Sylvie Andrews and her partner didn’t just lose the new house they’d helped build when the Eaton Fire ripped through Altadena, California, in January 2025. They lost an entire decade’s worth of sacrifices they’d made to put down roots in their hometown, and the community they’d created. “We put a lot of blood, sweat, and tears into it,” Andrews said. “That’s what we lost in the fire.”

That fire, along with the Palisades Fire to the west, destroyed more than 16,000 structures and killed 31 people. But while Andrews and thousands of Angelenos were racing to evacuate, other people saw a financial opportunity. Using Polymarket, the world’s largest prediction market platform, they made bets on the fires—how they would grow, how long they would last, and how much they would destroy.

Prediction markets are essentially gambling websites where people bet on the outcome of events, including elections, sports, the weather, and more. Anything is fair game, from oil prices and the spread of infectious diseases to international incidents. Markets usually frame questions in a “yes” or “no” fashion, with the price of a “contract” fluctuating between $0 and $1. A price of 50 cents on a “yes” contract means that the people doing the betting collectively believe the event has a 50 percent chance of happening. Market hosts make money by charging a fee on wagers.

In January 2025, Polymarket listed almost 20 questions, created by the platform’s “markets team,” related to the wildfires burning up Southern California. How many acres will the Palisades Fire burn by Friday, three days after it ignited on a Tuesday? Will the Palisades Fire reach Santa Monica by Sunday? When will the Palisades fire be 50 percent contained? Will the Palisades and Eaton fires be contained before February?

People spent $1.2 million betting on these queries, according to Aeon Magazine. “Wow,” Andrews said repeatedly when she learned the figure. “My first take is that it’s morally reprehensible,” she said. “The fact that someone would feel OK doing that flabbergasts me.”

“The prediction markets are just the wild, wild West,” said Susan Sherman, who grew up in Pacific Palisades. She lost her childhood home in the Palisades Fire; her late parents had owned it since 1963, and now it was gone. She sold the empty lot a few months ago. “I look at (betting on the fires) as just being very crass and heartless.”

As prediction markets boom and a new wildfire season begins, fire survivors and ethicists say that the betting encourages and rewards callous thinking—and dangerous behavior.

One major concern stemming from wildfire prediction markets is arson. “That’s what has me nervous,” Sherman said. Theoretically, making a bet could give someone the perverse incentive to start a fire or help one grow. Unlike other disasters, such as hurricanes, flooding, or extreme heat, a fire can be manipulated in minutes by just one person. “Systems that tie financial gain to wildfire outcomes risk encouraging misuse, including arson, and are not compatible with our mission,” a spokesperson for the US Forest Service said.

“Imagine what a bad actor might do,” said Ann Skeet, the senior director of leadership ethics at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University. “A market that might support that kind of activity, I think, is a dangerous market.” Firefighters or land managers with exclusive information about a fire’s behavior or an agency’s firefighting plans could even be tempted to bet on a fire, which would be considered insider trading.

He was born into a storm, lightning split the summer sky, in a
village the world had not yet heard of.
The midwife called it a bad omen, his mother called it a sign. Your first
life began in a storm, under open sky.

One winter night you ran your hand along a cat’s back, and the
darkness cracked open with sparks.
Your mother warned the house could burn.
You were already chasing what you learned: Light would return.

Your second life came underwater, in the current deep. No light,
no air, the river pulling you under,
the surface closing above you without a sound, and
something in you refused to sink or sleep.

Your third life came at the dam.
The water rose. The wall held you in place.
One flash, you turned your body and rose back into air, and left
the weight of water without a trace.

Your fourth life came in stone and dark. Entombed for a
night in a mountain chapel,
visited by no one. Only silence and the memory of a spark. You called
it an awful experience and left it there, untold.

Your fifth life came in fever,
nine months cholera held you down,
until your father said: Survive, and choose your own ground. You rose.
Not from the prayer, but from the promise he made.

Your sixth life came in silence, and it stayed.
Every sound cut through you, a clock three rooms away,
a ringing that would not leave, a noise you learned to bear, until you
lived inside that noise and made a home in there.

Your seventh life burned on Fifth Avenue, not your body, but your work. Not a thief
of fire, but one who stayed with the blaze.
A modern Prometheus, your life’s work turned to ash,
“I must begin again,” you said, and turned to new ways.

Your eighth life came in the street.
No storm. No warning. A taxi struck without a sign. A
sudden impact: ribs breaking, breath gone.
No diagram this time. Only the body, slow to keep up.

The ninth life came on quiet wings.
That dove found you in the dark, and your spirit rose. She did
not move. A beam of light fell from above.
The life you would not return from, the one you loved.

Your mother thought you had nine lives, nine close
brushes with death.
Each close call, a lesson. A hand that would lead you out of the
darkness and into the dynamo of eternal light. The world profits
from the mystery of your mind,
Upon your imagination we stand.

While many TVs released between 2010 and 2015 supported 3D, using the feature required clearing a series of annoying hurdles. You had to buy 3D glasses, which ranged from $10 to $20 for passive frames, to upwards of $50 for active glasses that required constant charging. You had to make sure your Blu-ray player supported 3D discs. And you had to pay a premium for those 3D Blu-rays, assuming you could find them in stock.

For the niche media geeks who cleared those roadblocks, 3D Blu-rays did a decent job of replicating the theatrical 3D experience. But the results depended heavily on the size and viewing distance of your TV. If you’re too far away from a 42-inch or even 50-inch set, you won’t really be immersed by Avatar’s world of Pandora. It was also extra annoying if you wanted to have a 3D watch party with a crowd — you’d either have to buy a ton of extra glasses, or hope your nerdy friends had their own.

Worst of all, 3D TVs with passive glasses effectively halved the resolution of 1080p, since they had to deliver a separate image. 3D projectors and higher-end TVs avoided that issue since they relied on active glasses, but the expense and battery limitations of those frames made viewing parties all but impossible.

Outside of 3D Blu-rays, it was also tough to find much 3D content. Networks like the BBC and ESPN broadcast a handful of 3D shows and games, but they both gave up on the format in 2013. “I have never seen a very big appetite for 3D television in the UK,” Kim Shillinglaw, the BBC’s head of 3D, said in a 2013 interview with Radio Times (via The Independent). “Watching 3D is quite a hassly experience in the home. You have got to find your glasses before switching on the TV. I think when people watch TV they concentrate in a different way. When people go to the cinema they go and are used to doing one thing. I think that’s one of the reasons that take up of 3D TV has been disappointing.”

As the hype around 3D TVs waned, 4K sets with HDR started to crop up with more immediate benefits. They looked noticeably sharper and brighter than earlier HDTVs, and they were buoyed by a ton of 4K content from Netflix and other streaming services. There was no need to buy a Blu-ray player, no need to put on glasses and no need to look hard for special content. It’s no wonder 4K took off. (And even if you’re not viewing 4K content, those newer TVs still made your older SD and HD shows look better than ever.)

According to a recent study by Precision Reports, around 25 percent of households with 3D TVs actually used the technology during the peak period between 2010 and 2018. Less than 10 percent of households kept using the technology after three years. The same report also found that 65 percent of users stopped using 3D because of a lack of content, 50 percent noted discomfort for long viewing sessions and 42 percent gave up due to high equipment costs.

Despite the many issues, though, Precision Reports also predicts that the 3D TV category will grow by 15 percent by 2036 thanks to the rise of glasses-free 3D sets, commercial implementations and gaming. I’ve yet to be impressed by any glasses-free 3D TVs, personally, and they typically don’t support multiple viewers since they rely on sophisticated eye tracking to function.

These may be the last days of Amazon’s Mechanical Turk.

An announcement on the Mechanical Turk website says that on July 30, 2026, the crowdsourcing service will close to new customers. Amazon Web Services says the decision was made after “careful consideration,” adding, “Existing customers can continue to use the service as normal. AWS continues to invest in security and availability improvements for Mechanical Turk, but we do not plan to introduce new features.”

In other words, Amazon isn’t completely pulling the plug, but the service is very much on life support.

First launched in 2005, Mechanical Turk was a marketplace where people were paid tiny amounts to perform simple tasks that resisted full automation — things like completing CAPTCHA challenges or identifying the basic sentiment in a sentence.

In its heyday, the service was at the center of debates around the ethics of crowdsourced labor, and it even played a small role in the early stages of the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal. 

Beginning in 2018, Amazon also began billing it as a way for companies to annotate data to train neural networks as part of its SageMaker AI service.

Less overtly, Mechanical Turk has also been described as the hidden enabler for companies taking a fake-it-till-you-make-it approach to AI, where products marketed as Ai are actually being performed by the Mechanical Turk workforce — all the more fitting since the original Mechanical Turk was itself a hoax, with a hidden human chess player pretending to be a chess-playing machine

Over time, the relationship between Mechanical Turk and AI models grew even more complicated. In a snake-eating-its-own-tail irony, a 2023 analysis found that between 33% and 46% of workers on the platform were using large language models to complete their tasks, raising questions about the reliability of data annotated on the platform and also about whether humans needed to be in the loop at all.

This week, after Amazon’s decision became public, one Reddit user suggested the platform died “years ago,” with workers and researchers abandoning it due to bots and fraud. The user predicted, “Someone at Amazon is going to decide keeping the Mturk servers running is a waste of time and resources and pull the plug entirely.”

Donald Trump arrives at next week’s NATO summit in Ankara holding unusual leverage, because the US decides which allies get access to the world’s most advanced AI, Politico reports. The alliance meets on 7 and 8 July with AI security questions hovering over the agenda.

A new wave of models from Anthropic and OpenAI can find and exploit security flaws better than most human specialists. Anthropic’s Claude Mythos surfaced vulnerabilities in classified US systems within hours during a government test.

“AI is fundamentally changing the threat landscape, and NATO needs to adapt accordingly,” Estonian cyber ambassador Helen Popp told Politico. Every capability available to adversaries is also available to allies, she argued, if they move first.

The 💜 of EU tech

The latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol’ founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It’s free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!

Advertisement

US agencies including the NSA and CISA have been testing Mythos for cyber defence and digital espionage. European allies have clamoured for access, and EU institutions have openly demanded it, with only a few countries, including the UK, initially allowed to run evaluations.

Anthropic expanded its Project Glasswing programme in June to around 150 organisations across more than 15 countries, including the EU. The scramble followed weeks of whiplash from Washington.

In early June, the Trump administration imposed export controls on Anthropic’s most cyber-capable models, banning foreign nationals from using them and forcing a worldwide shutdown. The controls were lifted on 30 June after an 18-day blackout.

The White House has also limited the rollout of OpenAI’s latest model to a small group of approved US firms, per Politico. The push and pull has frustrated allies, prompted a rare Five Eyes warning on AI cyber threats, and left frontier models moving between governments faster than regulators can follow.

Quiet corridors, loud subtext

The summit agenda includes a track on emerging and disruptive technologies, but an official told Politico that AI and cyber will get only brief mentions in the closing statement. Former NATO cyber policy leader Heli Tiirmaa-Klaar said allies avoid formally discussing topics that lack consensus, predicting talks in the margins instead.

The US State Department’s cyber bureau is not sending a representative amid an internal reorganisation, Politico reports. Senator Jeanne Shaheen said she will attend partly to reassure allies that the US will not “alienate them” over access to AI models.

Trump has separately signed NSPM-11, ordering the US military to adopt AI faster and shield models from China. Europe is hedging by building its own capability, including the defence AI alliance between Helsing and Mistral.

The war in Ukraine, now past its fourth year, keeps the stakes concrete, and allies have pledged 1.5% of GDP to protecting critical infrastructure. Laura Galante of the Center for European Policy Analysis called Ukraine the blueprint for operating in AI-fuelled warfare.

A State Department spokesperson said every ally must adopt “trusted leading-edge AI capabilities”. Which capabilities count as trusted, and who grants the trust, is precisely what Ankara will not quite discuss.

I’ve been a CNET journalist for over 15 years and I’ve tested everything from the latest electric cars and bikes to cameras and, er, TV-controlling magic wands. I’ve even compared drones to barn owls. My main focus focus has always been the latest, greatest phones and I’ve seen a lot of them in my time. Names like Apple and Samsung have remained stalwarts in the industry during my time, but I’ve also seen the rise of brands like Xiaomi, Huawei and OnePlus. Meanwhile once-dominant names like BlackBerry, HTC and LG have vanished from the mobile space. Even Sony doesn’t make much of a fuss over its phones these days. 

I’ve seen phones arrive with such wild fanfare that they changed the entire mobile industry, while others quietly trickled into existence only to vanish just as uneventfully. But it’s the weird ones that stick in my memory. Those devices that tried to be different, that dared to offer features we didn’t even know we wanted or simply the ones that aimed to be quirky for the sake of being quirky. Like someone who thinks an unusual hat is the same thing as having a personality. 

Here then are some of the weirdest phones I’ve come across in my mobile journey at CNET. Better yet, I still have these phones in a big cardboard box in my office, so I was able to dig them out and take new photos — though not all of them still work. Let’s start with a doozy. 

BlackBerry Passport

At the height of its power RIM’s BlackBerry was one of the most dominant names in mobile. It was unthinkable then that anything could unseat the goliath, let alone that it would fade into total nonexistence. But the once juicy, ripe BlackBerry withered and died on the bush, but not without a few interesting death rattles on its way.

My pick from the company’s end days is the Passport from 2014, notable not just for its physical keyboard but its almost completely square design. The rationale behind this, according to its maker, was that business types just really love squares. A Word document, an Excel spreadsheet, an email — all square (ish) and all able to be viewed natively on the Passport’s 4.5 inch display with its 1:1 aspect ratio. Let’s not forget that all Instagram posts at that time were also square so it had that going for it too. YouTube, not so much.

In theory it’s a sound idea. In practice the square design made it awkward to use, as the physical keyboard was too wide and narrow. Its BlackBerry 10 software, especially the app availability, lagged behind what you’d get from Android at the time. BlackBerry quickly ditched the new shape. After trying to claw back some credibility with its Android phones — including the stupidly named Priv, a phone I quite liked — and by bringing on singer Alicia Keys as Global Creative Director (because BlackBerry phones had keys, get it?) the company stopped making its own phones in 2016.

YotaPhone 2

You’d be forgiven for having never heard of this phone or its parent company, Yota. Based in Russia, Yota made two phones: the creatively named YotaPhone in 2012 and the similarly inspired YotaPhone 2 in 2014, pictured above. Both were unique in the mobile world for their use of a second display on the rear. From the front, these phones looked and operated like any other generic Android phone. Flip them over though and you’d get a 4.3-inch E Ink display.

The idea was that you’d use your Android phone as normal for things like web browsing, gaming or watching videos, but you’d switch to the rear display if you wanted to read ebooks or simply have it propped up to show incoming notifications. E Ink displays use almost no power, so it made a lot of sense to preserve battery life by viewing “slow” content on the back. 

The reality though is that beyond ebooks — which aren’t great to read on such a tiny screen anyway — there’s very little anyone might want to use an E Ink display for when out and about. It was difficult to operate, too, thanks to a slow processor and clunky software. After just two generations of YotaPhones, the company went into liquidation.

HTC ChaCha

Remember when Facebook was the cool spot to be instead of just the place your parents and their friends go to publicly air their most troubling of opinions? When I was at university, instead of trading phone numbers when you met someone, the default thing was to add each other on Facebook before you began poking each other. Facebook was so ubiquitous at the time that it was simply the way every single person I knew communicated. 

Keen to capitalise on Zuckerberg’s social media success, HTC brought out the ChaCha in 2011. The phone came with an utterly ludicrous name and a dedicated Facebook button on the bottom edge. Tapping this would immediately bring up your Facebook page, allowing you to post the lyrics to Rebecca Black’s Friday, ask what Fifty Shades of Grey is about or do whatever else it was we were all up to in 2011. 

Facebook might still be around in one form or another, but HTC abandoned its phone-making business back in 2018. Unsurprisingly, phones with dedicated hardware buttons tied to social media haven’t caught on. Though if I’m being generous there is strictly speaking an X button on every keyboard. 

Advertisement

Sirin Labs Finney U1

“Bro!” I hear you shout, all-too loudly. “BRO! You’ve got to check out what my Bitcoin is doing!” You’d then show me your phone and I’d watch while your crypto account plummeted, rebounded and plummeted again over the course of 12 seconds. The phone you’d be showing me, of course, would be the Sirin Labs Finney, a 2019 phone specifically targeted at crypto bros who wanted a device that would perfectly match their high-living, high-fiving crypto-trading lifestyle. 

At its core, the Finney is just another Android phone, but a hidden second screen pops up from the back of the phone, with the sole purpose of giving you secure access to your crypto wallet. The phone had a whole host of security features to ensure that only you could access your Bitcoin or Etherium, and it allowed you to send and receive cryptocurrency without having to use a third-party online platform. Apparently that was a good thing.

If you were entrenched in the crypto world, this phone might have been the dream. But the wallet wasn’t easy to use and the phone was expensive, thanks to the cost of that second screen. Sirin Labs stopped making phones soon after and the mobile industry learned an important lesson about not developing hyper-niche devices that aren’t even that well-suited for the handful of customers that might be interested.

Planet Computers Gemini PDA

Half phone, half laptop, all productivity. The Gemini PDA by UK-based mobile startup Planet Computers was a clamshell device in 2018 with a large (at the time) 5.99-inch display and a full qwerty keyboard. It was basically a slightly more modern interpretation of a PDA, like 1998’s Psion 3MX, in that it was effectively a tiny laptop that would fold up and fit in your pocket. The full keyboard allowed you to type away comfortably on long emails or documents while the regular Android software on the top half meant it also functioned like any other phone — apps, games, phone calls, whatever. 

It had 4G connectivity for fast data speeds and a later model even got an update to 5G. But, like the BlackBerry Passport, its focus on business-folk and productivity above all else meant it was a niche product that failed to garner enough appeal to succeed. It didn’t help that it was utterly enormous and fitting it in a jeans pocket was basically impossible, so it didn’t impress either as a laptop or as a phone. 

LG G5

LG remains a huge name in the tech industry today, thanks to its TVs and appliances, but it also tried to be a big player in the phone world, too. I liked LG’s phones — they were quirky and often tried weird things which kept my days as a reviewer interesting, perhaps none more so than the LG G5 in 2016. 

LG called the G5 “modular,” meaning that the bottom chin of the phone snapped off allowing you to attach different modules such as a camera grip or an audio interface. Like many items on this list I can say that it’s a nice idea in theory, but in practice the phone fell short. Swapping out modules meant removing the battery, which of course meant restarting your phone every time you wanted to use the camera grip. 

It was an inelegant solution to a problem that never needed to exist. But its bigger issue was that the camera grip and audio interface were the only two modules LG actually made for the phone. It’s as though the company had this fun notion in creating a phone that can transform according to your needs but then forgot to assign anyone to come up with any ideas on what to do with it. As a result, the end product was uninspiring, over-engineered and expensive.  

Samsung Galaxy Note

Samsung’s Galaxy Note series helped transform the mobile industry. It literally stretched the boundaries of phones, encouraging larger and larger screens — even creating the unpleasant and mercifully short-lived term “phablet.” But the first-generation model in 2011 was controversial, mostly due to what was then considered its enormous size. 

At 5.3 inches, it was significantly bigger than almost any other phone out there, including Samsung’s own Galaxy S2 — which, at a measly 4.3 inches, paled into insignificance against the mighty Note. It was mocked for being so huge, with memes appearing online poking fun at people holding it up when making calls. And while times have changed and we now have Samsung’s 6.9-inch Galaxy S25 Ultra, the original Note’s boxy aspect ratio meant it was actually wider than the S25 Ultra. So even by today’s standards it’s big.

It was also among the first phones to come with its own stylus shoved into its bottom. It’s a feature that few mobile companies have mimicked, but Samsung kept it as a differentiator on its later Note models before incorporating it into its flagship S line starting with the S22 Ultra. 

Nokia Lumia 1020

Nokia’s Lumia 1020 was my absolute favorite phone for quite some time after its launch in 2013. And it’s because of its weirdness. 

Nokia had an amazing history of bonkers mobiles — 2004’s 7280 “lipstick phone,” for example — and while the Lumia range was much more sedate, the 1020 had a few things that made it stand out. First, it ran Windows Phone, Microsoft’s brief and unsuccessful attempt to launch a rival to Android and iOS. A rival that I happened to quite like. 

It was also made of polycarbonate, with a smoothly rounded unibody design that strongly contrasted the angular metal, plastic and glass designs of almost all other phones launching at that time. Its look was unlike anything else on sale, and I loved it.

But the main thing I loved was its camera. With a 41-megapixel sensor, Carl Zeiss lens, raw image capture and optical image stabilization, the Lumia 1020 packed the best camera specs of any phone I’d ever seen. It made the phone a true standout product, especially for photographers like me who wanted an amazing camera with them at all times, but didn’t want to have to carry both a phone and a compact digital camera. 

While incredible image quality from a phone is a given in almost all camera phones in 2026, the Lumia 1020 was an early pioneer in what could be achieved from a phone camera. 

LG G4

LG, twice in one list? Oh yes, my friend, because the G5 seen above was not the first time LG went weird. Launched in 2015, the LG G4 had two main features that raised a few eyebrows. Most notably was LG’s decision to wrap the phone in real leather. Yes, real actual leather. Like what you’d get when you peel a cow. It even had stitching down the back, making it look like a handbag or a boot.

While it’s not a phone for vegans, I actually liked the look, especially as real leather — even the really thin stuff LG used on the G4 — naturally wears over time, gaining scuffs and scratches that give each phone a unique patina. It’s why I love my old leather Danner boots, and it’s why a vintage, worn-in leather jacket will almost always look better than a brand new one. Still, with leather being an expensive — and arguably controversial — material to use on a phone, it’s no surprise LG didn’t return to this idea.

But it’s not the only weird thing about the phone — the G4 was among a small number of phones released around that time that experimented with curved displays. It’s gently bent into a banana shape, the theory being that it makes watching videos more immersive, as is the case with curved screens in movie theaters. The problem is that movie screens are immense, so that curve makes sense. On a 5.5 inch phone like the G4, that curve is barely noticeable and only really served to push the price up. 

Motorola Moto X and Moto Maker

I’ve just pointed out how weird the LG G4 was for using leather and now I’m pointing out another phone that, as you can see in the image above, is also wrapped in leather. But the weird thing here isn’t that the Motorola Moto X came in leather — it’s that I personally got to choose that it came in leather. 

With the Moto X in 2013, Motorola launched a service called Moto Maker that allowed you to customize your phone in a wild variety of ways. From different-colored backs and multicolored accents around the camera and speakers through to using materials including leather and even various types of wood, there were loads of options to make your Moto X look unique. Each phone would then be made to order and you could even have it personalised with lazer etching and provide your Google account for it to be prelinked on arrival. 

If custom-making phones with a vast number of potential options en mass sounds like an absolute logistical nightmare then you’re on the same page as Motorola eventually found itself. Moto Maker only existed for a few years before the company retired its customization service. 

Advertisement

Samsung Galaxy Fold

I’m ending on a wildcard addition with the original Galaxy Fold. It’s a wildcard because Samsung’s Fold and Flip range are now up to number seven and we’ve got foldable devices from almost all major Android manufacturers. Though still not Apple. 

While the original Fold might have kicked off the foldable revolution, there’s no question it was a weird phone. I was among the first to test it in the world when it launched in 2019 and while I was certainly impressed by the bendy display, its hinge felt weird and “snappy” to use. The outer display was, let’s face it, terrible. 

On paper its 4.6-inch size is reasonable, but it’s so tall and narrow that it was borderline unusable for anything more than checking incoming notifications. Trying to type on it meant whittling down your thumbs to pointy nubs so I spent most of my time interacting with the phone’s much bigger internal screen. Cut to today when the Galaxy Z Fold 7’s outer screen measures a healthier 6.7 inches and as a result can function like any regular smartphone, with the bigger inside screen only required when you want more immersive content.

Looking back at the original Fold and its bizarre proportions, it’s honestly a surprise that Samsung persisted with the format. But I’m glad it did.

Watch this: The Galaxy S26 Ultra Could Be Samsung’s Best Yet, With These Changes

06:56

Ferrari answered requests from longtime customers who wanted more direct involvement with their cars. The 12Cilindri Manuale adds a physical gated shifter and clutch pedal to the front-engined V12 grand tourer while preserving strong performance and modern reliability. Ferrari will build only 1,499 examples worldwide. That exact number recalls the displacement of the company’s first V12 engine from 1947 and forms part of the car’s identity from the start.

Each example goes through the Tailor Made program. Owners can choose from 25 heritage hues, including the launch shade Rosso Rubino, and match them with unique leather and Alcantara combinations. Subtle external elements distinguish these vehicles without yelling. Pinstripes run over the front splitter and rear wings, an homage to the iconic 365 GTB/4. Special five-spoke forged wheels come in a variety of finishes. The front fenders include laser-etched shields, and the model logo is inscribed into the aluminum door sills.

Sale

LEGO Technic Ferrari FXX K Toy Car – Building Toy for Girls & Boys, Ages 10+ – Cool Birthday Gift for…

• LEGO FERRARI MODEL CAR KIT – Builders ages 10+ can create the legendary Technic Ferrari FXX K with authentic details and working mechanical features
• AUTHENTIC RACE CAR DETAILS – This supercar building set features working butterfly doors, opening hood, and an engine cover that reveals the…
• CAR MODEL KIT – Young engineers explore real automotive concepts with this educational learning toy as they build the working differential and watch…

The driving controls provide real involvement. Ferrari retained the efficient eight-speed dual-clutch transmission from the standard 12Cilindri, but eliminated the steering wheel paddles entirely. The typical six-speed H-pattern shifter is now housed in a machined metal gate on the center console. The reverse sits to the left side of the pattern. The lever is topped by a spherical metal knob with a lighted gear diagram and LEDs to show the active mode. In a typical triangular configuration, a clutch pedal sits between the accelerator and brake. Sensors on the lever and pedal detect every movement. Electronics then control the transmission and engine. Mechanical parts within the system—springs, cams, and rollers—generate resistance, clicks, and shifting loads, making the operation feel natural and predictable. If the driver mishandles the clutch when coming to a halt, the automobile may stall. Downshifting with your heels and toes works properly. Clutch drops are achievable given the correct conditions. Automatic mode is still available for easier driving and allows full use of all eight speeds.

The power comes from the same 6.5-liter naturally aspirated V12 found in the standard vehicle. It produces 830 metric horsepower at 9,250 rpm and 678 Nm torque at 7,250 rpm. The engine revs cleanly to a redline of 9,500 rpm, with linear delivery and the unmistakable V12 sound. Official performance figures show a 2.9-second sprint to 100 km/h and a top speed of over 340 km/h. In full manual mode, shifts take longer than the dual-clutch’s quickest action, so certain drivers may experience somewhat longer acceleration times. When necessary, launch control can still activate automatic shifting for the quickest escape.

Styling modifications maintain focus and functionality. The center tunnel and console were rebuilt to accommodate the new shifter assembly. Steel and aluminum gear gates echo the six-speed configuration. Seats are available in Comfort or Racing versions and have six vertical grooves that correspond to the forward gears. Each car’s Tailor Made status is marked by a specific silver or carbon fiber plate.

In Italy, prices start at 590,000 euros before taxes and options. In the United States, the figure exceeds $680,000 when the limited-run premium and equipment are factored in. First deliveries will begin in the first quarter of 2027. All cars are coupes, with no spider versions joining the series. This special version appeals to owners who already own paddle-shift Ferraris and desire a vehicle that takes greater physical effort on their favorite roads. The technical team researched previous manuals, particularly the one from the 599 GTB, to recreate the proper shifter travel, clutch feel, and mechanical character. The by-wire technology adds constancy that older, purely mechanical gears could never achieve despite temperature variations or wear.

Apple may be pulling an iPhone X for the iPhone Fold, by launching it in September but actually selling it months later.

Apple is widely expected to launch the iPhone Fold this fall, alongside the iPhone 18 Pro. However, the schedule of when it goes on sale could be completely different.

According to a Sunday X post by TF Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, the supply chain indicates there may not be enough inventory for the iPhone Fold to go on sale immediately after launch.

In his view, it seems that the iPhone Fold could repeat what happened in 2017 for the iPhone X.

Back then, the milestone model was introduced as usual alongside the other main releases, the iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus. But preorders began late in October, with sales in early November.

To Kuo, the supply chain has a target of producing about 7 to 8 million iPhone Fold units in the second half of 2026. But for the third quarter, there will apparently only be a production run of between half a million and a million units.

By comparison, the iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max will get about 20 million units produced.

Evidently, the supply chain is spelling out a similar launch pattern for the iPhone Fold as for the iPhone X.

Production history repeating itself

One of the reasons for the delay back with the iPhone X was production issues. Something followers of the iPhone Fold will be familiar with, too.

Back in 2017, the production of the iPhone X was at a similarly low 1 million units for the third quarter. This was due to the model introducing many new features that earlier models didn’t have, that the supply chain had to account for.

That included the OLED all-screen design as well as Face ID biometric security.

The iPhone Fold, naturally, has similar new-tech issues to deal with. That includes the folding display, as well as the well-documented rumors about the problematic hinge.

Ming-Chi Kuo has a documented history of accuracy when it comes to Apple, in part due to his in-depth supply chain checks. While we have dealt with rumors and claims about the iPhone Fold being delayed in the past, Kuo’s reports are generally considered to be closer to reality than the rest of the rumor mill.