step before the changes are applied. Some examples. Let’s imagine, for example, that we ask Copilot to review our agenda in Outlook. The system could analyze the calendar, detect conflicts between meetings and identify lower priority meetings. From there I would propose different adjustments, such as rescheduling some appointments or reserving blocks of time to focus on more important tasks. Once those suggestions are reviewed and approved, the system itself could apply the changes automatically, accepting, rejecting or rescheduling meetings and reserving blocks of time to focus on other tasks. The strategy. As we noted above, the move also reflects how Microsoft’s AI strategy is changing. The company has maintained a very close relationship with OpenAI for years and continues to be one of its largest shareholders, with a stake close to 27% after investments of around $13 billion since 2019. However, the rise of new models and the rapid evolution of the sector are pushing large technology companies to not depend on a single technology. Incorporating Anthropic tools within Copilot points precisely in that direction: building an ecosystem capable of relying on different models depending on the task. Platforms before models. What we are seeing with decisions like this is that the race for AI is not limited to developing increasingly advanced models. It’s also about deciding where those capabilities are going to live. In the case of Microsoft, the answer seems quite broad: The company has been integrating Copilot into more and more products and services in its ecosystem (and also external ones). For some users, this constant presence can be very useful; For others it can be somewhat invasive. But beyond these perceptions, the movement clearly shows Microsoft’s strategy. On the whole. So this is not just about adding another technology within Copilot, but rather reinforcing the idea that Microsoft wants to turn this assistant into a meeting point for different AI capabilities within its software. Incorporating Anthropic models alongside those of OpenAI points precisely to that scenario. Rather than relying on a single technology, the company appears to be laying the groundwork for a Copilot capable of combining different solutions as the AI ​​market continues to evolve. Images | Microsoft In Xataka | The best and worst of the Internet we know has been built on anonymity. AI brings bad news

The mayor of Lisbon has turned it into a magnet for European startups

by

Carlos Moedas does not feel like a conventional politician. The current mayor of Lisbon and former European Commissioner for Innovation recently insisted in which his training as an engineer marked his management. The idea: less rhetoric and more structural solutions. And it certainly seems to carry out this proposal, because it is leading a transformation that seeks to position the Portuguese capital not only as a tourist destination, but as one of the most relevant technological nodes in Europe. unicorn factory. The nerve center of this transformation is the call Unicorn Factorya hub of innovation that was launched in 2022 and that has become the flagship project of its mandate. Since its creation, this initiative has multiplied its size by five, and today it already houses thematic divisions specialized in cutting-edge sectors such as AI, blockchainhealth or green technologies dedicated to the agricultural field. The success is tangible: 17 “unicorn” companies (valued at more than $1 billion) have moved their operations to the Portuguese capital. Attracting startups. Moedas explained in comments to Financial Times how the real challenge of Lisbon is not to see companies born, but to help them grow. The project attracted 300 companies in 2025, a figure that represents notable growth from 250 the previous year. Among them there are companies with founders from the US, Brazil, or Denmark. Favorable conditions. To attract these startups Moedas has used several levers. The first is to sell Lisbon for what it is: a safe capital with a great quality of life. The second is to highlight that the tax regime for qualified immigrants is advantageous, and there are also tax credits for R&D, which of course is a strong argument for companies that consume a lot of resources in those initial phases and can thus receive aid in this process. But. The road, Moedas openly acknowledges, is not without potholes. Portuguese bureaucracy remains complex – the same thing happens in Spain – and that can deter entrepreneurs. The mayor of Lisbon states in the interview that a good part of his time is spent talking on the phone with foreign founders and helping them overcome these bureaucratic barriers. “Politicians do not create jobs, the markets create them,” he repeats: their job is to facilitate, not hinder, or at least that is the message. Competence. Although the activity is notable, there are founders of companies who know that the market is raffling them off. María Ribeiro Soares, from Immersiv Studios, warned of the difficulty retaining talent compared to markets with higher wages such as the United Kingdom or Germany. The other venture capital. There is another peculiarity in this entrepreneurship market. Lisbon startup founders have realized that while traditional venture capital is cautious, the so-called family offices are very willing to bet on these projects. These investors, often experienced, high-net-worth former founders, provide funding but also advice. Lisbon is not alone. The rise of Lisbon as a technological node is also accompanied by other Portuguese innovation centers such as Braga and Porto, where, for example, the biotechnology sector flourishes. There is also a direct connection with universities oriented to this market, and in that northern region of Portugal alone there are already some 1,200 startups with a combined valuation of close to 9 billion euros, according to the FT. The other great challenge. Portugal’s efforts to attract external talent have led to the arrival of numerous digital nomads, but this has had a counterproductive effect: it is causing an exodus among young Portuguese. They cannot access a housing market adapted to the pockets of those nomads, who charge triple. Rental prices have skyrocketed, and that has created tension that the mayor must manage. Image | EU2017EE Estonian Presidency | Aayush Gupta In Xataka | Portugal’s radical proposal to stop touristification: an underwater cable that connects with the US

We believed that GLP-1 drugs were only going to change obesity. They just turned upside down how we treat addictions

by

The famous GLP-1 receptor agonistsamong which some protagonists such as Ozempic stand out, have revolutionized the treatment of type 2 diabetes and of obesity. However, for some time patients and doctors had been reporting a “side effect” that was as surprising as it was hopeful, since it was seen that this treatment made people not feel like drinking alcohol or smoking. New routes. What began as a trickle of anecdotes in doctors’ offices has ended up being the target of study by different research teams who have seen here a new way of understanding the mechanism of addictions in humans. Now, a recent study published in B.M.J. backed by new clinical trialssuggests that these medications could be the key to treating addictive substance use disorders. How it looked. The heavyweight of this new research is a gigantic cohort study published in 2026, where the data of 606,434 United States veterans with type 2 diabetes. Here it was divided into two groups: those who started treatment with GLP-1 drugs such as Ozempic and those who took SGLT2 inhibitorswhich is one of the accepted treatments for advanced type 2 diabetes. The results. But the most shocking data came when analyzing patients who already had a previous history of addictions. In this group, the use of Ozempic resulted in a dramatic decrease in addiction problems requiring urgent treatment, but also saw a lower rate of hospital admissions, lower drug-related mortality, a drop in overdoses, and even a significant reduction in suicidal ideation and attempts. The essays. Although observational studies are very valuable, they also you have to go to the laboratory to see what is happening. Here, a 2025 randomized trial demonstrated that taking Ozempic dramatically reduced alcohol self-administration in a laboratory setting. Here patients reported less anxiety about having to have a drink or a cigarette, fewer days of heavy consumption, and incidentally, a decrease in the number of cigarettes they smoked per day. In the past, a study published in 2022 showed that using exenatide it was not possible to generally reduce the days of consumption of these drugs, but it was possible to see how the drug had a direct effect on some specific parts of the brain that are related to the reward centers. Because? That a drug designed for the pancreas affects our relationship with alcohol and tobacco, the truth is that it can raise many questions. The answer lies in the brain, since some reviews suggest that GLP-1 receptors not only regulate blood sugar or slow down gastric emptying. These receptors are also found in key brain areas that control the dopamine pathway, which is why, by activating them, drugs such as emaglutide or liraglutide attenuate the sensation of reward. In rodents, for example, they block the reinforcement produced by substances such as cocaine, opioids or nicotine and, basically, the drug stops “feeling good.” A paradigm shift. As can be seen every day, constant drug use over time can have devastating consequences for the lives of people and those around them. The problem is that right now there are few approved pharmacological therapies to support these addicts, and this makes any clue to have a new therapeutic door welcome. Although more research and large-scale Phase III trials are needed for regulatory agencies to officially approve their psychiatric use, GLP-1 drugs appear to be doing something that medicine has been seeking for decades: “satiating” not only physical hunger, but also the brain’s chemical hunger. Images | lilartsy In Xataka | Ozempic not only eliminates hunger, it is rewriting the supermarket ticket: goodbye to ultra-processed foods and spending on snacks

The Earth turned on its great geological engine billions of years earlier than we estimate. We know it from a microscopic crystal

by

For a long time, textbooks They have painted the primitive Earth like a ball of infernal and static magma, being a “lid” of inert rock where life or complex geological movement was impossible. Specifically, it was thought that the plate tectonicsthe engine that shapes the continents and recycles our planet’s nutrients, had taken much longer to start. However, we were wrong. How he did it. Science, in a recent article, has just put on the table the definitive evidence that indicates that the Earth began to move much earlier than we believed: at least 3.3 billion years ago, and most likely, more than 4 billion ago. And the key is not in the gigantic mountains under our feet, but in small fragments of glass smaller than a grain of sand. And if we want to travel in geological time, you have to go to jack hillsin Western Australia, where the oldest known fragments of terrestrial rock are found. The protagonists of this story are zircon crystals, extremely resistant minerals that act as authentic geological hard drives. The interesting thing is that, when they form, they trap isotopes and tiny amounts of other elements inside that tell us exactly what the environment was like at the time of their crystallization. The results. According to detailed analysis that collects Natureand supported by key works such as those published in the prestigious magazine PNASthese S-type zircons hide unmistakable geochemical signatures. Specifically, they reveal that, instead of a static and dead Earth’s crust, subduction processes already existed. That is, the oceanic crust was already colliding and sinking under other plates, melting back into the Earth’s mantle. A double life. But researchers have not limited themselves to looking at a specific era, but have traced the proportions of trace elements such as uranium, niobium or scandium in different zircons from Australia, Greenland and South Africa. Here they observed that during the Eoarchean, the Earth did not have a single geological behavior. Instead, it had two tectonic regimes. The first of these, known as a ‘stagnant lid’ with areas of crust dominated by plumes of oceanic magma that simply pushed upwards. On the other hand, it also had the ‘moving lid’ zone, which were active zones where volcanic arcs were already forming and there was subduction, very similar to modern plate tectonics, recycling the Earth’s crust. But there is more. As if that were not enough, other published studies in Science and Geology have contributed even more pieces to the puzzle, such as the transform faults in the Pilbara Craton of Australia that show horizontal movements 3,000 million years ago, and even inclusions of fresh water in zircons from more than 4,000 million years ago, which suggests that there were already emerging continents interacting with the atmosphere and the water cycle. It changes everything. Knowing that plate tectonics started so early is not a mere geological whim, since tectonics is the Earth’s thermostat: it regulates the carbon cycle, releases fundamental gases into the atmosphere and creates the necessary environments for the chemical breeding ground. In this way, if more than 4,000 million years ago our planet was already recycling its crust, having primitive continents and fresh water, it means that the conditions for life to emerge occurred much earlier than what science books dictated. Once again, the Earth shows us that, from its most remote beginnings, it has always been a living world. Images | Javier Miranda In Xataka | There are scientists deliberately causing earthquakes in the Alps and they have a good reason for it

bombs have turned dogs into other animals

by

Wars were never limited to the front nor did they end when fighting ceased. Throughout history they have altered landscapes, cities, customs and even everyday behaviors in unexpected ways, leaving silent transformations that only become visible over time. Some of them do not appear in history books or official balance sheets, but they reveal the extent to which a conflict is capable of reordering life itself on its margins. Also from your animals. The war beyond humans. Various studies hrevealed in recent months that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has not only left a devastating mark on the civilian population, but is also quietly transforming to the animals who shared that human environment, especially domestic dogs, whose fate has changed radically since the beginning of the conflict. Many were abandoned during evacuations, others were trapped in occupied territories or combat zones, and in a very short time they went from being dependent pets. to forced survivors from an extreme environment, becoming a hybrid population between the domestic and the wild. A studio born on the front. The latest research, published in the journal Evolutionary Applicationsanalyzed data from 763 dogs in nine regions of Ukraine thanks to the joint work of shelters, veterinarians and volunteers, including dangerous areas near the front lines. A key part of the work was carried out by Ihor Dykyy, a zoologist at the Ivan Franko National University of Lviv, who collected observations while serving as a volunteer with the Ukrainian armed forces in Donetsk and near Kharkiv, where he lived with dogs injured, traumatized by explosions and dependent on the improvised care of soldiers. Abandonment and breaking of the human bond. According to the lead author of the study, Mariia Martsiv, from the University of Lviv, the start of the war caused a especially dramatic situation for pets: some owners managed to escape with them, but many animals were left at train stations or abandoned in occupied areas. Although the study focused on domestic dogs, a large part no longer living under the direct care of humans and had passed into what was closest to a wandering existence, marked by scarcity, constant danger and the need to adapt quickly. The brutal selection. The data reveals that, in a surprisingly short period, the front dogs began to look similar more to wild species such as wolves or dingoes than domestic breeds. Extreme snouts, heavier bodies, or light coats became less common, while specimens increased smaller in size, with erect ears, straight tails and fewer white spots. As the researchers explainwar has acted as a ruthless filter favoring traits that improve survival: lighter animals that set off fewer mines, hide better, and present a smaller target for shrapnel. It’s not evolution, it’s survival. Scientists emphasize that these changes do not represent accelerated biological evolution, since the time elapsed is insufficient for profound genetic alterations. In fact, what happens they say is more similar to an immediate selection: Dogs with less adapted characteristics simply do not survive. It was also detected that in combat zones there are fewer old, sick or injured animals, and that dogs they tend to group togethera typical strategy of wild species to increase the chances of resistance in hostile environments. Between feralization and dependency. The work indicates that, despite the increasingly “wild” appearance and behavior, the majority of dogs continue to depending in part of humans for food, supplementing their diet with plants, small animals or carrion, including remains of fallen soldiers, and many have been informally adopted by Ukrainian troops. However, the team from the University of Gdansk, led by Małgorzata Pilot, also observed clear cases of feralizationdogs that no longer depend on people and have returned to a completely independent life. War as an ecological disaster. Although the study focuses only on dogs, its conclusions point to a much larger problem. As ecologist Euan Ritchie, from Deakin University, warns, if a species as adaptable and mobile as the dog is being affected so profoundly, the consequences for less flexible animals can be devastating. War, beyond the brutal human tragedy, also emerges as an environmental disaster that reconfigures entire ecosystems and leaves invisible scars long after the guns fall silent. Even dogs stop being dogs. Image | Ivan Bandura, Jorge Franganillo In Xataka | If the question is what Russia is going to do after the war in Ukraine, Europe has found a disturbing clue: millions of projectiles In Xataka | We had seen everything in Ukraine, but this is unprecedented: Russia is not launching drones, it is launching “Frankensteins”

drones sewn to other drones turned into lethal monsters

by

Since the first drones went from being simple surveillance platforms to weapons capable of change entire battlesthe war in Ukraine has incorporated these machines in layers, always due to necessity and adaptation. First reconnaissance UAVs, then armed drones, then swarms and loitering munitions. The latest has transformed the war into a new phase. Drones with drones. The war in Ukraine has crossed a disturbing threshold by entering fully into his Frankenstein phasewhere drones “stitched” to other drones give rise to improvised, but highly lethal, spawns. Russia has begun using larger aerial platforms as motherships transport and launch FPV attack very far from the front. The consequence is clear: the idea that FPVs are short-range tactical weapons is broken and a new strategic layer is inaugurated based on hybrids assembled with battlefield logic, not so much laboratory logic. Gerbera as a bringer of death. In this scenario a main actor appears. He Gerbera dronelight, rudimentary and cheap, was born as a simple decoy to saturate defenses during attacks Shahed type. Over time he began to carry small explosive charges and now it has been adapted for something even more disturbing: carrying an FPV hanging and releasing it in mid-flight. In fact, there are photographs and videos released at the beginning of this month of February that show this evolution already in usenot as an isolated experiment but as an emerging pattern. If you will, this type of “Frankenstein drone” has begun to walk alone. A nurse launching an FPV The logic of the graft. The first evolutions we had counted last year. The reason for this combination between drones is not only technical, but deeply operational. A fixed-wing drone can fly hundreds of kilometers, but lacks the agility needed to hunt down small or moving targets. The FPV, on the other hand, can, for example, enter through a window, follow a person or hit an exact point, and launching it from a mothership solves its great historical limitation: the scope. It is the sum of two weaknesses that together become a strength. Future swarms and the shadow of the Shahed. Although the Gerbera can only charge one FPV, at least for now, everything indicates that it is a test bed for something bigger. Industrial and military logic suggests that larger platforms like the Shahed could ttransport several drones of attack, increasing the probabilities of impact and allowing multiple targets to be attacked in a single mission. What’s more, the concept is vaguely reminiscent of a kind of bomber that does not launch bombs, but rather small autonomous hunters. Frankenstein is still in its early stages, but its final form is already apparent. The communications web. Plus: given the limitations imposed by Starlink blocking by SpaceX a few days ago, Russia has resorted to an invention that we had not seen in the war: sets of mesh spokes of Chinese origin that allow drones to communicate with each other and extend control in successive jumps. We are talking about a system that is already quite expensivebut it reduces dependence on satellites and opens the door to deeper and more impactful operations. In the medium term, Russian experts they point to another mutation o variant of the flying monster: FPV sets with greater autonomy and capacity own decisionin this case less dependent on the human operator and much more difficult to neutralize. Background: more AI. From battlefield to global problem. It is possibly the last of the legs to analyze with the appearance of these models. Ukraine has demonstrated an exceptional ability to shoot down carrier drones before they launch their charge, but now the concept is already out of the bottle. FPVs launched from mother “mothers” can destroy radars, anti-aircraft systems, aircraft on the ground or even armored columns at distances that were unthinkable until very recently, all at a ridiculous cost compared to traditional missiles. In other words, this new Frankenstein phase It is not just a quirk of war in Ukraine: it is a disturbing preview of the future of conflict, one where innovation aims to be hastily “stitched” with available parts and devastating results. Image | UNITED24 In Xataka | Ukraine has found what it needed in an unexpected ally. Spain had the missing piece against the shahed drones In Xataka | Russia has activated the “dandelion” armor: the scarier the tank, the more confused Ukraine’s drones are

He planted 16,000 trees and turned it into an anti-rich sanctuary

by

What of send everything to fry asparagus and go live on an island It is something that, more or less, has occurred to everyone. Now, whether you do it is another thing. If we talk about buying an island, the circle is already closed to a few and although the story we are going to tell is not from today and does not have current prices, the reality is that the 8,000 pounds that Brendon Grimshaw paid for the small island of Moyenne in 1962 (approximately 200,000 pounds today, about 230,000 euros) they gave him to buy almost three houses in his native Britain. He would have had real estate to speculate on, but the world would not have the Moyenne National Park. But let’s start at the beginning. Brendon Grimshaw was a British journalist who, after starting his career in popular newspapers such as the Batley News and the Sheffield Star in his native country, moved to Africa, where worked in important media such as the East African Standard magazine or the Tanganyika Standard. At the age of 37, he made a drastic decision: he was on vacation in the Seychelles when he made the decision to acquire an island of just nine hectares. Why buy an island? There are those who say that more than a vacation, he was looking for a purpose in life: to demonstrate his peace and love for nature. The BBC mentions “protect Moyenne from excessive urban development” as its initial objective, but it must be said that Until 1973 he continued working as a journalist and visiting the island on vacation. From that date on, he said goodbye to his profession and moved there to create a natural paradise that would last over time. The Sheychelles were beginning to emerge as a tourist destination and although it was abandoned, it would be a matter of time before someone arrived and set up a resort. And he changed Moyenne from top to bottom. The island had not been inhabited for half a century, except for a family of fishermen, and was in a scruffy state as a result of negligence and excessive human intervention: impenetrable thickets where invasive species reigned, as he himself says in the documentary. A Grain of Sand (which before it was a book). Note: globally the concept of environmentalism and care for the environment was being forged and was beginning to take off (the first “Earth Day” dates back to 1970). He was not alone in this mission: he worked hand in hand with the local René Antoine Lafortunea 19-year-old young man from that family of fishermen. Throwing everything away and setting up a five-star hotel is much easier than restoring an ecosystem, something that It took him a lifetime, literally.because Grimshaw died in 2012. René died younger, in 2007, leaving Brendon as a true Robinson Crusoe for five years. A restoration plan that took a lifetime Its areas of action can be divided into three: massive reforestation with native species, tackling the rat infestation and introducing some infrastructure. In A Grain of Sand narrates how the undergrowth was so thick that a coconut that fell from a tree did not reach the ground and that only four tall native trees remained that stood out, counted for the BBC in an interview. So planted by hand more than 16,000 trees of species such as mahogany, palm trees and other endemic species that had disappeared from the island. In the documentary he tells how the silence impacted him due to the absence of fauna: the absence of native fruit trees and the dense layer of scrub made it not an attractive place for birds, which are looking for a nesting place with food and safety. The reintroduction of native species and the restoration of the flora attracted more than 200 species of birds. Grimshaw also explained that when he arrived, there were also no giant tortoises that are now emblematic of the island: he introduced and bred Aldabra giant tortoises (Aldabrachelys gigantea) from other islands of the archipelago, which he later marked to continue their growth. Today there are more than 120 copies. Less striking but also very useful was that They built almost five kilometers of trails to improve accessibility. Practically with pick and shovel. In the 1980s, offers flooded in to buy the island, including that of a Saudi prince, who is said to have offered up to $50 million. Brendon Grimshaw’s response did not give rise to negotiations: “the island is not for sale“. The former journalist was getting older and had no children, so in 2009 and when Lafortune had already died, he arranged for the government of the Seychelles will declare to Moyenne as the Moyenne Island National Park to find legal protection for the island and its preservation. Today Moyenne has an essential biological importance for the Sheychelles archipelago: it serves as a seed bank and refuge for species, since while other islands are plagued with resorts, there there are no shops, restaurants or hotelshardly a basic restaurant for those taking an excursion to the island from neighboring islands such as Mahe. In Xataka | An atoll in the South Pacific has become a magnet for millionaires. Its great attraction is not its beaches, it is its banks In Xataka | A billionaire bought an island in Hawaii for himself and his friends. So the locals had to leave Cover | Jean-Francis Martin and documentary A Grain of Sand on YouTube

We have turned sadness into a psychiatric disorder. And that is a problem that is devouring us socially.

by

When Roland Kuhn discovered the first antidepressant in history, imipramine, the directors of Geygi hesitated to put it on the market because depression was so rare who did not believe it could become a profitable medicine (Healy, 1999). It was the 50s of the 20th century, but it seems like an alternative reality. Today, depression is omnipresent. Only in Spain, the consumption of antidepressants has grown 200% in the last fifteen years and it is nothing more than the reflection of an unstoppable international trend. How is it possible that, in just over half a century, depression has become “so common”? Are we confusing normal sadness with a psychiatric disorder, as many experts say? Are we pathologizing everyday life? I am not going to enter into terminological debates, no matter how interesting and necessary they may be. When talking about “invention of mental illness” or “pathologization of everyday life” we run the risk of minimizing problems as serious as depression and that is something that is not in question. On the contrary, the idea is understand her better to treat her better. As the neurologist Luis Querol said“if we stick to the conventional concept of diseaseanyone who has seen a melancholic depressive SUFFER (…) will recognize that it is an illness.” It is totally true: that is enough for now. Depression is a particularly insidious and destructive disorder. According to the WHOnot only is it the main global cause of disability, but it affects 350 million people and is behind 800,000 deaths each year. Synopsis of an epidemic However, this does not explain why depression has become an epidemic. Above all, because it is not a disease that we “just” discovered. Melancholy is one of those psychiatric disorders so old that they were already diagnosed by Hippocrates and classical Greek medicine. Since the 19th century, the European diagnostic tradition separated most mood disorders from deep melancholy and included this among the diseases that end up consuming the person (such as senile dementia). At the beginning of the 20th century, psychiatric practice already clearly differentiated between endogenous or melancholic depression (which affected between 1 and 2% of patients) and reactive or neurotic depression (much more common) which was a product of stress, loss or pain. (Unsplash) In 1980, in the middle of a deep reputation crisis for psychiatric practiceDSM-III changed the way we think about depression. It moves from an etiopathogenic model (which asked about the cause of the disease) to a semiological one (which, in its claim to atheoretical nature, was based on symptomatology). A careless eye might think that the change was terminological and that “endogenous” was only replaced by “major” and “reactive” by “dysthymia”; but, in reality, the DSM-III expanded the playing field. Melancholia became one of the five subtypes of major depression and, with this, the underlying depressive disorder went from having a prevalence of 2% to a prevalence of up to 17% (Kessler et al., 2005). In recent years, a good number of historians (and activists) have insisted that this change and the commercial pressure of pharmaceutical companies (Horwitz and Wakefield, 2007) have taken us to overdiagnosis current disease (Mojtabai, 2013; Parker, 2007). At its strongest, it is a difficult argument to reject. Especially because it is not that the existence of depression is denied, but rather that it is argued that the failure of epidemiologists, psychiatrists and social scientists to differentiate ‘normal sadness’ and ‘depressive disorder’ is leading to health policies that condemn many people to taking unnecessary medications and carrying the weight of stigma on their backs. Whys, doubts and conspiracy Basically, although it is not usually said clearly, we are talking about ‘iatrogenesis’; That is, suffering or damage to health caused by health professionals themselves. The current opioid crisis in the US It shows that, far from being pure conspiracy, pharmaceutical companies and their balance sheets can create a health problem of colossal dimensions. However, we must not be unfair, nor fall into banal Manichaeism. Although it may seem counterintuitive and paradoxical, many problems only appear when we have the solution them. Without antidepressants or effective behavioral therapies, depression was deep sadness, black sorrow that wells up, black shadow that amazes me. Something that was between us and there was nothing we could do to avoid it. (Jacob Sedlacek/Unsplash) Horwitz and Wakefield say that “tolerance for normal but painful emotions has fallen” in the West. And it may be true. But they forget two fundamental things: that, for the first time in the history of humanity, we can do without them and that it is not a personal problem, the modern world has tended to prioritize productive optimism and has forgotten how to live with sadness. At this point we realize that, if we want to learn to better separate “illness” from “normality”, it is not just a matter of challenging depressive overdiagnosis, but of claim sadness. The problem is that, why would we want claim sadness? And the answer, honestly, may surprise us. Sadness, said Lazarus (1991), promotes personal reflection after the loss. Focus our gaze on ourselves, promote resignation, invite acceptance (Izard, 1993). It allows us to waste time to update “our cognitive structures” (Welling, 2003); that is, to accommodate the loss. That reflective function of sadness It allows us to stop. And weigh actions, review our goals, modify our plans (Bonanno & Keltner, 1997; Oatley and Johnson-Laird, 1996). It makes us more attentive to detail, more precise. It makes us flee from heuristics and stereotypes (Bodenhausen, Gabriel and Lineberger, 2000; Schwarz, 1998) and distrust first impressions (Schwarz, 2010). Physiological arousal decreases and makes us more prone to slow thinking (Overskeid, 2000). Furthermore, it shapes us as a group. Causes sympathy, empathy and altruism in others (Keltner and Kring, 1998). The complex balance between “normality” and “disease” In 1843, Charles Darwin wrote a letter of condolence to a distant cousin in which he said that “strong affections have always seemed to me the noblest part of man’s character and the … Read more

Apple announced with great fanfare that the new Siri would be different from the rest of the AIs. It turned out that without Google there was no Siri

by

I’m not going to hide, I’m one of those who believed Apple when announced with great fanfare that Apple Intelligence It would be different from the rest. He had reasons to do so: his financial muscle, his obsession with taking care of the software and his philosophy of arriving late to the game to score the goals at the last minute. But here I was wrong. The only way Google has had to play in this game has been using someone else’s deck. From waiting almost two years to having it now. Apple announced Apple Intelligence in its 2024 keynote. One in which it did not give too many details but showed us a different approach to AI than that of Google and OpenAI. An AI with real interaction with the operating system, integration with both native and third-party apps… a real “co-pilot” completely integrated into iOS, and not a super-vitamined app, but isolated from the whole. From that keynote until then the only thing we have is Siri being able to open ChatGPT when the question gets a little complicated. And, just a few weeks after announcement of the agreement between Apple and GoogleGurman affirms that we will see the new Siri in a matter of weeks. If the prediction came true, it was not a matter of time. It was a matter of not having the resources. What’s coming in February. Gurman tells Power On that the Siri 2.0 that we have been waiting for since 2024 can become a reality in the second half of February. In fact, he points out that one of the reasons why Apple made the announcement of the collaboration with Google official was because it was close to obtaining sufficient demonstrations of its functionality. Although there are no details about how their disembarkation will be, the modus operandi from Apple is easy to predict: we will have to update our iPhone to the corresponding version of iOS 26 that includes these new features, since Apple introduces improvements to its native apps through system updates. Not so fast. Although there are no details on how long Apple and Google have actually been working, what we do know is that the new Siri is not ready yet. Gurman points out that it will arrive in beta phase starting in February, and that the objective is not to delay the final version until beyond April. Again, evidence that Apple did not have the Siri that it boasted so much about ready, accelerating and putting two extra gears now that it has the support of Google. It can turn out well. My colleague Javier Pastor told, very correctly, how Apple can the parasite’s strategy works for him. The company is not going to enter the investment battle for new models: it is going to spend millions of dollars to take advantage of an existing infrastructure and use an already proven pillar. The new Siri will be a premium wrapper for Gemini and, landing in the real world, few beyond those of you reading these lines will even be aware that Google’s AI is what is powering your iPhone’s AI. Image | Xataka In Xataka | The Apple Intelligence and Siri disaster has caused something unusual: Apple gives the keys to its kingdom to Google

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.