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.
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.
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.
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.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
