United

The United Kingdom has always been a country of pets, but fear has triggered a dangerous demand: dogs ready to attack

by

The proverb says that the dog is man’s best friend. In United Kingdom more and more people He believes he can be something more: his best protector. At least that is the feeling conveyed by dog ​​training companies, which have found a curious increase in demand thanks to the visibility that networks and networks are giving them. celebrities. They are not cheap, they carry many more responsibilities than a ‘conventional’ pet and they operate within a complex legal framework, but that does not prevent the fact that on the other side of the English Channel it is increasingly easier to come across dogs ready to jump at the command of their owners. There are those who prediction even that personal defense dogs are a billion-dollar market that is rapidly expanding in the United Kingdom. What has happened? That the training of defense dogs is becoming an increasingly profitable business in the United Kingdom. We know it thanks to Guardianwhich a few days ago published an extensive report in which he explains that this type of pets, ready to obey the orders of their owners and defend them with hooves and teeth (in the most literal sense of the expression) if necessary, is experiencing considerable growth. There are not many statistics or official data that corroborate the trend (Guardian does not provide them at least), but of course the message from the sector is clear. “Demand has increased, without a doubt,” confirms Alaster Bly, founder of K9 Guarda company specializing in “highly trained security guard dogs.” There are even trainers who offer special courses to train pets that people already have in their homes. Has demand increased that much? A quick search Google shows a good number of British companies and blogs dedicated to the same thing: selling or informing about defense dogs. And that’s not the only clue. There are even market reports that assure that it is a business in full expansion. A recent study published by AdAstra Solution estimated the size of the British protection dog market at 1.2 billion dollars in 2024. Its forecast is that in just a decade it will rise to 2.5 billion, with a growth rate CAGR of 9.2%. The key is not only that these pets arouse more interest, but that they are expanding their demand base. What does that mean? That dogs trained to serve as bodyguards seem to be ‘becoming popular’ in the United Kingdom. They are far from being a mass phenomenon, but something has changed: they are no longer a ‘whim’ of the wealthiest families or professionals in the security field. According to confirm Guardian After interviewing professionals in the sector, the panorama is changing little by little, as demand increases. Bly acknowledges that the majority of his clients are still wealthy people, but he has also seen growing interest from families who are not wealthy and simply want to “invest in security.” The reasons for this change? There are two that seem key. The first is concern about crime. Although official statistics can be contradictoryStatista tables reflect that the number of violent crimes against people recorded by the police in England and Wales have increased in recent decades. And clearly. In fact, although they have decreased in recent years, they continue to remain well above the snow levels of the beginning of the 21st century. Are there more reasons? Yes. The networks. British reporter Elle Hunt remember that the increase in demand has gone hand in hand with greater media exposure of this type of dogs through various means. One is celebrities. In recent years, personalities such as Rochelle and Marvin Humes, Molly-Mae Hague, Katie Price, J.Terry…actors, singers, footballers and television personalities with well-identifiable faces in the United Kingdom. In the sector, there are those who remember that the increase in demand coincides with greater visibility through Instagram or TikTok of defense dog exhibitions and competitions. Schuzthunda canine agility sport. And how much do they cost? Much more than a ‘conventional’ dog. A trained dog requires considerable work that, sometimes, begins even before the dog is born. Bly works, for example, with hybrids of German and Belgian shepherds, a “very specific genetic mix” that allows it to adapt to its function. Hence they are not cheap. They cost (at least) £32,000. However, price is only one of the factors that the owner must take into account. ¿Is there anything else? Yes. Another factor, even more important, is the care and responsibility that comes with having a dog specially trained for defense. Guardian remember that these personal protection dogs have a complex legal framework, since they are not under the Guard Dogs Law, which does regulate animals in charge of protecting premises or professionals. “They receive the same treatment as any other dog,” explains a criminal lawyer. The problem is that standard home insurance policies can leave them out of your coverage. An important factor in a country that has seen how in recent years attacks increased of dogs recorded by the police. Images | Bignsmall Paws317 (Unsplash) and Wikipedia Via | Guardian In Xataka | Asturias has been fighting for years to have a decent train connection. And now he is also fighting to include his dogs

BYD sells a total of zero cars in the United States. And, despite everything, it has denounced the United States for its tariffs

by

Not a year ago and it seems like a thousand lives have passed. In case you don’t remember, I’ll give you some background: the United States and China went to war about a year ago. A trade war who left us images to remember, like the photo of Donald Trump with the “reciprocal tariffs” table either the penguins who will now have to pay for putting their products there. Assuming, of course, that the penguins knew how to design, develop, produce and sell products. Beyond Pepín Tre’s own approaches, the truth is that we have been in tug-of-war between the United States and China for almost a year. In OctoberDonald Trump and Xi Jinping met to try to relieve tensions. It is one more of the chapters that has left us a most bizarre year in which, for example, China has been playing its own solitary tricks, redefining the origin of products, classifying them by their place of manufacture and not by the place of development or packaging and, thus, make the entry of chips accessible without lifting restrictions on other types of products. The last chapter of this story seems to be being written by BYD. The Chinese company is not selling cars in the United States. And what has already been approved by Joe Biden before the entry of Donald Trump, with bans on the sale of all cars with Chinese software or hardware, it does not seem to make things easy for the Asian company either. Despite this, BYD has made a tough decision: sue the United States. They believe that the tariffs they are paying are not legal. They doubt that the regulations used by Donald Trump allow tariffs to be imposed. And that is why they demand that all the money paid since April be returned to them. But what money? Much more than cars… although with cars in mind As we have told you in Xatakathe Asian company is much more than a car producer. In fact, and this is part of its secret, BYD did not start out as a regular car manufacturer. BYD, in addition to cars, produces batteries or heat pumps. Vertical integration is part of your secret to saving costs. From this evolution and opening new horizons, its automobile division was launched. But also buses and trucks. Because when BYD arrived in Europe it had already been there for many years selling their buses for our continent. And the same thing happens in the United States. It does not sell cars, but it does sell buses, trucks and batteries. In fact, according to Reuters750 BYD employees work in the United States in its North American division. Up to four BYD subsidiaries from which buses, trucks, batteries and renewable energy systems come out are those that have filed their lawsuit in the United States Court of International Trade. In it they defend that “the text of the IEEPA (the International Emergency Economic Powers Act on which the “reciprocal tariffs” policy was based) does not use the word “tariff” or any term of equivalent meaning.” Since Donald Trump announced the tariffs that he was going to impose on practically everyone, doubts about their legality or otherwise have been on the table. The United States Government dusted off the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to move them forward, a rule of the Cold war. However, doubts about whether or not this rule should go through Congress were on the table from day one. Even the Senate has voted against the tariffs to some countries but the resolution is purely aesthetic. Now, BYD claims that nowhere in the law does it specify that tariffs can be imposed on products coming from abroad. It is a theory supported by various companies that in recent months have also presented their own lawsuits in the same terms, such as Toyota, Costco or Prada, they point out in CarNewsChina. The decision of the court in charge of the lawsuit is key because if it rules in favor of the companies, the United States would have to return all the money collected since April. But it would also open the door for products to be exported without these special tariffs being applied, they would simply have to comply with the tariffs that were already active before April 2025. That is to say, At stake is not only money that BYD may have lost on the products it has sold there. At stake is also market entry which, with current tariffs, is almost impossible. Besides, Canada has opened the door to Chinese electric cars and Geely has dropped that their intention is also to sell their Chinese cars in the United States. The big question, as in the case of BYD, is how they intend to do it before the end of the decade with the restrictions that are currently imposed. It is a question that neither BYD nor Geely have answered. Photo | BYD and Joshua Hoehne In Xataka | “They are going to regret it”: Canada has generated even more tension with the US by opening the door to Chinese electric cars

enter the United States in three years despite 100% tariffs

by

The Chinese automotive industry has set out to conquer the West, and Europe is too small for them. The great objective is to take a bite of the cake that is the United States, a risky bet if we take into account the tariff wall to the chinese electric car. And there is already a firm proposal: Geely is preparing its assault on the United States with two aces up its sleeve. Volvo… and Canada. The plan. Does a few daysthe Autoline Network media public an interview with Ash Sutcliffe. He is the head of global communications at Geely Holding Group, a Chinese giant that has its own brands such as Zeekr either Lynk&Cobut which also controls the Western Lotus, PolestarSmart and… Volvo. The interview was published within the framework of CES, the technology fair in Las Vegasand it was strange because, if there are 100% tariffs on Chinese electric cars, what was Geely doing there? The answer is simple: they are going to assault the US market. Sutcliffe commented that they are studying all the global markets in which they can expand and there is an internal question: when and where they will land in the United States. He did not share the roadmap, but did comment that they will have “an announcement on this in the next 24 to 36 months.” Trojan horse. There are many questions here and none of them were clearly answered in the interview. For example, what will happen to US tariffs or regulations on the Chinese software in cars? Sutcliffe simply said that Geely is an international group used to following the data protection and trade regulations of various countries, so they will do “whatever is necessary to follow those regulations when the time comes.” He gave the example of the European GDPRand although the interview does not connect the dots, the fact that they have taken advantage of such a framework to firmly assure that they will be in a market as complicated and hostile as the American one in the short term is a sign that they have given the matter more than one turn. Geely has an advantage here with Volvo, Polestar and Lotus. They are brands under their umbrella and already operate in the United States, but specifically, what Sutcliffe stated was that they want to land with Lynk & Co and Zeekr. North American Gate. There are two important questions. One is the tariff wall: 100% on electric vehicles from China. In practice, it would make it unfeasible for Geely to start selling cars because users would have to pay a premium that would make the brand simply unable to compete on price. But there are two safe passages. On the one hand, Geely build factories on American soil, a door opened by the Trump Administration if, with this, local employment is created. The Volvo factory South Carolina It would be an interesting and organic option for that local production. On the other hand, use brokers that export to US soil. There Canada can be the ace up your sleeve for the Chinese company. If they decide not to assemble the Zeekr/Lyn & Co in South Carolina, they can always import the vehicles from Canada and take them to the United States through that northern gate. Canada has recently moved from a 100% tariff Chinese electric vehicles at 6.1%. It is a very limited movement, since the initial quota will be 49,000 units per year. It’s a ridiculous number, but a start, and it could be a test bed for Geely to bring its 100% electric brands to the US from Canada. But hey, the United States is very aware of this and in fact, they have already saying that Canada “is going to regret it.” Feet of lead. With this management of brands like Volvo, Geely has an easier time than other Chinese competitors to get its foot in the US market, but there is an important nuance in all this. Geely has not said “in three years we will be selling thousands of cars,” but rather “in three years we will detail our plan to enter the United States.” However, although as we said, there is no specific public plan, it is evident that a statement like this implies that they are oiling the machinery to try do the same as in Europe. Now, taking into account the political climate and government maneuvers on issues such as trade or tariffs, things could change a lot in 36 months. Images | Zeekr, BYD In Xataka | Chinese cars are no longer just cheap: they are the world’s largest product experiment

Elon Musk and Sam Altman predicted that AI will force the establishment of a universal basic income. The United Kingdom is already considering it

by

The main economic organizations in the world they don’t agree in their forecasts about what the real impact of the arrival of AI will be in the economic and labor sphere. A report The World Economic Forum estimated that AI will create 170 million new jobs. The problem is that until that happens, it will destroy about 92 million jobs. The US Senate consider that some 100 million jobs could be destroyed. Elon Musk and Sam Altman have repeated on several occasions that, to minimize this impact on society, it will be necessary to implement a universal basic income. In the United Kingdom, the government is debating measures to protect workers with the same idea. Millionaires ask for a basic income. Some of the top AI millionaires, such as Elon Musk, have predicted that universal basic income will be a reality in a future dominated by AI. While it is true that Musk’s vision is based on a vision more optimistic about the future in which “work will be optional” and it will not be necessary to save for retirement, the millionaire does not deny that universal income will be a necessary instrument to achieve it. Along the same lines, although with a more realistic vision, the CEO of OpenAI, Sam Altman, has funded studies on the effects of universal basic income in a scenario of job destruction and how this income helps recipients return to work train for new jobs. Companies do not need human labor. In one your blog postDario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, warned that AI will have an “unusually painful” impact on the labor market. “AI is not a substitute for specific human jobs, but rather a general job substitute for humans,” the manager wrote. For this reason, this mechanism is increasingly seen as a transition instrument that allows employees laid off due to the arrival of AI to retrain to re-enter the labor market. A systematic review of the Department of Economics of the University of Huelva on more than 50 empirical casespoint out that universal basic income improves spending on basic needs without participants stopping looking for work, so it will be a way for employees to train for new jobs. jobs created by AI. The UK Government is debating it. In an interview for Financial TimesJason Stockwood, UK Investment Minister, has revealed that within the Government “it is definitely being talked about.” The minister noted that “without a doubt, we are going to have to think very carefully about how to smooth the process of disembarking those industries that disappear, through some type of UBI and some type of lifelong learning mechanism so that people can retrain.” According to published BloombergMorgan Stanley declared a net job loss of 8% in the UK in the last 12 months due to AI, the highest among large economies. Which explains the concern of the British executive to begin evaluating formulas that cushion this impact. A lifeline to keep them afloat. Unlike Musk’s “optimistic” vision, British representatives do not see the arrival of AI as a liberating element that makes work optional, but as a problem that will temporarily leave millions of workers who will need help unemployed. So declared it Sadiq Khan, mayor of London, concerned about the high rate of “white collar” unemployment that can cause the arrival of AI in a city like London. Liz Kendall, Secretary of Technology of the United Kingdom, spoke along the same lines, assuring that, although it is true that more jobs will be created than will be lost, there will be a transition period in which AI will be “a weapon of mass destruction of jobs. We will not leave people and communities to fend for themselves,” collected Guardian. The million-dollar question: who finances that income? It is easy to predict that universal basic income would be a solution for those who do not have a job to return to because AI has automated it. However, something more complicated will be determining who will finance that basic income. Bill Gates already gave some clues almost a decade agoensuring that they should be their own companies that use robots in their processes those that pay for that subsidy “if a robot replaces the work of a human, that robot must pay taxes like a human.” Ioana Marinescu, economist and associate professor of public policy at the University of Pennsylvania consider that taxing technology companies could slow down their implementation at the local level, so that this transformation process it would be more progressive increasing that transition period that would give time to the labor market to adapt. In Xataka | AI and its impact on the labor market: how the perception of its arrival varies by country, explained in a graph Image | Unsplash (Alexander Gray, enrico bet)

Until now, Mexican children under 14 years of age did not have to pass an interview to enter the United States. That’s over

by

Mexico is preparing for an image that is difficult to see in recent years. With the changes in immigration policy and of access to the United States As a backdrop, the Trump administration has decided that both Mexicans under 14 and those over 79 will no longer be exempt to pass an interview with a consular officer to obtain their “non-immigrant” visas. In practice, this will affect children and the elderly who want to travel to the neighboring country to spend their holidays, for studies, business or for medical reasons. What has happened? That the US State Department has changed slightly the guidelines that Mexicans who want to apply for a nonimmigrant visawhich is used for tourism or business trips. And it has done so in an aspect that has generated some expectation in the country. From now on (from a few months ago actually) and as a general rule, Mexicans under 14 years of age and those over 79 must undergo a consular interview in person to obtain the document, just like the rest of the population. So far both (children and elderly) They used to be exempt. What does the US say exactly? The guideline collected in the official website of the US Embassy and Consulates in Mexico is quite clear: “All applicants for non-immigrant visas to the US, including those under 14 years of age and those over 79, will generally be required to appear for an in-person interview with a consular officer.” There are some exceptions, although for specific cases and as long as those involved meet “certain requirements”, such as presenting the petition in their country and not having been rejected before. For example, applicants for diplomatic visas or those who want to renew their B-1, B-2, B1/B2 permits or Border Crossing Card or Folio are exempt from the obligation. Of course, your passes cannot be expired for more than 12 months. This is also new, as remember The Country. Before they could take advantage of Dropbox process (visa interview waiver program) for 48 months following the expiration date of the document. Screenshot of the official website of the US Embassy and Consulates in Mexico. Why is it important? For several reasons. The first, as has been responsible for highlighting part of the Mexican press, is that in practice the change will mean that children and octogenarians will have to meet in person with a consular officer if they want to obtain their visa. In the case of minors under 14 years of age, it is no longer useful for their parents to come alone with all the documentation. The second reason is that the concept of “nonimmigrant visas” is broad. The list published by the US Department of State shows that its vast range includes those people who want to cross the Mexican border for business, tourism, to receive medical treatment, as athletes, to study or work as seasonal agricultural workers, among other cases. What do you recommend doing? The range is so wide that there are those who advises plan the procedures well in advance, especially at the busiest consulates, and starting from the base that the applicant will most likely have to pass the interview. The US administration itself remember That, if necessary, the consulate can request this procedure even from those who are exempt. Is it something exceptional? No. The US has tightened the access conditions for citizens of other countries (not just Mexico) and has become stricter with the requirements required of applicants for family-based immigrant visas. At the end of 2025 even transcended a proposal from Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that proposes that foreign travelers who want to cross the border in the United States must reveal up to five years of their network history. In the case of consular interviews for Mexican visa applicants, the change in criteria has come up against another handicap: a confusion in the dates. As remember The ImpartialIn July 2025, a guide was published that advanced the changes and stated that these would come into force as of September 2. According to a later update, the change was activated later: in October. Images | Global Residence Index (Unsplash) and Francesca Albert (Unsplash) In Xataka | More and more Americans want to live outside the US but they have a problem: Europe is closing its doors

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates import millions of tons of sand every year despite living on immense deserts

by

The story is striking in itself: Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, two countries closely associated with the desert, import tons and tons of sand every year. So striking, in fact, that the first intuition is that it is false. But, as soon as you get closer to it, you discover that not only is it true, but it is more interesting than it seems. Because yes, these countries import a lot of sand. In 2023, only the United Arab Emirates bought more than six million tons. And it is surprising, of course, because these are two countries located on enormous deserts. The explanation, however, is simple: the sand they have is not suitable for certain things. At a technical level, what is known as “eolian sand” (that which the wind accumulates in dunes) is very fine, very uniform and very rounded. That makes it a poor sand for making glass, concrete or other industrial products. It is not that it cannot be used, but it requires adjusting the mixtures, controlling the granulometry and impurities (fines), and carefully balancing the manufacturing processes. That is to say, the process ends up becoming so expensive that it is cheaper to import sand that is more suitable for standardized processes. And this, ultimately, should not surprise us. Sand is, today, the second most exploited resource in the world (only after water). The United Nations Environment Program estimates that every year 50,000 million tons of sand and gravel are used. What’s more, the lack of sand is so obvious that there are criminal networks that traffic with her internationally. However, we are not talking about just any sand. There are, as is evident, many types of sand. For what is not interesting today we can distinguish natural sand (HS 250590) and siliceous/quartz sand (HS 250510). The Gulf countries import, above all, the second. Emirates, to give an example, is spent half a million a year in the first and 87 million in the second. That is to say, although they are countries ‘rich’ in sand, they do not have the sand they need. A sand, moreover, with very specific specifications (granulometry, purity, humidity, fines, contaminants, consistency of supply) and that are basic for glass, foundry, filtration or the chemical industry. However, they also import natural sand. And this is interesting because, as they point out in the UNthis only makes clear the significance of the problem of governance and externalities. Despite having usable sand, in many cases it is preferred to buy from other countries (such as Oman) to avoid the negative externalities of draining sand from their coasts and deserts. Something that can alter livelihoods (fishing, agriculture due to salinization, coastal tourism) and increase vulnerability to storms. In the summer of 2019, the couple who became famous was arrested in Sardinia for hiding 40 kilos of sand in his trunk. That was the anecdote, the problem was another: that beyond mass tourism, the tensions on the sand are increasingly greater. It is something that has only grown and is normal. The world is not here to do without one of its most valuable resources. Image | Lars Portjanow In Xataka | We are running out of sand. And there are already traffickers who negotiate with it in India or Morocco

Taiwan colonizing the United States with TSMC as the spearhead

by

TSMC is the big name in the global semiconductor industry. We all have companies like NVIDIA, Qualcomm, Intel or AMD in mind, but It is TSMC that produces most of the chips of these companies. The Taiwanese company produces around 60% of the world’s chips, but when we talk about the most advanced chips, that dominance is practically total. It is a technological candy that has decided to expand and, after the plant in the United States, continues to buy land to expand its footprint. And it is a move that further unbalances the balance in terms of chips. Necessary expansion. TSMC’s base of operations is in Taiwan, but a few years ago, the company saw clearly that they had to expand their operations framework. It is something that responds to a double need. On the one hand, the more footprint they have in other countries, the more the technology industry will continue to depend on their technique. On the other hand, the main factor: the threat of china. China and Taiwan are going through a period of growing tension. We have seen maneuvers by China that I’m sure they’ve made the Taiwanese nervous.. Also Taiwan operations for show that they could defend themselves and countries like Japan and, above all, the United States They are very aware of the situation. 87% of TSMC’s more than 80,000 employees operate in Taiwan and any open conflict between the countries would mean a stoppage in the company’s operations. Little joke with this: if its chips move the world, let TSMC stop producing would cause an economic collapse. Arizona. There is a third factor that is encouraging this international expansion. Although Europe, the United States and China seeks national sovereignty in semiconductor matterthe reality is that companies need the cutting-edge chips that only TSMC can reliably mass produce. And, while financing semiconductor plants, countries have decided to invest millions to attract TSMC to their territories. The plant that will open in Germany either that of Japan They are two examples, but the one that is already operating is the American one. Although Trump, with his protectionist policies and ‘America First’, does not like it being a foreign company that cuts the cod, TSMC already has a huge plant located in Arizona from which it produces key components of the iPhone 16. This facility is the company’s most ambitious project far from Taiwan, and what started as a $12 billion investment in 2020 has become a colossal $160 billion-plus operation. They started to produce 4 nanometer chips at the beginning of 2025 and the idea is refine machinery to reach 2nm in 2029. New lands. Within the ‘Made in the USA’ strategy of the large American technology companies, TSMC Arizona is vital. And considering the economic opportunity that the AI ​​era has opened up, with the astronomical need for chips to create products like NVIDIA’s solutions for data centers, TSMC wants to grab as much of the pie as possible. As we read in The Wall Street Journala series of factors such as Taiwanese investment and a relaxation in US tariffs on Taiwan would allow TSMC to expand further. According to the media, last week the technology company purchased 900 acres – about 360 hectares – of land adjacent to its current property in Arizona. The total has been almost 200 million dollars and the intention is to expand the facilities to reach a dozen. TSMC + NVIDIA Made in the USA (more expensive). With this move, TSMC would discourage the competition from trying to invest to stand up to them because, as we say, they are the ones who dominate the production of advanced chips and who have the capacity to supply their enormous customer base. Apple is one of those that already buys chips from Arizonabut NVIDIA has confirmed that its B30 GPUs will be the first made in the United States. Now, there is a toll. HE esteem TSMC Arizona prices on advanced nodes are between 5% and 30%. There are several factors. In Taiwan they have the policy of “everything at one hour”, so any material the factory needs is very close, creating an extremely efficient chain. That does not happen in the American factory, where suppliers are far away and you have to resort to air transportation, which increases the price. There is also the fact that the wages They are higher in the US than in Taiwan. Headache. Despite these conditions, and being a foreign company controlling the show on home soil, TSMC has so dominated the process that the companies it’s worth it because they know that the chips they get will be the best for their products. Furthermore, from a political perspective, these additional costs may even be reasonable if they ensure that a conflict in Taiwan would not completely paralyze its economy. For TSMC, expansion is a great move. At the political level, countries that embrace their factories also have a reason to attract investment and Big Tech and the CEO of NVIDIA himself is clear that swith those who will lead the industry for decades. However, it is still an industry dependent on a single entity. Without leaving the United States, the country got his hands on Intel in the middle of last year in an almost unprecedented move to turn the company into the great american foundry. With TSMC expanding its network at home, they are going to have it complicated despite having the best technology available. Images | NVIDIA, TSMC, Intel In Xataka | The world’s technology industry practically depends on a single road: the one that leads to the Spruce Prine mine

The United States knows that Venezuela’s subsoil is full of rare earths. The big problem is that he doesn’t know where

by

The announcement that American companies could access to Venezuela’s vast oil has reignited a much broader ambition of Donald Trump’s administration. Because the Latin American nation has something that Washington desperately seeks, something that China he has plenty. He crux It’s how and how much. Beyond crude oil. Yes, the “b” side of the North American “landing” in Venezuela also seeks to explore the mineral potential of the country as part of “the national security of the United States.” The experts they point out that, in addition to crude oil, there would be unverified reserves of critical minerals and possible large quantities of rare earths, key inputs for defense and technology. However, the lack of reliable data, doubts about economic viability and operational risks in areas with the presence of armed groups and mining illegality turn the objective into an enterprise. much more complex that the oil reopening itself, with significant environmental impacts associates to energy-intensive mining. The supply chain and the bottleneck. Even if the extraction obstacles were overcome, the decisive challenge appears in processing. The refining of rare earths is concentrated in more than 90% in Chinaa domain constructed for decades through subsidies, industrial expansion and lax environmental regulations. This position has made rare earths a sensitive point of trade tensions between Washington and Beijing, with export controls that have highlighted the fragility of American supply chains. The consensus among analysts is that this industrial and geopolitical advantage cannot be reversed quickly, so new deposits without their own refining capacity would contribute little to short-term strategic resilience. Why it is important. It we have counted other times. The classification of “critical minerals” covers a broad set of raw materials essential for the economy and security, from aluminum and copper to a specific group of 17 elements known as rare earths, essential for high-performance magnets, advanced electronics and military systems. Although these elements are not scarce in the Earth’s crust, their extraction and refining are technically demanding and expensive. In the United States there are efforts to develop domestic capabilities, but start-up times are often measured in years or decades, which explains the temptation to look for external solutions that, in practice, rarely offer immediate results. Geological potential and structural limits. It happens that, unlike other countries with confirmed reserves, Venezuela does not appear in international lists as a relevant producer of rare earths, an explained absence for decades of opacity institutional during the governments by Hugo Chavez and Nicolás Maduro. Still, the country is believed to host deposits of coltan and bauxitesources of metals considered critical such as tantalum, niobium, aluminum and gallium. Projects like the Orinoco Mining Arc They sought to capitalize on that potential, but have been marked by illicit mining, lack of investment, a shortage of qualified labor, and a volatile regulatory environment that discourages international operators. A strategic mirage in the medium term. If you like, the final evaluation of the experts is clear: although the Venezuelan subsoil may hide valuable resources, its contribution to the security of supply of the United States it would be marginal on the near horizon. Without solid geological data, without security guarantees and without processing capacity independent of the Chinese circuit, Venezuela’s mineral interest seems more an extension of the geopolitical pulse than a practical solution, at least in the short term. In that context, the American bet faces a paradox: the country offers a lot on paper, but little that can be translated into real advantages over the next decade. Image | Mauricio CampelloRawPixel In Xataka | The US did not need to shoot to enter Caracas. All it took was an invisible weapon and unexpected “help” from Russia In Xataka | While the whole world looks at oil, Venezuela’s true treasure is hidden in the basements of London: its gold

force the United States out of its comfort zone

by

If today we were asked which country is leading the race for artificial intelligence, the most immediate answer would probably still be the United States. And it wouldn’t be an occurrence. For decades, the country has set the pace for technological innovation and a good part of the digital tools that we use daily come from their large companies. However, that leadership is no longer as incontestable as it once was. The board begins to move and there is an actor who is closing distances at a speed that is difficult to ignore. That actor is China. The question is no longer whether China competes, but how it got here. How a country identified for years as the world’s factory, associated with mass production and cheap labor, has become a benchmark for innovation and technological vanguard. In a new video from Xataka’s YouTube channelour colleague Francisco Franconi analyzes this process in detail and puts figures, context and nuances to a phenomenon that we are seeing develop almost in real time and that can alter the balance of power in the global technology sector. China is no longer just the world’s factory: it is building its own path in AI “China should be years behind the United States in the development of AIs. It is a fact, since between 85 and 95% of the global market of chips used in this sector belong to Nvidia,” explains Franconi. The data is key, but it does not explain everything. The race for artificial intelligence is not only played in the field of semiconductors. There are other structural factors that are equally determining, and one of them is energy. The video delves into the enormous energy gap that separates both countries and why this aspect is crucial to understanding Chinese progress. As Franconi points out, energy “is necessary to build chip factories, supercomputers and processing centers. Without it there is no industrial growth.” To contextualize this statement, the analysis uses data from the International Energy Agency that helps to measure the real scope of this advantage and its direct impact on industrial and technological development. Another of the axes of the video is resilience. Specifically, China’s ability to adapt and continue moving forward despite the sanctions and restrictions imposed by the different US administrations. Franconi focuses on the repeated limitations that affect NVIDIA, but also examines the case of Huawei and the role that startups such as deepseek in this new scenario. Talent appears as another of the fundamental pillars of this career. “A relevant fact is that China has a greater number of graduates in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, but the most shocking fact is that 50% of the world’s AI researchers are of Chinese origin“says Franconi. A figure that helps understand why the Asian country is gaining weight so quickly in development and research in artificial intelligence. The video also covers the current ecosystem of language models competing in the market and offers a clear snapshot of the position that China and the United States occupy in this technological race. An analysis that leads to our colleague’s conclusions about where this global pulse is heading and what implications it may have in the medium and long term. You can see now the full video on the Xataka YouTube channel. And, of course, we invite you to leave your comments both there and on this article. Images | Xataka In Xataka | Huawei is coming back. And not everyone is prepared for what is coming

After Venezuela, the United States is already saying loud and clear what its next objective is: Greenland

by

The world looks at Venezuela, but a good part of Europe, NATO allies and more specifically Denmark have one eye (or both) on another geographical point: Greenland. The capture of Nicolás Maduro opens a very wide range of questions about the future of Venezuela, but it has also fueled the unknowns that for months They surround Greenland, geographically located in North America, although at a political level it depends on Denmark. That Donald Trump wants Greenland to come under Washington’s rule is not new, but his words take on a new meaning after what happened on Saturday. Especially because the Republican leader himself has remembered in the last hours that he does not give up on the island: “we need itdefinitely”. Beyond Venezuela. That Venezuela is the protagonist of the start of 2026, no one doubts it. The operation launched by the US on Saturday and which culminated in the capture of Maduro opens a wide range of unknowns about the future of the South American nation. Especially after Trump himself has slipped that he is determined to keep the country under his tutelage “until there is a reliable transition”, a process for which doesn’t seem to trust in María Corina Machado. What happened in Venezuela has, however, shaken some chords that go far beyond America. The main one is probably related to Greenland. Trump wants the US to control the island, crucial for its geostrategic value and mining resources. That’s nothing new. He has said it on many occasionsbefore even being sworn into office. Saturday’s campaign, however, gives a new veneer to that claim, especially because there are those who already warn that the US has shown that it is willing to ignore international law. Click on the image to go to the tweet. “SOON”. The above would be enough to rock the diplomatic waters around Greenland, but Trump himself (and his entourage) have taken it upon themselves in the last few hours to make it clear that they are not giving up on Greenland. The first message in that direction was sent on Saturday by podcaster ultraconservative Katie Miller, who posted a tweet in which it showed a map of Greenland colored with the US flag and a message as simple as it was resounding: “SOON”, ‘soon’. The tweet, which has more than 28 million views, caused a stir because Miller is not a simple influencer from the republican and MAGA sphere. During the Republican’s first term she played a relevant role in the Department of Homeland Security and today she remains the wife of Stephen Milleran influential figure within Trump’s White House team. Hence, Denmark has given special relevance to his tweet. Just a few hours after Miller published it, the Danish ambassador to the US, Jesper Moller Sorensen, he took it upon himself to respond by the same means (X) to make it clear that Washington and Copenhagen are allies and Greenland is already integrated into NATO. “We expect full respect for the territorial integrity of Denmark.” “We need it”. Miller hasn’t been the only MAGA voice to speak out about Greenland. In case there were still doubts about the White House’s position, Trump himself has also done so. On Sunday, in an interview with TheAtlantic, The Republican made it clear that his aspirations for Greenland remain as strong as a year ago, if not stronger. In fact, far from softening the tone after the multiple frictions With Denmark, Trump has been gradually raising the tone. During the interview The Republican insisted that he will not give up the island and recalled that right now it is “surrounded by Russian and Chinese ships.” “We need Greenland, without a doubt. We need it for defense,” he emphasizedblunt. Just words? That is the unknown that remains after what happened on Saturday in Venezuela, a powerful military deployment that resulted in the capture of Maduro and that some experts and countries They see it as questionable from a legal point of view, if not directly contrary to international legislation. In the case of Greenland, the US has not only limited itself to sending messages. TO end of december Trump appointed the governor of the state of Louisiana as the US special envoy for Greenland, a decision that caused discomfort in the Danish Executive. The chosen one, Jeff Landry, is not just the governor of Louisiana. He is also a MAGA ally who, having recently assumed his position as special envoy, proclaimed in X that their goal is for “Greenland to be part of the United States.” Click on the image to go to the tweet. “Enough of the insinuations”. Trump and his entourage are not the only ones who have raised their voices to talk about Greenland. On this side of the Atlantic it has also done so (and with increasing forcefulness) Denmark itself through his Prime Minister, Mette Frederiksen: “I have to say this to the US: there is no point in talking about the need for the US to take over Greenland. I strongly urge you to stop threats against a close ally.” His voice joins that of Ambassador Moller Sorensen, who remembered in X that Greenland is already part of NATO, so it is integrated into the same defensive alliance as the US. More resounding It has even been the Prime Minister of Greenland, Jens Frederik Nielsen: “That’s enough. Enough pressure. Enough insinuations. Enough fantasies of annexation.” A recent survey has revealed that 85% of Greenlanders They do not want their island to integrate into the United States. The new Monroe Doctrine? As remember Financial TimesTrump himself has slipped that the Venezuela operation goes beyond that nation and is framed in a broader concept of “hemispheric defense” that reinforces Washington’s role in the American continent. Against this backdrop, Greenland finds itself in a complex position: it is geographically located in North America, but administratively and politically linked to Denmark. The picture is also completed with its important geostrategic role and mining wealth, which opens a … Read more

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.