News
Tesla Autopilot Abusers need to be held accountable, but how?
Tesla Autopilot Abusers need to be held accountable for their actions. For years, Tesla engineers have worked long and hard to improve Autopilot and Full Self-Driving. Hundreds of thousands of hours of work have been put into these driving assistance programs, whether it would be through software, coding, and programming or through other mediums. However, years of hard work, diligence, and improvement can be wiped away from the public’s perception in a minute with one foolish, irresponsible, and selfish act that can be derived from an owner’s need to show off their car’s semi-autonomous functionalities to others.
The most recent example of this is with Param Sharma, a self-proclaimed “rich as f***” social media influencer who has spent the last few days sparring with Tesla enthusiasts through his selfish and undeniably dangerous act of jumping in the backseat while his car is operating on Autopilot. Sharma has been seen on numerous occasions sitting in the backseat of his car while the vehicle drives itself. It is almost a sure thing that Sharma is using several cheat devices in his Tesla to bypass typical barriers the company has installed to ensure drivers are paying attention. These include a steering wheel sensor, seat sensors, and seatbelt sensors, all of which must be controlled or connected by the driver at the time of Autopilot’s use. We have seen several companies and some owners use DIY hack devices to bypass these safety thresholds. These are hazardous acts for several reasons, the most important being the lack of appreciation for other human lives.
This is a preview from our weekly newsletter. Each week I go ‘Beyond the News’ and handcraft a special edition that includes my thoughts on the biggest stories, why it matters, and how it could impact the future.
While Tesla fans and enthusiasts are undoubtedly confident in the abilities of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving, they will also admit that the use of these suites needs to be used responsibly and as the company describes. Tesla has never indicated that its vehicles can drive themselves, which can be characterized as “Level 5 Autonomy.” The company also indicates that drivers must keep their hands on the steering wheel at all times. There are several safety features that Tesla has installed to ensure that these are recognized by the car’s operator. If these safety precautions are not followed, the driver runs the risk of being put in “Autopilot Jail,” where they will not have the feature available to them for the remainder of their drive.
As previously mentioned, there are cheat devices for all of these safety features, however. This is where Tesla cannot necessarily control what goes on, and law enforcement, in my opinion, is more responsible than the company actually is. It is law enforcement’s job to stop this from happening if an officer sees it occurring. Nobody should be able to climb into the backseat of their vehicle while it is driving. A least not until many years of testing are completed, and many miles of fully autonomous functionalities are proven to be accurate and robust enough to handle real-world traffic.
-->The reason Tesla should step in, in my opinion, and create a list of repeat offenders who have proven themselves to be irresponsible and not trustworthy enough for Autopilot and FSD, is because if an accident happens while these influencers or everyday drivers are taking advantage of Autopilot’s capabilities, Tesla, along with every other company working to develop Level 5 Autonomous vehicles, takes a huge step backward. Not only will Tesla feel the most criticism from the media, but it will be poured on as the company is taking no real steps to prevent it from happening. Unbelievably, we in the Tesla community know what the vehicles can and what safety precautions have been installed to prevent these incidents from happening. However, mainstream media outlets do not have an explicit and in-depth understanding of Tesla’s capabilities. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that they have no intentions of improving their comprehension of what Tesla does daily.
While talking to someone about this subject on Thursday, they highlighted that this isn’t Tesla’s concern. And while I believe that it really isn’t, I don’t think that’s an acceptable answer to solve all of the abuses going on with the cars. Tesla should take matters into its own hands, and I believe it should because it has done it before. Elon Musk and Tesla decided to expand the FSD Beta testing pool recently, but the company also revoked access to some people who have decided that they would not use the functionality properly. Why is this any different in the case of AP/FSD? Just because someone pays for something doesn’t mean the company cannot revoke access to it. If you pay for access to play video games online and hack or use abusive language, there are major consequences. Your console can get banned, and you would be required to buy a completely new unit if you ever wished to play online video games again.
While unfortunate, Tesla will have to make a stand against those who abuse Autopilot, in my opinion. There needs to be heavier consequences by the company simply because an accident caused by abuse or misuse of the functionalities could set the company back several years and put their work to solve Level 5 Autonomy in a vacuum. There is entirely too much at stake here to even begin to let people off the hook. I believe that Tesla’s actions should follow law enforcement action. When police officers find someone violating the proper use of the system, the normal reckless driving charges should be held up, and there should be increasingly worse consequences for every subsequent offense. Perhaps after the third offense, Tesla could be contacted and could have AP/FSD taken off of the car. There could be a probationary period or a zero-tolerance policy; it would all be up to the company.
I believe that this needs to be taken so seriously, and there need to be consequences because of the blatant disregard for other people and their work. The irresponsible use of AP/FSD by childish drivers means that Tesla’s hard work is being jeopardized by horrible behavior. While many people don’t enjoy driving, it still requires responsibility, and everyone on the road is entrusting you to drive responsibly. It could cost your life or, even worse, someone else’s.
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
-->I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!
Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.
We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.
However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.
Tesla FSD v14.2.1 first impressions:
✅ Smooth, stress-free highway operation
✅ Speed Profiles are refined — Hurry seems to be limited to 10 MPH over on highways. Switching from Mad Max to Hurry results in an abrupt braking pattern. Nothing of concern but do feel as if Speed…— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 29, 2025
The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.
Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.
Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed
From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.
This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.
-->It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.
Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.
Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others
This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.
In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.
We had some readers also mention this to us:
-->The abrupt speed reduction when switching to a slower speed profile is definitely an issue that should be improved upon.
— David Klem (@daklem) November 29, 2025
After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.
-->News
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
Tesla is preparing to introduce the Model 3 Standard to the Netherlands this December, as per information obtained by AutoWeek. The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
While Tesla has not formally confirmed the vehicle’s arrival, pricing reportedly comes from a reliable source, the publication noted.
Model 3 Standard lands in NL
The U.S. version of the Model 3 Standard provides a clear preview of what Dutch buyers can expect, such as a no-frills configuration that maintains the recognizable Model 3 look without stripping the car down to a bare interior. The panoramic glass roof is still there, the exterior design is unchanged, and Tesla’s central touchscreen-driven cabin layout stays intact.
Cost reductions come from targeted equipment cuts. The American variant uses fewer speakers, lacks ventilated front seats and heated rear seats, and swaps premium materials for cloth and textile-heavy surfaces. Performance is modest compared with the Premium models, with a 0–100 km/h sprint of about six seconds and an estimated WLTP range near 550 kilometers.
Despite the smaller battery and simpler suspension, the Standard maintains the long-distance capability drivers have come to expect in a Tesla.
-->Pricing strategy aligns with Dutch EV demand and taxation shifts
At €36,990, the Model 3 Standard fits neatly into Tesla’s ongoing lineup reshuffle. The current Model 3 RWD has crept toward €42,000, creating space for a more competitive entry-level option, and positioning the new Model 3 Standard comfortably below the €39,990 Model Y Standard.
The timing aligns with rising Dutch demand for affordable EVs as subsidies like SEPP fade and tax advantages for electric cars continue to wind down, EVUpdate noted. Buyers seeking a no-frills EV with solid range are then likely to see the new trim as a compelling alternative.
With the U.S. variant long established and the Model Y Standard already available in the Netherlands, the appearance of an entry-level Model 3 in the Dutch configurator seems like a logical next step.
News
Tesla Model Y is still China’s best-selling premium EV through October
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Tesla Model Y led China’s top-selling pure electric vehicles in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment through October 2025, as per Yiche data compiled from China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) figures.
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Model Y is still unrivaled
The Model Y’s dominance shines in Yiche’s October report, topping the chart for vehicles priced between 200,000 and 300,000 RMB. With 312,331 units retailed from January through October, the all-electric crossover was China’s best-selling EV in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment.
The Xiaomi SU7 is a strong challenger at No. 2 with 234,521 units, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which achieved 146,379 retail sales through October. The Model Y’s potentially biggest rival, the Xiaomi YU7, is currently at No. 4 with 80,855 retail units sold.
Efficiency kings
The Model 3 and Model Y recently claimed the top two spots in Autohome’s latest real-world energy-consumption test, outperforming a broad field of Chinese-market EVs under identical 120 km/h cruising conditions with 375 kg payload and fixed 24 °C cabin temperature. The Model 3 achieved 20.8 kWh/100 km while the Model Y recorded 21.8 kWh/100 km, reaffirming Tesla’s efficiency lead.
The results drew immediate attention from Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun, who publicly recognized Tesla’s advantage while pledging continued refinement for his brand’s lineup.
-->“The Xiaomi SU7’s energy consumption performance is also very good; you can take a closer look. The fact that its test results are weaker than Tesla’s is partly due to objective reasons: the Xiaomi SU7 is a C-segment car, larger and with higher specifications, making it heavier and naturally increasing energy consumption. Of course, we will continue to learn from Tesla and further optimize its energy consumption performance!” Lei Jun wrote in a post on Weibo.
Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
