News
Opinion: Consumer Reports’ Tesla Autopilot stunt crossed a line in an already-heated EV climate
Just recently, Consumer Reports published the results of a test it conducted at its private track to demonstrate just how “easy” it was to fool Tesla’s Autopilot system into operating without a driver behind the wheel. The magazine was successful in its aim, but it also demonstrated that it takes a very determined driver and an elaborate set of procedures to bypass Tesla’s driver-monitoring systems.
Bypassing Tesla’s Active Safety Features: A Walkthrough
To accomplish its goals, Consumer Reports performed a series of blatantly illegal driving behaviors. The magazine’s team seemed to have buckled in the driver’s seatbelt without a person sitting in the seat. The driver, who was not actively belted in, then engaged Autopilot and reduced the system’s speed to zero. When the vehicle stopped, a weighted defeat device was placed on the Tesla’s steering wheel to simulate pressure from the driver’s hand. The driver then went over to the passenger seat and increased Autopilot’s speed, which enabled the vehicle to start moving again. Consumer Reports also made it a point to point out that the driver in its test did not open the vehicle’s doors, as that would disengage Autopilot.
Overall, Consumer Reports tried to demonstrate that it was easy to fool Autopilot. Only it didn’t. The magazine instead provided a reasonably comprehensive guide on how to bypass several layers of Tesla Autopilot’s driver-monitoring systems. In its piece, Consumer Reports argued that this was proof that Tesla’s driver monitoring is inadequate since it does not use eye-tracking technology like those employed in GM’s Super Cruise (or Ford’s BlueCruise). While a valid argument, this does not excuse the magazine’s demonstration. Had Tesla employed eye-tracking technology, it would have been easy for Consumer Reports to use another creative trick to fool the system just the same. If the driver’s seat in the Tesla used sensitive weight sensors, it would have been “easy” to cheat the system with a weighted object as well (a literal sack of potatoes would do).
Inasmuch as Autopilot’s driver monitoring systems are not foolproof, the contingencies in Super Cruise are likely not foolproof either, especially against a driver who’s deliberately bypassing a vehicle’s safety systems. Simply put, if a person is intentionally putting themselves in danger by participating in illegal driving behaviors, no driver-monitoring system would be enough. Nevertheless, the magazine suggested that when it comes to Tesla, the fact that Autopilot could be fooled by a defeat device and an elaborate set of procedures means that the EV maker is at fault.
The Allure of Tribalism
Humans are tribal creatures by nature, as concluded in a 2019 study from the Association for Psychological Science. It is then no surprise that tribalism is prevalent everywhere. These tribes exist in numerous segments, from politics to consumer products. A look at the current political climate in countries such as the United States and the Philippines would show this. The years-long arguments against fans of iPhones and Android smartphones, or console and PC gamers, also hint at the notion that groups among similarly-minded individuals are bound to be formed.
The auto sector is no stranger to tribes, as seen in the rivalry between enthusiasts of Ford and Chevrolet vehicles. The Mustang vs. Camaro debate is still ongoing today, as is the pickup rivalry between the Ford F-150 and the Chevy Silverado. Tribes also exist in the racing segment, with groups forming among enthusiasts of classic, big-engined American muscle cars and highly modified Japanese imports. Such is simply the nature of the car industry. There are rivalries among companies and those that support them.
Congratulations on the Mach E! Sustainable/electric cars are the future!! Excited to see this announcement from Ford, as it will encourage other carmakers to go electric too.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 18, 2019
And for the most part, this is okay, especially if members of certain tribes are willing to coexist with the other. Tesla, however, has been caught in the crossfire more often than not. This has spawned a narrative that has become quite popular among the company’s critics and the mainstream media—that Tesla has a cult of followers that blindly worship Elon Musk, and actively attack anyone supporting any other vehicle that is not a Tesla.
While fringe groups of aggressive Tesla fans exist, they certainly do not comprise the majority of the company’s supporters. During the Mach-E’s announcement, CEO Elon Musk actively supported the vehicle, even as classic Mustang fans threw up their hands and bashed the electric car in frustration at the notion of a crossover being given the classic sports car’s iconic name. Even today, when tempers in the EV community online are flared, numerous strong voices remain supportive of the Mach-E.
A Fallacy of Composition
Consumer Reports’ Autopilot workaround test garnered a ton of attention, and it did not take long before Ford CEO Jim Farley retweeted the magazine’s findings, noting that Teslas will drive with no one in the driver’s seat. This is quite disingenuous, as vehicles have always been capable of operating without anyone in the driver’s seat, provided that drivers actively participate in illegal behaviors (such as putting a stone or a brick on the accelerator). Consumer Reports’ own staff also engaged queries from numerous Tesla supporters online to mixed results. Head of Connected and Automated Vehicles at Consumer Reports Kelly Frunkhouser, for one, stood her ground against critical comments against the magazine’s test to such a degree that she opted to mock a Tesla supporter for having only four followers on Twitter. The tweet was later deleted.
Tesla Will Drive With No One in the Driver's Seat – Consumer Reports https://t.co/HGGYoAOHv6
— Jim Farley (@jimfarley98) April 22, 2021
The unfortunate thing in this whole scenario is the fact that some Tesla supporters actually had valid points against Consumer Reports’ Autopilot conclusions. Why was Autopilot not benchmarked against comparable systems like Super Cruise and regular cruise control? What are the safety stats of systems like Super Cruise? Why not cite data that shows how many accidents occur every year due to improper cruise control use? These are but a few of the questions that were brought to the magazine’s attention, but most were dismissed because Tesla fans are just a “cult” (queue in the Simpsons meme showing “weird nerds” shielding Elon Musk from “valid criticism”).
In later tweets, Consumer Reports Head of Auto Testing Jake Fisher called back to the magazine’s interaction with Tesla back in the Model 3’s early days, when the vehicle initially missed the agency’s “Recommended” rating because of its brakes. In that instance, Tesla acknowledged the issue and rolled out a software update to address it, which resulted in the Model 3 later getting a “Recommended” rating. CR’s Autopilot demo is not the same, however, as this time around, the alleged faults of Tesla’s driver monitoring systems were intentionally being bypassed. This is not a “we observed something wrong that Tesla needs to fix” situation. This is an “Autopilot can be fooled if we try really hard and thus Tesla is at fault” situation. The Model 3 brakes were indeed valid criticism, and Tesla reacted as such. A series of procedures that bypass active safety features, maybe not so much.
When CR first tested the Tesla Model 3, we complained about the ride, seat comfort, wind noise, controls, and brakes. Boy were the Tesla fans pissed. Tesla OTOH improved all those things. No regrets.
— Jake Fisher (@CRcarsJake) April 23, 2021
Skeletons in the Closet and a Familiar Game Plan
While Consumer Reports prides itself in its analysis of consumer products, the magazine has shown bias in the past. Consumer Reports may not want to talk about it much today, but back in the 80s and the 90s, the magazine ended up costing the United States one of its most affordable, fun, and popular off-roaders ever — the Suzuki Samurai. Better known in other territories as the Suzuki Jimny, the Samurai was introduced in the United States in 1985.
By 1987, Suzuki was selling roughly two Samurais for every Jeep Wrangler sold. Consumer Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports, then came out with a devastating report on the Samurai in June 1988, giving the small SUV a damning “Not Acceptable” rating due to its alleged rollover risk. Consumer Reports’ conclusions were serious, and it called for a recall of the 150,000 Samurais that were already sold in the United States. Consumer Reports also urged Suzuki to refund the vehicles’ purchase price to their owners since, as per statements from then-Consumers Union assistant director David C. Berliner, “The design is inherently flawed in the Samurai. It’s not something where they can make an adjustment, or put on some hardware in order to make a difference. As designed, the only solution is to take it off the market.”
Suzuki fought Consumer Reports’ findings, and even safety watchdog group Center for Auto Safety noted that the Samurai’s rollover incidents were not unusual for such a popular vehicle. By then, the Samurai received 44 reports of rollovers with 16 deaths and 53 injuries, but Ron De Fore, director of public and consumer affairs for the safety agency, noted that such numbers were not too high considering that there are 150,000 of the SUVs on the road. De Fore also stated that of the fatal incidents surrounding the vehicle, 63% were alcohol-related, and only 24% were wearing seat belts. But despite these, Consumer Union doubled down, eventually showing a video of its tests featuring two of the Samurai’s wheels coming off the ground in a swerve test. Addressing reporters, Consumer Union technical director R. David Pittle remarked that the vehicle “literally trips over its own feet.”
Needless to say, Consumer Reports’ attacks against the Samurai tanked the SUV’s sales in the United States. By 1989, the Samurai was selling just about 5,000 units per year. Suzuki pulled out the Samurai in 1995 due to dismal sales, but in 1996, Consumer Reports added salt to the wound by highlighting its Samurai findings in its anniversary edition. This prompted a lawsuit from the Japanese carmaker, which ultimately resulted in footage of Consumer Reports’ tests on the small SUV from 1988. The video was shocking. As could be seen in the videos from Consumer Reports’ own tests, the Samurai actually performed very well, resisting rollovers so much that Technical Director David Pittle opted to change the test course to make it more challenging. Footage of the tests showed some Consumer Union staff audibly cheering when the Samurai’s wheels finally left the ground.
A Cautionary Tale
Suzuki and Consumer Union settled the lawsuit in 2004, and while the Consumer Reports publisher did not pay the Japanese carmaker any money or issue a retraction, it did issue a joint press statement clarifying that the magazine’s article about the Samurai in 1988 may have been misconstrued. It was a moral victory for Suzuki, but the damage had been done.
This is something that the EV community, the auto sector, and the media itself must keep in mind. Anyone with the least bit of comprehension understands that there is a need to transition the motoring sector to more sustainable vehicles. The auto sector could not really afford to have another Suzuki Samurai saga right now, especially considering the sustainability goals of numerous countries worldwide.
Tesla is leading the pack by a wide margin, and the company is only accelerating, with more vehicles poised to be built in Gigafactory Berlin, Giga Shanghai’s expansion, and in Gigafactory Texas. The motoring world cannot really be involved in unnecessary drama against Tesla today, as the mission to accelerate the advent of sustainability is far more important than tribal quarrels or prejudice against a group of EV enthusiasts. Does Tesla have to improve? Definitely, yes, especially when it comes to build consistency and after-sales service. Can Autopilot be safer? Absolutely, and Tesla definitely should. Was showing a walkthrough of how to illegally hack the driver-assist system using a defeat device (among many) helpful? Perhaps not.
Don’t hesitate to contact us for news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
The Tesla Model Y became the first-ever car to reach a legendary Norwegian milestone, surpassing 100,000 new registrations after gaining a reputation as one of the most popular vehicles in the country and the world.
As of May 20, Norwegian authorities have registered 100,224 units of the electric SUV, according to data from local outlet Opplysningsrådet for veitrafikken (OFV).
By population, roughly one in every 29 passenger cars on Norwegian roads is now a Model Y, underscoring its rapid rise as a national favorite.
Since the first deliveries in August 2021, the Model Y has transformed from a newcomer to a staple in Norwegian traffic.
Tesla back on top as Norway’s EV market surges to 98% share in February
Geir Inge Stokke, the Managing Director of OFV, described the achievement as “remarkable,” noting that few single models have gained such traction so quickly. “Tesla Model Y has hit the Norwegian market spot on, and the numbers illustrate how fast the EV market has developed here,” Stokke said.
The Model Y’s success reflects Norway’s aggressive push toward electrification. Nearly nine out of ten units, 87.6 percent, to be exact, are privately registered, with the remaining 12.4 percent on company plates. Owners span the country, from major cities to smaller municipalities, proving it is no longer just an urban or niche vehicle but a true “people’s car.
Who is Buying Tesla Model Ys in Norway?
Typical Model Y drivers are men in their early 40s. The average registered user age is 44, with 83 percent male and 17 percent female. Stokke noted that household usage often extends beyond the primary registrant, broadening the vehicle’s real-world appeal.
Geographically, adoption concentrates in urban centers with strong charging infrastructure. Oslo leads with 16,861 registrations (16.82 percent of the national total), followed by Bergen (7,450), Bærum (4,313), and Trondheim (4,240).
The top five municipalities—Oslo, Bergen, Bærum, Trondheim, and Asker—account for 35,463 units, or about 35 percent of all Model Ys. Yet the vehicle’s presence outside big cities highlights its broad acceptance.
Growth Trajectory and Popularity
Tesla built a lot of sales momentum in a short amount of time. In 2021, registrations closed out at 8,267, but more than doubled to more than 17,000 units in 2022 and more than 23,000 units in 2023. 2025 was the company’s strongest year yet, as Tesla managed to record 27,621 registrations.
Through 2026, Tesla already has 7,036 registrations.
Tesla’s Global Success with the Model Y
Tesla has tasted so much success with the Model Y; it has been the best-selling car in the world three times, it has dominated EV sales in numerous countries, and contributed to a mass adoption of electric vehicles across the planet.
As Stokke emphasized, the Model Y’s journey from newcomer to icon mirrors Norway’s broader success story. With robust incentives that push sales, excellent infrastructure, and consumer eagerness to transition to sustainable powertrains, the country continues setting global benchmarks in sustainable mobility.
The Tesla Model Y stands as a shining example of how quickly change can happen when conditions align.
SpaceX has disclosed the full financial details of its groundbreaking agreement with Anthropic, confirming that the AI company will pay $1.25 billion per month for dedicated high-performance computing resources.
The revelation came through SpaceX’s latest securities filing in preparation for its initial public offering, shedding light on one of the largest compute deals in the artificial intelligence sector to date. The prospectus was released last night, as SpaceX is heading toward its IPO.
This arrangement underscores the fierce demand for specialized infrastructure as frontier AI models require unprecedented levels of processing power to train and operate effectively. Industry analysts see the disclosure as a significant milestone, highlighting how top AI labs are locking in massive capacity to stay ahead in a rapidly accelerating field.
For SpaceX, it feels like a massive move that pushes its perception as a company from space exploration to artificial intelligence.
SpaceX is following in Tesla’s footsteps in a way nobody expected
The comprehensive deal grants Anthropic exclusive access to SpaceX’s Colossus clusters, encompassing Colossus I and the substantially expanded Colossus II, which together deliver hundreds of megawatts of power along with more than 200,000 NVIDIA GPUs.
Payments extend through May 2029, totaling nearly $45 billion overall; capacity is scheduled to ramp up during May and June 2026 at an initial discounted rate to facilitate seamless integration. Both companies retain the option to terminate the agreement with ninety days’ notice, so there is definitely some flexibility for both.
This pact not only enhances Anthropic’s ability to scale usage limits for Claude users but also injects substantial recurring revenue into SpaceX, bolstering its expansion into advanced data center operations and future orbital computing initiatives.
Observers describe the collaboration between the two companies as strategically advantageous because it gives Anthropic cutting-edge AI development the opportunity to collaborate with SpaceX’s expertise in rapid, large-scale infrastructure deployment.
This disclosure arrives at a pivotal moment when computing resources have become the primary bottleneck for AI progress.
As leading organizations compete to build more powerful systems, securing reliable, high-density facilities has emerged as a key differentiator.
SpaceX’s sites, such as those in Memphis, offer superior power availability and advanced cooling solutions that set them apart from conventional providers. For Anthropic, the added capacity is expected to deliver tangible improvements, including extended context windows, quicker inference times, and innovative features that appeal to both enterprise clients and individual users.
Looking ahead, the partnership paves the way for ambitious joint projects, including potential space-based AI compute platforms designed to overcome terrestrial limitations on energy and thermal management. Such efforts could redefine sustainable computing at massive scales.
Financially, the deal solidifies SpaceX’s diverse revenue profile ahead of its public market debut, extending beyond traditional aerospace activities. The massive check SpaceX will cash each month opens up the idea that additional
While some experts question the sustainability of these enormous expenditures given ongoing efficiency gains in AI architectures, the commitment reflects a strong belief in sustained demand growth.
The agreement also exemplifies productive synergies across sectors, with aerospace engineering insights optimizing AI hardware performance. As global attention on technology concentration increases, arrangements of this nature may help shape equitable access to critical resources.
Elon Musk
SpaceX just filed for the IPO everyone was waiting for
SpaceX filed its public S-1, revealing $18.7 billion in revenue and billions in losses.
SpaceX publicly filed its S-1 registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2026, making its financial details available to the public for the first time ahead of what could be the largest IPO in history.
An S-1 is the formal document a company must submit to the SEC before going public. It includes audited financials, risk factors, business descriptions, and how the company plans to use the money it raises. Companies are required to file one before selling shares to the public, and it must be published at least 15 days before the investor roadshow begins. SpaceX had already submitted a confidential draft to the SEC in April, which allowed regulators to review the filing privately before it went public.
The S-1 reveals that SpaceX generated $18.7 billion in consolidated revenue in 2025, driven largely by its Starlink satellite internet division, which posted $11.4 billion in revenue, growing nearly 50% year over year. Despite that growth, the company lost about $4.9 billion in 2025 and has burned through more than $37 billion since its founding.
SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history
A significant portion of those losses trace back to xAI, Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company, which was recently merged into SpaceX. SpaceX directed roughly 60% of its capital spending in 2025 to its AI division, totaling around $20 billion, yet that division lost billions and grew revenue by only about 22%.
SpaceX plans to list its Class A common stock on Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX, with Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Bank of America leading the offering. The dual-class share structure means going public will not meaningfully reduce Musk’s control, as Class B shares he holds carry 10 votes per share compared to one vote for public Class A shares.
The company is targeting a raise of around $75 billion at a valuation of roughly $1.75 trillion, which would make it the largest IPO ever. The investor roadshow is reportedly planned for June 5.
Tesla Model Y becomes first-ever car to reach legendary milestone
SpaceX reveals what Anthropic will pay for massive compute deal
