Elon Musk wants you to believe Tesla is about to deliver self-driving without any data
There was one big thing missing from Tesla’s autonomy event yesterday: data. Elon Musk wants you to believe Tesla is about to deliver self-driving, but you just have to believe him despite the fact that he has been wrong about it every year for the past five years.
Yesterday, Tesla unveiled a cool-looking car, the Cybercab, that is entirely reliant on making Full Self-Driving (FSD) work, which was supposed to happen every year for the past 5 years, according to Elon Musk’s own statements.
Every year since 2019, Musk said that he expects Tesla to upgrade its supervised FSD into an unsupervised FSD, as promised, by the end of the year.
At one point, the CEO claimed that his inaccurate timelines were due to achieving “local maximums” in the software, which they couldn’t see until they hit those ceilings. Despite this problem, he keeps giving new timelines and selling the product while Tesla could still be running into local maximums.
What I wanted from Tesla’s event yesterday was to know what makes this time different. Musk said that Tesla is going to deliver unsupervised self-driving on current vehicles in California and Texas next year.
Then, Cybercab will follow when it enters production in 2026 or 2027.
But again, why should we believe Musk this time?
I was expecting one of two things that Tesla would announce at the event to build more confidence:
- Tesla would share data about FSD that shows real progress – something Tesla has never done. Really, it has never released FSD data beyond the number of miles covered. No disengagement nor intervention data.
- A change in strategy that would involve deploying level 4 self-driving in geo-fenced areas – a business model closer to what Waymo is doing.
Tesla did neither. Instead, it’s business as usual with FSD, which currently needs a 500-1000x improvement in miles between interventions.
The latest disengagement data crowdsourced by Tesla owners shows that FSD is currently at about 123 miles between disengagement and the pace of improvement is far from impressive:
Until Tesla shows a clear path toward 100,000+ miles between disengagmeeent, a steering wheel-less robotaxi is pretty meaningless, which explains why Tesla’s stock is down by as much as 10% following the event.
Instead of sharing some data about the program, which Tesla certainly has after over 1.6 billion miles on FSD, Musk decided to again only reference direct personal experiences that customers have with Tesla’s Supervised FSD.
I am not discounting that Supervised FSD can be impressive, and if it was being developed in a vacuum without Musk giving unreasonable timelines and selling promises to customers for up to $15,000, I think we would all be talking differently about this product.
But right now, even though you can have an impressive 100-mile drive without issue on FSD, it doesn’t translate into an unsupervised self-driving system because the data shows it can’t do it reliable thousands of times like a human could.
Now, that’s based on my own experience with the system over the last 3 years and the crowdsourced data. To be fair, the crowdsourced data only accounts for ~100,000 miles while Tesla has over 1.6 billion miles of data, but if Tesla refuses to share that data, I have to assume that it doesn’t look much better than the crowdsourced dataset.
But Fred, what about the demonstration at the event?
The Cybercab demos at the event were less impressive than FSD. Tesla chose the Warner Bros studio for a reason.
While these roads look like regular public roads, it’s a private studio set. Tesla doesn’t need to ask California for a self-driving permit to drive there. Tesla has always resisted testing unsupervised self-driving vehicles on California roads, something all other companies developing self-driving technologies are doing. Why? Because it would require them to share their data about disengagement.
Therefore, Tesla tuned FSD to work “unsupervised” on these private roads for the event. Also, I put “unsupervised” in quotes because they were unsupervised from inside the vehicle, but it looks like Tesla had staff tracking the demo vehicles and controlling their departures and arrivals.
Electrek’s Take
In short, Tesla needs to release its FSD data to show a clear path toward over 100,000 miles between disengagement. Otherwise, this whole thing is pretty meaningless. The Cybercab looks awesome. I love the design.
The fact that it only has two seats is a bit annoying, but it’s true that 90% of rideshare rides are for two passengers or fewer.
For higher volume transit, there’s the new Robovan, but it has the same FSD problem as all other Tesla vehicles.
Optimus looked to have had a meaningful improvement, but it is still ways from being useful and as per many attendees, it seems likely that there was at least a certain level of remote control.
Overall the event was very low in details and new information. It could have been an email. Looks like Tesla wanted to throw a party for its shareholders.
A party that cost them about $50 billion in valuation.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Tesla’s top crash safety architect, who helped the automaker achieve top safety scores for its entire car line-up, announced that he is leaving the automaker after 14 years.
We are talking about Petter Winberg, Tesla’s Principal Engineer for CAE crashing safety for the last decade.
After an extensive career at Volvo and SAAB, both car brands praised for their commitment to safety, Winberg joined Tesla in 2011 to work on the “crash safety development of Model S structure and side occupant restraints.”
At the time, Tesla was still working on the Model S, its first vehicle built entirely from the ground up, considering the original Roadster was based on the Lotus Elise.
CEO Elon Musk aimed for “Tesla vehicles to be the safest on the planet,” and Winberg took the challenge seriously.
He led the development of the vehicle body and chassis structure for Model 3 and Model Y, as well as the crash structure for Model S and Model X.
All of these vehicles have received top safety crash scores from independent testers worldwide – quickly elevating Tesla’s brand into a leader in passive safety.
Winberg and his team deserve a lot of the credit for this.
The engineer also led the design of crash readiness and the energy-absorbing capacity of Tesla’s latest “gigacasting” and structural battery pack designs, for which he obtained patents. Other automakers have since adopted similar designs.
For those less technical who want to understand how good and respected Winberg is at Tesla, he has been working for Tesla remotely in Sweden for the last five years. That’s impressive in itself, considering how much Musk hates remote work. He previously emailed Tesla management to tell them that only exceptional employees would be eligible for an exemption to work remotely, which he would approve himself.
After 14 years at Tesla, Winberg announced last week that he is leaving (via LinkedIn):
Having developed Model S, S-DM, X, 3, Y, Y-SP as well as future crash architectures, I have decided now is the time to move on. Thank you Tesla, keep crushing it! What an incredible team, I will miss you all.
He didn’t elaborate on his reasons for leaving the automaker or announce another venture.
Electrek’s Take
While Tesla has received much criticism for the dangers of its Autopilot and “Full Self-Driving” systems, I don’t think anyone can question that Tesla vehicles perform extremely well in terms of passive safety.
Independent testing has proven it time and time again.
Tesla has led the way in taking advantage of designing electric vehicles from the ground up. Its skateboard-like powertrain design and lack of engine in the front allow for a giant crumple zone to absorb the energy in case of a crash.
A big thank you to Petter Winberg for his designs and leadership in improving Tesla’s passive safety. He has undoubtedly made the automotive industry safer and saved lives. Congratulations.
As for his departure, it’s certainly a blow for Tesla. As we previously reported, the company has suffered a significant exodus of talent over the last year, with a big part of its leadership leaving during and after a wave of layoffs last year.
Many predict that Tesla could again initiate another wave of layoffs in the coming months as its sales are crumbling worldwide.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
The SU7 Ultra, Xiaomi’s new flagship electric vehicle, went against a Tesla Model S Plaid in a drag race and it smoked it.
The car is ridiculously powerful, and it’s about 35% cheaper than the Plaid, which is already affordable relative to its supercar performance.
We recently released a report about how impressed we are by Xiaomi’s incredible rise in the EV market in China.
Its first vehicle, the SU7, is a smash hit. It now consistently delivers over 20,000 units a month, it has surpassed the Tesla Model 3, its closest competitor, and has a more than 30-week-long backlog of orders.
The vehicle achieves more range and is cheaper than Model 3 while having additional features.
Last month, Xiaomi launched a new top-of-the-line version of the SU7: the SU7 Ultra.
The headline is that the $72,800 (529,900 RMB) has a powertrain packing up 1,526 horsepower. That’s absolutely insane. Xiaomi quotes a 0 to 100 km/h (0 to 62 mph) acceleration in just 1.98 seconds.
While the SU7 is meant more as a Model 3 competitor, the SU7 Ultra actually competes with Tesla’s flagship Model S Plaid in terms of performance.
They organized a drag race between the SU7 Ultra and Model S Plaid. Here it is:
As you can see, the SU7 Ultra slipped at the start, which is not surprising considering how much power it outputs, but it still managed to catch up and beat the Model S Plaid.
At over 1,000 horsepower, many, myself included, thought that it was a bit mad to offer a vehicle like the Model S Plaid with such supercar power for a relatively cheap price – RMB 814,900 (approximately $112,000 USD) in China and just $95,000 in the US.
But now, Xiaomi shakes things up even more by offering 1,500 horses for just a little more than $70,000. It’s mad.
Now, I can hear your thoughts: “but it’s just good in a straight line drag race like other EVs.” Think again, the SU7 Ultra prototype claimed the title as the fastest four-door sedan at the famous Nurburgring race track in Germany.
Electrek’s Take
Damn, the Chinese are good. Xiaomi has come hard with the SU7, but the crazy thing is that it’s just one of several Chinese top-of-the-line EVs coming out. Nio has the ET7, BYD has the U7, and there are many more.
These vehicles are all impressive in their own rights.
It’s easy to understand why American automakers are so scared and lobbied the US government for 100% tariffs on them.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Environment
Trump administration sends a clear message to the oil and gas industry: ‘You’re the customer’
HOUSTON — The officials leading President Donald Trump’s energy agenda made clear to oil, gas and mining executives this week that they have an ally in Washington who intends to make it as easy as possible for them to drill in federal lands and waters.
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum told executives gathered for the world’s largest energy conference that the Trump administration does not view climate change as an existential threat. Energy Secretary Chris Wright said rising global temperatures are simply a byproduct of developing the country’s national resources to support economic growth and national security.
Burgum leads Trump’s recently established National Energy Dominance Council and Wright serves as his deputy on the interagency body tasked with boosting production. Burgum was effusive in his praise of the oil and gas industry during remarks delivered at CERAWeek by S&P Global conference.
“I’m going to share two words that I do not think that you have heard from a federal official in the Biden administration during the last four years. And those two words are thank you,” said Burgum, who previously served as governor of North Dakota, a state that produces 1.2 million barrels of oil per day.
Burgum leaned on his experience as software company executive to lay out his view of the interior department’s role. The department under his leadership views the companies developing resources on federal lands as “customers” who are contributing revenue to the nation’s “balance sheet,” Burgum said.
“If someone was sending me revenue, they weren’t the enemy. They were the customer,” Burgum said. The administration loves anyone who wants to harvest timber, mine for critical minerals, graze cattle, or produce oil and gas on federals, the interior secretary said.
Royalties sent from lease agreements on federal land will help the U.S. pay down its national debt and balance the budget, Burgum said. “You’re the customer,” the interior secretary told the executives.
The value of nation’s abundant natural resources far outweighs its $36 trillion in debt, Burgum said. If financial markets understood the value of America’s natural resources, the 10-year long-term interest rate would come down, Burgum claimed.
“The interest rates right now are one of the biggest expenses we have as a country,” Burgum said. “So one of the things that we have to do is unleash America’s balance sheet, and President Trump is helping us do that,” he said.
Burgum slammed the Biden administration’s focus on climate change as an “ideology.” He said the Trump administration views Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon and China winning the artificial intelligence race as the two existential threats facing the U.S. rather than global warming. Wright said Biden had a “myopic” and “quasi religious” belief in reducing emissions that hurt consumers.
Burgum and Wright dismissed policies that support a transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy, arguing that wind and solar won’t be able to meet rising energy demand in the coming years from artificial intelligence and re-industrialization.
“There is simply no physical way that wind, solar and batteries could replace the myriad uses of natural gas. I haven’t even mentioned oil or coal yet,” Wright said at the conference. Wright previously served as CEO of oilfield services company Liberty Energy and a board member at nuclear startup Oklo.
Oil execs see allies in Washington
Oil executives are enthusiastic about the change of administrations in Washington, returning the praise they received from Trump’s energy team during the week.
ConocoPhillips CEO Ryan Lance said Wright and Burgum “understand the business,” describing them as the best energy team the U.S. has seen in decades. TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanné said he was “impressed by the quality of our counterparts.” Chevron CEO Mike Wirth said the industry is “seeing some reality come back to the conversation.”
“For years, my message has been, we need a balanced conversation about affordability, reliability and the environment, and focusing only on climate leads us to ignore the first two,” Wright said.
The executives all referred to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, following Trump’s executive order to rename the body of water. The president issued an order on his first day to repeal Biden’s ban on offshore drilling in 625 million acres of U.S. coastal waters.
BP CEO Murray Auchincloss briefly slipped before correcting himself when discussing how generative AI is helping with exploration: “We started doing this in the Gulf of Mexico, uh America, and we spread that to other nations as well.”
But Trump’s calls to “drill, baby, drill” are running up against market reality. The CEOs of Chevron and Conoco said U.S. oil production will likely plateau in the coming years after hitting new records under the Biden administration.
“Chasing growth for growth’s sake has not proven to be particularly successful for our industry,” Wirth said. “At some point, you’ve grown enough that you should start to move towards a plateau, and you should generate more free cash flow, rather than just more barrels.”
Lance sees U.S. oil production plateauing later this decade and then slowly declining.
“Maybe it’s time to go back to exploring the Gulf of America,” Pouyanné said. “The new administration is opening the Gulf. It has been slowed down after the Macondo drama,” he said, referring the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the largest in the history of marine drilling operations.
U.S. oil producers are scheduled to meet with Trump next week, industry lobby group American Petroleum Institute said in statement.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports11 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway