News
Tesla fires back at Fortune with cheeky “Misfortune” blog post

The drama continues between Tesla and Fortune after the media outlet published a story questioning Tesla’s ethics claiming the company sold $2 billion worth of stock but failed to disclose that it was under investigation by the National Highway Transport Association (NHTSA) after Joshua Brown was killed when his Model S in Autopilot mode crashed into a tractor trailer.
Since the story was published, Tesla CEO Elon Musk defended the company’s position that news surrounding the Autopilot related death was not material to its stock price. Fortune disagreed citing that the stock price dropped $6 per share after news broke that the NHTSA was in fact investigating evidence surrounding Brown’s death. That’s when Musk fired back via email picking choice words with Fortune’s writer and stating, “Indeed, if anyone bothered to do the math (obviously, you did not) they would realize that of the over 1M auto deaths per year worldwide, approximately half a million people would have been saved if the Tesla autopilot was universally available. Please, take 5 mins and do the bloody math before you write an article that misleads the public.”
The Tesla vs Fortune debacle spilled over into the public Twittersphere between Fortune’s Editor Alan Murray and Elon Musk. The tweets continued throughout Wednesday with Alan Murray defending the media outlet’s position that Tesla did not disclose news of the Autopilot death. Fortune went as far as quoting statements made in an SEC filing by Tesla which warned investors that a fatal crash related to its Autopilot feature would be a material event to the company’s brand, business, and operating results. Tesla would later bring to light that Fortune mischaracterized the quote within the SEC filing.
Tesla has since released a blog post on this matter titled “Misfortune”.
Misfortune
Fortune’s article is fundamentally incorrect.
First, Fortune mischaracterizes Tesla’s SEC filing. Here is what Tesla’s SEC filing actually says: “We may become subject to product liability claims, which could harm our financial condition and liquidity if we are not able to successfully defend or insure against such claims.” [full text included below] This is just stating the obvious. One of the risks facing Tesla (or any company) is that someone could bring product liability claims against it. However, neither at the time of this SEC filing, nor in the several weeks to date, has anyone brought a product liability claim against Tesla relating to the crash in Florida.
Next, Fortune entirely ignores what Tesla knew and when, nor have they even asked the questions. Instead, they simply assume that Tesla had complete information from the moment this accident occurred. This was a physical impossibility given that the damage sustained by the Model S in the crash limited Tesla’s ability to recover data from it remotely.
When Tesla told NHTSA about the accident on May 16th, we had barely started our investigation. Tesla informed NHTSA because it wanted to let NHTSA know about a death that had taken place in one of its vehicles. It was not until May 18th that a Tesla investigator was able to go to Florida to inspect the car and the crash site and pull the complete vehicle logs from the car, and it was not until the last week of May that Tesla was able to finish its review of those logs and complete its investigation. When Fortune contacted Tesla for comment on this story during the July 4th holiday, Fortune never asked any of these questions and instead just made assumptions. Tesla asked Fortune to give it a day to confirm these facts before it rushed its story to print. They declined and instead ran a misleading article.
Here’s what we did know at the time of the accident and subsequent filing:
- That Tesla Autopilot had been safely used in over 100 million miles of driving by tens of thousands of customers worldwide, with zero confirmed fatalities and a wealth of internal data demonstrating safer, more predictable vehicle control performance when the system is properly used.
- That contrasted against worldwide accident data, customers using Autopilot are statistically safer than those not using it at all.
- That given its nature as a driver assistance system, a collision on Autopilot was a statistical inevitability, though by this point, not one that would alter the conclusion already borne out over millions of miles that the system provided a net safety benefit to society.
Given the fact that the “better-than-human” threshold had been crossed and robustly validated internally, news of a statistical inevitability did not materially change any statements previously made about the Autopilot system, its capabilities, or net impact on roadway safety.
Finally, the Fortune article makes two other false assumptions. First, they assume that this accident was caused by an Autopilot failure. To be clear, this accident was the result of a semi-tractor trailer crossing both lanes of a divided highway in front of an oncoming car. Whether driven under manual or assisted mode, this presented a challenging and unexpected emergency braking scenario for the driver to respond to. In the moments leading up to the collision, there is no evidence to suggest that Autopilot was not operating as designed and as described to users: specifically, as a driver assistance system that maintains a vehicle’s position in lane and adjusts the vehicle’s speed to match surrounding traffic.
Fortune never even addresses that point. Second, Fortune assumes that, putting all of these other problems aside, a single accident involving Autopilot, regardless of how many accidents Autopilot has stopped and how many lives it has saved, is material to Tesla’s investors. On the day the news broke about NHTSA’s decision to initiate a preliminary evaluation into the incident, Tesla’s stock traded up, not down, confirming that not only did our investors know better, but that our own internal assessment of the performance and risk profile of Autopilot were in line with market expectations.
The bottom line is that Fortune jumped the gun on a story before they had the facts. They then sought wrongly to defend that position by plucking boilerplate language from SEC filings that have no bearing on what happened, while failing to correct or acknowledge their original omissions and errors.
Full text referenced above:
We may become subject to product liability claims, which could harm our financial condition and liquidity if we are not able to successfully defend or insure against such claims.
“Product liability claims could harm our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition. The automobile industry experiences significant product liability claims and we face inherent risk of exposure to claims in the event our vehicles do not perform as expected resulting in personal injury or death. We also may face similar claims related to any misuse or failures of new technologies that we are pioneering, including autopilot in our vehicles and our Tesla Energy products. A successful product liability claim against us with respect to any aspect of our products could require us to pay a substantial monetary award. Our risks in this area are particularly pronounced given the limited number of vehicles and energy storage products delivered to date and limited field experience of our products. Moreover, a product liability claim could generate substantial negative publicity about our products and business and would have material adverse effect on our brand, business, prospects and operating results. We self-insure against the risk of product liability claims, meaning that any product liability claims will have to be paid from company funds, not by insurance.”
News
Tesla is preparing to take on autonomy’s final boss
India’s city streets are notorious for their complexity and congestion.

If there is any sign that Tesla is now confident about its self-driving program, it would be this. As could be seen on Tesla’s Careers page, the company is now hiring Autopilot Vehicle Operators in Delhi and Mumbai, India.
As far as real-world traffic is concerned, one could argue that India’s city streets are the final boss of autonomous driving systems due to their complexity and congestion.
Tesla job openings
As per Tesla in its recent job openings, Prototype Vehicle Operators will be responsible for driving an engineering vehicle for extended periods and conducting dynamic audio and camera data collection for testing and training purposes. In both its job listings for Mumbai and Delhi, Tesla noted that successful applicants will be gathering real-world data on the weekends and around the clock.
Considering the job openings in India, Tesla seems to be intent on rolling out its advanced driver-assist systems like FSD in the country. This is quite interesting, as Tesla is not hiring Prototype Vehicle Operators in other territories that recently launched, such as the Philippines. Perhaps Tesla intends to tackle FSD’s final boss of sorts before rolling out FSD in other territories.
FSD’s rollout
Tesla’s autonomous driving program uses the company’s Full Self-Driving system, which is currently available on vehicles in North America and China. Tesla, however, has a more advanced version of FSD called Unsupervised FSD, which is currently being used in vehicles that are part of the Robotaxi pilot in Austin and the Bay Area.
Elon Musk has also recently announced on X that Tesla will be releasing FSD V14 in the coming weeks. He also shared a number of improvements that can be expected from FSD V14. “The FSD release in about 6 weeks will be a dramatic gain with a 10X higher parameter count and many other improvements. It’s going through training & testing now. Once we confirm real-world safety of FSD 14, which we think will be amazing, the car will nag you much less,” Musk wrote in his post.
News
Tesla Sweden finally makes IF Metall union give up 600-day strike
Tesla and the union have opened the door to resolutions that do not involve a collective agreement.

After nearly two years of industrial action and sympathy strikes, Swedish labor union IF Metall has stated that it is softening its stance in its dispute with Tesla. With this, Tesla and the union have opened the door to resolutions that do not involve a collective agreement.
Union chair Marie Nilsson told Sveriges Radio’s Ekot that while the preferred outcome remains a signed agreement, “other alternative solutions” are now on the table.
Union reconsiders rigid demands
The strike, which began over 600 days ago, has been marked by a series of strategic moves from both sides. IF Metall blocked Tesla’s access to license plates by targeting mail delivery, while Tesla bypassed the restrictions by importing vehicles in bulk through German ferries to Trelleborg, among other strategies.
Despite the high-profile tactics, the number of active strikers has been relatively small, just about 60 in total, as noted in a CarUp report. Tesla Sweden has also maintained that it does not intend to bow down to the union’s demands. Over the 600-day strike, Tesla Sweden has adapted its operations to get around the union and its allies’ strikes.
Possible paths to ultimate resolution
Nilsson, for her part, noted that IF Metall is now willing to explore alternatives, such as embedding industry-standard terms directly into Tesla’s employment contracts or shifting Tesla’s Swedish operations to a company that already has a collective agreement.
“You can do it in different ways. The easiest thing would be to sign a collective agreement. But when that is not possible, we have to find other alternative solutions as well, so we are open to discussion,” Nilsson stated.
IF Metall, if any, has acknowledged that Tesla has already improved working conditions in Sweden since the dispute began. Tesla Sweden has argued that its working conditions are already better than union standards, which is reportedly one of the reasons why very few company employees actually participated in IF Metall’s strike.
“There have been conversations throughout the journey where we compared our conditions. Tesla has adjusted details without going into details, they want to be a good employer, it’s about wages and conditions,” Nilsson stated.
Cybertruck
Tesla Cybertruck is getting a big security upgrade
“Cybertruck was not 100% carryover in execution like S3XY, so it required work.”

Tesla confirmed today that a massive Cybertruck security feature is on the way soon, and it is one that owners have been asking about for a long time.
Like all Teslas, Cybertruck has the excellent security feature known as “Sentry Mode.” The feature essentially turns your Tesla into a moving security camera, recording any event that happens nearby.
It has been used to solve crimes such as vandalism and burglary, and even used by police departments to solve other, high-profile crimes.
Tesla quietly added this extra Sentry Mode feature to deter vandals
However, Cybertruck has been missing one key feature of Sentry Mode: the use of the B-Pillar camera has not been enabled, leaving one of the most vandalized and targeted vehicles in the United States with a weakness.
One person who has been vocal about it is Tesla Cybertruck enthusiast Greggertruck, who has been pushing for answers for months. He finally got his answer from Cybertruck Vehicle Program Manager Siddhant Awasthi:
“It will come soon! Cybertruck was not 100% carryover in execution like SX3Y so it required work. Team has finished work on this and just need to make sure it’s validated and runs reliably (which it should for its feature).”
It will come soon! Cybertruck was not 100% carryover in execution like SX3Y so it required work. Team has finished work on this and just need to make sure it’s validated and runs reliably (which it should for its feature)
— Siddhant Awasthi (@siddawa) August 14, 2025
It sounds as if Tesla’s issue was something they similarly experienced when deploying Full Self-Driving to Cybertruck. The other four Tesla vehicles were able to use FSD because they’re all relatively similar in ride height and overall functionality. They share tons of similarities.
Cybertruck did not get FSD right away because Tesla still had to work on the differences between it and the other cars in the lineup. As Awasthi said, “Cybertruck was not 100% carryover in execution like S3XY, so it required work.”
Tesla Cybertruck FSD release expected for Sept, Park Assist to come first
It sounds as if Tesla is close to resolving some of the more intricate details of adding the functionality, and it was just a matter of time before it figured out the issue.
The release of the B-Pillar camera being active during Sentry Mode events on Cybertruck will likely come in a software update in the coming weeks.
-
Elon Musk1 week ago
Elon Musk teases crazy new Tesla FSD model: here’s when it’s coming
-
Elon Musk6 days ago
Elon Musk confirms Tesla AI6 chip is Project Dojo’s successor
-
News6 days ago
Tesla Model Y L reportedly entered mass production in Giga Shanghai
-
Elon Musk7 days ago
Tesla CEO Elon Musk details massive FSD update set for September release
-
Cybertruck6 days ago
Tesla’s new upgrade makes the Cybertruck extra-terrestrial
-
News4 days ago
Elon Musk reaffirms Tesla Semi mass production in 2026
-
Elon Musk1 week ago
Tesla ‘activist shareholders’ sue company and Elon Musk for Robotaxi rollout
-
News1 week ago
Elon Musk explains why Tesla stepped back from Project Dojo