News
SpaceX’s next Starship launch go for Tuesday attempt after licensing dispute
Update 2: Activity at the launch pad suggests that SpaceX is preparing Starship SN9 for a launch attempt as early as 3 pm CST (UTC-6). Today’s launch window lasts until 6 pm CST, enough time for one or more scrub-and-recycle flows in the event of an abort.
Update: Despite signs to the contrary yesterday evening, SpaceX appears to have received an FAA license for Starship SN9’s high-altitude launch debut or is confident that that disputed license is imminent.
According to Mary (aka BocaChicaGal), one of a handful of remaining Boca Chica Village residents, SpaceX has asked the villagers to evacuate for an SN9 launch attempt as early as Tuesday afternoon (CST/UTC-6). To be clear, this is not the first (or second) time residents have evacuated in anticipation of a launch attempt that never came, but there is certainly a chance that this particular instance is the real deal. Stay tuned for SpaceX’s official webcast and unofficial coverage from NASASpaceflight.com and others.
The Washington Post’s Christian Davenport reports that SpaceX’s Starship SN9 FAA launch license is close to being approved, potentially setting the company up for another high-altitude Starship launch as early as Tuesday afternoon, February 2nd.
However, no update on the status of the FAA’s launch license “review” came on February 1st and local Boca Chica residents received a health and safety alert later that evening, likely implying that Tuesday is off the table for Starship SN9’s launch debut.
Delayed for unknown reasons when the FAA withheld a necessary launch license, Starship serial number 9 (SN9) was believed to be ready for an SN8-style launch debut as early as January 25th. According to sources that spoke with The Verge last week, “SpaceX [refused] to stick to the terms of what the FAA authorized” during Starship SN8’s wildly successful launch debut and last-second landing failure, but the FAA refused to comment on the specifics and never offered a material example of how SpaceX violated its SN8 launch license.
Simply put, if the FAA actually had some kind of smoking gun that demonstrated a clear failure by SpaceX to follow the rules it agreed to in good faith, it’s almost impossible to believe that the regulatory agency would withhold that information – especially once it began to be raked over the coals of public perception as the news broke. Why stay silent in the face of harsh criticism if one could easily show that the source was in the wrong?
One possible explanation is a general disinterest or feeling of obligatory detachment at the FAA or its spaceflight wing – often a valuable tactic employed by bureaucratic institutions to operate (or appear to operate) more objectively. On the other hand, it’s also possible that the FAA is splitting hairs to argue that SpaceX refused to “stick to the terms” it laid out, possibly to the point that even the agency itself is aware that publicizing the specifics of SpaceX’s purported sins wouldn’t help its case in the public eye.
It’s fairly easy to imagine that SpaceX – as habitually fast-moving and quick to respond to changing scenarios as it is – may have tweaked Starship SN8’s flight profile as the date got closer and a more detailed picture of vehicle health and weather conditions materialized.
Ultimately, it appears that Tuesday is likely out of the question for Starship SN9’s launch debut. However, SpaceX submitting a safety alert to local residents for possible testing from 8am to 5pm CST (UTC-6) implies that the company could continue testing the SN7.2 test tank, kick off Starship SN10’s first test(s), or even put Starship SN9 through another wet dress rehearsal or static fire. Stay tuned for updates!
Elon Musk
Tesla’s Elon Musk: 10 billion miles needed for safe Unsupervised FSD
As per the CEO, roughly 10 billion miles of training data are required due to reality’s “super long tail of complexity.”
Tesla CEO Elon Musk has provided an updated estimate for the training data needed to achieve truly safe unsupervised Full Self-Driving (FSD).
As per the CEO, roughly 10 billion miles of training data are required due to reality’s “super long tail of complexity.”
10 billion miles of training data
Musk comment came as a reply to Apple and Rivian alum Paul Beisel, who posted an analysis on X about the gap between tech demonstrations and real-world products. In his post, Beisel highlighted Tesla’s data-driven lead in autonomy, and he also argued that it would not be easy for rivals to become a legitimate competitor to FSD quickly.
“The notion that someone can ‘catch up’ to this problem primarily through simulation and limited on-road exposure strikes me as deeply naive. This is not a demo problem. It is a scale, data, and iteration problem— and Tesla is already far, far down that road while others are just getting started,” Beisel wrote.
Musk responded to Beisel’s post, stating that “Roughly 10 billion miles of training data is needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving. Reality has a super long tail of complexity.” This is quite interesting considering that in his Master Plan Part Deux, Elon Musk estimated that worldwide regulatory approval for autonomous driving would require around 6 billion miles.
FSD’s total training miles
As 2025 came to a close, Tesla community members observed that FSD was already nearing 7 billion miles driven, with over 2.5 billion miles being from inner city roads. The 7-billion-mile mark was passed just a few days later. This suggests that Tesla is likely the company today with the most training data for its autonomous driving program.
The difficulties of achieving autonomy were referenced by Elon Musk recently, when he commented on Nvidia’s Alpamayo program. As per Musk, “they will find that it’s easy to get to 99% and then super hard to solve the long tail of the distribution.” These sentiments were echoed by Tesla VP for AI software Ashok Elluswamy, who also noted on X that “the long tail is sooo long, that most people can’t grasp it.”
News
Tesla earns top honors at MotorTrend’s SDV Innovator Awards
MotorTrend’s SDV Awards were presented during CES 2026 in Las Vegas.
Tesla emerged as one of the most recognized automakers at MotorTrend’s 2026 Software-Defined Vehicle (SDV) Innovator Awards.
As could be seen in a press release from the publication, two key Tesla employees were honored for their work on AI, autonomy, and vehicle software. MotorTrend’s SDV Awards were presented during CES 2026 in Las Vegas.
Tesla leaders and engineers recognized
The fourth annual SDV Innovator Awards celebrate pioneers and experts who are pushing the automotive industry deeper into software-driven development. Among the most notable honorees for this year was Ashok Elluswamy, Tesla’s Vice President of AI Software, who received a Pioneer Award for his role in advancing artificial intelligence and autonomy across the company’s vehicle lineup.
Tesla also secured recognition in the Expert category, with Lawson Fulton, a staff Autopilot machine learning engineer, honored for his contributions to Tesla’s driver-assistance and autonomous systems.
Tesla’s software-first strategy
While automakers like General Motors, Ford, and Rivian also received recognition, Tesla’s multiple awards stood out given the company’s outsized role in popularizing software-defined vehicles over the past decade. From frequent OTA updates to its data-driven approach to autonomy, Tesla has consistently treated vehicles as evolving software platforms rather than static products.
This has made Tesla’s vehicles very unique in their respective sectors, as they are arguably the only cars that objectively get better over time. This is especially true for vehicles that are loaded with the company’s Full Self-Driving system, which are getting progressively more intelligent and autonomous over time. The majority of Tesla’s updates to its vehicles are free as well, which is very much appreciated by customers worldwide.
Elon Musk
Judge clears path for Elon Musk’s OpenAI lawsuit to go before a jury
The decision maintains Musk’s claims that OpenAI’s shift toward a for-profit structure violated early assurances made to him as a co-founder.
A U.S. judge has ruled that Elon Musk’s lawsuit accusing OpenAI of abandoning its founding nonprofit mission can proceed to a jury trial.
The decision maintains Musk’s claims that OpenAI’s shift toward a for-profit structure violated early assurances made to him as a co-founder. These claims are directly opposed by OpenAI.
Judge says disputed facts warrant a trial
At a hearing in Oakland, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers stated that there was “plenty of evidence” suggesting that OpenAI leaders had promised that the organization’s original nonprofit structure would be maintained. She ruled that those disputed facts should be evaluated by a jury at a trial in March rather than decided by the court at this stage, as noted in a Reuters report.
Musk helped co-found OpenAI in 2015 but left the organization in 2018. In his lawsuit, he argued that he contributed roughly $38 million, or about 60% of OpenAI’s early funding, based on assurances that the company would remain a nonprofit dedicated to the public benefit. He is seeking unspecified monetary damages tied to what he describes as “ill-gotten gains.”
OpenAI, however, has repeatedly rejected Musk’s allegations. The company has stated that Musk’s claims were baseless and part of a pattern of harassment.
Rivalries and Microsoft ties
The case unfolds against the backdrop of intensifying competition in generative artificial intelligence. Musk now runs xAI, whose Grok chatbot competes directly with OpenAI’s flagship ChatGPT. OpenAI has argued that Musk is a frustrated commercial rival who is simply attempting to slow down a market leader.
The lawsuit also names Microsoft as a defendant, citing its multibillion-dollar partnerships with OpenAI. Microsoft has urged the court to dismiss the claims against it, arguing there is no evidence it aided or abetted any alleged misconduct. Lawyers for OpenAI have also pushed for the case to be thrown out, claiming that Musk failed to show sufficient factual basis for claims such as fraud and breach of contract.
Judge Gonzalez Rogers, however, declined to end the case at this stage, noting that a jury would also need to consider whether Musk filed the lawsuit within the applicable statute of limitations. Still, the dispute between Elon Musk and OpenAI is now headed for a high-profile jury trial in the coming months.