Twitter is also a Nazi bar full of people that take anything slightly less harmful for humanity as a personal attack.
Its not hard to see what they’re doing…
First they add negative comments, then follow up with a positive post to seem like they’re being Impartial!
It’d be interesting to see how often the negative comments are put before the positive comments though because i’d guess it’s a lot higher than the reverse!
When writing an argument (and your biased) you start with the opinion you don't want to support and end with the opinion you do want to support, because people usually remember the last part of an argument better than the first part. That is at least when assuming people ACTUALLY read (and the classical rhetoric theory)... but so many people have fucked attention spans, so I'm not sure if this is still accurate.
You know that some weirdo would say the opposite if it was positive comments first. It's a lose-lose situation for the writer.
Could also be a truth sandwich. Or a lie sandwich, what do I know
I'm 99% sure it's just rage bait. They get to act like it's just reporting on what others said (despite them being the ones choosing which to quote), and they also get to include stuff that someone, no matter who they are, will get annoyed with. It's the worst kind of "reporting" as they add nothing of value, only create negative engagement, and they aren't even willing to own what they publish.
The stupidest thing is how Ferrari has historically gone to great lengths to make their cars sleek and pointy despite the need to accommodate big-ass radiators and engine intakes, yet just when using an electric drivetrain makes 'sleek and pointy' easy for them, they come out with this boxy shit instead!
And even worse, it's a sedan (which Ferrari has never made before). WTF.
Clearly, what happened here is that the bean-counters insisted that Ferrari needed to diversify into new market segments (both more practical cars and EVs) but somebody at the top hated the idea, so they did it in the most sabotaged, begrudging way possible. They didn't have the courage to make a proper two-seat electric sports car.
Ferrari has in fact made several sedans.
First sentence of the article:
The new model departs from the look of typical Ferraris as the Italian brand's first ever five-seater,
I guess maybe I shouldn't have read that and assumed. I knew they had 2+2 two-door coupes, but didn't know they'd made any four-seaters with four doors.
Yeah the current Purosangue is a 4 door SUV. I assumed it was a 5 seater until now.
The back doors are pretty well hidden, in the SUV, but I think I prefer the styling of the EV to many of the recent Ferraris. The suicide door are stupid though.
Well Sir Jony Ive did play a part in that design so yeah its shit.
Disagree, I love the way it looks!
Edit: I mean, whoo!... is that a hole instead of a front grill, that goes under the hood and over the windshield? Now that's radical, man!
I like it too… There are dozens of us! Dozens!
I've seen this on an electric Dodge Challenger (which is also quite ugly in my opinion). This hole and the wing above it act as a spoiler and fast cars need all the downforce they can get, so I guess this will become a norm for fast electric cars in the future.
It is weird how they made it look kinda lumpy. Like it looks better than some EVs but I’m a bit surprised this is coming from Ferrari.
Are EV engine sizes that crazy that you need a larger housing for them?
Yeah, it just looks generic. It should look like a fuckin g Ferrari though!
The sports car manufacturer's cycle of business:
- Lose revenue due to EV competition.
- Design EV that looks like a cotton candy/kid's toys version of your other cars.
- EV sells poorly.
- Scrap EV plans and return to non-EV lineup.
- Go back to 1.
I'm genuinely curious about the reliability. I've been lucky enough to own a lot of cars in my life. I will tell you every somewhat modern/modern exotic car I've owned has been an absolute piece of over priced shit beyond "it looks and sounds cool''. I kid you not probably every other time I drove my Lamborghini Aventador with 5k miles some stupid shit would break, radiator hoses, electrical problems, misfires and they all cost stupid amounts of money to fix. While my 2002 Camry has 185k miles with only regular maintenance and I'd feel comfortable driving it across the US.
I get they're meant to be looked at ect, but if you can't design a radiator hose that lasts over 2 years and 5k miles you've got a serious engineering problem. Hell, I had a 68' mustang that still has the the OEM from the factory before I replaced it and it technically still was fine. Absolutely ridiculous, these things are like a bunch of expensive parts just bolted together like a 2nd grader did it.
Sorry for the rant. These cars are one of the few things that ligit get me pissed as an automotive lover.
Isn’t that just Italian manufacturing quality. Same with how McLarens and Range Rovers aren’t very reliable despite the high price tag that‘s just because British manufacturing is generally trash. (Though Rolls Royce is the exception especially their jet engine production department)
Like Porsche builds reliable sports cars.
They probably can build an EV that is maintenance free, except for the batteries wearing down. Electric engines are very reliable because they are relatively simple.
Main issues with the electric motors are leaks.
An air-cooled motor would probably last much longer, at least in a moderate climate. Issue is EVs tend to have powerful motors so they need cooling.
I don't know if it's possible, since it's exposed to the elements. Manufacturers have certainly tried.
It wasn't all that long ago that a few car companies were selling their CVT transmissions as having lifetime transmission fluid, that didn't need topping up or changing.
Even if it's as minimal as having to change the brakes/tyres, there's still going to be maintenance that needs to be done, if only to check that the car can go some period of time without needing further maintenance.
I feel the I8 doesn’t look bad at all.
You are 100% correct. My bad.
That and this isn't a practical car. I mean 99% of people who even buy this aren't buying it as a DD. Something like a Porsche Cayenne would be more something that's more reasonable if you want peoole to buy it and DD.
I really like the design of the Dodge Charger EV, but the super loud speaker blasting fake engine sounds is dumb (yeah I know you can turn it off, but ew) and the thing is notoriously unreliable.
Anyhow yeah, my Kona EV looks like a non-EV Kona. People mostly only notice that cars are electric when they're a wacky design or charging in public.
I JUST saw an Audi GT on my local roads yesterday! I was wowed by it. It got me thinking that I wanted one! I also wondered what Ferrari was coming out with...and speak of the ugly devil, they unveil the Luce the very next day.
-_-
Yeah, I've been wanting one of those since they were announced. Such a good looking car.
I love the sentence “While the (this car)’s infotainment system isn’t as touch-heavy as a other Audi models”
Basically telling me “This car is better-designed than the others” but somehow making it feel slightly negative?
This is the best looking EV I’ve seen. Also two seconds 0-60? TF does that even FEEL LIKE? I’ve felt ~3s before and it was insanity. I wanna feel two seconds owo
Ferrari execs, probably: "No, we have to make clear that we're modern™ and there's more to our cars than toxic masculinity!!!"
... which might even be a good selling point for a lot of people, except for the kind of people who buy a Ferrari.
Renault 5
And the renault 4, renault twingo. Seriously Renault has been doing a stellar job.
There are some fundemental problem with making an EV look like a "normal car" though.
EVs are more dense than their ICE counterparts. This means that the whole vehicle needs more structure to protect it in a rollover than an ICE of the same size. Thicker frames and pillars in a smaller car end up making it look bulgy and weird.
I think (but not 100% sure) that EVs are required to have extra protection for the battery to prevent them from getting punctured and having a "thermal runaway" event. This makes the cars even more pudgy.
The energy source and propulsion methods have changed, which will affect their design of the cars. Much in the same way early jet airplanes looked like regular airplanes with jets attached, EVs started as regular cars with electric motors. We're currently in the weird transition phase of EV design. We're seeing the EV equivalent of the P80 Shooting star, and maybe starting to get into some cars that are akin to the F86 Sabre. We have a long way to go until the design catches up to the propulsion.
I worked at a lithium ion battery company for 11 years. If anything, the switch to EVs gives you even more options for body shape/type. The batteries are located at the bottom of the frame, and the motors are hub motors located at the wheels. It gives the vehicle a lower center of gravity, and gives the body designers artistic freedom to make it look however they like. I don't accept the argument that it has to look dorky. The original Tesla Roadster was just a modified Lotus Elise, and it looked basically bone stock. There is no need for the front to be loaded up with a huge motor, there is a reason a lot of EVs have a "frunk"...there is just a bunch of extra room. No need for an oil reservoir, or a transmission, or hydraulic brake lines and reservoir, or any other fluids.
Thanks for the context.
Is it possible to make an EV that doesn’t look like a dorks version of a futuristic car?
Yeah. Tesla looks pretty decent... Except its designed to trap you inside, and prevent outside help as you burn alive.
The normal person priced sedan thing has the same awkward "Look I'n Electric" proportions as that Ferrari. It's only the stupid priced Tesla's that looks less stupid.
Yeah it's ugly as fuck. But other models look quite good.
The big fat ass elevate screen in the middle of the dashboard looks like cheap shit.
The outside looks like a late 1990s European high end car.
It's high tech made to look cheap using plastic and putting what's basically a computer monitor as centerpiece rather smoothly intergrating it with the rest, all wrapped in a frame which is an outdated idea of a luxury car.
(IMHO, or course)
Part of that is the shape of a car is dictated partly by the power train, and an EV has a lot more flexibility in that regard.
But partly it's because they want to look different, which usually means worse. And you're right about BYD, they do look sharp.
I like the look of byd, but why do they keep retracting the fucking door handles?
This is apple removing the aux jack all over again... Nobody wants this.
Agreed, but China recently banned those style of handles, so I wouldn't expect any BYD will have them much longer.
I don't think this fully applies to Ferrari in the way it might apply to mass market cars.
That's a nice looking Peugeot.
I think I saw the Honda you were thinking of yesterday. Very similar to the peugot. It was even the same colour as the Ferrari.
Who the fuck paints a Ferrari blue.
Carmakers including Ford and Volkswagen have doubled down on petrol cars, especially in the US, due to...regulatory changes under President Donald Trump, who has cut incentives for EV buyers.
I'm pretty confident that if you're buying a $640,000 car, you place little relative value on a $7,500 tax credit. It being present or not is under a 1.2% price difference. That particular factor probably isn't very relevant as regards cars like these.
Looks boring and generic, you are Ferrari ffs... Give me fins, lasers, cool interiors, fucking something to make it stand out. Who wants this?
Jaguar did this too, making boring EVs with none of the signature styling that the brand is famous for, and then proceeded to tank.
They know what we want, but they deny us at every turn.
Not that this matters in the age where cybertrucks are allowed to exist, but that thing will slice a pedestrian clean in half
“Slice in half by the Batmobile” is a way better obituary than “CyberStruck”.
Optimization have sucked away wiggle room everywhere.
The outside looks interesting given the small wiggle room EV have on design. We will not have dramatically unique car designs till battery tech gets 10x energy dense and cars can afford not being shaped like an egg shell
The inside is all Ferrari/Ive choice. There are some cool touches like the display unit. But majority is constricted by supply chain optimization. There's only so much you can deviate before things start costing an arm/leg at the scale Ferrari sells cars. Ferrari can afford custom manufacturing with some manual work but not hand manufacturing everything.
Eh, the second one could easily be mistaken for it's contemporary rival Aston Martin.
Maybe Honda is hiring...
It looks like the current Toyota Prius.
The way they've done the front/sides makes feel big/tall, in a way that a lot of other Ferraris don't. Like someone took a crossover SUV, and flattened it a bit with a hydraulic press.
10/10 would have beckoned Barbie to go celebrating
Also, the tow truck for this thing is Lucifer.
And why is the interior from an e500?
This design is getting slandered, damn. Personally I think it looks absolutely sick, but for a brand like Ferrari I'm not sure it's a good move. It has that electric car look, which makes it seem less exclusive. I'd totally want one if I needed a car and it was actually affordable, but given the price it probably should've looked more exclusive.
Looks like it came straight out the future as depicted in those classic 90's scifi movies. Looking at it like a petrol engine Ferrari, it sucks. Looking at it like a modern piece of engineering, it has some interesting things going for it.
Is it just me or is this paragraph confusing as fuck with regards to the time form?
Ferrari plans to roll out the electric vehicle (EV) after previously ruling out such a move, opting instead to make hybrid cars that are powered by both petrol and electricity.
My ESL ass would have written it more like this
Ferrari plans to roll out the electric vehicle (EV) after having previously ruled out such a move. At the time they opted instead to make hybrid cars that are powered by both petrol and electricity.
Not sure my version is grammatical, but at least you know what's now and what was then.
As an "EFL" speaker, yours is clearer, more grammatical. If I'd written this, I'd probably have changed the "opting instead" to "when they opted", but yours uses two shorter sentences, which is better style in English.
Having seen native French speakers producing "one sentence covers an entire page" text when studying ESL, I've tried to keep my bad habits under control myself. Can be a bit too easy to produce a runaway sentence sometimes, when you've a lot of thoughts to get on the page.
Yours is clearer, but the example is journalistic style, the same way sometimes headlines come across unclear or confusing.
This car is not very beautiful, but it looks like interesting for me. Like a car from the future e.g. "ghost in the shell" etc.
The normal Ferrari design is... boring (every sports car has the same look). This is new and fresh design. Everybody speaks/love/hate it and I think that is a good promotion for Ferrari.
And the most of car designs are created for fuels engines, but this used e-engines... Smaller and lighter. They doesn't need the old forme anymore and the designer have so new interesting options.
I think that could borne a new design era. In- and outside.
This is their biggest car ever, longer even than their crossover SUV. Takes a bit of space to fit in 120 kWh of battery capacity and five seats without being a tall car. Batteries are heavy too, so it's actually heavier than said crossover too. Despite the fact that that thing has a huge V12 engine. Believe that also makes it the heaviest car they've ever made, at least in modern times.
The design conceals it well though.
Like a car from the future e.g. “ghost in the shell” etc.
At the same time, it does feel like almost every EV/Hybrid tries to go for the futuristic styling, enough that it's starting to become a bit bland, since a lot of EVs end up taking after that kind of look. It was neat the first few times, but it's starting to wear out its welcome, imo.
Making it seem like a normal car that just so happens to be driven by an electric powertrain would give it a bit more appeal.
Indeed, I am now seeing it as well, now that you have mentioned it. xD
I love that they're trying new stuff but it's weird thinking about the Daytona SP3 and that being from the same company. It reminds me of those slippers they make Japanese kids wear in school.
Yep, that's ugly. I wonder if it's because electric cars don't need as many functional components, like eg. air intakes? Don't need so much detail work to harmonise the stuff on the outside, therefore, it ends up looking like a child's toy?
Proportions are still kind of graceless and unweildy, and that colour is nasty. I'd probably have gone the same yellow as the brake shoe, or just classic Ferrari red...
What's the issue? As I understand it, that's basically how all EVs work. Other than specifically being made by Ferrari.
If it's the Ferrari thing, give them a chance. I haven't heard about them royally screwing up tightly coiled cables yet, but I'm sure they could find a way.
No, I might be behind the times on this but usually you power axles, do you not (really naively asking)?
I would imagines any disruptions only affecting one wheel instead of axle being rather catastrophic. The brakes are also always set up in a way that you don't brake on one wheel only even if it's damaged.
So uncoupling all 4 wheels seems like a really really bad idea. Of course you can compensate this electronically, but that will work about sd well as the Boeing 737 max with its issues. There are physical things you should not mess with.
But maybe as I said I am behind the times and with electric cars that's normal now to power wheels (l/r) separately?
It's not uncommon. Rivian, Rimac, and various Chinese cars all have IWD (Individual Wheel Drive.) For a rather longer time, trams have been running with stub-axles and individual motors for decades.
All the super-fast EVs from the Model S Plaid and Lucid Air Sapphire to the Rimac Nevera have used separate L/R motors in the rear for some time now, and some have been separate motors for all four wheels. I think that includes some Rivians, and definitely the Nevera.
Keep in mind that having an electric motor per wheel would be nothing like having a gasoline engine per wheel. Not only can an electric motor change its thrust thousands of times per second for good traction control, it can also apply regenerative braking or even just let the motor spin freely.
I assume the cars are at least monitoring the current to each motor constantly, so it's just a programming decision when the LR motor fails whether to go into limp mode vs still sending 500hp to the right rear wheel to see what happens.
Good to hear and I understand electric motors but being in IT I have a special perspective on failures. And I'd rather have an axle suddenly accelerate /decelerate instead of one wheel.
You are behind the times. This is a pretty well-studied and implemented thing. It is expensive, though, which is why you don't see if more often. If a motor stops working, you can still drive the car with the other three motors. That's SUPER simple with modern computing and software.
Now, the part where the motors are Ferrari-made... let's see how that turns out.
Hub motors are pretty rare in the EV (car) space actually.
Lordstown Endurance had a hub motors on each wheel. Almost all of those were bought back and scrapped. Aptera had hub motors in the initial design specs, but last I heard, that fell through and they are doing inboard motors with a continuous 2 speed transmission and driveshafts.
Teslas has various multi-motor layouts, but none of them are hubs as far as I can remember.
Mach E has 1 motor standard, 2 and motors on the GT.
looks kinda like a tesla.
Opinion seems to be that Ferrari failed in building an electric car that no-one wants to buy.
I wonder if they deliberately built something they know won't be a success so they can point to that failure as pushback on regulations that would prevent them continuing to build traditional petrol cars.
Task failed successfully.
It looks like a fucking soap box on wheels. Color matches too.
Id like to see how it looks in person. It doesn't look that bad to me from the front but that rear quarterpanel shot makes it look like one of those short wheelbase, Fiero kit car Ferraris. Four doors was definitely a bold choice...
That said, I will probably never see one in person so 🤷
I think it's kinda genius. High end is all about image. Their sport cars show racing heritage. With EVs they have the opportunity to branch out into something different, and not necessarily have to follow any guidelines. Same happened with their SUVs.
The most important thing is that it has to be recognizable. It won't work if the Uber rich can't tell a Ferrari EV from a Peugeot. And that I think is something they must work on, because it looks too generic.
Nothing like a 600,000 dollar car to say, let's try to reduce our environmental footprint.
Behold the Apple Car. With unapologetically plastic parts. I thought Ive only designed the dash, which he did a good job on btw.
It’s a joke. Because Jony Ive is involved. He described the material of iPhone 5c during the launch as “Beautifully, unapologetically plastic”
Oh damn, didn't know that one. I've never really watched too many Apple events, especially for phones since those are the most boring.
Funnily enough for a phone I think plastic is better than glass. Doesn't feel premium, but at least it doesn't shatter when dropped.
Pretty cool that they have motors on each wheel. It’s most likely the way of the future.
Possibly but still cool.
No, its not.
Everyone is complaining it's fuck ugly but it's a Ferrari so that's not news.
This "opinion" presumably being based upon your personal experience with being an expensive waste on wheels..
@lemmy.world
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/...
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/...
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
go to feed...
Honestly, BBC, if you're going to aggregate statistics about tweets on Twitter, use it as some kind of crude poll, maybe you could get something useful that way.
But reporting on anecdotes about anonymous tweets for opinion seems of almost zero value from a news standpoint. If a tweet mentioned a fact that you could validate, say, that might have some value.
But what you're doing here is on-par with saying "someone on Twitter said that they liked chocolate ice cream, and someone else said that they didn't like chocolate ice cream". That just doesn't really seem newsworthy. I would say that it'd be surprising if you couldn't find posts of both sorts for virtually any topic.
save