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.
-
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Elon Musk
Another Tesla SpaceX merger prediction by ARK Invest has Elon Musk talking
Elon Musk again denies a Tesla China split as new SpaceX merger speculation resurfaces quickly.
Elon Musk restated that Tesla has no plans to separate its China business from the rest of the company, responding to a new round of merger speculation from ARK Invest.
On the firm’s “Brainstorm” podcast, Cathie Wood’s team, including chief futurist Brett Winton and research director Nick Grous, argued a Tesla and SpaceX combination remains likely, with an announcement possible before the end of the year even if the deal itself would not close that quickly. Winton called Tesla’s Shanghai operations a “small ish wrinkle” for a merger rather than a real obstacle, since SpaceX’s national security work with the U.S. government sits uneasily next to Tesla’s manufacturing base in China.
Musk pushed back on the framing directly. “China is awesome. I strongly encourage people to visit,” he wrote on X. He also repeated language he first used in late July, when the Wall Street Journal reported that Tesla executives had been told to prepare for a possible spinoff, sale, or closure of the China business ahead of a SpaceX tie up. Musk called that report “absurdly fake news” at the time, adding that a separation had “never even come up in a discussion ever,” a line he echoed again this week.
The repeated denial has not settled the underlying question, because Shanghai’s role in Tesla’s business is exactly what makes a merger complicated. Gigafactory Shanghai still ships more than half of Tesla’s global deliveries and functions as the company’s main export hub for Europe and Asia. Teslarati previously reported on Musk’s initial denial, and the merger conversation itself has been building since SpaceX’s IPO gave it public shares to use as acquisition currency.
Wedbush’s Dan Ives has pegged the odds of a Tesla SpaceX merger at 80 to 90 percent by early 2027, and ARK’s prediction of a year end announcement adds another data point to that timeline, even as Musk keeps rejecting the specific mechanics reporters have described. Neither position rules out the other. Musk can deny a China spinoff was ever discussed while analysts still expect some form of combination to move forward, since ARK and Ives are both describing convergence at the corporate level, not necessarily the internal restructuring the Journal described in July.
For now, Tesla’s China business remains intact, and Musk’s comments this week make clear he has no interest in publicly walking that position back, no matter how often the merger question resurfaces.
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
Tesla headlights cause recall of over 20,000 Model 3 and Model Y
