News
Elon Musk receives tasteless stab from PA Treasury with fabricated Boring Co. quote
Despite the positive change that Tesla, SpaceX, and The Boring Company offer to the world, it is certain that there will always be people who will criticize Elon Musk’s efforts. It comes with the territory that when you become such a successful and well-known public figure that you are sure to ruffle a few feathers.
However, when a State Government agency starts to spew venom in the direction of a man whose concerns are increasing the longevity of Planet Earth, one can only look at it as a facetious attempt to gain some kind of recognition. This is especially notable when it is on a social media outlet as popular as Twitter, and even more so if the said agency fabricates a quote to make its point.
The Pennsylvania Treasury’s official Twitter account recently took a stab at Musk’s idea for using underground transportation tunnels through the Boring Company. The tunneling startup has already completed a private tunnel in Los Angeles and is halfway finished with another in Las Vegas, which is expected to be capable of moving about 4,400 people an hour. The official PA Treasury then decided to throw their two cents into the mix.
“What if we took something like a subway, but made it unfathomably expensive and only for cars, and also make sure that it will never work?”—Elon Musk,,a genius,” @PATreasury tweeted on January 13.
Just so we are all on the same page, the PA Treasury just made up that “quote.” Elon Musk never said that. In fact, the SpaceX and Tesla CEO has always maintained that the Boring Company’s tunnels will be affordable and functional, with some rides going as low as $1 per person. Its smaller tunnels are also far more affordable to build compared to regular subway tunnels, as proven by its proof-of-concept in Los Angeles.
While the Boring Company has not completed a public tunnel yet, it is important to note a few things. First, the Los Angeles tunnel, while private, is functional. The company’s website states that the tunnel is only accessible by people who are invited to use it, but the $10 million underground transportation tube works.
The purpose of the tunnel “is to demonstrate that a lift can be built in very small footprints and within existing buildings, whether they are houses, office buildings, or retail parking lots. Looking forward, one could have a lift in the basement of every office building, allowing extremely convenient commutes,” according to the tunneling startup’s website. The tunnel has done exactly that. It demonstrated that the idea is feasible and certainly possible.
Meanwhile in Sin City, the Las Vegas Convention Center tunnels will have the potential to be connected to various hotspots like the Strip and McCarron Airport. The $52.5 million project was secured by Boring Co. in May 2019 and will be ready for public use in early 2021. Amidst these rebuttals, many of which were expressed by supporters of Tesla, the PA Treasury opted to explain why it opted to take a stab at Musk.
“If you don’t like the post or any of our posts, that’s fine. But we think generating a conversation about all of these issues is good. And, let’s be honest, no one would be having this conversation if this was more boring, government-speak content… The point isn’t to be overly mean to Musk, though he can handle it. It’s to generate the conversation about the role of tech, public investment in infrastructure, income inequality, the love our society shows for CEOs, etc.,” the account tweeted.
While Musk’s ideas are not accepted by everyone, the purpose of the tweets seem to be questionable at best. Inciting conversation is a good and healthy thing. Why not talk about the upcoming tax season or other financial issues? Based on the tasteless nature of the PA Treasury’s tweet, as well as the fact that it deliberately used a false quote to gain attention, one could be compelled to infer that everything seems to be a ploy to gain social media traction by using Elon Musk’s name as a conversation starter.
As a Pennsylvania resident and someone who has lived here for 24 out of the 25 years I have been alive, this is very disappointing. I realize not everyone is going to agree with the ideas that Musk has, but to state that the Boring Company tunnels are an ineffective way to attack the traffic problems so many of us deal with, and making up a quote to get the point across, is simply incorrect. The Boring Company is a young entity and has been around for just over three years.
To put that into perspective, Tesla was formed in 2003 and did not begin delivering Tesla Roadsters until 2007. The Roadster was met with many issues and Tesla was not really considered a serious car company until the Model S began deliveries in June 2012 and the vehicle’s stellar reviews started coming in. Skeptics said Tesla would fail and that an electric car would never break through and become more appealing than a gas-powered automobile. Here we are in 2020 and Tesla’s most affordable sedan is consistently outselling comparable gas vehicles and causing the United States’ most popular luxury sedans to see low sales numbers.
The issue is that Musk confronts issues head-on and tries to figure out out-of-the-box solutions. This is more than what most people do. If nobody was doing it, there would be nobody to criticize. However, Musk is trying to make life on Earth easier for all of us. So, why don’t we let the man do what he has done for years: Bring us closer to an environmentally-friendly and sustainable Earth.
News
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
News
Tesla analyst says Full Self-Driving is about to have its iPhone moment
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.