Union

The European Union is very determined that batteries are removable in 2027. And Apple is very determined that they are not

by

The European Union has detailed your plan so that phone batteries are removable starting in 2027. A regulation that will arrive in the midst of the greatest revolution in battery capacity in recent years: the democratization of silicon-carbon and the commitment to 100% models eSIM. For years, the industry has abandoned removable batteries for technical reasons. The unibody design has improved water and dust resistance, optimized internal space and increased structural efficiency. It is something that has not been enough for Europe. What’s going to happen. Europe has reconfirmed its plan to make phone batteries be removable by law in 2027. It is a hard blow for many manufacturers, who have been creating a “unibody” design industry for years to improve their resistance to water and dust, as well as a more efficient internal structure (every millimeter inside a smartphone is key). That the batteries have to be removable dynamites the plan that manufacturers have been following for almost a decade, since it is required by law that they be “easily removable.” What does this mean. The novelty in the text has to do, precisely, with what the European Union understands with this concept. The manufacturer will no longer be able to glue the batteries to the plate, something that required them to be removed using a heat gun to remove the adhesive. If a specialized tool is required to remove the battery, it will be provided by the manufacturer itself. The manufacturer will need to include clear instructions on battery removal and replacement. The software will not be able to hinder the process or block phone functions if the replacement has not been done at an official service. Hardware availability must be at least five years. The cost of batteries must be “reasonable and non-discriminatory” in price. Although there are many questions in the air and, as usual, few specificities, what is clear is that starting next year there will be a very powerful change at the industry level. And then, China arrived. China is leading a paradigm shift in smartphone battery technology: the arrival of silicon-carbon. This type of battery allows much higher energy densities in the sizes we already know. Or, in other words, that in the usual batteries we have more capacity than ever. Thanks to China, phone batteries are skyrocketing to cases 10,000mAh. The problem? European restrictions on the transport of high-density batteries are very strict, which is why many of the phones that are marketed in China with enormous batteries end up landing in Europe with noticeably smaller cells. And that, for the consumer, is a problem. Europe moves the industry, but China does not plan to stop. Europe is an important enough market that big technology companies have to completely rethink the hardware of their devices. The best example is Apple, which had to bend to USB-C in all territories of the world due to EU demands. An especially painful move, considering that it was the only manufacturer with its own charging port standard. The mandatory nature of removable batteries will, once again, lead to a change in the industry. But China faces the dilemma between slowing its progress with carbon silicon batteries (something it does not seem willing to do) to give in to European regulations, or assuming the extra cost of manufacturing a model for each region. The latter has been doing so for years and, in fact, pushes some consumers to opt for more complete versions from China. not so fast. Although the headline goes to the return of the removable battery, there is an exception for which manufacturers like Apple have been protecting themselves for years. Commission Communication C/2025/214, which develops and interprets article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2023/1542, contemplates an exit for durability: if the battery retains at least 80% of its capacity after 1,000 charge cycles (or 83% after 500 cycles) and the phone meets an IP protection standard, the manufacturer may be exempt from the requirement for user replacement. It is no coincidence that, two years ago, Apple will double the number of cycles of its batteriesgoing from 500 to 1,000. Thanks to this exception, both Apple and many manufacturers will be able to continue selling a good part of their phones as we know them today. Summing up. The smartphone industry is on the verge of chaotic change. The cheapest mobile phones seem to be forced to give up the unibody design, China has hit a wall to continue innovating in batteries that can leave the country (it is not easy to continue growing sizes and maintain cycle capacity), and the high-end seems that it will be able to escape if it maintains batteries that maintain 80% of their capacity after 1,000 cycles. A soap opera whose ending we still do not know, but for which the manufacturers will have to start writing the next chapter. In Xataka | How to charge your mobile phone to maximize battery life

Spain has been building a bridge with China for years. Now it is the European Union that needs to cross it

by

Pedro Sánchez is going to land in China this week for the fourth time in three years. No other Western leader comes close. Why is it important. What seemed like a diplomatic eccentricity has become a trend. A year ago, Spain seemed an outlier in Europe due to its favorable and close stance towards China. Today it is France, with its calls for tougher trade measures against the Chinese government, who seems isolated, according to analyst Noah Barkin in his specialized newsletter. Watching China in Europe. The context has changed everything: the war in Iran, the volatility of the Trump government and the tariff as a political weapon have pushed Europe towards where Spain already was. The context. In recent years, Spain has attracted a constellation of Chinese companies while maintaining a discourse of rapprochement with China that the rest of the EU viewed with skepticism, if not suspicion. The map of Chinese presence in the country is already considerable: The result of all this rapprochement is also reflected in capital flows: Chinese investment in Spain went from 149 million euros in 2024 to 643 million in 2025, an increase of 331% in a single year. Nevertheless, has done little to reduce Spain’s large trade deficit with the Asian giant. The pattern is known: investment arrives, but Spanish exports do not grow at the same rate. Openness has a price. Between the lines. Barkin describes it like this: Pedro Sánchez has positioned himself as the most openly pro-China and Trump-critical leader in Western Europe. This gives Spain a position as unique as it is uncomfortable. Being China’s favorite interlocutor on the continent means assuming the diplomatic costs of that position when the EU needs to maintain a common voice vis-à-vis China. The contrast. While Spain opens its arms, the European Parliament cautiously reopens its ties with China after eight years of distance. A delegation of MEPs visited China this week on the first official trip since 2018, with a clear message, according to coverage by Traffic light China: commitment does not mean concession. The European Union negotiates with one hand and shields with the other. Spain, on the other hand, has opted for the extended hand, practically alone. The big question. Is Spain a pioneer or a lever? A pioneer sets the path that others end up following because it is the right one. A lever is an instrument that others use for their own purposes. Barkin warns that Spain is following the Orbán model: welcoming Chinese investment without the necessary checks and balances. The comparison may be unfair in its nuances, but it points to a very real risk: that the Spanish opening strategy lacks the reciprocity that Europe needs to negotiate as a bloc. In Xataka | Donald Trump’s tariffs are having an unforeseen effect on China: its factories are getting stronger Featured image | ZQ Lee, Sam Williams

I spent 8 hours a day watching porn to train the AI. Today he leads the workers union that fights against that

by

Spend a workday tagging porn there’s nothing fun about it. Content moderators They have been denouncing terrible working conditions for years and now The same thing is happening with data labeling to train AI. In 404media They tell the story of Michael Geoffrey, a Kenyan who spent months working for two AI companies, until they completely destroyed his mental health. The jobs. Michael stayed in front of his computer for eight hours watching porn, describing what was happening in the images in great detail. It was no affiliation, but rather he worked for a data labeling company that then used all those descriptions to train AI models. When the day was over, his second job awaited him at a sexual AI chatbot company. In this job, Michael had to maintain sexual conversations with users, adopting whatever role was necessary each time; I had to pretend to be a man, a woman, straight, homosexual… and of course adapt to the context in each conversation. Behind the AI. Although they have the last name IA, in reality These sexbots have a lot of human work behind them. That is, when someone talks to their girlfriend or boyfriend AIyou may be talking to a real person. Michael wrote his testimony and said that he had to fake intimate connections with anonymous users. Their interactions were then used to train the AI. In the case of data labeling, workers are exposed to all types of content, some extremely violent. For example, for AI to be able to detect content of sexual abuse and violence, these workers must see thousands of images of abuse and extreme violence, and all for ridiculous salaries. In a Time reportthey said that one of these companies paid between 1.3 and 2 dollars net per hour. The consequences. After several months on the job, Michael suffered from insomnia, stress and began to have problems having sexual relations. He tells 404media that “there came a point where my body no longer responded. When I saw someone naked, I didn’t even feel anything.” Endless hours, exposure to very unpleasant content and very low salaries. Some claim that it is like a form of modern slavery. The companies behind. One of them is Sama, a San Francisco-based company that defines itself as “the perfect example of ethical AI.” It’s the company that paid 2 dollars an hour. Another company that has also been at the center of the controversy is Remotasks, a Scale AI subsidiaryone of the largest labeling companies. It was founded by Alexandr Wang, current head of AI at Meta. By Remotasks it is said that he pays late and often not the amount that was originally promised. These and other similar companies They are outsourced by OpenAIGoogle, Meta and more to train your AI models. The workers organize. Currently, Michael is the secretary of the Data Labelers Association of Kenyaan organization that wants to give voice and make visible the work of these underpaid and invisible workers. Other organizations have also been created such as African Content Moderators and Tech Workers who demand better working conditions and resources to care for the mental health of workers. In Xataka | People Blaming ChatGPT for Causing Delusions and Suicides: What’s Really Happening with AI and Mental Health Image | Data Labelers Association

If the controversy is that AI steals works in its training, the European Union has the solution: license them

by

A few weeks ago the Washington Post published this image of the “Panama Project”: It is a warehouse with hundreds of thousands of books waiting their turn to be scanned and destroyed in the process. It is part of an internal program Anthropic to train its AI and the result of tens of millions of dollars in purchases to digitize all those works without permission from their authors. They are not the only ones who “they borrow” copyrighted content to train their artificial intelligences and the European Union is clear about something: stop stealing protected content and properly license works to train AI. And AI companies defend themselves by saying that no one is going to think about small companies. Europe is clear: if you want to train AI, pay the author It is curious how the entertainment industry and the regulation of countries shook hands at the beginning of the 2000s with those ads of “you wouldn’t steal a purse. You wouldn’t steal a car. Don’t steal a movie.” They portrayed copying a CD or downloading a movie as if you were breaking into the Pentagon’s systems. Years later, that same industry turns a deaf ear given what big technology companies are doing to train AI. The Washington Post document states that others such as Meta, Google and OpenAI They had also participated in the race to obtain data in bulk for your models. There are kicking examples, like the 81.7 TB of copyrighted books that you have downloaded Meta or that OpenAI will use animation from all the studios to train its AI (earning reproaches by Ghigli and more Japanese studies and complaining that Deepseek has looted ChatGPT). Given the context, it is time to say that the European Parliament has grown tired of this and has one of the things he is best at: legislating. In this case, it makes perfect sense for Europe to take this measure, and the agency issued a report non-binding law that urges the European Commission to develop rules that set minimum standards for these AI companies. “Generative AI should not operate outside the rule of law” Basically, if they use protected content for their training, they must license it and also compensate the authors. with the title “Protecting creative work with copyright in the age of AI”the European Parliament demands a series of measures apart from licensing the works. They are the following: Calls for the transparent and remunerated use of protected content to train generative AI. AI vendors are expected to recognize and pay for the copyrighted work they used to train their systems. Measures so that owners of works with rights can exclude their protected work from training. The reason that they argue MEPs is that “generative AI should not operate outside the rule of law. If copyrighted works are used to train artificial intelligence systems, creators have the right to transparency, legal certainty and fair compensation.” The European Group of Societies of Authors and Composers, or GESAC, points in the same direction. In statements to EuronewsAdriana Moscoso del Prado, general manager of GESAC; assures that “this vote adds to the growing recognition at the EU level of what is at stake. Innovation, equity and cultural sovereignty must go hand in hand.” AI companies fight back From the CCIA, the Computer and Communications Industry Association, it was noted that this is not a measure to protect artists, but rather “a compliance tax.” That is, something that must be fulfilled no matter what and that goes against progress. The group argued that such a measure would not go against large companies, but against small ones. They say that many will have difficulty negotiating complex licensing agreements with major publishers, “holding back Europe’s digital competitiveness on the global stage” and stating that what they would need to do is improve existing laws in the European Union, including the AI ​​Law and the Copyright Directive. In any case, there is nothing on the table at the moment. As we say, it is a self-initiative report by Parliament and is not binding. The Commission can now consider whether to do so or not, but it makes one thing clear: Parliament’s position on any future AI measures by the Commission. The problem is that generative AI has already plundered millions of copyrighted works on which it can build its next interactions. The software has tons of information to pivot on and can evolve in other areas, like stopping hallucinating, for example. And it is another example of the two speeds of this matter: the technological ones taking the first steps and the legislators behind them seeing what can be done when the act they want to legislate on was already carried out years ago. Images | Washington Post, Anti-Piracy Campaign (edited) In Xataka | The AI ​​industry is only sustainable by violating copyright laws. So he’s trying to eradicate them

In 1968 the Soviet Union launched two turtles into space. The most incredible thing is that the two came back to tell it

by

After the applause, whistles and the clinking of vodka bottles with which the night had started, silence now extends through the control center of Yevpatoria like a cold blizzard. The Soviet engineers, standing scattered in front of the monitors, can almost feel their icy, wet touch on their skin. All eyes are focused on the same person: Vasili Mishin, the chief designer who arrived from Baikonur to supervise the launch of the Soyud spacecraft of the Zond 5 mission. Sitting in front of the computers, Mishin does not take his penetrating eyes off the flashing lights on the panel. The Soyud which shortly before had successfully taken off towards the Moon (with a Proton rocket) from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan, is having problems. And serious. With each clearing of Mishin’s throat, the silence in the Yevpatoria room becomes denser and denser. Although, like the rest of his comrades, Mishin had celebrated the takeoff of the Soyud ship in style, now beneath his thick, tangled eyebrows his pupils shine with a concentrated expression. History remembers him as “the loser in the race to the moon“, but that night he hits the nail on the head. Before the expectant gaze of his colleagues (and the distant but overwhelming tutelage of the Moscow leaders, immersed at that time in the space race with the United States), Mishin gives some precise and the ship 7K-L1 solves its first incident. The gyrfalcons of Moscow breathe a sigh of relief. Mishin’s brow relaxes. And at the Yevpatoria control center, bottles of vodka are being uncorked again. The celebration continues. Zond 5 at the time of being rescued. (POT) It is the night of September 14-15, 1968. Hundreds of meters above the heads of Mishin and the Yevpatoria engineers, 7k-L1 rises unstoppably towards the Moon. The journey of Zond 5 will go down in history for being the first probe to hit one turn around the satellite and return to Earth. An odyssey not without difficulties. The problem that the ship registered shortly after taking off from Kazakhstan would not be the only one on its eventful journey. Zond and his peculiar crew Zond 5 does not attract attention, however, due to the incidents it has had since its takeoff. He does it for the curious crew that was on board. The same one that would have perished in space if Mishin and the rest of the Yevpatoria team had not shown their cold blood. In order to check whether trips around the Moon could pose any problems for astronauts, the Soviets introduced Zond 5 capsule fruit flies, worms, plants, seeds, bacteria and… two turtlestwo copies of Testudo horsfieldii. In the pilot’s seat there was also a mannequin that emulated a Soviet astronaut: it was 1.75 meters tall and weighed 70 kilos. Space technicians had inserted sensors to monitor the levels of radiation to which he was exposed. A peculiar Noah’s Ark… With a rag and plastic Noah at the controls. Scientists with turtles in their hands. As Brian Harvey tells it in Soviet and Russian Lunar Explorationthe turtles had to face a journey worthy of Hollywood. On the way to the Moon, part of the mechanism contaminated and became unusable. During their return to Earth, another incident prevented the operation from proceeding as planned. The work that the Soviets had done left much to be desired: the sensor to locate the Earth was poorly mounted and the optics of the stellar sensors were blocked by the thermal insulation. On their return, the Chelonians had to endure a tremendous sway. The violent descent caused the outer shield of the ship (which weighed about 5,400 kilos) to reach very high temperatures. The capsule landed in the Indian Ocean on September 21, around seven in the afternoon. Their large parachutes were deployed to cushion the fall and beacons marked their location, not far from the Borovichy ship, who took it out of the water the next morning. From there he transferred to the cargo ship Viasili Golovin bound for Bombay, where he embarked on a Antono planev that took her back to the USSR. When they checked the interior of the ship, the technicians met the watery eyes of the pair of intrepid turtles who had flown around the Moon. They arrived before all of us. (Schorle/Wikipedia) Although their health was good, the turtles looked like two newcomers from the war: they had lost 10% of their body weight, they were starving (they had not eaten since days before takeoff, when they were placed in the capsule) and to make matters worse, it is said that one of them had hurt her eye. Not a bad balance if you take into account the stellar journey they had undergone. Their triumphant return after making a historic return to the Moon, however, did not help them save their lives. What the violent splashdown in the Indian Ocean had not done, scientists from the USSR did shortly after. After your first exam they sacrificed to perform an autopsy on them and study them in depth. The trip that had ended successfully. Zond 5 had been about 1,950 kilometers from the Moon and made a historic circumlunar journey. He also left impressive images for posterity. The Legacy of the Space Turtles The maneuvers of the Zond 5 mission generated excitement even outside Soviet borders. At the Jodrell Bank Observatory in Manchester, the famous radio astronomer Sir Bernard Lovell He tracked the ship. The English center would set off alarms by intercepting a message with a human voice that had its origins in Soviet ingenuity. Had the USSR managed to make a trip around the Moon piloted by an astronaut? In reality, what they were listening to was a recording to test transmissions in space. Among the voices they heard in Manchester was in fact that of the veteran Russian cosmonaut Valeri Bykovsky. On the pages of the book Animals in SpaceColin Burgess and Chris Dubbs point out that the voice was … Read more

Ryanair and the rest of the low-cost airlines have been charging for your carry-on suitcase for years. The European Union is tired of it

by

It is no surprise that the main business of “cheap airlines” is precisely charge you for cabin luggage. A cheap Ryanair or EasyJet ticket can easily be double the price if you include a small suitcase to carry in the cabin. And from Europe I want this to end nowboth by users and legislators. not so fast. In this regard, the European Parliament has voted in favor to allow all passengers to carry one cabin bag of up to 7 kg free of charge, in addition to their personal bag or backpack. The measure has sparked criticism from low-cost airlines, since they rate it ‘existential threat’ to its business model, and that could raise ticket prices by up to 25%, according to EasyJet. The trigger. The European legislative proposal establishes that any passenger may carry at no additional cost one personal item plus one piece of hand luggage of up to 7 kg and with combined dimensions of 100 cm. This would affect all flights to or from EU airports operated by EU airlines. Of course, it should be noted that this bill must still go through the European Council before becoming law. Baggage and margins. Bag fees have become a great source of income for low-cost airlines. Jay Sorensen, airfare expert at consulting firm IdeaWorks, counted to the Financial Times that European airlines raised $16 billion in 2025 just for baggage, of which 60% went to low-cost airlines. Although these fees are not usually broken down individually, Sorensen estimates that they represent almost a fifth of the total revenue of low-cost airlines. Reaction of the industry. Kenton Jarvis, CEO of EasyJet, has qualified the “lunatic idea” proposal and warns that the additional costs “would have to be passed on” to all passengers through higher prices, even for those traveling without luggage. On the other hand, József Váradi, CEO of Wizz Air, account to FT that consumers are “much smarter” and “are able to navigate the current system of optional tariffs.” For its part, Airlines 4 Europe, the industry lobby, has presented a survey according to which half of passengers would prefer to pay lower fares and keep suitcases as an optional extra. Margins. The low cost model is based on eliminating minutes on the ground and fuel costs. Augusto Ponte, European director of the consulting firm Alton Aviation, account FT that if each passenger carried between 2 and 4 additional kg, a plane with 150 people would have 500 kg extra weight, which translates into between 15 and 20 additional euros of fuel per hour of flight. According to Ponte, for an airline like EasyJet, which flies approximately one million hours annually, that would mean more than €28 million extra per year in operating costs, approximately a tenth of its total profit. In addition, the executive says that 150 additional suitcases in the cabin per flight would cause delays of about 10 minutes in each boarding, not counting the time necessary to relocate the excess in the hold. Ponte assures that, in short-haul aircraft that make six flights a day, this would be equivalent to one hour less operation per plane each day. Consumer protection. Beuc, the European consumer association, strongly supports the proposals of Parliament and even proposes raising the permitted weight to 10 kg. Agustín Reyna, its general director, argues that passengers “expect their hand luggage to be included in the price of the ticket” and that forcing them to pay turns luggage into “a luxury item.” For his part, Andrey Novakov, the Bulgarian MEP who is leading the parliamentary negotiation on these rules, has declared that the goal is “to strive for clearer and more predictable rules for airlines and a stronger aviation sector, but never at the expense of passengers.” Cover image | Gabor Koszegi In Xataka | When Ryanair CEO went to a restaurant he was charged for two extras: “priority seating” and “legroom”

Hyundai imagines factories full of humanoid robots. A Korean union has said ‘not so fast’

by

Hyundai has been building a very specific story for months about the future of its factories, one in which humanoid robots go from being a distant promise to a real industrial tool. The image is powerful and connects with a global race to automate increasingly complex processes, but in South Korea that discourse has already found its first limit. Even before robots enter production lines, the union has come forward to make its position clear and warn that any changes that impact employment will have to be negotiated. A clear warning. Hyundai Motor Union has made it clear that “Without an agreement between the company and workers, not a single robot can enter South Korean plants,” stressing that any decision with an impact on employment must go through the negotiation table. The message connects directly with the current collective agreement, which requires all measures that affect work to be subject to debate and joint approval. With this positioning, the introduction of humanoids is emerging as one of the possible reasons for friction between worker representatives and the Asian corporation. Fear that South Korea will lose prominence. The union links automation to a broader movement of industrial reorganization, marked by the growth of manufacturing in the United States. As they explain, the planned increase in capacity at the US plant could end up subtracting volume from factories in South Korea, and they maintain that two centers would already be suffering from a lack of workload. In this context, humanoids are interpreted not only as a technological tool, but as an element that can accelerate job adjustments if it is not accompanied by clear guarantees regarding the maintenance of employment. The starting point of the discussion. This comes after Hyundai introduced Atlas, the humanoid robot developed by Boston Dynamicsas a key piece of its medium-term industrial strategy. The firm assured that it plans to progressively integrate it into its global network of factories starting in 2028. It also explained that these robots are designed to take on general industrial tasks and work alongside people, with the aim of reducing physical effort and taking on potentially dangerous jobs. Of course, he avoided specifying how many units he will deploy in the first phase or how much the project will cost. First in the United States. The manufacturer has already begun to draw how it wants to industrialize this bet. The group has explained that it will build a specific plant in the United States for the production of robots, a factory dedicated to producing Atlas on a large scale in the coming years. The first operational destination would be at the Georgia plant, known as HMGMAwhere humanoids would initially be used in very specific tasks, such as classifying and sequencing parts for the assembly line. The small labor print. Hyundai’s commitment is part of a much broader race to bring humanoid robots to the industry. Companies such as Tesla, Amazon or the Chinese manufacturer BYD have announced similar plans, although with different degrees of maturity. Some projects have already gone from demonstration to real work, such as the robot Figure 01 in a BMW plantwhere he performs support tasks autonomously. These are still limited and highly supervised experiences, but sufficient to show that the leap from the laboratory to the factory has already begun. Images | hyundai In Xataka | 100% autonomous factories where it is not necessary to turn on the light: China is already considering manufacturing cars only with robots in 2030

We already know who to thank for Google making AirDrop also work with Android phones: the European Union

by

A few days ago Google gave a surprise and announced that it had managed to make its system Quick Share was compatible with AirDrop. Suddenly it was possible to wirelessly transfer data and content from a Pixel 10 to an iPhone or iPad and vice versa. What Google did not do is tell how it did it, but in reality the credit was not its own, but rather the European Union’s. what has happened. Google has updated the feature Quick Share of Android to support AiDrop. That makes it possible to share files directly over an end-to-end Wi-Fi connection. Any Apple device with AirDrop enabled will appear in the list of nearby devices when you try to share content with Quick Share, and the same will happen in reverse in the AirDrop menu. It is the Android-iOS interoperability (and we will see if also with macOS) that we have all dreamed of for a long time, and that is now finally a reality. First the Pixel 10, then the others. At the moment only the Google Pixel 10 They support this option, but it is more than likely that it will reach the entire range of Android devices. Google confirmed in The Verge that Apple had not been involved in this development in any way, but in reality it was. The thing is that his role was not voluntary. How AirDrop works. This feature makes use of Bluetooth to allow devices to detect each other, and then an end-to-end Wi-Fi connection takes care of the data transmission. The crucial detail is that Apple developed a proprietary protocol called Apple Wireless Direct Link (AWDL) to facilitate that connection between devices. And since it was proprietary, no one else could use it and AirDrop was a fantastic option that was only available for devices in this ecosystem. Very Apple everything. This is where the EU comes in.. At the beginning of the year the European Union decided that Apple had to adopt interoperable wireless standards and was to do so starting with iOS 26. No one paid much attention to the impact the announcement would have on AirDrop, but cloud services company Ditto took care of glimpse the future and explained how “the EU has killed AWDL.” Which is effectively what happened: Apple was forced to abandon its proprietary protocol in favor of interoperable alternatives. Hello Wi-Fi Aware. The new regulations forced Apple to add support for the Wi-Fi Alliance’s Wi-Fi Aware standard and replace AWDL. The curious thing is that Wi-Fi Aware was developed with the support of Apple, but here the operable implementation was the one that was forced to be used on devices from the Cupertino firm. This reminds us of USB-C. This reminds us of what happened previously with the Lightning port, which was essentially a proprietary version of the USB-C standard. When the EU forced to use this connector on mobile phones and other devices Apple had to ditch the Lightning port. That has made charging adapters interoperable, and the same is now true for AirDrop. A promising future. Wi-Fi Aware has been added to both iOS 26 and iPadOS 26 (but it does not seem to be integrated into macOS 26), and therefore mobile phones from the iPhone 12 will be compatible with this option. For its part, Android has been supporting this standard since Android 8.0, which makes the vast majority of devices candidates to take advantage of this interoperability with Apple devices. What’s not clear is whether it will be possible to use QuickShare with AirDrop directly on Macs, but there are alternatives in that case: myself I have NearDrop installed on my Mac mini M4 and I can share files from my Pixel 8 Pro without problems with Apple equipment. In Xataka | Notifications with ads from some of the apps we use the most are hijacking our phones. And there’s not much to do

The European Union will impose a new CO2 tax in 2027. And that means one thing: more expensive gasoline

by

The European Union has a new tax to punish fuel consumption. And that implies, without any doubt, a increase in the price of gasoline and diesel that we use in our day to day. But also in which carriers need to work. And that has consequences. EMISSION RIGHTS. It is not really new, because it is part of a package of measures whose reform It was already approved in 2018. We talk about EU trade emission rights trade regimealso known as the ETS2 that will change in 2027 to impose a new tax on the consumption of fuels emitted CO2. This new tax applies to the fuel consumed in homes and, of course, to transport (both particular and merchandise) that until now had been left out. And that has a clear result: the price of gasoline will rise. How does it work? With the change that will arrive in 2027, it will be the fuel suppliers that have to buy emission rights for carbon dioxide of the products they sell. For each ton of CO2 generated by that fuel, a price will be paid to the European Union. The main problem is that we do not know what increase we face. EMISSION RIGHTS They will be bought by auction So the price fluctuates. At the moment, the most optimistic estimates indicate a price of about 48 euros per ton of CO2, according to The Energy Newspaperbut Bloomberg Nef Bet on a substantial increase in the coming years and aim at 122 euros per ton of CO2 in 2030. These increases can reach an increase in demand but also by speculation with their price, with companies buying emission rights to have them reserve when considering that they will be more expensive in the future. What can we expect? When we go to the gas station, a rise in the fuel price, of course. How much? That is the big doubt. Obviously, this new cost for the supplier should fall in cascade to the final consumer. The doubt is whether something of it will be absorbed along the way or, on the contrary, it will affect completely. According to the European Commission, the expected increase with those 48 euros/ton of CO2 is 0.11 euros/liter of gasoline and 0.13 euros/liter of diesel. That is, in a 50 -liter deposit we talk about an increase between five and six euros. Other sources point to a larger cost. As we have seen, everything will depend on how much the supplier costs the right of issuance and how much the client can affect without the competition. Distributor companies point to ABC that the price will be between 0.15 and 0.25 euros/liter. The hidden climb. But beyond the cost for The driver who fills his carthe new tax points to another problem: a general increase in the cost of life. In that same article of ABC, Transport associations point to wait for an increase of up to 45 cents/liter of CO2. It would be necessary to see if the increase reaches these levels but what is certain is that the cost of fuel It has a direct impact on inflation. Because if moving the product is a greater expense, the ultimate seller has to raise the price to continue maintaining the profits … In greater or lesser average depending on the product, what is certain is that both increases usually go hand in hand. Keep in mind that ETS2 also affects the price of gas, so it is an extra cost than adding to the equation. Worry. As is logical, the first accounts have already begun to look for solutions. From the Bank of Spain they point out that inflation can rebound in 2027 to 2.5% after a year 2026 more restrained. In Belgium they calculate That an average home will pay between 250 and 400 euros more a year. At the moment, the system will have a market stability reserve. The idea is that if the price shoots, the European Union can release emission bonds to control the price and cushion the increase. In addition, it has been designed has designed the Social Fund for Climate (SCF), a fund of at least 86.7 billion euros between 2026 and 2032 to surrender to the most vulnerable families and small businesses. Photo | Xataka In Xataka | Yes, the EU knows what our car consumes and the speed at which it circulates. And none of that has to do with an alleged espionage

All commercial relations between the European Union and India depend on one thing: Basmati rice

by

For years, Brussels and New Delhi negotiate a free trade agreement. It is a historical, tremendously ambitious and, above all, necessary for all parties: for India because the union is its third commercial partner (and represents 10% of its total trade); for union because it desperately seeks to diversify partners in an increasingly aggressive and polarized context. Well, negotiations They are about to derail and all by grain of rice. Basmati rice, to be concrete. Basmati is a highly appreciated rice. Of long and delicate fragrance, this variety of rice has been growing at the foot of the Himalayas, between India and Pakistan. Even today. In fact, According to 2019 dataIndia produced 65% of the world’s basati. Pakistan, the other 35%. Something perfectly normal in two countries that have 3,323 kilometers of border. The problem is that, in short, They are India and Pakistan. Why not be friends? In 2018, India requested the label of exclusive protected geographical indication for the Basmati in the EU. There the problems began. Pakistan, as was predictable for anyone who knew the rivalry between the two countries, fell flatly and claimed it for himself. Although it seems a minor issue, a decision in favor of one country or another could seriously affect exports of the victim. And India wants to take advantage. No one can recriminate it to New Delhi: the current geopolitical situation has cornered a European Union. And it is not that the previous situation was great strength. It is only enough to remember that before the pandemic (and probably after) it was not manufactured Not a gram of paracetamol throughout the continent. Therefore, what was some common sense, in the middle of the commercial war, has become pressing: Brussels needs to expand the pitch and India is its great trick to do so. We live rare times (or not so much). For years, the international commercial consensus that gave the World Trade Organization and its standards the pivotal nature of world economic dynamics. Today, between Bravuonadas and Wars, we have discovered that this consensus was nothing more than a fiction. The economic fragmentation, the collapse of multilateralism and the growing uncertainty have led to such crisis of the system that even a grain of rice can put it in check. Image | Kanesue | Joshua Olsen In Xataka | India to Pakistan: “I’m not going to give you more water from my rivers.” An unprecedented climbing of the conflict

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.