News
NASA SLS rocket launches Orion spacecraft to the Moon
After years, months, days, hours, and minutes of waiting, NASA’s first Space Launch System (SLS) rocket has successfully lifted off from Kennedy Space Center and sent an Orion spacecraft on its way to the Moon.
Originally projected to launch by late 2016, SLS lifted off for the first time at 1:48 am EST (06:48 UTC) on November 16th, 2022. Once known as Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1), NASA’s SLS debut was renamed “Artemis I” when the Trump administration created the Artemis Program in 2017. By most measures a semi-modernized Apollo Program without a geopolitical race against the Soviet Union, the Artemis Program survived the election of a new president in 2020, and the SLS rocket’s debut has officially become the program’s first major mission to get off the ground.
That SLS rocket has had a very long journey to its first successful launch. Supplied by United Launch Alliance (ULA), the rocket’s small Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) – the stage responsible for orbital burns – was delivered to the Kennedy Space Center in November 2017. Boeing shipped the first Core Stage – SLS’ central liquid rocket booster – to Mississippi for proof testing in January 2020, and CS-1 completed that testing in March 2021 and was delivered to Florida by April 2021.

After almost 12 months of painstaking assembly, the first fully-assembled SLS rocket rolled out to Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39B (Pad 39B) and attempted its first on-pad wet dress rehearsal (WDR) test. Seven months, three partially-completed WDRs, and two aborted launch attempts later, everything finally came together on November 16th, 2022.
By all appearances, the first SLS launch went perfectly. Shortly before liftoff, SLS ignited four former Space Shuttle Main Engines, making sure they were performing as expected. Seconds later, the launch computer fully committed and ignited both of SLS’ Shuttle-derived solid rocket boosters (SRBs) – motors than cannot be shut down after they’re lit. Much like the Shuttle did, SLS leapt off the pad after SRB ignition.
Combined, NASA says its RS-25 liquid engines and SRBs produced up to 4000 tons (8.8M lbf/39,200 kN) of thrust at liftoff, making SLS the second most powerful rocket to ever leave the launch pad. Only the Soviet Union’s N1 rocket, which produced up to 4500 tons (9.9M lbf/44,100 kN) of thrust at liftoff, was more powerful. But unlike N1, which failed four times over four launch attempts, the first SLS rocket reached orbit as planned, making it the most powerful rocket ever successfully launched.
About two minutes after liftoff, both SRBs successfully separated from the Core Stage. Eight and a half minutes after liftoff, the Core Stage shut down its four RS-25 engines and deployed the ICPS and Orion spacecraft just below the height of a stable orbit. 51 minutes after liftoff, ICPS ignited its lone RL-10 engine for 22 seconds to insert itself and Orion into a stable Earth orbit. Finally, about an hour and forty minutes after liftoff, ICPS ignited for a lengthy 18-minute trans-lunar injection (TLI) burn, sending Orion on a trajectory that will intercept the Moon on November 21st.

If all goes according to plan, Orion will then use its own European Service Module (ESM) to correct its trajectory and enter a Distant Retrograde Orbit around the Moon on November 25th, where it will remain tens of thousands of kilometers above the lunar surface. Orion will then leave lunar orbit as early as December 1st and reenter Earth’s atmosphere on December 11th before the capsule finally splashes down in the ocean.
Assuming Artemis I goes perfectly, Artemis II – SLS and Orion’s first launch with astronauts aboard – is scheduled no earlier than (NET) 2024. Artemis III, which will team up with a modified version of SpaceX’s Starship launch vehicle to attempt to land astronauts on the Moon for the first time since 1972, is expected to follow NET 2025. However, a reliable source with a prophetic track record estimates that Starship and SLS might not be ready to launch Artemis III until 2028.



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.