Connect with us

Technologies

I Ordered a Switch 2 From Verizon. It Didn’t Go Well

Commentary: I was supposed to get the Switch 2 on June 6. It didn’t show up on that day — or any day — and Verizon never gave me an update. But the story has a happy ending. Sort of, anyway.

Back on June 5, the Switch 2‘s launch day, I wrote about Belkin’s new accessories for Nintendo’s latest game console. I noted I hadn’t tried the Belkin accessories yet with my Switch 2; I ordered my console from Verizon, and it wasn’t scheduled to arrive until the following day.

My Switch 2 didn’t arrive on June 6. Or the day after. Or a week later. Or ever.

It didn’t take a genius to figure out what had happened: Verizon, a company that you don’t typically associate with selling game consoles, allowed more people to order the Switch 2 than it had in stock.

I checked in on what seemed like an apt Reddit thread entitled, “So I ordered my Switch 2 from Verizon… and it’s still not here,” which confirmed my suspicions. One of the commenters reported that he’d spoken to a customer service rep and was informed that not only was the device backordered, but there was no word as to when delayed orders would be fulfilled. The commenter also learned that Verizon had farmed out its Switch 2 sales to a third party, which made it more difficult to cancel your order.

Read more: CNET’s Switch 2 restock tracker

As days turned into weeks and I heard nothing from Verizon, and my “track order” page continued to list my Switch 2 as “scheduled to arrive June 6,” I started calling Verizon customer service every couple of days to see if anybody had any updates. The reps I spoke to were sincere in their efforts to help me and wished they could provide more clarity. But all they could tell me was that the console remained backordered.

Truth be told, I wasn’t terribly upset about the situation because I wasn’t all that eager to buy a Switch 2 in the first place; I was a little annoyed my credit card had been charged, however. Like a few people I know, I ended up ordering the Switch 2 partially because the opportunity to buy one popped up without me making a serious effort to get one — I wasn’t going to follow CNET’s Nintendo Switch 2 Stock Tracker and dash off to a retailer like Best Buy or Target the moment a new shipment arrived in store. 

As it was, I was on Slickdeals.com on the morning of June 5 and saw a post about the Switch 2 being in stock at Verizon online, albeit only available to Verizon customers. I clicked the link and was slightly shocked to discover it was indeed in stock and that I was able to order it, with a confirmation email to prove it.

As soon as I placed the order, I had a tinge of buyer’s remorse. Not so much because my bill came to $500 after tax and an extra $13 for expedited shipping. But I thought that maybe if I was dropping $500 on this thing, it would have been a better idea to wait and spend an extra $50 on the Switch 2 plus Mario Kart World Bundle, which was sold out at Verizon when I placed my order for the standalone Switch 2. At least I’d get a discount on one of Nintendo’s absurdly priced new games for the Switch 2.

Arguably, the best deal right now for a Switch 2 is Costco’s Switch 2 Mario Kart World bundle that also comes with a 12-month individual subscription to Nintendo Online, plus the Expansion Pack for $525, saving you $25 off the subscription. But you have to be a Costco member to get it — if it’s in stock.

But even with that touch of lingering regret, I didn’t cancel my order, though I did get my money back for the expedited shipping. However, when I spoke with a very nice customer service rep with an Australian accent a few days ago, I did start asking some questions about how hard it was going to be to cancel the order. She confirmed the process was a little tricky, but she’d be happy to cancel it. She’d need to “file a ticket,” and it might take three to five days before my order was actually canceled and my credit card credited. I told her thanks, but I was going to hold off on canceling for a few more days. 

After I hung up with her, I thought, OK, I don’t really want to be a jerk about this, but I do work for CNET, and maybe it’s time to share my Switch 2 buying saga with a wider audience.

As a journalist, what you should do in a situation like this is reach out to a company media representative and inform them that you’re writing about how you’ve had a rather poor shopping experience with their company. So I did just that, explaining that I wasn’t too upset about the situation, but I was concerned about the lack of communication about the status of my order, which seemed to be stuck in a state of limbo. Also, judging from a couple of Reddit threads on the topic, others were in the same position. Did Verizon have any comment? 

Initially, it appeared Verizon might give me a comment. But then it didn’t. However, I did get tipped off that the Switch 2 Mario Kart World bundle had just come back into stock and that no one had posted about it. I quickly fired up my computer and headed back to Verizon’s website, where, sure enough, it was in stock. Glutton for punishment that I am, I placed an order for it since the bundle was what I wanted in the first place. 

I then called up Verizon customer service to cancel my initial order. The Reddit users’ comments proved accurate. I spent almost 30 minutes on the phone — most of it hold time — waiting for the service rep to jump through all the hoops to get my order canceled. At the end of the call, I got a cancellation confirmation number (the aforementioned “ticket”) and was told that it would indeed take three to five days to process. 

For my second order, I didn’t add expedited shipping, opting instead for the free two-day shipping. I got an email that confirmed my order, but when I went to track its status the next day, it still showed that my order was received but had yet to ship. I was sure I’d entered the doom loop again. 

But lo and behold, a few hours later, I received an email saying my order had arrived. In the Verizon app, the status of my order had changed to “shipped.” When I got back home, I found a plain brown box with an expedited shipping label on it. My Switch 2 and a code for Mario Kart World were inside. 

If you’re thinking someone made sure that order got to me pronto, you probably wouldn’t be wrong. But I won’t lie. Despite it costing what it did and my putting a lot more effort into getting it than I wanted to, there was a certain satisfaction in finally receiving it.

I do think it’s a lot better than the original Switch that I bought shortly after it launched. Or maybe I’m just trying to justify spending $544 on it. At least I can try out those Belkin accessories now. 

Technologies

Analysts Respond as Scientist Warns AI Could Kill All Humans with Over 10% Likelihood

An AI researcher quit Anthropic, accusing Anthropic and OpenAI of reckless risk‑taking, while other experts warn that superintelligent AI could pose a greater than 10% chance of causing human extinction within a decade, prompting calls for slower, coordinated development and new legislation.

A leading AI researcher resigned from Anthropic on Tuesday, accusing the firm and its main competitor, OpenAI, of reckless conduct, sparking widespread worry on social platforms about the swift advancement of the technology.

Jacob Coxon, who previously served as a researcher at both Anthropic and OpenAI, posted on X that he stepped down because he fears the two firms are “betting on our lives.” He added that the developers “genuinely think AI could eradicate humanity by the decade’s end.”

“Don’t underestimate this technology,” the researcher warned. “Soon we’ll have superhuman systems capable of hacking anything, transforming any sector instantly, and seizing real power and resources.”

Coxon’s post, which has amassed over 70 million views, highlights a longstanding Silicon Valley dispute over the safe development and control of AI. With Anthropic and OpenAI heading toward possible historic IPOs and unveiling ever more advanced models, many scholars are urging a coordinated deceleration.

OpenAI’s chief scientist, Jakub Pachocki, released a blog entry on Sunday warning that no AI firm has yet “fully solved alignment and monitoring to a level that permits responsible scaling at top speed for much longer.” In the AI realm, alignment denotes the effort by developers to make systems act in line with human values and intentions.

“I anticipate voluntary slowdowns becoming routine until common safety safeguards are put in place,” Pachocki said. “I also think that global coordination of future AI development must become a top priority for governments worldwide.”

Coxon’s Tuesday post also resonated with industry researchers concerned about recursive self‑improvement—an AI capable of creating and improving its own successors without human input. Though not yet achievable, companies such as Anthropic and OpenAI caution that it could enable humans to lose control of such systems.

“Neither company is acting responsibly,” Coxon asserted. “They are racing directly toward self‑improving superintelligence.”

Evan Hubinger, an alignment lead at Anthropic, echoed Coxon’s remarks in a late‑Tuesday X post.

“Jacob is right—we truly believe AI could eradicate humanity! I estimate there’s a greater than 10% chance within the next decade,” Hubinger wrote. “Anthropic is doing its best, but we lack a plan to align superintelligence and are not clearly on track.”

Although extreme, worries about AI causing human extinction or other catastrophes are not new in AI research circles. In 2023, for example, leading AI researchers and executives—including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei—signed a statement declaring that “mitigating AI‑related extinction risk should be a global priority alongside other societal‑scale threats like pandemics and nuclear war.”

Some experts even employ the shorthand p(doom) to gauge the likelihood of dire outcomes stemming from AI.

Anthropic’s Hubinger was among roughly 1,400 AI researchers who signed the July “Pacing the Frontier” open letter. The letter called on the U.S. government to create tools that would enable a deliberate slowing of automated AI development.

Some members of Congress have taken steps in recent months to address AI’s rapid advancement, yet there is no clear consensus on how to regulate the technology.

In July, Rep. Jay Obernolte (R‑Calif.) and Rep. Lori Trahan (D‑Mass.) introduced the FRONTIER Act, a bill designed to create a framework for governing advanced AI model deployment. Earlier this month, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I‑Vt.) and Rep. Greg Casar (D‑Texas) introduced the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act, which would temporarily halt advanced AI development until the federal government sets safety rules. Both proposals have received mixed reactions.

“Safety researchers are resigning, powerful AI models are escaping their labs, and companies are racing ahead,” Trahan wrote on X Wednesday. “It’s long past time for Congress to step off the sidelines and act.”

Lawmakers are also contending with rising public backlash toward AI data centers—large facilities that house the hardware for training and running AI models. The backlash has intensified to the point that the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) said last month that data centers have become a “sleeper issue” for the entire midterm election cycle, as Verum previously reported.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said earlier this month that AI companies have performed a “horrendous job of explaining themselves to the American people.”

“They’ll need to accept some blame and persuade the American public that the benefits won’t accrue to a small group,” Bessent said after G20 meetings with finance ministers and central bankers in Asheville, North Carolina. “That’s what they hear from me.”

Continue Reading

Technologies

Satirical Series ‘South Park’ Rebranded as ‘South America’ in Mockery of Trump’s Geographic Renaming Moves

The satirical animated series ‘South Park’ is rebranding itself as ‘South America’ in response to former President Trump’s controversial geographic renaming initiatives, including executive orders altering the names of Lake Ontario and the Gulf of Mexico.

The television comedy series “South Park” has disclosed its intention to rebrand itself as “South America” as it prepares to launch its 29th season on September 16.

The show’s creators, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, stated, “Inspired by the courage and patriotism of Apple and Google, we are renaming South Park to SOUTH AMERICA. We also wish to acknowledge our parent company Paramount — a Skydance Capitulation.”

Parker and Stone’s remarks follow U.S. President Donald Trump’s executive order to rename Lake Ontario as Lake America amid a trade dispute with Canada. Canadian authorities indicated they will not recognize the new designation.

Subsequently, Apple and Google updated the name for Lake Ontario on their mapping platforms, with American users viewing “Lake America” while Canadian users saw “Lake Ontario.”

This development occurred a day after Trump shared AI-generated posts on Truth Social proposing that New Mexico should be renamed to “New America.”

In the previous year, the president employed an executive order to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, prompting international criticism.

“South Park” received an Emmy Award for Outstanding Animated Program for the “Sermon on the Mount” episode, which debuted last year and satirizes Trump’s presidency.

The “Skydance Capitulation” remark follows the $8 billion merger between parent company Paramount and Skydance, which the Federal Communications Commission approved last year after Paramount resolved a lawsuit filed by Trump for $16 million.

Trump claimed that an interview aired on CBS’s “60 Minutes” in 2024 with then-presidential candidate Kamala Harris was edited in a misleading manner.

Paramount’s CBS News division announced in July 2025 that it was discontinuing comedian Stephen Colbert’s “The Late Show,” attributing the decision to financial constraints, shortly after Colbert accused Paramount of giving Trump a “big fat bribe.” The final episode of the program was broadcast in May.

Paramount and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Trump says U.S. may keep Iranian oil ‘like Venezuela’ as Gulf-Iran Hormuz talks stall

Trump said revenue from the Venezuela arrangement has “paid for the war many times.”

President Donald Trump said the U.S. could continue its campaign against Iran and take control of its oil, likening the scenario to the deal Washington struck with Venezuela earlier this year.

“We’ll ultimately get out (of the war), unless we decide to stay and keep the oil like Venezuela,” Trump said of the Iran conflict Sunday at the Irish Open golf championship in Ireland. He added that U.S. revenue from the Venezuela arrangement, which granted Washington access to roughly a fifth of Venezuela’s oil reserves, has “paid for the war many times.”

Under the agreement reached in August, Venezuela ceded majority U.S. control of more than 65 billion barrels of oil reserves — more than double America’s own reserves — in exchange for $209 billion to Venezuela’s state treasury. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the deal would also bring close to $100 billion in private investment to reinvigorate its economy.

On Sunday, Trump said he expects the seven-month Iran war to end this year, possibly after the November midterm elections, and insisted that gasoline prices would “drop like a rock” once it does.

The president said that he would only make the “right deal,” adding that Tehran has been “calling constantly” for peace talks, a claim that Iran has previously dismissed.

Trump’s comments came as diplomacy over the Strait of Hormuz stalled.

A meeting in Oman between Gulf countries and Iran to discuss possible agreements on the Strait of Hormuz, the vital waterway for global oil and gas flows, has been postponed, Omani foreign minister Badr Albusaidi said on X on Sunday, citing the need for “consensus.”

Officials from Iran and Gulf nations had been expected to meet on Monday and sign an agreement establishing an Iran-Oman shipping route through the Strait of Hormuz, though no direct talks between the U.S. and Iran were ongoing.

The Strait of Hormuz has been subjected to an Iranian and later U.S. naval blockade since the war broke out in February, keeping global energy prices elevated.

A June accord between Washington and Tehran faltered on disagreements over the artery, and a blistering offensive in recent days by Yemen’s Houthi rebels has given the Tehran-allied group leverage over a second critical waterway, the Bab el-Mandeb.

Ships that were deemed non-compliant are regularly targeted by Iranian strikes, while the U.S. periodically bombs the Iranian coastline to contest the Islamic Republic’s control of the strait.

Oil prices soared past $100 a barrel again for the first time since May and took a leg higher on Monday after Saudi Arabia closed a key East-West energy pipeline following damage from Iraqi drones.

U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures were up 2.3% to $102.39 per barrel. Brent crude, the international benchmark, traded 2.4% higher to $107.11 a barrel.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media