Connect with us

News

Michigan becomes first state to approve self-driving cars for public roads

Published

on

Michigan has become the first state to approve the sale of autonomous cars for use on public roads. Governor Rick Snyder signed the legislation making the sale of self-driving cars legal on December 9. The legislation is part of a package of four bills that cleared the Michigan senate last September. In addition to authorizing the sale of autonomous cars, the package includes funding for the American Center for Mobility — a research campus where autonomous driving technologies can be tested before being offered to the public.

American Center for Mobility

Proposed American Center for Mobility Credit: Michigan Economic Development Corp

The new law permits the sale of vehicles similar to Google’s autonomous test car that has no steering wheel, accelerator, or brake pedal. “By establishing guidelines and standards for self driving vehicles, we’re continuing that tradition of excellence in a way that protects the public’s safety while at the same time allows the mobility industry to grow without overly burdensome regulations,” Gov. Snyder said at a bill signing ceremony. “We are still the heart and soul of the auto industry, make no mistake about that,” Snyder continued.

The driving force behind the legislative package — which was vigorously supported by Ford and General Motors — is a desire to stop the brain drain of engineers from Michigan to Silicon Valley and other West Coast technology centers like Seattle. The American Center for Mobility will be constructed at the GM’s former Willow Run powertrain factory and automotive testing area. Prior to that, Willow Run manufactured B-24 bombers during World War II and was an important part of a manufacturing structure that made America the so-called “Arsenal of Democracy.”

Willow Run already has some infrastructure that will be useful for testing autonomous cars. It has long straightaways for high speed testing. It features a three level interchange, a high speed loop, and several bridges and tunnels. In addition, it already has the infrastructure needed to test connected car systems and features mock-ups of urban, suburban, and rural environments, according to AutoBlog.

This legislation will turn “the eyes of the world once again on Michigan for its engineering and its research,” says Michigan senator Ken Horn, a co-sponsor on the legislative package. “It’s a different kind of car-building,” Horn said on the Senate floor prior to voting, “but car-building nonetheless.”

Advertisement

It is ironic that Michigan should be so intent on being a leader in some areas while remaining doggedly opposed to innovations in others. The determining factor seems to be what Ford and General Motors want, as they are the tail that wags the dog in Michigan. The state bitterly opposes Tesla’s direct to customer sales model, for instance.

On the one hand, the state has bought shares of Tesla Motors for its retirement fund. Tesla is also a significant presence in Michigan’s manufacturing sector after purchasing the former Michigan-based Riviera Tool Company. But despite all Tesla’s lobbying efforts, the state’s franchise dealers, with substantial support from General Motors, have managed to block any changes to state law that would permit Tesla to open showrooms in the state to sell its cars directly to the public.

The new law permitting the sale of self-driving cars highlights the current struggle between traditional car companies and technology companies. Leading up to next week’s Technology In Motion conference co-hosted by Automotive News, Mike Ableson, vice president of strategy and global portfolio planning for General Motors, said automakers need to look at “the innovations coming out of Silicon Valley from Apple and Google and Samsung and put boundaries around that, not just for the OEM but also for the consumer. How far into the car do you let them come?”

Frank Weith, director of connected services at Volkswagen Group of America, said automakers need to make sure they don’t lose their identity as new technologies play a larger and larger role in the cars of the future. “We don’t want to be just a commodity, selling bulk vehicles to Google or Apple or Uber,” Weith said. “We want to be part of the consumer experience and keep our product up there.”

Advertisement

Both Ableson and Weith pointedly refrain from mentioning Tesla, but the shadow of Elon Musk is clearly a background factor in their remarks.

 

"I write about technology and the coming zero emissions revolution."

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla and driver sued by family of woman killed in Texas crash: what we know

Published

on

Credit: CNBC

Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.

The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.

Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.

Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.

Advertisement

Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration

Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.

The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”

This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.

Advertisement

More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.

We look forward to more details being released with time.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Cybertruck

Tesla Cybertruck is officially the safest pickup, IIHS says

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has awarded the 2025-2026 Tesla Cybertruck crew cab pickup its highest honor: Top Safety Pick+. This marks the Cybertruck as the only full-size pickup to achieve this distinction in recent evaluations.

The award applies specifically to vehicles built after April 2025, following structural upgrades including front underbody reinforcements and footwell modifications.

These changes enabled strong performance in updated crash tests. The Cybertruck earned “Good” ratings in the small overlap front (driver and passenger sides), updated moderate overlap front, and updated side tests—core requirements for the Top Safety Pick+ designation.

It also secured acceptable or good headlights across trims and a “Good” rating for its standard front crash prevention system in pedestrian scenarios, along with acceptable or good performance in vehicle-to-vehicle testing.

Advertisement

The Cybertruck avoided every single pedestrian collision, including:

  • Daytime child crossing
  • Nightitime adult crossing
  • Night parallel adult

Advertisement

In the large pickup category, competitors such as the Toyota Tundra received only a standard Top Safety Pick, while the Ford F-150 and Ram 1500 did not qualify for either award. This positions the Cybertruck as a standout in occupant protection and crash avoidance among its peers.

Credit: IIHS

Ironically, the same vehicle celebrated for superior U.S. safety performance remains banned from public roads in the United Kingdom and much of Europe. Regulators there cite the Cybertruck’s sharp external edges and highly rigid stainless-steel construction as failing pedestrian-protection standards. European and UK rules require rounded surfaces on protruding parts to minimize injury risk in collisions with vulnerable road users.

Critics also point to the truck’s substantial weight and unyielding body structure, which some argue could transfer more force to other vehicles or pedestrians rather than absorbing it.

Tesla’s engineering philosophy underpins the Cybertruck’s strong IIHS results. The vehicle features a distinctive stainless-steel exoskeleton made from ultra-hard 30X cold-rolled stainless steel. This provides exceptional structural rigidity and a robust safety cage that resists deformation in side impacts and rollovers.

Engineers designed integrated load paths to channel crash forces away from the occupant compartment while allowing controlled energy absorption in key zones. Post-April 2025 refinements to the front underbody further optimized performance in overlap crashes.

Advertisement

Complementing the passive structure is Tesla’s advanced active safety suite, including the standard Collision Avoidance Assist system with automatic emergency braking. This contributed directly to the vehicle’s strong front crash prevention scores. The skateboard platform and low center of gravity also enhance stability and handling, reducing the likelihood of certain crashes.

The IIHS recognition highlights how Tesla’s combination of high-strength materials, structural innovation, and software-driven safety systems can deliver top-tier protection in rigorous testing. While global regulatory differences on design and pedestrian interaction continue to limit the Cybertruck’s availability outside North America, its U.S. safety credentials set a new benchmark for full-size pickups.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX’s newest Starmind will make earth data centers obsolete

Elon Musk confirmed Starmind as SpaceX’s AI satellite constellation name, targeting one million orbital compute nodes.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk confirmed that Starmind will be the official name of SpaceX’s planned AI satellite constellation, following a trademark filing by xAI that surfaced earlier this week. Starmind is what’s being described to the FCC as a constellation of up to one million AI satellites

It’s worth noting that SpaceX’s Starlink communication satellite and Starmind are built on the same orbital infrastructure concept but serve entirely different purposes. Starlink is a connectivity network, with satellites receiving and relaying data between points on Earth, and functioning as a high-speed internet backbone in space. The satellites themselves do not process or think, and move information from one place to another, the same function a fiber cable performs underground.

SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history

Starmind, on the other hand, is something completely different, and tather than moving data, its satellites would compute data through artificial intelligence and directly in orbit using onboard processors powered by large solar arrays. Where a Starlink satellite is essentially a very fast pipe, a Starmind satellite is a server. The practical implication is that Starmind would allow AI models to run inference, process queries, and generate outputs from space, then beam results down to users anywhere on Earth within milliseconds, and without the data ever needing to travel to a terrestrial data center.

Advertisement

Starship will be able to carry 30 to 50 AI1 satellites per launch, delivering the equivalent of dozens of server racks per flight, with no land acquisition, no power grid approval, and no cooling infrastructure required on the ground.

SpaceX is pursuing this new technology as terrestrial data centers are running into hard limits such as lack of physical space, community opposition, and power and water consumption at a scale that is increasingly difficult to permit. Space has unlimited solar power, natural vacuum cooling, and no zoning boards. Musk said in a June 8 video presentation that he expects space to become the lowest-cost location to deploy AI compute within two to three years. Two AI1 prototypes are scheduled to launch in early 2027, with volume production targeted for the end of that year at a new facility called Gigasat.

The real world applications Starmind enables extend well beyond powering Grok. A constellation of orbiting AI processors could run inference workloads for any paying customer, anywhere on Earth, with latency measured in milliseconds rather than the seconds associated with ground-based cloud routing across continents. Starmind, if it scales as described, would make SpaceX the landlord of AI compute the same way Starlink made it the landlord of satellite internet.

Advertisement
Continue Reading