worth

Is it worth paying more for the most compact smart ring on the market?

by

The market of wearables in format of smart ring It is in a moment of maturation and one of the undisputed kings of the sector, Oura, has made a move. With the recent launch of Oura Ring 5the company seeks to protect its throne against some increasingly aggressive rivals. However, the Oura Ring 4 It is still a very powerful option in stores and often has good offers. If you are thinking about making the leap to invisible technology, we analyze in depth what changes, what remains and which of the two models best adapts at your finger and your budget. The price could vary. We earn commission from these links OURA Ring 4 Smart Ring The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Technical sheet of both Oura smart ring models feature oura ring 5 oura ring 4 thickness 2.28 mm (40% more compact) 2.88mm broad 6.09mm 7.9mm weight Between 2 and 2.69 grams Between 3.3 and 5.2 grams materials Aerospace Titanium Titanium sizes available From 6 to 13 From 4 to 15 autonomy Between 6 and 9 days Between 5 and 8 days Water resistance 100 meters (IP68) 100 meters (IP68) price (from) 429 euros 379 euros subscription 5.99 euros per month (mandatory) 5.99 euros per month (mandatory) The key differences to note Design: the Oura Ring 5 no longer looks like a device tech Without a doubt, the greatest evolution of Oura 5 It’s your “slimming“. Although the Oura Ring 4 was already stylish at the time, it still felt like a slightly thick or technological ring compared to a traditional wedding band. On the other hand, the Oura Ring 5 has achieved reduce its total volume by 40%. At only 2.28 mm thick, it is very discreet and blends perfectly with conventional jewelry. The largest size of the Ring 5 (2.69 grams) weighs less than the smallest Ring 4 size (3.3 grams). If it could previously be annoying to sleep with the previous model, the new one solves this problem completely. Of course, you have to be careful with the sizes. To achieve this size, Oura has had to sacrifice options. The Oura Ring 5 It is only available in sizes 6 to 13while the Oura Ring 4 ranges from 4 to 15. If you have very thin or very large fingers, the previous model is still your only option. Sensors and precision Both devices use LED light combinations (red, green and infrared) along with temperature sensors and accelerometers to monitor your health 24/7. The difference lies in the physical layout. By downsizing on Ring 5, the sensors now protrude less but they make better contact with the skin. Oura says that although the Ring 5 traces 12 signal paths (compared to the Ring 4’s 18), its new algorithms and improved component power offer even more accurate and stable heart rate and blood oxygen readings during nighttime movements. The software does not discriminate (for now) One of the most honest points from Oura is that the big software news reaches both generations. The ecosystem releases powerful tools such as Health Radar (designed with Resmed to measure nocturnal blood pressure and breathing patterns), the AI medical advisor Counsel Health and metrics for users using GLP-1 weight loss medications. So you won’t miss out on any of these health benefits if you decide to save and opt for the fourth-generation model. Autonomy: being more compact does not make it impossible for the Oura 5 battery to last longer It can be thought that a ring 40% smaller would house a tiny battery, but Oura has redesigned the battery to improve autonomy. The Oura Ring 5 promises between 6 and 9 days of actual usescratching an extra day of average autonomy compared to the 5-8 days offered by the Oura Ring 4. Both models They are loaded using their own basealthough the Ring 5 now has an optional very convenient aluminum travel case, sold separately. So… which model to choose The initial outlay of the Oura Ring 5 starts in the 429 euros for its standard finishes (silver and black), scaling up to 529 euros if you are looking for the new premium finishes like Deep Rose. For its part, the Oura Ring 4 is part of the 379 eurosa difference that usually widens when we find specific sales. In both cases, remember add the 5.99 euros per month subscription to unlock your metrics, which is mandatory on both generations. If you still hesitate between the Oura Ring 4 and the Oura Ring 5, here is the key to choosing. Buy the Oura Ring 4 if: You are looking for the best quality-price ratio: The software, graph and health analysis that you will see on your smartphone are exactly the same. You have an extreme size: If your finger requires a size 4, 5, 14 or 15, Ring 5 does not directly manufacture your size. You take advantage of an offer: If you find it discounted by a margin of more than 70 or 80 euros compared to the new model, the smart purchase is to go for the previous generation. The price could vary. We earn commission from these links OURA Ring 4 Smart Ring – Rose Gold The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Buy the Oura Ring 5 if: You are looking for maximum comfort: If you are a light sleeper or are not used to wearing rings, the Ring 5’s smaller millimeters and grams justify paying for the novelty. You want it to pass for real jewelry: Its aesthetics are impeccable and the internal sensors are barely noticeable when touched with your finger. You want to stretch the battery to the maximum: Its small extra autonomy guarantees you forget about the charger for more than a week. The price could vary. We earn commission from these links The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Some of the links in this article are affiliated and may provide … Read more

Hubble is slowly falling, but NASA doesn’t know if it’s worth rescuing

by

At the end of this month, the launch of Link, the ship developed by the Katalyst Space company, is scheduled to rescue the Neil Gehrels Swift Telescopewhose orbit has been declining in recent years due to atmospheric resistance. Although the development of this mission has been expensive, NASA considers that it has been a minimal investment compared to all the return that can be generated by keeping the telescope in operation for a few more years. Therefore, given that Hubble is also deorbiting, the question arises whether it would be interesting to do the same. It is clear that this telescope can still provide a lot of science. However, it is an old instrument, so its maintenance and operation are quite expensive. That is why NASA is doing calculations to discern whether it would be interesting to develop a ship similar to Link for its rescue or if, ultimately, it is more profitable to let it deorbit. Almost 100 million dollars in one year. During 2025, NASA invested 98.8 million dollars on the Hubble Space Telescope. Only the much newer James Webb required more investment. We must not forget that Hubble was launched in 1990. It is very old, so today it is more expensive to maintain and even operate with it. But it’s in good shape. Despite needing so much investment, Hubble is in great shape. Many saw the launch of James Webb as an opportunity for Hubble to retire. The networks were filled with photographs in which images of the same point taken by one telescope or another were compared, always much more clearly in the James Webb. However, they are not exclusive telescopes, but complementary. Hubble focuses on detecting emissions in visible and ultraviolet light, while James Webb specializes in near and mid-infrared. It is true that James Webb can see through dust and gasgo further and take images with higher resolution. However, there are objects that can only be observed at the wavelengths at which Hubble works. Today he continues to make great discoveries and if he were to deorbit and retire he would leave a very big void in space research. The ideal would be to last 15 more years. The Habitable Worlds Observatory is scheduled to launch in the 2040sa large telescope, much more advanced than Hubble, which will also work in visible and ultraviolet light. This could, in a way, retire Hubble. Until then, it remains a necessary telescope. You have to do calculations. With the Swift, the profitability of launching a ship to their rescue was very clear. For Hubble, more calculations will have to be made, since a ship larger than Link would also be needed. Still, given how useful this telescope has been and continues to be, it would not be strange if it is still profitable to recover it. If this is not done, re-entry into the Earth’s atmosphere could occur. in 2029, with a median set in 2033. There would be no time to get his replacement ready. It is a very important detail to take into account. Image| NASA Hubble Space Telescope In Xataka | The James Webb has broken another historical record: a supermassive black hole older than expected

SpaceX wants to reach a capitalization of 1.75 trillion dollars. Analysts are clear that it is worth less than half

by

SpaceX’s is the first of the record-breaking IPOs that are expected this year: it will take place on June 12, 2026 under the symbol SPCX. This operation promises to be the most important public offering of shares in history, and the company has already indicated that its objective is to obtain funds worth $75 billion to achieve an astronomical valuation of 1.75 billion euros. But how SpaceX is valued is one thing, and how analysts value it is quite another. Overrated. The financial analysis firm Morningstar has carried out an analysis of SpaceX’s financial accounts and have reached a striking conclusion: “We believe the company has been significantly overvalued and investors will have the opportunity to buy the shares at more attractive levels after the IPO.” Or what is the same: they advise not participating in that initial IPO, and waiting because they anticipate that the stock will fall in the first days on Wall Street. It’s only worth half. In these conclusions, Morningstar establishes that the valuation discounting SpaceX’s cash flow is $780 billion. That represents 48% than the valuation of the private market, which is 1.5 trillion dollars, and 44.5% less than the valuation attributed to the company itself, which amounts to 1.75 trillion dollars. Is it really more promising than Nvidia? Dan Coatsworh is one of the main analysts at the firm AJ Bell, and he commented on CNBC how that theoretical internal valuation of $1.75 trillion would mean that the value of SpaceX (P/E, Price to Earnings ratio) is 67 times its sales, two times more than, for example, happens at Nvidiathe most valuable company on the planet today. Beware of xAI. One of SpaceX’s theoretical strengths is its artificial intelligence division, xAIbut analysts explain that in reality its theoretical advantage is “undetermined”, and in fact they pose it as “a material threat of value destruction” for the parent company, SpaceX. Morningstar believes that the AI ​​division is worth $170 billion, and that what really matters is something else. The Starlink engine. SpaceX’s real argument for going public and its real strength is not the reusable Falcon 9 rockets, but the profitability of Starlink. The company’s satellite constellation has achieved sustained cash flow in recent months, and its global customer base is growing at an enviable pace. It is undoubtedly SpaceX’s great recurring revenue generation machine. Morningstar values ​​it at $611 billion. The double class trick. SpaceX plans to sell shares at a fixed price of $135 per share, but they will only list 3% of the total shares. In addition, Elon Musk will continue to maintain tight control of the vote with 85% of the total through a dual-class share system. Class A shares, those that go public, allow the right to one vote per share. Class B shares go to the founder and the first key investors. They are not sold on the open market, and each one usually gives 10, 20 or more votes. Institutional dependency. The value of the company, however, is supported by the contracts it has with the US government. Specifically with NASA and with the Department of Defensewhich depend entirely on SpaceX systems for their critical missions. That not only guarantees long-term income, but is a compelling argument to attract more conservative investment funds. Either you believe Elon, or you don’t. We are facing an operation that will test Elon Musk’s real power over the markets. Although SpaceX is an extraordinary company, it is overvalued due to its founder’s habit of selling hype. The tactic of coming out as an indivisible package (Starlink + xAI + Image | Xataka with Magnific In Xataka | Elon Musk knows that TSMC is overwhelmed: Terafab is his idea to completely change the global chip industry

a leap that is worth it in almost everything

by

Movistar has taken longer than other operators to get on the bandwagon. Wi-Fi 7but he already did it. His new Smart WiFi 7 router It has been available for some time for customers with fiber and, as usually happens every time the operator releases equipment, the same debate of Is it worth changing to the new one?. Although this technology ends up being better in everything, it will depend on the devices you have at home that are going to connect to the network. In this article we review the real differences between one and the other, what the change costs and for whom it makes sense to do so. Similar concept in design At first glance, the two routers share a philosophy, being vertical devices that rest on a base and are placed in any corner of the room without too much concealment. But that’s where the aesthetic similarities end. He Smart WiFi 6 It maintains a white and gray casing, while the new Smart WiFi 7 opts for a combination of black and blue and is positioned edge-on. The reset buttons, WPS and the telephone jack remain almost identical. Perhaps the most visible change in this sense is that the power switch becomes a button. What changes inside: technology, antennas and ports The important difference is not in the casing, but in the guts of the device. The Smart WiFi 6 mounts nine internal antennas (5×5 on the 5 GHz band and 4×4 on the 2.4 GHz). The new Smart WiFi 7 incorporates ten antennas, nine with configuration MU-MIMO and an additional one for DFS support. Of course, there is one detail that should be clear: The Movistar router does not operate in the 6 GHz bandone of the great promises of the WiFi 7 standard. smart wifi 6 router smart wifi router 7 Nine antennas: 5×5 (5GHz). 4×4 (2.4 GHz). Nine antennas: 5×5 MU-MIMO (5 GHz) with DFS support. 4×4 MU-MIMO (2.4 GHz) with an additional antenna for DFS support. Four Ethernet ports. One SC/APC optical port compatible with GPON networks. Three Gigabit Ethernet ports. One port up to 10 Gbps. One SC/APC optical port compatible with GPON and XGS-PON networks. WiFi 6 (802.11ax, compatible with 802.11 ac/n) WiFi 7 (802.11be, compatible with 802.11ax/ac/n) 2.5 times faster speed. 50% less latency. 70% more capacity. 9% less energy consumption. WPA3 Security WPA3 Security In cable connectivity there is also an important leap. The previous model offered four ports Gigabit Ethernet. The new one retains three Gigabit ports, but adds one port up to 10 Gbps prepared to take advantage of the maximum speed symmetrical fiber. The SC/APC optical port also changes, as it is now compatible with networks XGS-PONin addition to the GPON. Regarding performance, Movistar says that the new router is up to 2.5 times faster, has 50% less latency, 70% more traffic capacity and 9% less electricity consumption. In addition, according to the company, it adds a 10% improvement in coverage compared to the previous model. The extra capacity is probably the information that may interest us most in an average home, since the house is increasingly full of cameras, televisions, speakers, robot vacuum cleaners and consoles competing for the same network. What WiFi 7 really provides To understand why Movistar talks about these improvements, it is important to be clear about what WiFi 7 is. It is the standard 802.11besuccessor of Wi-Fi 6 and of WiFi 6Eand the WiFi Alliance gave the green light to technology during CES 2024. Among its benefits we have channels up to 320 MHz, twice as wide as WiFi 6. It also offers 4K-QAM modulation, which allows more data to be packed into each transmission. In addition to this, WiFi 7 incorporates the technology MLO (Multi-Link Operation)which is perhaps the one that interests us most at home and that allows a device to send and receive data on several bands at the same time. In theory we could reach speeds of up to 46 Gbps compared to 9.6 Gbps for WiFi 6. The important nuance is that these advantages only materialize if the device that connects also supports WiFi 7. A laptop or mobile phone from a few years ago will connect to the new router without problem, but will continue to function under the previous standard. Therefore, you will not notice a substantial change in speed as long as you do not have equipment compatible with this technology. What doesn’t change There are functions that remain identical in both models. Both allow the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz bands to be unified under a single SSID, both are managed from the Movistar Smart WiFi mobile application (for iOS and Android), both are compatible with the Smart WiFi 6 amplifier to extend coverage and both work with the FTTR fiber from the operator (the Movistar service that uses an ultra-fine fiber thread to bring the connection to every corner of the house). Security does not change either, since both routers continue to use the protocol WPA3. How much does it cost and how to get it The most direct way to get the Smart WiFi 7 without paying anything extra is to contract Movistar’s 10 Gbps fiber. It doesn’t matter if it is a new registration, a portability or a client who is already in the company and decides to upgrade to that modality, because in all cases the router is included. Movistar markets this speed for five euros more a month above the usual rate. There is also good news for those who contract other rates from the company. As we recently mentioned, the equipment is included free of charge in new registrations. miMovistar rates since February 16, 2026, and the operator’s website already offers it along with the miMovistar Unlimited package with 1 Gbps fiber or 600 Mbps. But be careful: if the contract is for fiber without any other additional service, the equipment delivered is still the Smart WiFi 6. If you are a customer of … Read more

“Going to the gym for an hour” is not worth spending eight hours sitting. And there is a deep evolutionary reason for that.

by

They have slipped it on us and it is time to recognize it. For years, the gym boom has been received with enthusiasm: having ubiquitous and accessible sports facilities to get us out of our sedentary routine can only be understood as something positive. And yet, the way sport has entered our lives is deeply problematic: we have managed to create a “compartmentalized model” of physical activity that is leaking everywhere. So “going to the gym” doesn’t work? No, it’s not that. It’s not what the evidence says. Intense exercise is helpful. Very useful. And it is always better than doing nothing: but the idea of ​​going to the gym for an hour and that’s it forgets that the relevant unit is not the hour at the gym, but the energy pattern of the 24 hours a day. Let’s put it another way: Why do the Hadza They do not burn more calories than office workers despite walking 12 km a daywhy weight loss gym programs consistently disappoint or why the WHO has begun to separate “exercise” from “sit less”? The answer to these three questions is the same: the evolutionary biology of the human being. Two lines of research that converge at the same point. Between 2012 and 2018, a team from Duke University coordinated by Pontzer discovered that the body It is not dedicated to linearly adding exercise expenditure to basal expenditure. What it does is compensate for it (reducing expenditure on other vital functions such as inflammatory, reproductive processes or metabolic control). That is, doing an hour (or more) of intense exercise does not have to increase total energy expenditure. The second line of research arises from comparing people with the same weight and height. In ’99, the Mayo Clinic discovered that the daily difference in energy expenditure can be attributed to things like walking, standing, housework, and other types of small unconscious movements. To this we must add that a sedentary lifestyle is, in itself, a risk factor. In 2016, Ekelund and his team discovered that between 60 and 75 minutes a day of moderate physical activity are needed to eliminate the excess mortality risk associated with sitting for 8 hours or more a day. That is, one hour of exercise does not solve the problem. And the problem is that the public conversation doesn’t realize it. It is unbalanced: the dominant imagination since the 80s sees doing “a handful of hours of exercise” as a way to “buy” health. The very long debate about how many steps to take each day is exactly the same. The issue, as I say, is that the evidence is clear that we are not buying anything. And then? Should we close the gyms? Nothing of the sort. The important thing at this point in 2026 is to begin to understand that the correct unit to think about our physical activity is the full day. As the WHO says“more activity is better than little; any activity is better than none; (however) reducing a sedentary lifestyle provides independent benefits” and is worth addressing regardless of the exercise we do. The idea of ​​”training for an hour and then spending the rest of the day calmly” does not hold water. Going to the gym is positive, but it is not a papal bull: intense exercise works as something that adds to leaving a sedentary lifestyle. It does not replace it. Image | Anupam Mahapatra In Xataka | Cereals yes, but wrapped in black cardboard: the packaging business aimed exclusively at men

bought $87 million worth of ETH and sells it all in one quarter

by

The Harvard investment fund prepared to buy Ethereum in autumn of last year. Three months later, he ended up selling everything. At the same time, it has continued to reduce its position in Bitcoinwhich has also been declining quarter by quarter since will reach its all-time high in mid-2025. The institution, which for a few years had been increasingly betting on cryptocurrencieshas experienced first-hand how the landscape has changed in a very short time. The play. The Harvard investment fund, known as Harvard Management Company, revealed in its latest filings with the SEC that it had completely liquidated its position in BlackRock’s Ethereum ETF during the first quarter of 2026. The position, valued at around $86.8 million, lasted just one quarter. In fact, at the time of purchase, the fund had become the largest new buyer of BlackRock Ether, as commented Bloomberg analyst James Seyffart told Fortune. At the same time, Harvard also cut its position in the Bitcoin ETF of BlackRock (IBIT) by 43%, leaving it at about 117 million dollars. It is the third consecutive quarter in which its crypto positions decrease. Why it matters. Harvard is not just any university when we talk about investment. Its endowment (the university’s permanent investment fund) is the largest in the world and many are attentive to its movements. That it has bet (and undone so quickly) on Ethereum gives clues about how institutions are viewing this cryptocurrency. The thing about Ethereum is that it has something that Bitcoin doesn’t have. And its network can host financial applications. That should make it more attractive in theory. However, what the numbers say is something else: the price of Ethereum has accumulated a drop of 29% so far this year, compared to 12% for Bitcoin, and in the last five years Bitcoin has clearly surpassed Ethereum. In detail. Harvard’s crypto story begins in the second quarter of 2025, when bought 1.9 million shares of BlackRock’s IBIT ETF for about 116.7 million dollars, making Bitcoin its largest position in listed equities, even above Nvidia or Alphabet. The peak came in Q3 of 2025, with 442 million in Bitcoin ETF. From there, the road was downhill, with a 21% cut in Q4, simultaneous entry into Ethereum for 87 million, and in Q1 2026 complete exit from Ether and a new 43% cut in Bitcoin. Between the lines. The exit of Ethereum in a single quarter suggests that it was a strategy that did not end up convincing. Harvard’s portfolio of listed equities It is only 16 positionsand this is a tiny fraction of its total $57 billion endowment. Its largest position currently is TSMC, with about 232 million, followed by gold, with about 200 million. Eric Balchunas, ETF analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence, counted Fortune that flows into Bitcoin ETFs remain relatively resilient despite the fall it is having in 2026. Regarding Harvard’s position specifically, he noted that, having many other assets that have performed well, “absorbing losses in Bitcoin may be more bearable, with the hope of a recovery.” He also recalled that endowments are “the most difficult institution to convince” to enter ETFs, which makes both entry and exit even more striking. ETFs at other universities. Among the rest of the universities, the panorama is different. Dartmouth maintained its position in IBIT unchanged during Q1 and expanded its crypto exposure with a new entry into Bitwise’s Solana ETF, being one of the first US universities to do so. Brown University He didn’t move his position either. at IBIT. Harvard, for now, is moving in the opposite direction. And now what. Harvard’s crypto strategy could also be conditioned by an internal factor. And NP Narvekar, the director of the endowment since 2016 and the architect of its shift towards alternative assets, has informed the board of his intention to retire, possibly at the end of 2027, according to account the Wall Street Journal. There is still no open successor search process, but it is a factor that may explain why Harvard is getting rid of somewhat riskier positions. Cover image | DrawKit Illustrations and Somesh Kesarla Suresh In Xataka | Two decades ago Apple left Intel because it didn’t know how to be a foundry. Now he comes back because he has learned his lesson

Now it’s worth more than a Ferrari

by

While Formula 1 rests between races, Fernando Alonso continues to make people talk. This time not from the cockpit of his Aston Martin or showing off his exclusive Pagani Zonda Green Diamond of 10 million eurosbut from the streets of Monaco at the wheel of an Italian compact from the 90s that many believed forgotten. As and how did he count Motorpassionthe Asturian pilot has been seen circulating with a Lancia Delta HF Integrale Evoluzione Martini 6and the scene has generated both admiration and nostalgia among motor fans. If you were a teenager in the 90s and you liked cars, your room was surely decorated with a poster of this car. Although it has not been officially confirmed that the car is owned by Alonso, there is a detail that suggests that the legendary limited edition Delta Integrale is already part of the two-time champion’s garage: it is the license plate that the car sports. in the videos that have gone viral on social networks: he wears the number 14, Alonso’s fetish number. An icon of the rally with 310 units in the world The Lancia Delta HF Integrale Evoluzione Martini 6 is not just any nostalgic whim. This version was launched in 1992 to commemorate the sixth consecutive constructors’ title that Lancia achieved in the World Rally Championshipa feat that no other brand has matched in the WRC. Only 310 units were manufactured of this Lancia Delta between the end of 1992 and 1993, which explains both its sentimental value and its current price on the collectors market. RM Sotheby’s (Motorcar Studios) The Martini 6 edition is instantly identified by its line with blue and red stripes on white bodywork, inherited from the team’s official sponsor, Martini Racing. Inside, Recaro seats in blue with red stitching, a carbon fiber shift knob and a numbered plate that indicates which of the 310 units manufactured the car belongs to. Under the bulging hood to make room for the engine that characterized the entire Delta Integrale family, there is a 2-liter four-cylinder, 16-valve turbocharged engine with 210 HP distributed among the four wheels, which allowed the vehicle to go from 0 to 100 km/h in 5.7 seconds. To put it in perspective it was the same time a Ferrari Testarossa of the time, and could reach a maximum speed of 220 km/h. A real wolf disguised as an elegant Italian utility vehicle from the 90s. RM Sotheby’s (Motorcar Studios) From the original 40,000 euros to 350,000 in the current market When it was released, the special edition Martini 6 It cost about 40,000 euros in exchange, a considerable figure that, at that time, was more typical of a Porsche 911 than an Italian compact. Three decades later, and as has happened with many other models from the 90s, the collector market has multiplied that value spectacularly. In 2023, the Lancia Delta HF Integrale Evoluzione Martini 6 with the 272 frame went up for auction at RM Sotheby’s. The bidding hammer fell when it reached $117,600. The best preserved specimens and with about 20,000 kilometers they can already reach 300,000 euros, and those who have traveled less than 5,000 kilometers are close to 350,000 euros. The Lancia is not the only classic with which Alonso has been seen in Monaco during the season break. In recent weeks too has circulated with a Ferrari F40, a Mercedes CLK GTR, a Lamborghini Sián and an exclusive Pagani Zonda Diamante Verde. What differentiates this Lancia from the rest of the cars in Alonso’s garage is precisely its character. The Delta is neither a luxury supercar with stratospheric figures nor a work of art with hand-made body. It’s a 90s compact with racing pedigree. He last bastion of authenticity for the petrolhead. The memory of when mechanics and pilot were connected at a level that no current electronic control unit could match. In Xataka | Porsche has discovered that making expensive supercars is no longer so profitable: now the money is in making each car unique Image | RM Sotheby’s (Motorcar Studios), Fernando Alonso

Claude has helped a man recover $400,000 worth of bitcoin he lost 11 years ago. Logged in and forgot password

by

An X user named Cprkrn recently told of his odyssey with a (very) happy ending in X. In 2015 he bought five bitcoins (BTC) when the price was around $250. In a fit of university euphoria he decided that his password should be an anti-establishment manifesto and changed it to the phrase ““lol420fuckthePOLICE!*:)”. The problem is that he did it completely stoned, and when he got up the next morning he realized that his money had disappeared. He then began an odyssey to try to remember that password. One with a happy ending. Eleven years of despair. For eleven years, those five bitcoins remained lost while their value continued to increase. Today its value is around $400,000, and our protagonist has not stopped seeing how this fortune had slipped through his fingers. To try to recover the password he tried everything, especially brute force attacks to try to guess the password with thousands of combinations. He looked through old folders that he had saved without success, and then something occurred to him: turn to Claude. Claude didn’t hack your wallet, he was just a spectacular detective. What Cprkrn ended up doing was ask Claude to analyze 1 GB of iCloud backups, old Apple notes, emails, and forgotten system files saved on a computer I had used in college. The challenge was not to “crack” the password, but to find the trace of how it could have been created. Order within chaos. What Claude did was organize all that data that was scattered to turn it into a perfect structured file that could be analyzed. After evaluating all the information, the AI ​​model realized that it was trying to open the wrong file. He located a file called wallet.dat from before the password change that caused the nightmare, and crossed it with a mnemonic phrase that the user had written down in an old notebook that he had discarded. That allowed that password to be reconstructed, and in less than an hour Cprkrn had recovered his fortune and regained access to your BTC wallet. Money safe. The first thing he did after discovering that password was move those bitcoins to another secure wallet to avoid problems: every conversation we have with Claude or other chatbots is recorded on the servers of those companies in plain text, so Cprkrn covered his back to prevent that information from being used to avoid scares. Blessed Darius. The joy of having recovered those five bitcoins led this user to publish a message on Twitter telling the whole adventure. In said message promised who would name his future son “Darío” in honor of Anthropic CEO, Darío Amodei. Needles in the haystack. History shows that great language models are extraordinary tools for finding needles in haystacks. Traditional tools helped, but AI’s ability to analyze information and find patterns is once again amazing. This anecdote is linked, for example, to recent rise of models like Claude Mythos Preview to find security vulnerabilities that seemed impossible to find. Again, everything is based on the ability of these models to “understand” the data provided to them, organize them and extract what is needed from them. Being a digital Diogenes has a reward. For years the recommended practice for those changing or upgrading equipment was “delete/format the old, start from scratch with the new.” This story changes the focus, because in the age of AI, messy data from 15 or 20 years ago is not digital garbage: it can be a treasure that helps us review our past and reveal data that we no longer remember. The story, however, contrasts with that of James Howells, who for years struggled to try to recover the hard drive with thousands of bitcoins that ended up in a landfill. He ended up giving up after the court’s refusal to give him permission to search for that hard drive. Image | Kanchanara In Xataka | The NYT claims to have found Satoshi Nakamoto and the evidence is as conclusive as ever: little or nothing

Anthropic is one step away from being worth as much as Samsung. And what the market is buying is not Claude

by

Anthropic, the company behind Claude, is exploring a new round of financing that would value it at more than 900,000 million dollars. If it closes, it would surpass OpenAI as the world’s most valuable AI startup. Altman’s company set its needle at 862 million last month. The figure more than doubles the 350,000 million it had in February. In just two months. Why is it important. The valuation no longer reflects Anthropic’s sales. It responds to a bet on what the company can become in five years or a decade: a provider of something resembling an essential service. Anthropic bills Claude for subscriptions and accesses to its API. That business exists, grows quickly and has reasonable margins. But it does not by itself justify a valuation that is close to that of Samsung, the Korean megalodon that manufactures everything from the chips we carry in our pockets to the ships that cross the ocean. The context. What the market is buying with Anthropic, and as often happens in the stock market, is not the present, but a hypothesis: that a very small handful of laboratories will control the foundational layer on which the software of the next decade will be built. And that Anthropic will be one of those few. And it will do so in a very profitable way. The logic, on the other hand, is the same that led to overvaluing telecos during the bubble dotcom or to the electric companies at the beginning of electrification. Whoever owns the basic infrastructure sets the rules. Google has already committed 10 billion to the previous valuation, with another 30 billion conditional on objectives. Amazon has put in 5 billion and plans to inject 20,000 more. An IPO could come before the end of the year, around October. Between the lines. That Google and Amazon, two of the largest cloud companies in the world along with Microsoft, finance a company that also sells through them says a lot about how they understand the moment. They are ensuring supply, it is not just an investment in a supplier. It is the difference between buying shares in an oil company and buying a field. Anthropic is, for these hyperscalersa deposit. Yes, but. The hypothesis has its cracks. The models are commoditizing faster than it seemed a year ago. The technical difference between Claude, ChatGPT and Gemini It is measured in nuances, not in generational leaps. If foundational AI ends up being a commodity (something like electricity or water coming out of the tap), current valuations are unsustainable. If it ends up being an infrastructure with network effects and high barriers to entry (something like an operating system), they may even fall short. The market is paying for the second hypothesis. Time will tell. The money trail. Anthropic recently announced, with restrained fanfare, Mythosa model capable of detecting and exploiting vulnerabilities in critical software. The company deemed it “too dangerous” to release and has only given it to a closed group of companies for internal testing. Even so, it has been accessed by unauthorized users. That is exactly the reason why some investors pay these figures: such a model is not sold but granted. And whoever decides to whom it is granted has regulatory power de facto that not even a Samsung, at least outside of South Korea, has ever had. The big question. What happens if the bet goes wrong? A valuation of 900 billion means that Anthropic has to generate, at some reasonable point, revenues in the order of tens of billions a year with very high margins. It is possible. But it was also important for Cisco to maintain its 2000 valuation, and it has needed 26 years to tie. The difference is that this time the buyers of the bet are the companies themselves that depend on the result. This reduces the risk of a sharp correction. And he postpones it. In Xataka | There is a thing called “Ornn price index”, it is out of control and it is bad news for everyone Featured image | Xataka

Vinted is already worth 8 billion and has achieved it without AI. Just selling your neighbors’ used clothes

by

Vinted, the Lithuanian second-hand platform, has closed a secondary sale of shares of 880 million euros led by EQT which increases its valuation to 8,000 million. It has not raised new capital. It has let investors and employees out, and brought in new shareholders (BlackRock, Schroders, Teachers’ Venture Growth) who can hold out both privately and on the stock market. This IPO does not even have a date yet, but the company says that already operates internally as if it were listed. Why is it important. The technology ecosystem in 2026 has been obsessed with AI for some time, so Vinted is a nice anomaly: it has built a profitable business, with more than €1 billion in revenue and €62 million in net profit in 2025, without mentioning AI anywhere. Its value proposition is different, and its story is not that of a startup that has found a shortcut but rather that of a market that has taken fifteen years to mature and that is now changing consumer habits on a continental scale. The context. Vinted was born in 2008 in Vilnius as a way for neighbors to exchange clothes. It has taken almost two decades to become what it is today: a second-hand trading infrastructure with its own logistics, integrated payments and presence throughout Europe. In 2024, TPG capital entered at a valuation of 5,000 million. In just over a year, that figure has risen 60%. In figures: 10.8 billion euros in gross merchandise value (GMV) in 2025, 47% more than the previous year. 1.1 billion euros in revenue (2025). 62 million euros of net profit (2025). 8,000 million euros of valuation after the operation, compared to 5,000 million in 2024. Yes, but. The profitability is there, but it is modest for that valuation: 62 million profit on 1,100 million income is a margin of 5.6%. Only 1.2 points above that of Mercadonafor comparison. Far below that of any technology. To justify 8 billion, Vinted needs to demonstrate that it can scale that margin and not just volume. The online second-hand market is quite competitive: eBay paid $1.2 billion two months ago to buy back Depop from Etsy and strengthen its position in second-hand fashion. Wallapop It has a generalist profile that also takes away its share in countries like Spain. And in the United States, the large market that Vinted has not yet conquered, the company recognizes which is in the testing phase, not expansion. Between the lines. The entry of EQT as an anchor investor in this round has more meaning than it seems. EQT is the Swedish fund that also controls Idealista and Magnific (before Freepik). Its commitment to Vinted reinforces the thesis that large European private equity funds are building positions in second-generation digital platforms: businesses with real network effects, their own infrastructure and proven traction in Europe, before they are listed. When the time comes to go public, they will be caught in it. The big question. Can Vinted replicate in the United States what it has done in Europe? The company has started allowing buyers from London and New York to trade with each otherbut the American market has its own dynamics, its own consolidated platforms and a different second-hand culture. The answer to that question will determine whether Vinted is an $8 billion company or has the potential to become an $80 billion company. In Xataka | There are too many clothes in the world and there is a company earning billions of euros thanks to it: Vinted Featured image | Xataka with Mockuuups Studio

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.