Adidas now offers a laced version of its 3D-printed shoes
The Climacool were originally launched last September in limited quantities, but Adidas expanded their availability in April 2025 with a global launch that included select Adidas store locations in the US. The new $160 Climacool Laced are $20 more expensive than the slip-on version, and while they're also available from 'selected retailers' and Adidas' stores starting today, they can only be purchased online through the company's Confirmed platform.
The shoe's main structure is still 3D-printed as a single piece in a process that Adidas says 'takes approximately 24 hours and includes spinning, baking, and compression using high-tech polymers.' The upper portion of the Climacool Laced features a slightly different design than the slip-ons that now incorporates printed eyelets, but the tongue and laces are made from different materials added afterwards that aren't 3D-printed.
The new version will potentially make the Climacool more comfortable and compatible with a wider variety of foot sizes while retaining the unique features of their 3D-printed lattice structure that was breathable and fast-drying.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
I Asked ChatGPT How To Make Money in a High-Tariff Economy: Here's What It Said
As of July 17, the tariff situation is still unfolding, and we don't yet have clear answers on what the economy will look like once all tariffs are finalized and enacted. But we do know, as we've long known, that tariffs will make most imported goods more expensive for U.S. consumers. We're thinking a lot about saving money right now, as we brace for more inflation, but we should also be thinking about making money in a high-tariff economy. Learn More: Read Next: To get help with this, I asked ChatGPT how to earn money in a high-tariff economy. I was expecting vague answers along the lines of 'pick up a side hustle,' but ChatGPT delivered very specific suggestions of entrepreneurial endeavors. Some of these business ideas I'd never have thought about had I not gone down the ChatGPT rabbit hole. The first two suggestions piqued my interest and made me think, 'It could work,' while the second two made me think, 'This is absurdly unfeasible.' Here's what ChatGPT came up with. Start a Local Manufacturing and Production Business ChatGPT's first 'idea' made the most sense to me: Start a local manufacturing and production business. Tariffs make imported goods more expensive and that makes many consumers turn to locally produced alternatives. This shift in shopping behavior creates an opportunity for manufacturers of local goods to get in on the action. 'Start a small-scale manufacturing business (e.g. furniture, textiles, food processing),' ChatGPT said. 'Contract with larger firms looking to localize their supply chain. 'Create high-quality, made-in-country products with strong branding.' In a separate window, I typed in the ChatGPT prompt bar, 'more examples of small-scale manufacturing business.' It provided the following: 'Handmade soaps or cosmetics; food and beverage products (jams, sauces, baked goods; home décor items); 3D printed products; eco-friendly packaging or bags and custom clothing.' Find Out: Start an Import Substitution Business Another niche proposal from the most popular AI chatbot: Start an import substitution business. Here ChatGPT is suggesting that you make items in the U.S. that specifically replace the imported items '(e.g. electronics, auto parts, clothing)' that are getting too expensive due to tariffs. 'Focus on goods affected most by tariffs.' Creating some of these items might be possible, but others might be out of reach. Start an Agriculture Business ChatGPT next told me to 'start an agriculture and agri-business.' Here, the AI bot is talking about producing not clothing or car parts, but food. 'Grow high-demand crops or livestock locally,' ChatGPT said. This one struck me as a fine idea for a multimillionaire in rural Iowa, but a totally impractical venture for most people. ChatGPT is essentially instructing us to become farmers — a job that requires a lot of skill, upkeep and, most importantly, land. The average farm in the U.S. spans over 460 acres, or 20 million square feet. Start a Logistics and Supply Chain Services Business It's not only foreign products that are affected by tariffs, but also the way they reach us. The shipping industry at a global level will see disruptions, including delays, reroutes and temporary (hopefully) price increases. You can make money off the crisis, according to ChatGPT, by doing the following: 'offer import/export consulting; specialize in customs clearance, local sourcing or freight forwarding; develop tech solutions to optimize inventory under tariff constraints.' Running a logistics and supply chain business sounds like an even more unlikely venture than mass farming. I asked ChatGPT how you can start this type of business, and it gave me a list that included general tips such as 'develop a niche' and 'write a business plan.' It also instructed me to legally register my business, set up operations and develop vendor and supplier relationships. It's not that this is bad advice, it's that it's woefully subpar. Can you imagine starting a business this complex and serious without an incredibly nuanced understanding of logistics and supply chain management? This is less a suggestion and more a pipedream. But, if it inspires you to learn more and make more, then maybe it's worth your time. More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban Warns of 'Red Rural Recession' -- 4 States That Could Get Hit Hard 8 Common Mistakes Retirees Make With Their Social Security Checks Clever Ways To Save Money That Actually Work in 2025 This article originally appeared on I Asked ChatGPT How To Make Money in a High-Tariff Economy: Here's What It Said Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
As Bitcoin and Ethereum Soar, Should Investors Hop Onto the Crypto Train or Wait for Prices to Drop?
Key Points It's reasonable to be hesitant about buying during a powerful rally. That doesn't mean you should always avoid doing it. Waiting for lower prices is a choice that does not always pay off. 10 stocks we like better than Bitcoin › The cryptocurrency markets are having an absolutely sizzling summer. Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) recently topped $123,000, Ethereum (CRYPTO: ETH) vaulted above $3,700, and Solana (CRYPTO: SOL) trades for more than $195 after a steep climb. All three coins are up between 34% and 137% in just the past three months, with Ethereum being the pacesetter and Solana and Bitcoin the runners-up. That kind of linked movement raises a classic dilemma for investors: Is it smarter to chase the strength and buy coins now, or wait for the inevitable pullback? History says crypto does deliver violent corrections regularly, yet it has also said that sidelining cash during bull markets has cost investors much more than the subsequent crashes ever did. Let's shed some more light on this issue and determine what the best course of action is. The rally still has legs The macroeconomic and monetary factors at play today all point toward the crypto sector's bull run having plenty of juice left. First, central banks from Europe to China are already cutting their interest rates, thereby reducing the cost of borrowing and increasing liquidity, and there is likely to be more easing through the end of the year, potentially in the U.S. as well. Cheaper money usually finds its way into risk assets like crypto, which tends to act like a levered bet on that rising tide. Second, institutional demand is here, and it's powerful. June saw $4.6 billion worth of inflows into Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs), propelling the coin to record highs. The same institutional desks are now green‑lighting Ethereum allocations, and other cryptocurrencies may soon be on the docket as well. Newfound regulatory clarity might be the strongest accelerant of all here. On July 18, the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act (Genius Act for short) was signed into law, thereby providing a legal framework for bank‑issued stablecoins. The industry's biggest policy overhang of the past five years is finally starting to abate. Lastly, momentum is broadening beyond the big two coins. Solana's tokenized real‑world asset (RWA) value has jumped 140% year to date to reach more than $418 million as of July 14. That's double the growth rate of the wider RWA market. Much of that spike comes from xStocks, a joint venture between two of the biggest centralized cryptocurrency exchanges -- Kraken and Bybit -- that now lists 60 tokenized U.S. equities tradable 24/7 with instant on‑chain settlement. Growing uses like these reinforce the idea that crypto's sandbox is turning into real infrastructure, and capital is already flowing in to reflect the change. How to climb aboard without losing sleep It's no secret that rallies of this size generate fear of missing out (FOMO) and its shadow, regret. Resisting FOMO is key, especially if you accept that this rally is nowhere close to being over -- impulsive buying can easily lead to disaster. Crypto remains habitually volatile. Assuming you jump in with a lump sum at the wrong moment, a routine flash crash can sting hard enough to force an ill‑timed exit. And, generally speaking, investing without a long-term plan for how to manage the investment is a recipe for heartache. Don't assume that this uptrend will last long enough to make you rich, because it will not. Instead, now is a great time for dollar-cost averaging (DCA). Buy a set dollar amount of your preferred coins on a schedule, and you will smooth your entry price across bull and bear stretches alike. Over multiyear horizons, it reduces the chance that short‑term volatility leads you to make an actual investing mistake. This method does not eliminate risk. Bitcoin fell very sharply in 2022, and a similar drawdown will happen again. But if your horizon is five years or more, the probability of negative returns shrinks dramatically, especially when underlying adoption and policy support keep expanding. In closing, crypto's train is already leaving the station, and it may be hauling new cars behind it for a while. Stepping aboard with discipline beats waving from the platform hoping for a cheaper ticket. Don't worry if you don't hop on at the perfect moment -- it's the direction of travel that matters the most. Do the experts think Bitcoin is a buy right now? The Motley Fool's expert analyst team, drawing on years of investing experience and deep analysis of thousands of stocks, leverages our proprietary Moneyball AI investing database to uncover top opportunities. They've just revealed their to buy now — did Bitcoin make the list? When our Stock Advisor analyst team has a stock recommendation, it can pay to listen. After all, Stock Advisor's total average return is up 1,048% vs. just 180% for the S&P — that is beating the market by 867.59%!* Imagine if you were a Stock Advisor member when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $652,133!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,056,790!* The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 21, 2025 Alex Carchidi has positions in Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. As Bitcoin and Ethereum Soar, Should Investors Hop Onto the Crypto Train or Wait for Prices to Drop? was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio
Fast Company
4 minutes ago
- Fast Company
Reliability is the hidden foundation of enterprise AI success
Most traditional enterprise systems are one-dimensional. They do what they're designed to do—full stop. Once deployed, they either perform or they don't, and when something breaks, you fix it. AI -powered systems are different because they're capable of evolution. Each training run is more than a simple technical iteration; it's a moment of potential emergence. Behavior you didn't explicitly build into your systems can surface as unexpected value, like when a model trained on text suddenly demonstrates multi-step reasoning. That leap is where innovation starts to compound. However, that emergence depends on whether the job completes. When a job fails, what's lost isn't limited to compute or time. The momentum derails, creating a missed opportunity for value to crystallize. This is what I call 'AI compound interest'—the accumulated return on uninterrupted iteration. But that value only builds if each step in the process completes and contributes to the next. Interrupt the chain, and you reset the curve. More than time, recovering that momentum can cost you strategic ground. That's why reliability is more than a technical checkbox. It's key to success. Unfortunately, most leaders overlook the fact that reliability doesn't scale like compute does. A single node with 99.9% uptime seems dependable, but multiply that across 1,000 nodes, and those small gaps add up fast. Teams can tune models, refine pipelines, and optimize every layer, only to lose hours of training to a silent node failure. No failover, no checkpoints—just progress, wiped. This is an operational reality that reveals a core design truth: AI success isn't built on flawless execution. It depends on systems designed to take a hit and keep going. I've seen this play out firsthand. In a past role, my team and I managed a dozen servers under a 99.9% SLA, which allowed for about eight hours of downtime per server, per year. We invested heavily in what we thought was best practice: premium disk controllers, mirrored drives, and 24/7 support contracts. It looked bulletproof. However, when one of those premium controllers failed, it took 48 hours to replace. That single failure obliterated our SLA margin and consumed our operations budget. Meanwhile, the lower-tier components we'd expected to fail never did. The problem wasn't that we were underprepared. We just weren't prepared for the right thing. We'd protected against low-risk threats and missed the higher-impact failure mode entirely. Reliability isn't about covering every edge case. It's about knowing which failures are most likely to cost you, then designing your recovery model around them. NOT EVERY SLA IS BUILT THE SAME Too often, infrastructure decisions are made on the strength of vendor marketing —99.9% uptime, multi-zone distribution, racks of GPU capacity. While those numbers sound concrete, I find that they hide the real-world operational behavior. That's why I started asking, 'What margin exists behind that promise?' For example, if a node fails mid-training, how quickly is it detected and how is the job reassigned? Do they checkpoint progress automatically, or does recovery start from zero? One provider might expect you to build around failure by overprovisioning and absorbing the risk. Another may design failure recovery into the architecture itself, enabling graceful recovery without human intervention. Both may have the same SLA on paper, but they represent a different experience in practice. Another common issue I see is treating training and inference as if they operate within the same reliability domain. Though they're both parts of the AI lifecycle, their operational realities and failure consequences couldn't be more different. Training workloads are long running, highly distributed, and sensitive to synchronization breakdowns. One missed checkpoint can set a project back by hours, even days. Inference, on the other hand, plays out in milliseconds. It's user facing, latency sensitive, and unforgiving. A hiccup in one microservice can instantly ripple out to thousands of users. So when teams apply the same reliability strategy to both, they often end up overcompensating in one area and underestimating risk in another. THE SILENT LIMITER: POWER INFRASTRUCTURE Despite the fact that it governs everything, power is a risk that most leaders don't factor in. At hyperscale, power is a physical constraint. When you initiate a large-scale training run, the sudden spike in energy demand can overload the entire localized infrastructure. That could result in a specific rack of equipment shutting down or, in more extreme cases, an entire section of a data center hall. I've experienced the challenge of diagnosing intermittent failures that present as issues with individual nodes, then turn out to be the result of too much power being drawn at once. That's why I've started advising leaders to treat energy orchestration as a first-class reliability concern, on equal footing with compute and storage. WHAT RELIABILITY REALLY MEANS Too many teams treat reliability like an insurance policy. But in practice, it's something deeper. If AI is going to deliver strategic value, reliability has to be part of the foundation. It's what makes iteration sustainable and ensures the output of today's training cycle becomes the input for tomorrow's breakthrough. It shows up across the board—in the speed at which you can retrain, the confidence your team has to push models into production, and the frequency with which those models ship without rollback. These signals reinforce the same truth: reliability is embedded in how consistently everything works when it matters most. As a leader, it's time to start asking your team, 'Are we building for failure, or reacting to it? Are we compounding our innovation, or constantly clawing it back? When a failure occurs, do we lose models, or just milliseconds?' Because in AI, velocity may get you to the frontier, but only continuity lets you build on it.
