News
Elon Musk wants the Government to be a referee, not a player in the game of industry and innovation
Elon Musk is one of the most innovative minds to ever exist in the tech community. With his multiple companies providing successful changes in how some industries, like automotive, are looked at, Musk is a proven CEO with a track record to back it up. His many ideas basically changed the idea of what it is like to drive a car, which many of us thought would be dominated by gas and diesel-powered engines for years to come. An innovative mind and a lot of hard work undoubtedly contributed to Tesla’s success, and Musk has no interest in giving credit to anyone who didn’t earn it.
With the election coming to a close and a new Presidential campaign being selected to run the United States for the next four years, Musk was recently asked during an interview with the Wall Street Journal whether President-Elect Joe Biden’s plans to spend big on industry and innovation were a good thing. Musk doesn’t seem to have a problem with the idea, but he is vocal about the fact that the government should do more regulating than contributing. The role of Government, after all, is to enact laws and make sure they are abided by citizens. Additionally, assisting with companies’ innovation is something the Government shouldn’t stick its nose up at. Still, Musk just hopes that it plays more of an administrative role instead of becoming a “player in the game.”
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
“It’s the Government’s role to establish the rules of the game and then ensure that those rules are properly enforced,” Musk said. The CEO even compared the Government’s role to that of a referee in a game of football: Know the rules, enforce them correctly, make sure the game is fair.
What the Government doesn’t need to do is stay out of the way of the big companies who are working to innovate the processes of daily life to benefit them and their objectives. “I think when the Government does not do a great job is when they want to not just be a referee on the field, they want to be a player on the field. This does not end up in a good situation.”
The issue with the Government overreaching into the field of industry and innovation is that they will “pick technology winners and losers” instead of letting companies play out their innovation themselves. This could lead to small companies being undermined even if they have ideas or technology that larger companies don’t have access to.
This scenario, if Government was overly involved in tech and innovation, could have crippled Tesla’s efforts when the company was just starting to churn out vehicles in 2008. Even though Tesla had established itself as a player in electric vehicles, it was a small, relatively unknown company that faced massive problems due to lack of funds. Nearly shutting its doors after issues with the original Roadster, Tesla somehow overcame the adversity and received more investor money.
Now, imagine if the Government would have been a player instead of a referee in this scenario. It would have likely given a large financial assistance package to a well-developed, large scale automaker like Ford or GM to develop EVs. Instead, it stayed out of the innovation portion of the equation and let the players decide the game for themselves. Tesla ended up becoming the leader in EVs, while GM and Ford are failing to catch up. It’s fairly safe to say that without Tesla, EVs would not be what they are today. The legacy automakers that exist in the universe of automotive manufacturing would likely have cranked out one or two low-range models because their primary focus is still on gas-powered cars and not on electrification.
This whole picture perfectly aligns with how Tesla’s story has played out thus far. It is fairly obvious that the Government in 2008 would have sided with a company with proven infrastructure, and not some company who had a shot in the dark to change the entire framework of vehicle manufacturing. This is where Musk made his next point: Make the rules that incentivize the outcome, not the path.
The ultimate goal is to let companies figure out issues on their own. There is no reason to have Government programs essentially hold the hands of private industry. There needs to be more of a focus on the end goal and not the path a company takes to get there. Rarely is the road to success a straight and narrow path. Many companies, Tesla being a prime example, have to fight and struggle to create a new, innovative project. Tesla’s story is perfect evidence that the end goal takes a lot of persistence and it doesn’t need to be filled with hand-holding from large Government entities. While Biden’s plan to pump money into innovation and industry may help some companies get back on their feet in dire times of need, it shouldn’t hold the hands of these large companies whose job it is to figure out the answer to problems.
When large car companies begin to manufacture and deliver electric vehicles that are good for consumers, then they should be rewarded. Riding on the coattails of Government assistance packages that don’t necessarily guarantee innovation is the wrong way to go about things. When companies prove that they are in the business of creating a great product, then the rewards should come in. It’s that simple.
On behalf of the entire Teslarati team, we’re working hard behind the scenes on bringing you more personalized members benefits, and can’t thank you enough for your continued support!
News
Tesla Optimus V3 gets early third-party feedback, and it’s eye-opening
Jason Calacanis’ remarks, which were shared during a discussion at CES 2026, offered one of the first third-party impressions of the yet-to-be-unveiled robot
Angel investor and entrepreneur Jason Calacanis shared some insights after he got an early look at Tesla’s upcoming Optimus V3. His remarks, which were shared during a discussion at CES 2026, offered one of the first third-party impressions of the yet-to-be-unveiled robot.
Calacanis’ comments were shared publicly on X, and they were quite noteworthy.
The angel investor stated that he visited Tesla’s Optimus lab on a Sunday morning and observed that the place was buzzing with energy. The investor then shared a rare, shocking insight. As per Calacanis, Optimus V3 will be so revolutionary that people will probably not even remember that Tesla used to make cars in the future.
“I don’t want to name drop, but two Sundays ago, I went to Tesla with Elon and I went and visited the Optimus lab. There were a large number of people working on a Sunday at 10 a.m. and I saw Optimus 3. I can tell you now, nobody will remember that Tesla ever made a car,” he noted.
The angel investor also reiterated the primary advantage of Optimus, and how it could effectively change the world.
“They will only remember the Optimus and that he is going to make a billion of those, and it is going to be the most transformative technology product ever made in the history of humanity, because what LLMs are gonna enable those products to do is understand the world and then do things in the world that we don’t want to do. I believe there will be a 1:1 ratio of humans to Optimus, and I think he’s already won,” he said.
While Calacanis’ comments were clearly opinion-driven, they stood out as among the first from a non-Tesla employee about Optimus V3. Considering his reaction to the humanoid robot, perhaps Elon Musk’s predictions for Optimus V3 might not be too far-fetched at all.
Tesla has been careful with its public messaging around Optimus V3’s development stage. Musk has previously stated on X that Optimus V3 has not yet been revealed publicly, clarifying that images and videos of the robot online still show Optimus V2 and V2.5, not the next-generation unit. As for Calacanis’ recent comments, however, Musk responded with a simple “Probably true” in a post on X.
News
Tesla taps Samsung for 5G modems amid plans of Robotaxi ramp: report
The move signals Tesla’s growing focus on supply-chain diversification and next-generation communications as it prepares to scale its autonomous driving and robotaxi operations.
A report from South Korea has suggested that Samsung Electronics is set to begin supplying 5G automotive modems to Tesla. If accurate, this would mark a major expansion of the two companies’ partnership beyond AI chips and into vehicle connectivity.
The move signals Tesla’s growing focus on supply-chain diversification and next-generation communications as it prepares to scale its autonomous driving and Robotaxi operations.
Samsung’s 5G modem
As per industry sources cited by TheElec, Samsung’s System LSI division has completed development of a dedicated automotive-grade 5G modem for Tesla. The 5G modem is reportedly in its testing phase. Initial supply is expected to begin in the first half of this year, with the first deployments planned for Tesla’s Robotaxi fleet in Texas. A wider rollout to consumer vehicles is expected to follow.
Development of the modem began in early 2024 and it required a separate engineering process from Samsung’s smartphone modems. Automotive modems must meet stricter durability standards, including resistance to extreme temperatures and vibration, along with reliability over a service life exceeding 10 years. Samsung will handle chip design internally, while a partner company would reportedly manage module integration.
The deal represents the first time Samsung has supplied Tesla with a 5G vehicle modem. Tesla has historically relied on Qualcomm for automotive connectivity, but the new agreement suggests that the electric vehicle maker may be putting in some serious effort into diversifying its suppliers as connectivity becomes more critical to autonomous driving.
Deepening Tesla–Samsung ties
The modem supply builds on a rapidly expanding relationship between the two companies. Tesla previously selected Samsung’s foundry business to manufacture its next-generation AI6 chips, a deal valued at more than 22.7 trillion won and announced in mid-2025. Together, the AI chip and 5G modem agreements position Samsung as a key semiconductor partner for Tesla’s future vehicle platforms.
Industry observers have stated that the collaboration aligns with Tesla’s broader effort to reduce reliance on Chinese and Taiwanese suppliers. Geopolitical risk and long-term supply stability are believed to be driving the shift in no small part, particularly as Tesla prepares for large-scale Robotaxi deployment.
Stable, high-speed connectivity is essential for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving system, supporting real-time mapping, fleet management, and continuous software updates. By pairing in-vehicle AI computing with a new 5G modem supplier, Tesla appears to be tightening control over both its hardware stack and its global supply chain.
Tesla’s new Full Self-Driving pricing strategy will eliminate one recurring complaint that many owners have had in the past: FSD transfers.
In the past, if a Tesla owner purchased the Full Self-Driving suite outright, the company did not allow them to transfer the purchase to a new vehicle, essentially requiring them to buy it all over again, which could obviously get pretty pricey.
This was until Q3 2023, when Tesla allowed a one-time amnesty to transfer Full Self-Driving to a new vehicle, and then again last year.
Tesla is now allowing it to happen again ahead of the February 14th deadline.
The program has given people the opportunity to upgrade to new vehicles with newer Hardware and AI versions, especially those with Hardware 3 who wish to transfer to AI4, without feeling the drastic cost impact of having to buy the $8,000 suite outright on several occasions.
Now, that issue will never be presented again.
Last night, Tesla CEO Elon Musk announced on X that the Full Self-Driving suite would only be available in a subscription platform, which is the other purchase option it currently offers for FSD use, priced at just $99 per month.
Tesla is shifting FSD to a subscription-only model, confirms Elon Musk
Having it available in a subscription-only platform boasts several advantages, including the potential for a tiered system that would potentially offer less expensive options, a pay-per-mile platform, and even coupling the program with other benefits, like Supercharging and vehicle protection programs.
While none of that is confirmed and is purely speculative, the one thing that does appear to be a major advantage is that this will completely eliminate any questions about transferring the Full Self-Driving suite to a new vehicle. This has been a particular point of contention for owners, and it is now completely eliminated, as everyone, apart from those who have purchased the suite on their current vehicle.
Now, everyone will pay month-to-month, and it could make things much easier for those who want to try the suite, justifying it from a financial perspective.
The important thing to note is that Tesla would benefit from a higher take rate, as more drivers using it would result in more data, which would help the company reach its recently-revealed 10 billion-mile threshold to reach an Unsupervised level. It does not cost Tesla anything to run FSD, only to develop it. If it could slice the price significantly, more people would buy it, and more data would be made available.
Tesla Optimus V3 gets early third-party feedback, and it’s eye-opening
Tesla taps Samsung for 5G modems amid plans of Robotaxi ramp: report
