News
General Motors ends the Chevy Bolt, along with an old narrative [Op-Ed]
General Motors’ decision to end the Chevy Bolt also brought closure to an old narrative that the vehicle, which has been plagued by a disastrous perspective driven by major battery issues, is not dependable. Ending what accounted for more than 98 percent of its 2022 EV sales last year may be more than a public relations move than anything.
There is no doubt the Chevy Bolt is a common option among electric vehicle buyers. The car is still commonly considered one of the more affordable electric options on the market, and the most recent model year was no different. Offering both the EV and slightly more spacious EUV at a price point below $30,000 is just what GM needed to surge sales of sustainable powertrains within its offerings after stalled efforts to widely manufacture its other models, like the GMC Hummer EV and Cadillac Lyriq, slowed the so-called “leader in EVs” potential rise to prominence.
While GM executives noted yesterday during the company’s Q1 2023 Earnings Call that the termination of the Bolt EV and EUV will make way for more popular and soon-to-be-offered pickups and SUVs, it is not a far-fetched thought to think that eliminating the two models is a move that offers both high risks and high rewards. On one hand, GM has been extremely dependent on the Bolt models to drive EV sales. On the other, the vehicles are basically the only reason GM has any credibility in the space.
GM bids farewell to the Chevy Bolt, bringing closure to its best-selling EV
Eliminating the Bolt means two things: GM will have immense pressure to ramp up production of its other vehicles. If successful, it will truly launch itself into an entirely new status. Failure could set the automaker back years in terms of what it has worked so hard to build, all of which can be attributed to the Bolt’s prowess as the manufacturer’s most popular EV.
But even more important is that an old narrative that has hovered over the Bolt like a dark storm cloud will go, and that is that it is a car plagued with old stories of battery issues, which were widely fixed as a result of a major overhaul that cost GM over $1 billion.
Various Bolt EVs were widely followed by the massive recall, which the automaker paid $1.8 billion to remedy. During the Q2 2021 Earnings call, the company said it would voluntarily recall all 2020-2022 model year vehicles to fix a series of manufacturing defects within battery cells. These problems forced owners to do things like limit the state of charge, park outside of their garages, and even avoid certain parking lots, as Bolts were banned from parking on some properties.
It worked quickly to fix the issues, and eventually, the Bolts were handed back to their owners and were safe to drive once again.
While the problems and defects disappeared, the opinions didn’t.
It begs the question of whether GM is eliminating the Bolt for another reason, at least partially. Bringing an end to a vehicle that brought so much of both triumph and turmoil to the GM name has its positives and negatives. Ultimately, GM plans to be all-electric in the long term, and getting off the ground running with a new lineup of EVs on its Ultium platform is the most crucial part of the process.
Unfortunately, this includes bringing closure to a model that may come with a negative narrative in the future.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with tips! Email us at tips@teslarati.com, or you can email me directly at joey@teslarati.com.
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.
The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality.
“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.
When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.
After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”
“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.
Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.
During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.
As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
