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.
News
Tesla gathers 93,000 FSD miles in a country where FSD isn’t approved – here’s how
Tesla has quietly logged an impressive 93,000 miles (roughly 150,000 km) of autonomous driving at its Giga Berlin factory—using Full Self-Driving (FSD) in a country where the technology remains unavailable to consumers on public roads.
Tesla has gathered 93,000 Full Self-Driving miles in a country where Full Self-Driving is not even approved. Here’s how.
Tesla has quietly logged an impressive 93,000 miles (roughly 150,000 km) of autonomous driving at its Giga Berlin factory—using Full Self-Driving (FSD) in a country where the technology remains unavailable to consumers on public roads.
The milestone, revealed alongside news that Giga Berlin has now built 750,000 Model Y vehicles, highlights how Tesla is putting its AI to work in one of the most controlled environments imaginable: it’s own factory floor.
Every Model Y that rolls off the final assembly line at Giga Berlin doesn’t need a human driver to reach the outbound lot. Instead, the freshly built vehicles engage FSD and navigate themselves across the factory campus.
The Tesla Model Ys rolling off the production line at Giga Berlin have now driven themselves on FSD a combined 93,000 miles from the end of the production line to the outbound lot. https://t.co/6RhL3W4q4p pic.twitter.com/DOKKHUcSSL
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) May 11, 2026
The route—from the end of the production line through marked internal pathways to the staging area where cars await delivery or export—is entirely on private property. No public roads, no mixed traffic, and no regulatory hurdles for on-road autonomous operation.
It’s a closed-loop system: wide lanes, predictable layouts, minimal pedestrians, and consistent conditions that make it one of the simplest proving grounds for the software.
A short factory tour video shared by Tesla Manufacturing shows General Assembly team member Jan explaining the process. Gesturing beside a glossy black Model Y still wearing its protective wrap, he notes the cumulative distance the fleet has covered autonomously.
Tesla Giga Berlin seems to be using FSD Unsupervised to move Model Y units
The cars handle the short drive flawlessly, freeing up workers who would otherwise spend hours shuttling vehicles manually. For a high-volume plant like Giga Berlin, the time and labor savings add up quickly. Even small gains in cycle time per car can reclaim valuable space in the outbound lot and streamline logistics.
This internal deployment serves multiple purposes. First, it delivers zero-cost validation data. Each factory run exposes FSD to real-world physics—acceleration, steering precision, obstacle avoidance—in a repeatable setting far safer than public testing.
Second, it demonstrates the system’s readiness at scale. If FSD can reliably move thousands of brand-new cars without intervention inside a busy factory, it underscores the robustness of the vision-based, end-to-end neural network Tesla has been refining.
Critics often point to Europe’s cautious regulatory stance on unsupervised autonomy, yet Tesla has turned that limitation into an advantage. While owners in Germany still cannot activate consumer FSD on highways or city streets, the software is already proving its worth behind the factory gates.
The 93,000 miles represent not just internal efficiency gains but a subtle flex: the cars are manufactured ready to navigate autonomously, at least in the bounds of the factory. It’s a big feather in the cap of FSD, even if regulators have yet to green-light broader use.
As Giga Berlin continues ramping output, expect this autonomous logistics loop to grow. What began as a practical workaround for moving finished vehicles has quietly become one of the most compelling real-world showcases of FSD’s potential—right in the heart of regulated Europe. Tesla isn’t waiting for approval to perfect its autonomy; it’s already driving the future, one factory mile at a time.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk reveals how SpaceX is always on board Air Force One
Musk confirmed Tuesday that Starlink internet is live and kicking on Air Force One. Responding with a simple “Yup!” to a post showing him and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang aboard the presidential jet en route to Beijing with President Trump, Musk proved the point: America’s most important aircraft now has seamless, high-speed satellite connectivity—even over the middle of the Pacific.
Air Force One, the official call sign for a U.S. Air Force aircraft carrying the President, now runs on SpaceX Starlink, CEO Elon Musk revealed.
Musk confirmed Tuesday that Starlink internet is live and kicking on Air Force One. Responding with a simple “Yup!” to a post showing him and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang aboard the presidential jet en route to Beijing with President Trump, Musk proved the point: America’s most important aircraft now has seamless, high-speed satellite connectivity—even over the middle of the Pacific.
Yup!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 13, 2026
The timing couldn’t be more symbolic. With trillion-dollar CEOs and the President sharing the cabin, Starlink wasn’t just a nice-to-have—it was mission-critical. No more spotty signals or dropped calls. Instead, real-time video conferences, secure data transfers, and global coordination at Mach speed.
Starlink’s aviation push has already transformed commercial and private flying. Dozens of major airlines have signed on or begun rollouts.
Hawaiian Airlines, United Airlines, Qatar Airways, Air France, SAS, WestJet, airBaltic, and Emirates (now equipping its Boeing 777 and A380 fleets) offer Starlink Wi-Fi to passengers. Lufthansa plans to follow in late 2026.
On private jets, the upgrade is even hotter: owners and charter companies report skyrocketing demand because Starlink turns cabins into flying boardrooms.
Starlink gets its latest airline adoptee for stable and reliable internet access
The advantages are massive. Traditional in-flight Wi-Fi relied on slow, high-latency geostationary satellites or ground-based systems that cut out over oceans and remote areas. Starlink’s low-Earth-orbit constellation delivers blazing speeds—often exceeding 200 Mbps download with latency as low as 25-60 milliseconds—gate-to-gate, from takeoff to landing.
Passengers stream 4K video, join Zoom calls, or work in the cloud without buffering. Pilots get real-time weather, NOTAM updates, and live ATC data. Even private-jet travelers get the benefits, as it means productivity that rivals the office.
On Air Force One, those benefits become strategic superpowers. The presidential aircraft demands unbreakable communications for national security, diplomacy, and crisis response. Starlink provides global coverage with no dead zones, offering redundancy against traditional systems that could fail in contested airspace or during long-haul flights.
It enables the President and staff to maintain secure links with the Pentagon, allies, or business leaders anywhere on Earth. During the Beijing trip, it likely facilitated direct coordination on trade, tech, and AI—proving the system’s reliability for the highest-stakes missions.
Critics once dismissed Starlink as a rich-person toy or military experiment. Now, it’s the backbone of commercial fleets, private aviation, and the world’s most visible symbol of American power, and it is providing stable internet to travelers.
With over 2,000 commercial aircraft committed and private-jet installations booming, Starlink is rewriting the rules of connected flight, and it seems like each week, a new airline is choosing to use it for on-flight connectivity.
For Air Force One, it’s more than faster Wi-Fi. It’s uninterrupted command-and-control in an increasingly connected world—ensuring the President never has to go dark at altitude. Elon Musk just made sure of it.
Elon Musk
SpaceX unveils sweeping Starship V3 upgrades ahead of May 19 launch
SpaceX has released a detailed list of changes for Starship Version 3, the next iteration of its fully reusable super-heavy-lift vehicle. Scheduled for its maiden flight as early as May 19 from Starbase in Texas, Starship V3 incorporates dozens of redesigns across the Super Heavy booster, Starship upper stage, Raptor 3 engines, and Launch Pad 2.
SpaceX has unveiled sweeping upgrades to its Starship v3 rocket ahead of the upcoming May 19 launch.
SpaceX has released a detailed list of changes for Starship Version 3, the next iteration of its fully reusable super-heavy-lift vehicle. Scheduled for its maiden flight as early as May 19 from Starbase in Texas, Starship V3 incorporates dozens of redesigns across the Super Heavy booster, Starship upper stage, Raptor 3 engines, and Launch Pad 2.
Elon Musk reveals date of SpaceX Starship v3’s maiden voyage
The updates focus on simplification, mass reduction, reliability, and enabling core capabilities like rapid reusability, in-orbit refueling, Starlink deployment, and crewed missions to the Moon and Mars.
Collectively, these modifications mark a major step-change. By reducing dry mass, improving thermal protection, and integrating systems for orbital operations, Starship V3 aims to transition from test vehicle to operational infrastructure.
Here is an explicit, broken-down list of the key changes, first starting with the changes to Super Heavy V3:
- Grid Fin Redesign: Reduced from four fins to three. Each fin is now 50% larger and stronger, repositioned for better catching and lifting performance. Fins are lowered on the booster to reduce heat exposure during hot staging, with hardware moved inside the fuel tank for protection.
- Integrated Hot Staging: Eliminates the old disposable interstage shield. The booster dome is now directly exposed to upper-stage engine ignition, protected by tank pressure and steel shielding. Interstage actuators retract after separation.
- New Fuel Transfer System: Massive redesign of the fuel transfer tube—roughly the size of a Falcon 9 first stage—enables simultaneous startup of all 33 Raptors for faster, more reliable flip maneuvers.
- Engine Bay / Thermal Protection: Engine shrouds removed entirely; new shielding added between engines. Propulsion and avionics are more tightly integrated. CO₂ fire suppression system deleted for a simpler, lighter aft section.
- Propellant Loading Improvements: Switched from one quick disconnect to two separate systems for added redundancy and reduced pad complexity.
Next, we have the changes to Starship V3:
- Completely Redesigned Propulsion System: Clean-sheet redesign supports new Raptor startup, larger propellant volume, and an improved reaction control system while reducing trapped or leaked propellant risk.
- Aft Section Simplification: Fluid and electrical systems rerouted; engine shrouds and large aft cavity deleted.
- Flap Actuation Upgrade: Changed from two actuators per flap to one actuator with three motors for better redundancy, mass efficiency, and lower cost.
- Faster Starlink Deployment: Upgraded PEZ dispenser enables quicker satellite release.
- Long-Duration Spaceflight Capability: New systems for long orbital coasts, orbital refueling, cryogenic fluid management, vacuum-insulated header tanks, and high-voltage cryogenic recirculation.
- Ship-to-Ship Docking + Refueling: Four docking drogues and dedicated propellant transfer connections added to support in-space refueling architecture.
- Avionics Upgrades: 60 custom avionics units with integrated batteries, inverters, and high-voltage systems (9 MW peak power). New multi-sensor navigation for precision autonomous flight. RF sensors measure propellant in microgravity. ~50 onboard camera views and 480 Mbps Starlink connectivity for low-latency communications.
Next are the changes to the Raptor 3 Engine:
- Higher Thrust: Sea-level Raptors increased from 230 tf (507k lbf) to 250 tf (551k lbf); vacuum Raptors from 258 tf (568k lbf) to 275 tf (606k lbf).
- Lower Mass: Sea-level engine mass reduced from 1630 kg to 1525 kg.
- Simpler Design: Sensors and controllers integrated into the engine body; shrouds eliminated; new ignition system for all variants. Results in ~1 ton of vehicle-level weight savings per engine.
Finally, the upgrades to Launch Pad 2 are as follows:
- Faster propellant loading via larger farm and more pumps.
- Chopstick improvements: shorter arms, electromechanical actuators (replacing hydraulic) for reliability.
- Stronger quick-disconnect arm that swings farther away.
- Redesigned launch mount for better load handling and protection.
- New bidirectional flame diverter eliminates post-launch ablation and refurbishment.
- Hardened propellant systems with separated methane/oxygen lines and protected valves/filters.
SpaceX states these elements “are designed to enable a step-change in Starship capabilities and aim to unlock the vehicle’s core functions, including full and rapid reuse, in-space propellant transfer, deployment of Starlink satellites and orbital data centers, and the ability to send people and cargo to the Moon and Mars.”
With these upgrades, Starship V3 is poised for an epic test flight that could accelerate humanity’s multiplanetary future. The rapid pace of iteration underscores SpaceX’s relentless drive toward making life multiplanetary. Launch watchers are in for a spectacular show.
Tesla gathers 93,000 FSD miles in a country where FSD isn’t approved – here’s how
Elon Musk reveals how SpaceX is always on board Air Force One
