The Verge⁠56%

Apple’s self-driving car program left a legacy of powerful AI chips ⁠22%

By Terrence O'Brien⁠58%

7/12/2026, 4:27:06 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Appeal to Authority, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 33.3% saturation with 154 hits. Analysis detected 851 faulty-reasoning hits from 462 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 35.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠22% (17,163 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 78.40% of the article peer group.

Apple’s failed self-driving car program left a legacy of powerful AI chips 
The company is accelerating development of the M7 Ultra, which could support up to 1.5TB of RAM. 
Jul 12, 2026, 4:27 PM UTC 
Terrence O'Brien is the Verge’s weekend editor. 
He’s covered the tech industry for over 18 years and knows a thing or two about synths. 
Apple’s self-driving car program never really got off the ground , but it may have been what made the company’s chips the powerful AI performers they are. 
Early in the development of the self-driving platform, Apple realized that it would need powerful on-device AI processing . 
While the car processor was never finished , as Mark Gurman details in his latest Power On newsletter, it did lead to the development of the Neural Engine, the backbone of Apple’s on-device AI processing. 
The Neural Engine made its debut with the iPhone X and the A11 Bionic . 
In those early days, it was primarily used for computer vision, powering FaceID, Animoji, and augmented reality features. 
But by laying the groundwork for on-device AI processing, Apple established itself as an early leader by bringing the Neural Engine to desktops with the M-series chips . 
While Apple’s AI software efforts have lagged behind the rest of the industry, its hardware has been impressive. 
It’s also what has allowed Apple to tout its privacy features, since less data is sent to the cloud. 
Apple is making its AI hardware a cornerstone of its strategy going forward. 
According to Gurman, the company is skipping the Pro, Max, and Ultra versions of its upcoming M6 chip. 
Instead, it’s accelerating development of the M7, which should arrive in the first half of 2027 with significant Neural Engine upgrades. 
The M7 Ultra is expected to be the basis for a new server product from Apple as well, with support for up to 1.5TB of RAM. 
Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates. 
ICE are heavily armed killers. 
They’re also huge losers 
Of course viewers are giving up on Netflix shows 
Less is more with the Oura Ring 5 
Netflix is turning into YouTube 
Advertiser Content From 
This is the title for the native ad 
How Philips Hue got the smart home right 
The fight against AI data centers is just beginning 
After years of teasing, the viral Nopia synth is ‘basically finished’ 
FL Studio head Constantin Koehncke turns to Reddit for feedback and fun 
The perfect kit for all your tiny repairs 
Victoria Song Jul 12 
Terrence O'Brien Jul 11 
Shall We Go On Sinning So That Grace May Increase? 
is hypnotic, healing, and hopeful 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 12.3%Terrence O'Brien: 4.3%The Verge: 3.6%Confirmation Bias12.3%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.1%The Verge: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 1.1%Terrence O'Brien: 3.8%The Verge: 3.8%Availability Heuristic1.1%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.8%The Verge: 1.3%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 4.1%Terrence O'Brien: 1.1%The Verge: 0.7%Hindsight Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.8%The Verge: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 4.1%Terrence O'Brien: 8.9%The Verge: 6.2%Framing Effect4.1%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.6%The Verge: 0.9%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.3%The Verge: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 5.8%Terrence O'Brien: 0.3%The Verge: 0.4%Sunk Cost Effect5.8%This article: 12.1%Terrence O'Brien: 2.1%The Verge: 4.0%Optimism Bias12.1%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 1.8%The Verge: 2.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 5.8%Terrence O'Brien: 12.1%The Verge: 9.7%Negativity Bias5.8%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 1.0%The Verge: 1.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.4%The Verge: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.3%The Verge: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 1.1%Terrence O'Brien: 0.7%The Verge: 0.6%In-Group Bias1.1%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 1.5%The Verge: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 7.1%Terrence O'Brien: 2.9%The Verge: 2.8%Halo Effect7.1%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.6%The Verge: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.0%The Verge: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.4%Terrence O'Brien: 1.3%The Verge: 1.8%Recency Bias2.4%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.9%The Verge: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.0%The Verge: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 3.4%The Verge: 1.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 1.0%The Verge: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 13.6%Terrence O'Brien: 6.1%The Verge: 4.0%Appeal to Authority13.6%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 1.1%The Verge: 1.6%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 1.9%Terrence O'Brien: 1.6%The Verge: 1.2%Slippery Slope1.9%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.4%The Verge: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 7.1%Terrence O'Brien: 5.9%The Verge: 6.8%Hasty Generalization7.1%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.4%The Verge: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 1.9%Terrence O'Brien: 1.3%The Verge: 0.7%Bandwagon1.9%This article: 5.0%Terrence O'Brien: 6.6%The Verge: 4.2%Appeal to Emotion5.0%This article: 3.9%Terrence O'Brien: 1.5%The Verge: 1.1%Begging the Question3.9%This article: 20.1%Terrence O'Brien: 3.5%The Verge: 2.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)20.1%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.3%The Verge: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.5%The Verge: 0.8%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.0%The Verge: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.2%The Verge: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 4.1%Terrence O'Brien: 2.7%The Verge: 3.6%Anecdotal4.1%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.1%The Verge: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 2.6%The Verge: 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.0%The Verge: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.9%Terrence O'Brien: 0.1%The Verge: 0.1%Middle Ground3.9%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.2%The Verge: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.0%The Verge: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.2%The Verge: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.9%Terrence O'Brien: 3.2%The Verge: 2.6%Unattributed Quote3.9%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 2.9%The Verge: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 33.3%Terrence O'Brien: 11.4%The Verge: 10.8%Biased Writer Voice33.3%This article: 4.1%Terrence O'Brien: 2.0%The Verge: 1.1%Indoctrination4.1%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 3.5%The Verge: 1.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Terrence O'Brien: 0.1%The Verge: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 25.1%Terrence O'Brien: 3.7%The Verge: 4.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…25.1%

462 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers17%attributed speech383writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageTerrence O'Brien • 7 words • 0.0% coverageTerrence O'Brien • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageMark Gurman • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageConstantin Koehncke • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageVictoria Song • 4 words • 0.0% coverageTerrence O'Brien • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Mark Gurman

100%flagged-word coverage
35 attributed words44% of attributed speech87% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+72.1 ptsWriter: 27.9%Mark Gurman: 100.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -30.3 ptsWriter: 30.3%Mark Gurman: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-5.0 ptsWriter: 5.0%Mark Gurman: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-4.7 ptsWriter: 4.7%Mark Gurman: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.