News
SpaceX, NASA celebrate Blue Origin’s lunar lander lawsuit loss and get back to work
In a November 9th press conference, NASA leaders have begun to publicly celebrate the end of seven months of Blue Origin litigation and disruption to its Human Landing System (HLS). A federal court’s dismissal of that lawsuit means that the space agency can finally get back to work with SpaceX on its Starship Moon lander.
Following the failure of that lawsuit, NASA administrator Bill Nelson says that it will take the space agency some time to fully determine what and how much damage Blue Origin has caused. In the briefing, Nelson and associate administrators Kathy Lueders and Jim Free confirmed that Dynetics’ protest and Blue Origin’s protest and lawsuit have delayed SpaceX’s first crewed Starship Moon landing to no earlier than (NET) 2025.
Painfully, though, the briefing primarily focused on NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and Orion spacecraft and the latest news about the system and the space agency’s attitude towards it are not encouraging.
Namely, exemplifying just how broken and deceptive NASA’s cost “transparency” is when it comes to SLS and Orion, the space agency used the briefing to announce its first updated Orion cost projections in more than half a decade. All the way back in September 2015, NASA announced major Orion delays and revealed that it had already spent $4.7B on the spacecraft and was committing another $6.7B through its first crewed launch – then scheduled no earlier than 2023.
That’s likely where NASA is getting its magically diminished Orion cost estimate. In reality, including Bush-era Constellation Program development that began in 2006, Orion will have cost NASA and the US taxpayer almost $22 billion by the end of 2021 and before a single full-up launch. Effectively doing the bare minimum to acknowledge a sanitized version of reality, NASA now says that Orion will cost at least $9.3 billion to its first crewed launch, which has been delayed to NET May 2024. It’s entirely unclear how NASA is calculating that deflated figure but in the six years since the space agency’s 2015 announcement that it would spend another $6.7B before Orion’s first crewed launch, it’s actually spent at least $8.4B and will have blown past the latest $9.3B target by mid-2022. Barring drastic funding cuts, Orion development will actually cost the US about $12.6B from 2016 to Artemis II and ~$25.8B since 2006 (not including inflation).
In an even starker demonstration of cognitive dissonance, when a New York Times reporter asked a hard question about the possibility of sidestepping Orion and SLS to get astronauts onto SpaceX’s Starship lunar lander, Administrator Nelson – having just repeatedly discussed Starship – fell back on an old boilerplate statement that “there’s only one rocket capable of doing this” – “this” being launching humans to the Moon and returning them to Earth and that “one rocket” being SLS. Association admin Jim Free also exhibited similar confusion, stating that “the architecture…just wouldn’t work.”
In reality, as currently contracted with NASA, SpaceX’s Starship Moon lander is a highly capable crewed spacecraft that will be refueled in Earth orbit before propelling itself to lunar orbit, where an SLS-launched Orion spacecraft would join it and transfer over three astronauts. Starship would then use its own propulsion to change orbits, land on the Moon, and eventually boost back into lunar orbit to transfer that crew back to Orion for the return to Earth. Nothing short of sheer ignorance – willful or not – could prevent competent spaceflight engineers or managers from understanding the possibilities such an architecture raises.
If NASA is already committed to human-rating Starship’s propulsion systems, which it is, it doesn’t take a grand leap of imagination to consider the possibility of adding a few more burns to Starship’s extremely complex concept of operations. If, for example, Starship has enough performance to return to Earth orbit from the lunar surface, it’s not hard to imagine NASA’s Artemis astronauts boarding Starship in Earth orbit after a far cheaper commercial launch and then returning to Earth orbit to debark Starship and return to that crew-rated reentry vehicle. As it turns out, NASA already has a highly successful crew-rated commercial rocket and spacecraft that’s already operational and likely more than 10 times cheaper than SLS/Orion.
While there are obvious challenges and uncertainties with such an option, the point is more that failing to even acknowledge the possibility of alternatives is a brutal appraisal of several of NASA’s most senior leaders and confirms that the politics of a jobs program like SLS/Orion is actively disrupting their ability to engage with reality and properly manage complex, risky programs.
Ultimately, it’s great news that SpaceX and NASA can finally get back to work on their Starship Moon lander plans. However, it’s also clearer than ever that SLS and Orion will remain a noose precariously balanced around the agency’s neck, forever threatening the Artemis Program and stifling NASA’s ability to seriously plan for – let alone publicly entertain or even acknowledge – contingencies or fresh ideas.
News
Tesla looks to upgrade Matrix Headlights with new features
According to the update, Tesla will work on improving the headlights when coming into contact with highly reflective objects, including road signs, traffic signs, and street lights. Additionally, pixel-level dimming will happen in two stages, whereas it currently performs with just one, meaning on or off.
Tesla is looking to upgrade its Matrix Headlights, a unique and high-tech feature that is available on several of its vehicles. The headlights aim to maximize visibility for Tesla drivers while being considerate of oncoming traffic.
The Matrix Headlights Tesla offers utilize dimming of individual light pixels to ensure that visibility stays high for those behind the wheel, while also being considerate of other cars by decreasing the brightness in areas where other cars are traveling.
Here’s what they look like in action:
-
- Credit: u/ObjectiveScratch | Reddit
-
- Credit: u/ObjectiveScratch | Reddit
As you can see, the Matrix headlight system intentionally dims the area where oncoming cars would be impacted by high beams. This keeps visibility at a maximum for everyone on the road, including those who could be hit with bright lights in their eyes.
There are still a handful of complaints from owners, however, but Tesla appears to be looking to resolve these with the coming updates in a Software Version that is currently labeled 2026.2.xxx. The coding was spotted by X user BERKANT:
🚨 Tesla is quietly upgrading Matrix headlights.
Software https://t.co/pXEklQiXSq reveals a hidden feature:
matrix_two_stage_reflection_dip
This is a major step beyond current adaptive high beams.
What it means:
• The car detects highly reflective objects
Road signs,… pic.twitter.com/m5UpQJFA2n— BERKANT (@Tesla_NL_TR) February 24, 2026
According to the update, Tesla will work on improving the headlights when coming into contact with highly reflective objects, including road signs, traffic signs, and street lights. Additionally, pixel-level dimming will happen in two stages, whereas it currently performs with just one, meaning on or off.
Finally, the new system will prevent the high beams from glaring back at the driver. The system is made to dim when it recognizes oncoming cars, but not necessarily objects that could produce glaring issues back at the driver.
Tesla’s revolutionary Matrix headlights are coming to the U.S.
This upgrade is software-focused, so there will not need to be any physical changes or upgrades made to Tesla vehicles that utilize the Matrix headlights currently.
Elon Musk
xAI’s Grok approved for Pentagon classified systems: report
Under the agreement, Grok can be deployed in systems handling classified intelligence analysis, weapons development, and battlefield operations.
Elon Musk’s xAI has signed an agreement with the United States Department of Defense (DoD) to allow Grok to be used in classified military systems.
Previously, Anthropic’s Claude had been the only AI system approved for the most sensitive military work, but a dispute over usage safeguards has reportedly prompted the Pentagon to broaden its options, as noted in a report from Axios.
Under the agreement, Grok can be deployed in systems handling classified intelligence analysis, weapons development, and battlefield operations.
The publication reported that xAI agreed to the Pentagon’s requirement that its technology be usable for “all lawful purposes,” a standard Anthropic has reportedly resisted due to alleged ethical restrictions tied to mass surveillance and autonomous weapons use.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is scheduled to meet with Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei in what sources expect to be a tense meeting, with the publication hinting that the Pentagon could designate Anthropic a “supply chain risk” if the company does not lift its safeguards.
Axios stated that replacing Claude fully might be technically challenging even if xAI or other alternative AI systems take its place. That being said, other AI systems are already in use by the DoD.
Grok already operates in the Pentagon’s unclassified systems alongside Google’s Gemini and OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Google is reportedly close to an agreement that will result in Gemini being used for classified use, while OpenAI’s progress toward classified deployment is described as slower but still feasible.
The publication noted that the Pentagon continues talks with several AI companies as it prepares for potential changes in classified AI sourcing.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk denies Starlink’s price cuts are due to Amazon Kuiper
“This has nothing to do with Kuiper, we’re just trying to make Starlink more affordable to a broader audience,” Musk wrote in a post on X.
Elon Musk has pushed back on claims that Starlink’s recent price reductions are tied to Amazon’s Kuiper project.
In a post on X, Musk responded directly to a report suggesting that Starlink was cutting prices and offering free hardware to partners ahead of a planned IPO and increased competition from Kuiper.
“This has nothing to do with Kuiper, we’re just trying to make Starlink more affordable to a broader audience,” Musk wrote in a post on X. “The lower the cost, the more Starlink can be used by people who don’t have much money, especially in the developing world.”
The speculation originated from a post summarizing a report from The Information, which ran with the headline “SpaceX’s Starlink Makes Land Grab as Amazon Threat Looms.” The report stated that SpaceX is aggressively cutting prices and giving free hardware to distribution partners, which was interpreted as a reaction to Amazon’s Kuiper’s upcoming rollout and possible IPO.
In a way, Musk’s comments could be quite accurate considering Starlink’s current scale. The constellation currently has more than 9,700 satellites in operation today, making it by far the largest satellite broadband network in operation. It has also managed to grow its user base to 10 million active customers across more than 150 countries worldwide.
Amazon’s Kuiper, by comparison, has launched approximately 211 satellites to date, as per data from SatelliteMap.Space, some of which were launched by SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket. Starlink surpassed that number in early January 2020, during the early buildout of its first-generation network.
Lower pricing also aligns with Starlink’s broader expansion strategy. SpaceX continues to deploy satellites at a rapid pace using Falcon 9, and future launches aboard Starship are expected to significantly accelerate the constellation’s growth. A larger network improves capacity and global coverage, which can support a broader customer base.
In that context, price reductions can be viewed as a way to match expanding supply with growing demand. Musk’s companies have historically used aggressive pricing strategies to drive adoption at scale, particularly when vertical integration allows costs to decline over time.
Tesla looks to upgrade Matrix Headlights with new features
xAI’s Grok approved for Pentagon classified systems: report
