News
Florida man charged after trying to hit Tesla protestors with car
Tesla protestors were nearly struck with the man’s car, though authorities say no one was injured.
A man in Florida has been charged with assault after attempting to drive into protestors outside of a Tesla store over the weekend, coming as the latest in ongoing protests and vandalism against CEO Elon Musk.
On Saturday, 44-year-old Andrew Tutil attempted to drive into protestors with his Nissan Pathfinder at the West Palm Beach Tesla store, although no one was injured, according to a report from Palm Beach Daily News. The store had around 150 protestors outside around 1:00 p.m., and Tutil reportedly drove slowly into the crowd before parking on the sidewalk and getting out.
“He drove into a crowd of senior citizens,” said Mark Offerman. “Everybody was able to move out, but two older women were really almost clipped. We immediately called the cops.”
After parking on the sidewalk where protestors had to jump out of the way, Tutil, a retired U.S. Army Captain, civil engineer, and supporter of Donald Trump, claimed that he was an employee of the Tesla store and that his brakes and electronics had malfunctioned, according to Offerman.
Palm Beach County records show that Tutil was later arrested and charged with first-degree felony aggravated assault with a deadly weapon without intent after police questioned Tutil and surrounding witnesses and reviewed photos and video footage.
The news comes as a wave of protests, acts of vandalism, and some violent encounters such as this one have been increasingly targeting Tesla stores in recent weeks against Musk and the Trump administration. Additionally, Musk’s work with Trump’s newly created “government efficiency” division has been a central theme in protests at Tesla stores, as federal workers have expressed criticism for the administration’s approach to “eliminating fraud and waste.”
🚨 President Trump on Tesla protests and vandalism:
-
-— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 11, 2025
READ MORE ON TESLA PROTESTS: I went to an anti-Musk protest at a Tesla store in Colorado—here’s what I experienced
The widespread protests began in January, after Musk performed what many said looked like a Nazi salute at Trump’s inauguration ceremony, and after he spoke at a campaign event for the far-right German party Alternative for Germany (AfD). During the rally, Musk said that there was “too much of a focus on past guilt and we need to move beyond that,” which many claimed was in reference to Nazi Germany.
The so-called “Tesla Takedown” movement launched over the past several weeks is targeting around 500 separate protests across 277 stores around the U.S. The Palm Beach protest on Saturday was just one of a handful in Florida alone, including those in Gainesville, Jacksonville, Merrit Island, and Sarasota, to name a few.
One protestor at a Tesla store in Colorado earlier this month told Teslarati that she was protesting Musk because she was “highly concerned that our Constitution is being ignored,” adding that “it’s dangerous to have power rest in a handful of ultra-wealthy people.”
Others at the event highlighted Musk and Trump’s attacks on queer, trans, and non-binary people, as well as the administration’s recent controversies with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and claims that the President is aligning with Russia President Vladimir Putin, as a few of the major reasons they were protesting at the Loveland Tesla store.
-
Musk has mostly deflected and made light of claims of his alignment with Nazis, while the public has been polarized on defending or condemning these and other actions.
The Tesla CEO was defended by Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who said he was being “falsely smeared” immediately following the inauguration event. While the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) also went on to defend the action as an “awkward gesture,” the group has since condemned some of Musk’s more recent posts making light of genocide.
Earlier this month, Musk reposted then deleted a screenshot shared by X user Rothmus claiming that “Stalin, Mao and Hitler didn’t murder millions of people,” but that “their public sector workers did.”
“It is deeply disturbing and irresponsible for someone with a large public platform to elevate the kind of rhetoric that serves to undermine the seriousness of these issues,” the ADL wrote in a response on X.
Credit: Rothmus/Alice Smith (via Elon Musk repost on X)
In addition to what have largely appeared to be peaceful protests at Tesla stores, a number of acts of vandalism, including graffiti, arson, and some even more violent assaults involving weapons, have been targeting the automaker’s locations around the world.
Multiple people were taken into custody following repeated arson and graffiti at a Tesla store in Colorado within the past few weeks, while multiple Tesla vehicles have been set on fire at stores, and one Tesla store has been shot at. Owners of Tesla’s vehicles have also been targeted in public, with some being captured on Sentry Mode keying or tagging the vehicles.
The Trump administration has also started labeling such attacks against Tesla as “domestic terrorism,” and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has started investigating several of the events, including one involving two Cybertrucks that were set on fire in Seattle and another at a store in Oregon that was shot at twice in a few weeks.
Tesla’s Giga Berlin director responds to anti-Musk criticism
-
-
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) reported a beat in revenues and EBITDA in its first earnings call report while also minimizing losses as its business continues to gain momentum.
After its IPO in July, SpaceX saw some tough losses on Wall Street due to a major selloff after a delay in its 13th Starship test flight. The ship launched later that week and completed what was arguably the most successful IFT operation in the Starship program’s history.
Nevertheless, the company is continuing on and reported some encouraging financials while also promoting what appears to be a robust outlook moving forward in its Space, AI, and Connectivity divisions.
SpaceX to report first-ever earnings today: here’s what to expect
Earnings Results
- Revenues: $7.8 billion reported vs. $6.7 billion expected
- Adjusted EBITDA: $3.5 billion vs. $2 billion expected
- Net loss of $541 million, an improvement of $467 million from net loss of $1.0 billion
Additionally, CFO Bret Johnsen had these comments:
“2026 has been a momentous year so far, and the second quarter demonstrated the true power of SpaceX. Revenue growth accelerated across all our business segments and we delivered strong operating leverage, with significant margin expansion led by our new AI compute agreements. Our unparalleled leadership in launch, Starlink subscriber growth, new enterprise and government partnerships, and best-in-class AI infrastructure underscore our ability to drive meaningful scale and deliver attractive returns. As a newly public company, we are delighted to welcome our broad base of shareholders and bondholders. We ended the second quarter with $100 billion of cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities, and $47.5 billion in backlog. This financial strength gives us substantial capacity to invest in Starship, Starlink Broadband and Mobile satellites, and our AI platform, while maintaining a disciplined long-term capital allocation framework.”
Space Business Highlights
SpaceX shared some of its biggest Space Business Highlights for Q2:
- Space revenues grew 55% sequentially and 29% year-over-year to $962 million, driven by a higher number of large customer launches and a favorable customer shift compared to the prior year
- Total costs and expenses for the Space segment were up by $389 million year-over-year, as we continued to accelerate R&D investments in our Starship program, which we believe will reduce the cost to orbit by 99% or more relative to the historical average, and unlock significant revenue potential across all business segments
- Leading launch provider for the world with 78 launches and 1,041 metric tons of mass to orbit deployed over the six months ended June 30, 2026, primarily allocated to Connectivity for the deployment of our Starlink constellation
- Starship V3 development continued to advance towards full and rapid reusability:
- Completed Starship V3’s first suborbital mission in May, Flight 12, which achieved a successful lift off from our new Starbase pad, a precision landing of Starship’s upper stage, and deployment of modified V2 Starlink satellites
- Subsequent to the second quarter, completed Starship Flight 13 in July, which achieved all flight objectives including deploying 20 production V3 satellites, demonstrating in-space relight of a Raptor engine, and executing the softest ever splashdown of Starship, providing critical views of an intact heatshield
SpaceX will report its earnings today at 4:30 P.M. EDT.
-
Elon Musk issued a second pointed warning to SpaceX short sellers on Tuesday, just hours before the company was set to release its first quarterly earnings as a publicly traded firm. Responding to a report highlighting elevated short interest, Musk wrote on X: “I try to warn them, but they just double down …”
The comment came as data from S3 Partners showed roughly 95 percent of available SPCX shares to borrow were on loan, translating to about 34 percent short interest as a percentage of the float. The stock has traded under pressure since its record-breaking IPO in June 2026, declining significantly from early peaks.
I try to warn them, but they just double down … 🤷♂️
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 4, 2026
This marks the second such message from Musk in under three weeks.
On July 17, amid post-IPO volatility, he stated: “The survival probability of firms who maintain a significant short position in SpaceX over time is very low.” At that time, SPCX had fallen roughly 30 percent from its peak above a $2.6 trillion valuation, with short sellers reportedly realizing gains of about $8.7 billion.
-
Musk’s warning aligned with optimistic analyses projecting that Starship-driven cost reductions could enable a multi-trillion-dollar space economy through applications such as orbital solar power, asteroid mining, data centers, and Mars-related projects, positioning SpaceX as critical infrastructure.
SpaceX is scheduled to report second-quarter results after the market close later today, followed by a webcast. Analysts anticipate revenue near $6.9 billion, reflecting growth in Starlink, launch services, and AI-related segments. The earnings release precedes a major lockup expiration on August 6 that could free hundreds of millions of insider shares.
Musk has a long track record of confronting short sellers, particularly regarding Tesla, where he has argued that persistent bearish positions underestimate transformative technologies. Critics view his optimism as overly ambitious given near-term stock fluctuations, while supporters see temporary dips as opportunities in a longer-term expansion of the space economy.
As SpaceX opens its books to public scrutiny for the first time, the high short interest and Musk’s repeated cautions set the stage for heightened market attention on the results and management’s commentary.
Tesla’s AI lead Ashok Elluswamy doubled down on the company’s strategy regarding Full Self-Driving’s speed settings, and owners are definitely confused.
Earlier versions of Full Self-Driving allowed owners to set a max speed that the vehicle could travel while operating under the semi-autonomous driver assistance platform. This allowed more customization for the driver, giving them the ability to experience FSD’s robust performance with their own personal preferences.
Speed is massively important for obvious reasons — it’s not only a question of keeping the vehicle occupants comfortable by traveling at a safe speed, but it’s also something that could contribute to a ticket or infraction from law enforcement.
With the release of FSD v14 last year, Tesla removed the ability to set a max speed and instead opted for five Speed Profiles, ranging from “Sloth,” the most conservative, to “Mad Max,” the most aggressive and spirited. These profiles not only control speed, but also how frequently the vehicle will execute passes, perform lane changes, and other contributing factors.
The removal of the Max Speed setting was a major complaint amongst the Tesla community because it left owners scrambling for a way to experience suitable behaviors while traveling at an appropriate speed. Most felt the driving profiles would be a good indicator of the behaviors, while speed would still be left up to the discretion of the driver.
Instead, Tesla’s Speed Profiles determine both, and the constant tinkering of how they behave has been a major bottleneck and point of confusion for both owners and the company. From update to update, the Speed Profiles will change, sometimes more drastically than others. Some owners have complained that the “Standard” profile is too fast, while others have experienced “Mad Max” traveling below the speed limit:
What has happened to Mad Max?
At one point it was going 32 in a 35. Traffic ahead had pulled away considerably https://t.co/bjKvaMVTNX pic.twitter.com/aaZSWmLu5v
-— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 24, 2026
These things change with each update, but the big complaint is that owners are on the hook for any tickets that come from FSD’s infractions; that’s the caveat of the suite being named FSD (Supervised). It ultimately means the driver is responsible, and the automaker has no liability when it comes to speeding tickets or general traffic infractions.
It is the driver’s responsibility to take over or adjust based on this.
Elluswamy essentially confirmed that there are no plans to bring back Max Speed control, because it is what he referred to as “an anti pattern.” He then echoed something that CEO Elon Musk has started to really push with FSD, and that’s the idea that Tesla is really honing in on the preferences of the driver.
Max speed control is an anti pattern.
We are working on better learning of user’s implied preferences.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) August 3, 2026
-
Owners were confused by Tesla’s decision, stating that there must be a better way, especially considering disengagements for incorrect speeds are common:
This…. is not the way
— Kyle Conner (@itskyleconner) August 4, 2026
😭 I appreciate this mentality ! But currently the no.1 reason I disengage in Australia is incorrect speed zones.
— Ryan’s Model Y (@ryanjaycowan) August 3, 2026
This is fine but you need to start accepting liability for speeding tickets then. https://t.co/lyCgdA83gQ
— Jeremy Judkins (@jeremyjudkins_) August 4, 2026
-
Okay https://t.co/nOvoXQkNg1 pic.twitter.com/jGRtF2xtox
— Chad Moran (@ChadMoran) August 3, 2026
From personal experience and using FSD for over 72 percent of my driving miles since v14 was released late last year, I make Speed Profile adjustments constantly. If FSD is traveling a tad too quickly, I will scale it back, and if it’s too conservative, I’ll make it more aggressive.
I don’t complain about making the Speed Profile changes too frequently, but it would certainly be nice to have it happen less frequently. There are far too many times I am concerned about getting a ticket, even in Standard mode.
The biggest issue for me, personally, which seems to be echoed throughout the community, is the fact that Tesla’s goal is to minimize disengagements. Many drivers are stating that speed is a major reason for disengagements.
However, Tesla is not willing to bring back this one level of input because it would technically be a regression.
-
Whether it’s right or wrong in your opinion, it is what Tesla is going with, and it seems like it has pivoted quite a bit from its other strategies for minimizing interventions by pushing its AI to behave in a way that would fit the occupant’s personal preferences.
SpaceX reports beat in first earnings while minimizing losses
Elon Musk sends second warning to SpaceX shorts ahead of first earnings
