News
How consumers view robotaxis ahead of Tesla’s ‘We, Robot’ event: study
Ahead of Tesla’s Robotaxi unveiling event on Thursday, one firm has released data suggesting that early consumer experience with driverless ride-hailing platforms has generally been positive.
On Tuesday, J.D. Power shared the results of its 2024 U.S. Robotaxi Experience study, which found that, on average, consumers ranked driverless ride-hailing experiences an 8.53 out of 10. In its second year, the study surveyed 3,773 respondents along with 773 consumers who lived in cities such as San Francisco, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Las Vegas, and Dallas, where robotaxi services are already available.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, consumer confidence in robotaxis was about substantially higher in those who had prior experience in one of the self-driving vehicles, landing at 76 percent, and well above the 20 percent for those who had not. Consumer confidence was also improved by public exposure to the technology, with 34 percent of those who had not ridden but had witnessed self-driving vehicles expressing some level of trust and acceptance.
Notably, these results suggest that sheer experience with robotaxi platforms — both riding inside them and seeing them on the street — tends to give consumers greater public trust in these driverless solutions. The results also come as the market for driverless ride-hailing continues to grow, as Tesla and other companies ready their commercial robotaxi offerings.
The study featured five categories, including comfort and convenience, initiating rides, taking rides in the given vehicle, service availability and cost, as well as overall vehicle technology. Responses for the study were fielded in August.
What's special about FSD Supervised is that it works anywhere in the US & Canada.
No high definition maps, no geofence.
This means you can even use it in places that no Tesla has never traveled to before
— Tesla AI (@Tesla_AI) October 4, 2024
The key findings also included that consumers regularly seek out safety features and easy access to authorities, such as the inclusion of an emergency button in robotaxis. Service area coverage and cost remain barriers for some consumers who haven’t tried the services out yet, with the vast majority of companies employing a mapping strategy to certain service areas.
“The robotaxi segment is still anyone’s game, given that most people are not familiar with robotaxi brands and haven’t formed a clear associative imagery,” said Kathleen Rizk, J.D. Power’s Senior Director of User Experience Benchmarking and Technology.
Other key findings include that consumers strongly value how well vehicles navigate traffic laws, and how well they perform when maneuvering regular traffic. In addition, 77 percent of rides said they would prefer a driverless robotaxi to a ride-share with a human driver when needing to have a private conversation.
You can view J.D. Power’s full study results for the 2024 Robotaxi Experience Study on the firm’s website here.
Currently, driverless ride-hailing services and tests are operated by the Google-owned company Waymo, May Mobility, Zoox, and Motional. Meanwhile, General Motors (GM) subsidiary Cruise was forced to halt self-driving operations last fall after an accident with a pedestrian, though it’s currently aiming to relaunch services by the end of this year.
While Tesla offers its Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised to customers, it doesn’t currently have the software available to consumers as a driverless ride-hailing system. However, the company is widely expected to unveil a ride-hailing service during its “We, Robot” event on Thursday, and it has already teased a mobile app ride-hailing platform.
The company’s FSD Supervised, eventually expected to become Unsupervised as Tesla targets the cars becoming safer than human drivers, is also one of the only self-driving softwares out there that doesn’t utilize area mapping. For that reason, Tesla has touted its ability to scale FSD beyond mapped-out service areas, especially when paired with the ongoing training of its AI neural network through real-time driving footage.
Apparent camouflaged Tesla Robotaxi prototype sighted at Warner Bros. Burbank
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
