Connect with us
USAFA_Hosts_Elon_Musk USAFA_Hosts_Elon_Musk

News

Elon Musk less than 1M followers away from becoming Twitter’s most followed account

U.S. AIR FORCE ACADEMY, Colo. -- Tesla Inc. Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk poses for a photograph with U.S. Air Force Academy Cadets in Mitchell Hall during a tour hosted by Superintendent Lt. Gen. Richard Clark on April 7, 2022. Musk met with Academy senior leadership and delivered remarks to a crowd of cadets and faculty. (U.S. Air Force photo by Justin R. Pacheco)

Published

on

Elon Musk is just about one million followers away from becoming the most followed person on Twitter. The CEO’s gap between Barack Obama, currently Twitter’s most-followed account, has narrowed to less than one million. 

A look at Barack Obama’s page would show that the former US President currently has a total of 133,128,202 followers as of writing. In comparison, Elon Musk’s profile on Twitter shows that the CEO is followed — at least as of writing — by 132,207,559 accounts. This means that the gap between Musk’s and Obama’s follower count has narrowed down to just about 920,000 followers. 

Musk has always been a Twitter power user, and following his acquisition of the social media platform last year, his follower count maintained its momentum. This has allowed Musk to close in on the former US President, who has maintained his place as the platform’s most-followed account for years. 

There are some notable differences between Musk and Obama’s Twitter accounts. Musk tends to use Twitter regularly, and his posts are notoriously off-the-cuff, for better or worse. Obama, on the other hand, adopts a more measured and formal approach to his posts on the social media platform. Both Musk and Obama generate millions of impressions per tweet, though Musk’s posts tend to receive more replies.  

Musk also follows only 187 accounts on Twitter despite having over 132 million followers. The former US president, on the other hand, follows a whopping 563,395 accounts as of writing. 

Advertisement

The jury is still out on whether Musk’s purchase of Twitter for $44 billion was a wise decision, though the CEO has mentioned that the social media platform “has a shot at being cash flow positive” in the second quarter. It will be quite an accomplishment if Twitter does become cash flow positive, considering that the social media platform never made much money prior to Musk’s acquisition. 

“We’re getting close to the point where we’re close to having the total expenditures for the company excluding debt roughly equal to debt…I think we’ll be there in Q2. I don’t definitely want to count chickens before they hatch…but I think we’ve got a shot at being cash flow possible next quarter,” Musk noted during a Morgan Stanley conference.

As noted by Business Model Analyst, Twitter posted its first-ever net income of $1.2 billion in 2018, marking the first year it was profitable. It seemed like the social media platform had some momentum then, as in 2019, Twitter was profitable again with a net income of $1.4 billion. Between 2013 and 2017, Twitter did not post annual profits. The company was not profitable in the years after 2019 either. 

Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.

Advertisement

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future

Published

on

Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

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.

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.

Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic

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.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says

Published

on

tesla model 3 first generation headlight
Credit: Tesla Asia/Twitter

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.

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.

Continue Reading

Lifestyle

NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story

The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.

Published

on

By

The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.

Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot

Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.

The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.

Continue Reading