News
Mars rover to Earth, this red planet has a methane problem
NASA’s Curiosity rover has been exploring an area of Mars called Gale Crater, since landing on the red planet in 2012. It was tasked with assessing the habitability of Mars. What was Mars like in the past? Were the conditions right for life?
Let’s be clear, Curiosity was not equipped with the instruments needed to identify life forms, but it can tell us if conditions were right for life to have survived.
Throughout its time on the red planet, Curiosity has discovered a bit of an enigma: Mars has methane and the abundance changes with the seasons. Big surges of methane can indicate that some sort of biological process is taking place, but that’s not always the case. And it’s not a definitive sign of life.
Methane is a gas produced by one of two methods on Earth: biological and geological. That means that some sort of life form could be producing or perhaps there’s some sort of geological explanation.
This is puzzling to scientists back on Earth because the Martian methane has been detected by ground-based telescopes. But recent orbital data from Mars shows the minuscule amounts of methane are gone.
In fact, the Trace Gas Orbiter (TGO)—a joint European and Russian mission—which launched in 2016 and was designed to sniff-out trace gases, such as methane, says the Martian air is basically methane-free.
But, NASA’s Curiosity rover may have just taken a big step forward in understanding this conundrum.
Curiosity’s detection of methane is nothing new. The six-wheeled rover has detected surges in methane throughout its mission. The most recent occurrence, recorded in June 2019, showed staggeringly high levels of methane—21 ppb (parts per billion). That’s the highest the rover has recorded to date.
Neither TGO nor its counterpart, the Mars Express orbiter, detected any methane at all in June.
TGO has detected minute amounts of methane—around 0.012 ppb—during its first few months of science operations. That’s equivalent to roughly 30 times less than what Curiosity sees. (Mars Express did detect the first methane surge that Curiosity spotted in June 2013.)
Why is there such a discrepancy between ground measurements and orbital data? The Curiosity science team has a few ideas.
First off, there could be some sort of atmospheric process taking place that is scrubbing it out of the atmosphere. Curiosity takes measurements on the ground and detects the methane, while TGO orbits the planet and does not. This means that something happens to it as it travels upwards through the atmosphere.
Another explanation could be atmospheric expansion and contraction. Mars has an atmosphere, albeit an incredibly thin one compared to Earth’s. Every day the heat from the sun causes the atmosphere to expand and contract.
As the atmosphere expands during the day, the methane could become more diffuse. Since Curiosity measure methane at night, when the rover is less busy, it could explain why the methane appears more abundant. That means that the rover is sniffing the atmosphere when its more dense, which means the methane concentration would be greater.
The team plans to take some daytime methane measurements and compare those with orbital data. This will give the team some insights into why the data is so different. Once they have that puzzle solved, they can move onto larger questions, like what generates the methane?
It’s also entirely possible that the gas may have been generated billions of years ago in deep, underground pockets, and it’s just now seeping up through the bedrock. Only time and more measurements can tell.
NASA is sending its next-generation Mars rover to the red planet this July. Dubbed the Mars 2020 rover, the vehicle is a souped-up version of Curiosity. This rover will not only be able to look for biosignatures (or signs of life), it will also bag up samples for a future return to Earth.
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”
