We thought that innovating was the way but we were very wrong

Recently reflected on the future iPhone 17 Air. Something hides this phone that I do not understand, since trying to sell an iPhone simply thinner as the main novelty of 2025 does not finish quadrar. Nor does the Galaxy S25 Edgean ultradelgated S25 future that, according to the photos, will have a hardware even lower than that of its brothers. The point is that, a few years ago, we imagined that mobiles would not have ports and would be very futuristic. None of this has happened. We have the same as in those years we dreamed, but with Less Bevel and Best hardware. I am not sure where the mobiles will go in the coming years, but I am quite clear where they will not go. Ports and buttons elimination. If something is making clear the industry is that this future iPhone “without buttons or ports” (We talked about him in 2018agüita) cannot be further from reality. In fact, 2024 was the year that showed us that we love the buttons, moving the industry to add a camera control that does not work well on any phone, but that provides that extra button. Something similar happens with the ports. We have been dreaming of a phone without ports for years, and we cannot be further from this reality. A mobile without ports is not so easy to introduce the public. In fact, Xiaomi already tried with him Mix Alphaa conceptual mobile that was presented in 2021 and which we did not know anything again. Your fast charging system would be chaos (It is already with cables CDifferent loads C, fast -owned fast charging protocols, etc.), the connection to the car would only be possible in cases of having an auto/wireless carplay Android, and the PowerBanks industry would have to fully migrate to MAGSAFE type loaders. Biometry to the face ID. There was a time when manufacturers obsessed with biometry. In fact, Samsung was the first company to introduce Iris reading on a phone. Years later, we have 90% of the phones taking a 2D photo with the camera and using this photo as a biometry system. Google also tried, for only one year, with the facial reader of the 4 xl pixel. It took a single generation to back down, forget about facial biometry for a while, and recover it years later with 2D camera. The rest, we leave it to Apple and Honor, the only companies that bet on full 3D facial recognition and much safer. Implement these systems requires extra cameras and Tof sensors. They are not especially expensive technologies, but it has important commitments for the terminal design. Innovative screens no, thanks. A few years ago, mobiles with 3D screen wanted to consider as the future. In fact, there are manufacturers like Nubia who still try on tablets such as Nubia Pad 3D. Beyond experiments of this type the market has left something clear: it wants “normal” screens without this technology. Something similar happens with folding mobiles. Although we see them as something new, they have been in the market from 2019and no brand is getting them to be mainstream. There was also talk that, little by little, this technology would be cheaper. The reality is that no and that, to equal price against traditional phones, Users continue to prefer the latter. Here you have an extensive and detailed list of technological trends that were anticipated as “the future of mobile phones” but that, until 2025, have not managed to consolidate or have been forgotten, based on analysis of experts and documented cases. Surprises in design, either. We usually complain that manufacturers repeat design and do not innovate. The reality is that, every time there is a breaker project in design, it fails. LG was the one who ventured the most a few years ago, with a LG G5 Modular that failed to take off in sales. Nor did the LG Wingwith its rotating screen. ARA also failedGoogle’s project to create a modular mobile that didn’t even see the light. The one of Google killing things It is not something new, but in 2016 they seemed clear that a mobile has to look like a mobile if you want to sell. In short, no matter how much we weigh (and bored), the near future of the telephone will continue to go through hardware improvements, increasingly deep integration of AI and few surprises. At least, until someone manages to punch on the table to tear down the pillars that have been holding this industry for years. Image | Xiaomi In Xataka | Mobile phones are stagnant in terms of innovation. There is an explanation

We thought the tablets were falling into oblivion. We were wrong

2023 was a simply terrible year For the tablets market. They sold one 20% less of tablets that in 2022, and is a segment in which the AI ​​is not expected to work as a sales incentive, unlike the mobile phones. No one was saved, not even Apple, with a year -on -year drop of 19.8%. Given the numbers, it was easy for 2024 to be a more positive year (when everything goes wrong, you can only go better). And indeed, This has been according to Canals. World shipments grew 9% year -on -year. Recovery signs. The tablets market remains far from 2020, the year in which it reached one of its historical peaks. The subsequent years were falling, and 2024 has been the first year since 2020 in which growth is experienced. According to Canals, we are entering the product renewal cycle, as well as in some recovery in the demand of tablets. According to Canalys sources, 2025 is expected to be a fairly solid year, with sustained growth throughout the different quarters. Offers and subsidies. Countries like China, with important subsidies for electronic productswill extend their programs by 2025. In others, as in Japan, government initiatives focused on the educational field are expected to help boost the sale of tablets. On the manufacturers side, some as honor have introduced strong sales packages (telephone + tablet, thus telling the tablet as sale, even if you only pay the phone) in countries such as the United Kingdom, and the rest of the Chinese brands are expected to expand Its presence in emerging countries. Cake distribution. There are not too many novelties in regards to who sells more tablets worldwide. The answer for years is clear. Apple Apple: Market share of the 38.6%annual growth of 5.3%. Samsung: Market share of the 18.8%annual growth of 8.2%. Lenovo: Market share of the 7.3%annual growth of 29.3%. Huawei: Market share of the 7.1%annual growth of 12.0%. Xiaomi: Market share of the 6.2%annual growth of 73.1%. Image | Xataka In Xataka | BEST TABLETS IN QUALITY PRICE. Which to buy based on use and recommended models

We are wrong about the origin of sunburn

We all know that if we spend a lot of time exposed to the sun without protection we will burn The skin becomes red, hot and inflamed and hurts with a simple touch. Then it peels off and for days we can barely touch each other. That’s clear, we don’t need science to explain it to us because practically all of us have experienced it at some point. However, we were wrong about the origin of those sunburn. We have always thought it was due to DNA damage. That’s what the textbooks say. Now, however, an international team of scientists has shown that, in reality, they are the RNA damage those that give rise to that unpleasant effect. These researchers, coming from the University of Copenhagen and Nanyang Technological Universityin Singapore, they carried out their experiments both in mice as in human skin cell cultures. This is very important, since not everything that is studied in mice can be extrapolated to humans, but cell cultures can help understand the effects on our species. With both types of experiments they observed that the response to RNA damage is much faster. At least, it is the one that seems to be closely related to sunburn. It may seem that this does not give us any interesting information. What does it matter if it’s DNA or RNA? Sunburns hurt just the same! And yes, that’s true, but this seemingly trivial fact It can help us a lot in the future. DNA or RNA? DNA is the instruction book of an organism. It contains all the information about who we are and what we need to stay alive. Our DNA contains the instructions to synthesize insulin when glucose builds up in the blood or to help us sleep through melatonin when night falls. They also include data about the color of our eyes or the way our hair grows. Everything we are is in DNA. All our cells have the same DNA, but not all DNA is used in all cells. For example, the gene with the instructions to synthesize insulin is in the cells of the eye, but it is not necessary there. It will never be used. Yes, it is necessary in the cells of the pancreas, since it is the organ that is responsible for synthesizing it. It is used there. This use of a specific gene is what is known as gene expression. The gene turns on where and when it is needed. In this case, in the cells of the pancreas (where), when glucose accumulates in the blood (when). Differences between DNA and RNA. Credit: Sponk (Wikimedia Commons) We already know what DNA is. Something more or less immutable. It can undergo mutations, but it remains more or less fixed throughout our lives. On the other side we have RNA. This is another nucleic acid. DNA is deoxyribonucleic acid and RNA is ribonucleic acid. It differs in the presence of a different sugar within the molecule: ribose In the case of RNA and deoxyribose in the case of DNA. There are many types of RNA: transfer RNA, ribosomal RNA, messenger RNA… Each one has a function, but in this case we are going to focus on the messenger, since it is the one mentioned in the study of sunburn. We have already seen that DNA is used only when and where it is necessary. This use consists of using the information contained in a gene to build a protein, which will carry out the desired function. These proteins are synthesized in cellular organelles called ribosomes. But there is a problem. Ribosomes are unable to read DNA. said very roughly speaking, It is a language they do not understand. They understand the language of messenger RNA. Therefore, when a gene is to be expressed, its information is transcribed into messenger RNA. Like when we translated a page from an instruction book that was in English into Spanish so that our grandmother knew how to use the washing machine. That is the function of messenger RNA. With this well learned, we can move on to the next thing. What does all this have to do with sunburn? Sunburn is caused by exposure to the Sun’s radiation. Specifically, ultraviolet raysespecially type B (UVB). This generates DNA damage, it is totally true. In fact, these DNA damages can accumulate and eventually lead to a melanoma. None of that has changed. However, we usually think that sunburns are that first warning that DNA has been damaged and, in reality, it turns out that it has not. It is the messenger RNA the one who gets upset. How UVB affects ZAK signaling pathways to cause sunburn symptoms. (Lind et al., Molecular Cell, 2025) After reading the literature and carrying out several experiments, the authors of the study that has just been published thought that sunburn could be related to a protein called ZAK-alpha. This is involved in the response to something known as ribotoxic stress. That is, when a failure is detected in the messenger RNA, this protein starts the immune system to attack the cells in which this damage is found, so that the altered messenger RNA not translated on the ribosome. If that happened, you would get failed proteins and could be dangerous. This immune system response also launches an inflammatory response. The skin turns red, becomes hot, swells… What does it sound like to you? Indeed, sunburn! This entire cascade of reactions to ultraviolet radiation was detected in human skin cell cultures. But what would happen in a living organism? The scientists tried to genetically modify a group of mice so that the gene with the instructions for synthesizing the ZAK-alpha protein was not present. If there was no ZAK alpha, when the mice were exposed to ultraviolet B radiation They did not experience burns. On the other hand, with ZAK-alpha intact they did. What is the use of knowing all this? The authors of the research believe that this new … Read more

Why what we understand as “normal” development in children could be wrong

Image source, Getty Images photo caption, Due to the immense variety of components that affect the growth of a human being, it is very difficult to define something as “normal.” Item information Author, Samuel Forbes and Prerna Aneja Author’s title, The Conversation* January 14, 2025 For parents, caregivers and teachers, it is often tempting to base our understanding of a child’s development on what we believe is “normal.” We often do it without thinking, when we describe a child as “doing well” in one subject and “falling behind” in another. Whenever we make this kind of comparison, we have some kind of mental reference point in our heads: for example, a toddler should be able to climb furniture at age 2. Increasingly, child development researchers argue that the same is true in their field, the study of how behaviors and skills such as language develop. Many of the studies that claim to investigate child development, whether implicitly or explicitly, claim that their findings are universal. There may be many reasons for this. Sometimes there is a temptation to exaggerate conclusions, sometimes it can be the way readers or the media interpret the findings. The result is that what has been found in a group of children is then taken as the standard, the criterion against which future research is compared. Academic biases Image source, Getty Images photo caption, Most of the existing academic research on child development comes from Western countries. Most research on child development comes from wealthier Western countries, particularly the United States, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, and France. Chances are, if you’ve heard of childhood development milestones, they occurred in one of these countries. This is because it can be difficult to conduct basic research on child development in developing countries, as colleagues and reviewers will ask or demand comparisons with Western populations to put findings from these regions in context. Of course, without realizing it, these colleagues and reviewers have established Western children as the norm. Complex environments Image source, Getty Images photo caption, Most academic studies on child development have been carried out in developed countries, and do not take into account development in other cultures. But is it fair to make these comparisons? One of the complicated aspects of child development research is that it occurs in a cultural and social context from which it cannot be separated. But this context is often confusing. Differences in physical environment, parenting styles, location, climate, etc. interact to shape children’s growth. In addition to these differences, there are also individual variations. These can be, for example, curiosity, shyness and neurodiversity, which can frame the way a child shapes their own learning environment. Take the field of childhood motor development: the study of how children learn to move. Many parents in particular may be familiar with charts showing when they can expect their child to sit, crawl, stand and run. The existence of these graphs makes it seem quite universal, and a child’s motor development is often judged in this way. This makes sense. Early research was concerned with finding out what was normal, and it makes sense to try to support children who might be at risk of falling behind. The time and order investigated then gave rise to the norms and scales that we still use today. Image source, Getty Images photo caption, Studies have standardized the stages of development, without taking into account that the environment affects each individual differently. Is something like the timing of motor development universal? It’s easy to imagine it could be. When there are no physical or cognitive barriers, we all learn to sit and stand, so at first glance it seems fair to say that it could be. But it turns out that the context in which children develop plays a very important role even in something as seemingly universal as this. In countries and cultures where babies routinely receive firm massages from their caregivers, such as in Jamaica, motor development accelerates. It is clear that a norm developed in one culture may not translate well to another. Beyond the rules Image source, Getty Images photo caption, Many times, research has no way to incorporate key information such as the social and cultural context of the children it studies. Clearly, the problems highlighted above are not unique to motor development. In areas such as language development or social development, the cultural component is even more pressing. There is simply no way to understand these elements of child development without also understanding the context in which they take place. Each child develops within a context and, no matter how normal our own culture may seem to us, There is no objective, context-independent standard with which we can compare other children.. That is, we should accept the disorder. If we think of normal child development as something that just happens, researchers miss understanding the dynamics of development itself. But worse, educators and caregivers may not realize that development is something we can act on, and they miss the opportunity to create change. Image source, Getty Images photo caption, Each child develops uniquely, and it is through that understanding that better results are achieved. An important part of viewing child development as intertwined with culture is that it not only means collecting data from other cultures, but involving local communities and research perspectives. Understanding communities means listening to them, empowering them and giving them space to have a voice. Moving beyond a Western-centric understanding of child development will not only benefit researchers and lead to more accurate science, but will hopefully benefit everyone who works with children around the world. *This article was published on The Conversation and reproduced here under the creative commons license. Beam click here to read the original version. Samuel Forbes is Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of Durham and Prerna Aneja is a Lecturer in Psychology at the University of East Anglia. Subscribe here to our new newsletter to receive a selection … Read more

Patient dies due to hospital error asking the wrong family about disconnecting life support

This sounds like a nightmare, but it really happened. In summer 2021, David Wellsa 69-year-old man, arrived at PeaceHealth Southwest Medical Center in Vancouver, Washington, after an accident in which He choked on a piece of meat and fell unconscious.. What happened next is something that even in the worst horror movie you couldn’t imagine. It turns out that, due to an identification errorWells was mistaken for his roommate, Michael Beehler. The hospital contacted Beehler’s sister, Debbie Danielson, and asked if she wanted to turn off life support for who she believed was her brother, since he was supposedly with “brain death”. Without thinking too much, Debbie made the difficult decision to authorize the disconnectionbelieving he was ending his brother’s life. Debbie then organized the funeral, wrote the obituary and mourned the loss of what she thought was her loved one. But on August 14, an unexpected call shocked her. His brother Michael was alive. He receives a call from his “dead brother” “I told him, ‘You can’t be alive. You’re dead!’”Debbie remembered, completely surprised. From there, everything was chaos. The medical examiner confirmed that the body presumed dead was not Beehler’s, but Wells’. But that’s not all, since the worst of all is that Wells’s son, Shawn, did not find out about the mix-up until 2023, when the story was revealed in the media. “I have no words to describe how poorly they handled this. “I can never take that decision back,” Shawn said, devastated. And even though his father David Wells they had detected him brain deaththe family was not consulted to disconnect him, although the hospital thought so, but the call was made to the family of Michael Beehler. The incident was so serious that the Washington Department of Health investigated what happened. The hospital had not implemented a proper process to verify patient identities, resulting in this fatal error. Affected family sues Although no sanctions were imposed, the hospital said it took steps to improve its identification procedures. But the Wells family, along with Beehler and Danielsondecided to sue the hospital and other entities involved, including ambulance and funeral homedue to negligence and emotional distress. They are seeking justice for the terrible mess that changed their lives forever. For its part, the PeaceHealth hospital issued a statement in which it defended its care and explained that everything happened during the difficult days of the COVID-19 pandemicwhen hospitals were under enormous pressure. Despite this, the affected family cannot help but feel that such a serious mistake should never have happened. Keep reading:

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.