News
Tesla challenged by CR advocacy group to release detailed Autopilot data
Consumers Union, the advocacy division of Consumer Reports, recently called on Tesla to publicly release detailed Autopilot data behind the company’s safety claims. In a statement published on Thursday, the advocacy group stated that Tesla must improve Autopilot’s safety systems, considering that another life was lost while the driver-assist feature was engaged.
Experts from CR have determined that Tesla’s current safety systems for Autopilot is inadequate. The CR experts also noted that Tesla’s contingencies for Autopilot “fails to effectively address the safety risks of foreseeable uses of the system,” unlike other driver-assist features involving automated steering and braking.
Consumers Union Director of Cars and Product Policy and Analysis David Friedman explicitly called on Tesla to stop using consumers as “beta testers” of unproven technology. Friedman also stated that Tesla should not make broad safety claims without providing detailed Autopilot data.
“After another tragedy involving Autopilot, Tesla should commit to put safety first—and to stop using consumers as beta testers for unproven technology. While the results of the crash investigations will be critical to understanding all that contributed to this tragedy, previous NTSB findings already showed that Autopilot should do more to protect consumers. We see no excuse: Tesla should improve the safety of Autopilot without delay.
“Tesla markets itself as an innovator. It should not put lives at risk, damage its reputation, or risk the success of its systems—or driver assist technology as a whole—by failing to take steps that would better protect consumers’ safety. Further, the company should not make either specific or broad safety claims without providing the detailed data to back them up. They should show, not just tell, us how safe their system is,” Friedman said.
Friedman also criticized Tesla’s response to the ongoing NTSB investigation into the fatal Model X accident last month near Mountain View, CA. According to the Consumers Union executive, Tesla should improve Autopilot’s design instead of issuing defensive statements that put the blame on the driver of the ill-fated electric SUV.
“Instead of issuing a defensive Friday evening blog post or statements blaming the victim, Tesla should fix Autopilot’s design and be transparent about their safety claims. The company should publicly provide detailed data to demonstrate conditions for which its Autopilot system can safely operate.
“It should limit Autopilot’s operation only to those conditions and have a far more effective system to sense, verify, and safely react when the human driver’s level of engagement in the driving task is insufficient or when the driver fails to react to warnings. If other companies can do it, Tesla should as well.”
Just yesterday, Tesla and the NTSB issued statements about the Elon Musk-led company’s departure from the investigation into the fatal Model X accident. According to the NTSB, Tesla was removed from the probe due to the company’s insistence on releasing data to the public despite the investigation not being complete.
-
- The aftermath of a fatal Tesla Model X accident. [Credit: Dean C. Smith/Twitter]
-
- The aftermath of a fatal Tesla Model X accident. (Credit: Mercury News/Twitter)
Responding to these reports, Tesla issued a statement stating that it has chosen to withdraw from the NTSB’s investigation due to the agency’s handling of the probe. The electric car maker and energy company also noted that it would be issuing a Freedom of Information Act request on the NTSB’s apparent focus on Tesla. Here are excerpts from Tesla’s statement.
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.
The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality.
“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.
When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.
After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”
“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.
Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.
During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.
As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
