News
Opinion: Tesla FSD Beta critics’ pearl-clutching and outrage are getting ridiculous
Tesla’s “Request Full Self-Driving Beta” button is here, and so is the Fear Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD). Over the weekend, Tesla owners with qualified vehicles and who purchased the company’s Full Self-Drivings suite were able to press a button that would allow them to apply for a slot in the company’s soon-to-be-expanded FSD Beta program. The company also launched its Safety Score system as a way to help determine which of its customers are safe drivers.
True to form, it did not take long before Tesla critics pounced on the “Request FSD Beta” button and the company’s “Safety Score” system. Pretty soon, even a US Senator joined the fray in condemning the FSD Beta program. While this is not a surprise and almost expected considering Tesla’s history, it must be said that this time, the pearl-clutching and outrage from the company’s critics are getting quite ridiculous.
Tesla’s Strategy
To get proper context on the FSD Beta expansion, one must know how Tesla started the program in the first place. The FSD Beta program was launched in October 2020, and for nearly a year, it was limited to just about 2,000 drivers. These drivers have accumulated valuable real-world data over the past 11 months, and none were involved in an accident. This effectively did two things: one; it proved that the FSD Beta program is feasible, and two; it set a very high bar for the rest of the FSD Beta rollout.
Expanding the FSD Beta program requires tons of caution. Thus, it was no surprise that the company launched a Safety Rating system designed to evaluate the driving behavior of Tesla owners. This effectively gave the company a rather objective way to evaluate which drivers could participate in the FSD Beta program expansion. It should also be noted that owners who qualify for the program would not be using a consumer release version of the Full Self-Driving suite. They would simply be part of the FSD Beta test program.
Clutching Pearls
This fact seems to have escaped some of the media coverage about the FSD Beta program expansion. Bloomberg, for one, ran with a headline that read “Tesla Starts Judging Owners It Charged $10,000 for Self-Driving.” This premise is quite incorrect as the $10,000 Full Self Driving suite being sold by Tesla is a consumer release product, not the advanced driver-assist system that would be used by owners who qualify for the FSD Beta program. Despite this, sentiments opposing the program, as well as the Safety Score system, have been quite evident among the company’s critics.
Such a misinformed take was evident in a Twitter post shared by US Senator Richard Blumenthal, who noted that Tesla was “putting untrained drivers on public roads as testers for their misleadingly-named, unproven system.” The Senator added that the FSD Beta strategy is a “seeming recipe for disaster” as the company is playing “Russian Roulette for unsuspecting drivers & the public.” Interestingly enough, the politician also cited a tweet from CNBC, which included an article that is, in many ways, slanted against the EV maker.
Outdated Information
Wrong takes on hot topics are typically due to outdated information, and in the case of US Senator Blumenthal, this might be the case. Back in 2018, the politician rode in a Model 3 with Consumer Reports Head of Auto Testing Jake Fisher, who was operating a version of Tesla’s Autopilot that is now incredibly outdated. During the drive, Fisher was quick to point out what capabilities Autopilot was lacking, all while operating the system without his hands on the wheel.
Consumer Reports is hardly a Tesla authority considering that the magazine, which prides itself on consumer advocacy, quite literally featured a thorough walkthrough on how to abuse Tesla’s Autopilot system back in April using defeat devices and a variety of tricks. If Blumenthal is basing his take on Tesla on CNBC‘s recent reporting — which was slanted negatively against the EV maker — and his past experiences with Consumer Reports — which operates Autopilot irresponsibly — then it is no wonder that he is skeptical about the FSD Beta test expansion.
The Irony of it All
The most ironic thing about the pearl-clutching and outrage among Tesla critics today is the fact that the “Request FSD Beta” button essentially does nothing for now. It does not make owners who press the button automatic FSD Beta testers. They’d have to have great Safety Scores for that. And due to the presence of Safety Scores, Tesla owners who wish to participate in the FSD Beta program are now driving safer than ever before. The company effectively incentivized safe driving this weekend, and somehow, it was still met with a ton of negativity.
Also ironic is the fact that statistics are on Tesla’s side. Take the well-publicized NHTSA investigation on Autopilot crashing into stationary emergency vehicles, for example. When the probe was launched, the news was extensively covered with headlines like CNN‘s “Tesla is under investigation because its cars can’t stop hitting emergency vehicles.” But while such headlines are compelling, the fact is that the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) report notes that there are about 8,000 stationary emergency vehicle crash injuries per year. Tesla had nine crash injuries with stationary first responder vehicles in the last 12 months, and some of those involved drivers who were not paying attention to the road.
The NHTSA notes that there are about 2,740,000 crash injuries in the United States per year, and there’s hardly any outrage for the human lives included in this grim statistic. Tesla’s Full Self-Driving system, which generally drives very conservatively, could effectively reduce this number by a notable margin. It is then quite disappointing to see the narrative being formed around the expansion of the FSD Beta program, especially considering that the advanced driver-assist system would only be released for owners who generally drive safely.
Valid Tesla Criticism
Interestingly enough, there are actual valid angles of criticism for Tesla’s FSD Beta rollout. The program for now is vastly focused on the United States, but the company sells the FSD suite to owners worldwide. It would then be beneficial to Tesla owners if the program’s expansion is expedited to areas such as Canada and Europe, to name a few. FSD, after all, is intended to be a universal system that should be capable of operating anywhere. Following this logic, FSD Beta must be tested on a wider set of areas as well — as soon as possible.
There are also Tesla owners who purchased the Full Self-Driving suite years ago on vehicles that are still equipped with MCU1 units. Some of these vehicles are already coming out of warranty, and their owners are yet to enjoy any FSD features since most of the advanced driver-assist system’s functions today require an MCU2 unit. Considering that Tesla owners were promised that their cars would be equipped with the hardware necessary for Full Self-Driving with an FSD suite purchase, it would only be right for Tesla to expedite MCU1 to MCU2 retrofits for owners with vehicles that were produced from March 2018 or earlier.
But misrepresenting the FSD Beta program expansion and criticizing the Safety Score system, that’s a far harder sell.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk pivots SpaceX plans to Moon base before Mars
The shift, Musk explained, is driven by launch cadence and the urgency of securing humanity’s long-term survival beyond Earth, among others.
Elon Musk has clarified that SpaceX is prioritizing the Moon over Mars as the fastest path to establishing a self-growing off-world civilization.
The shift, Musk explained, is driven by launch cadence and the urgency of securing humanity’s long-term survival beyond Earth, among others.
Why the Moon is now SpaceX’s priority
In a series of posts on X, Elon Musk stated that SpaceX is focusing on building a self-growing city on the Moon because it can be achieved significantly faster than a comparable settlement on Mars. As per Musk, a Moon city could possibly be completed in under 10 years, while a similar settlement on Mars would likely require more than 20.
“For those unaware, SpaceX has already shifted focus to building a self-growing city on the Moon, as we can potentially achieve that in less than 10 years, whereas Mars would take 20+ years. The mission of SpaceX remains the same: extend consciousness and life as we know it to the stars,” Musk wrote in a post on X.
Musk highlighted that launch windows to Mars only open roughly every 26 months, with a six-month transit time, whereas missions to the Moon can launch approximately every 10 days and arrive in about two days. That difference, Musk stated, allows SpaceX to iterate far more rapidly on infrastructure, logistics, and survival systems.
“The critical path to a self-growing Moon city is faster,” Musk noted in a follow-up post.
Mars still matters, but runs in parallel
Despite the pivot to the Moon, Musk stressed that SpaceX has not abandoned Mars. Instead, Mars development is expected to begin in about five to seven years and proceed alongside the company’s lunar efforts.
Musk explained that SpaceX would continue launching directly from Earth to Mars when possible, rather than routing missions through the Moon, citing limited fuel availability on the lunar surface. The Moon’s role, he stated, is not as a staging point for Mars, but as the fastest achievable location for a self-sustaining off-world civilization.
“The Moon would establish a foothold beyond Earth quickly, to protect life against risk of a natural or manmade disaster on Earth,” Musk wrote.
News
Elon Musk confirms Tesla Semi will enter high-volume production this year
Musk shared his update in a post on social media platform X.
Elon Musk has confirmed that Tesla will begin high-volume production of the Class 8 all-electric Semi this year.
He shared his update in a post on social media platform X.
Musk confirms Tesla Semi production ramp
Tesla CEO Elon Musk reaffirmed on X that the Semi is finally moving into volume production, posting on Sunday that “Tesla Semi starts high volume production this year.”
The update comes as Tesla refreshed its Semi lineup on its official website, an apparent hint that the program is transitioning from limited pilots into wider commercial deployment. As per Tesla’s official website, two variants of the Semi will be offered to consumers: Standard and Long Range.
The Standard trim offers up to 325 miles of range with an energy consumption rating of 1.7 kWh per mile and a gross combination weight rating of 82,000 pounds. The Long Range version pushes driving range to 500 miles, with Tesla noting a higher curb weight of about 23,000 pounds, likely due to a larger battery pack.
Both trims support fast charging, with Tesla stating that the Semi can recover up to 60% of its range in 30 minutes using compatible charging infrastructure.
Broader Tesla Semi rollout
Tesla has already delivered production Semi units to select partners, including snack and beverage giant PepsiCo as well as logistics behemoth DHL, which confirmed that its truck operates daily in California, traveling roughly 100 miles per day and requiring charging just about once a week.
The company has also partnered with Uber Freight, as noted in a Benzinga report, with Tesla executives previously describing the agreement as a way for fleet operators to experience the Semi’s lower operating and maintenance costs firsthand.
With Musk now publicly committing to high-volume production, the Semi appears poised to move beyond pilot programs and into scaled commercial use, an important step in Tesla’s wider push to electrify heavy-duty and long-range trucking.
News
Tesla tops France reliability rankings, beating Toyota for the first time
The milestone was celebrated by CEO Elon Musk on social media platform X.
Tesla has overtaken Toyota to become France’s most reliable car brand in 2025, as per a new nationwide reliability ranking published by Auto Plus magazine.
The milestone was celebrated by CEO Elon Musk on social media platform X.
Tesla tops reliability ranking in France
Tesla ranked first overall in Auto Plus’ 2025 reliability study, surpassing long-time benchmark Toyota across all powertrain types, including gasoline, hybrid, and electric vehicles.
The ranking, published on February 6, 2026, evaluated early problems reported in 2025 on vehicles registered in France since January 1, 2018, with fewer than 150,000 kilometers on the odometer, as noted by a Numerama report. This marked Tesla’s first appearance in the magazine’s reliability rankings, which was enabled by the company’s growing vehicle population in the French market.
According to the publication, Tesla vehicles showed no recurring major defects beyond isolated suspension arm issues, which are covered under the company’s four-year or 80,000-kilometer warranty. Other reported issues were described as minor, including occasional screen glitches and door handle concerns.
Why this ranking differs from earlier criticism
Tesla’s top placement contrasts sharply with past assessments from the German Automobile Club (ADAC), which previously ranked the Model 3 and Model Y low in its technical inspection reports. Auto Plus noted that those inspections were focused heavily on factors such as brake disc wear, which are not necessarily the best benchmarks for overall vehicle reliability.
By focusing instead on real-world reliability data and early ownership issues, Auto Plus’ methodology offered a broader picture of how vehicles perform over time rather than how individual components age under inspection standards. The publication emphasized that electric vehicles, with far fewer moving parts than combustion-engine cars, are not inherently less reliable.
While the ranking supports the case that electric vehicles can match or exceed the reliability of traditional brands, the magazine acknowledged limitations in its analysis. Still, Tesla’s debut at the top of the list underscores how perceptions of EV durability are shifting as more long-term data becomes available in major automotive markets like France.