Connect with us

News

Tesla defends its right to release individual driver data to disprove claims

Published

on

During a week in which the House of Representatives voted to repeal Obama era Internet privacy protections, Tesla has come under fire from owners who dispute the all-electric carmaker’s right to disclose individual driver data to the media while also failing to share that data with the drivers themselves.

A pattern of Tesla public data dissemination has occurred after accidents in which Tesla vehicles have had automation software engaged. Tesla vehemently stands behind the safety and reliability of its cars, citing how its “Autopilot has been shown to save lives and reduce accident rates.” That comment came as result of a request from The Guardian. In explanation as to why Tesla releases individual driver information to the media, the Tesla spokesperson added, “We believe it is important that the public have a factual understanding of our technology.”

It is important to note that, in a famous case in which a Tesla Model S was the subject of serious scrutiny following a driver’s death after colliding with a truck while the driver-assist feature was engaged, the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a report of no fault on Tesla’s part. Indeed the report stated that “Tesla vehicles crash rate dropped by almost 40 percent after Autosteer installation.”

What’s being contested here then? Several things, actually. Tesla feels it has an explicit corporate need to stand behind its driving-assist Autopilot technology through public disclosures of individual driving data when a crash occurs. Individual Tesla drivers, on the other hand, express a desire to maintain the right to information privacy regarding their driving performance. And, while Tesla has disseminated individual driver information to the media following Tesla crashes involving its Autopilot system, it continues to deny data sharing with individual customers. Moreover, the company does not follow the commonly accepted research practice of gaining permissions from study participants prior to including them in a data set.

And now some Tesla owners are fired up.

Advertisement

The technology available within a Tesla can provide information about the location of a driver’s hands on the steering wheel, if and when a driver’s door opens, and, importantly, the engagement and performance levels of autonomous technology. Tesla insists that it only releases specific driver data to the media when information has been misrepresented to the public.

Tesla crashes always seem to catch media attention. After a fatal early morning Tesla Model S crash in Indianapolis, a distraught dad claimed that his daughter would still be alive if she had been driving any other car but a Tesla. In a Baarn, Netherlands accident in which a Tesla Model S collided at high speed with a tree and killed the driver, Tesla investigated alongside local authorities. Uncertain as to whether Tesla’s Autopilot feature was engaged, the company said at the time it would analyze data collected through vehicle recovery procedures and “ share it with the public” once reports became final. In 2016, the first crash in China involving a Tesla operating in Autopilot mode caused a great deal of consternation. And a driver of a Model X that crashed along a trek to Yellowstone in Montana posted an open letter to Elon Musk and Tesla, asking the company to “take responsibility for the mistakes of Tesla products” and accusing Tesla of using drivers as “lab rats” for testing of its Autopilot system.

It is that dehumanization of Tesla drivers which has suddenly come to the forefront. Yes, as in all vehicular incidents, various factors come into play, especially driver error: physical (tired), emotional (angry), psychological (confused), or intellectual (distracted) factors occur when a person gets behind the wheel. But that’s not what is at issue in the case of drivers’ rights to information privacy when they engage technology applications. Is driving a personal act, a type of agency for which the driver assumes all responsibility? And, if all research institutions are required to acquire ethical consent from participants, why is Tesla absolved of such responsibility? The answers to these questions will continue to evolve as technology advances at amazing speeds.

In the upcoming age of self-driving cars, every touch screen signal is transmitted to the cloud as an immediate extension of a car’s functionality. A year ago, at a Congressional hearing about driverless cars, Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey questioned over and over whether driverless car manufacturers would assume a minimum standard for consumer privacy protection. None of the constituents present answered his question.

And now, with the U.S. Congress clearly opposed to internet privacy protections, will the public — Tesla drivers included — give up the fight? Will it be “the classic politics of resignation,” as Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard law professor, asserts? He says, “Most people… pick fights they know they can convince people they can win.” It’s an era in which the U.S. Presidential transition team members, according to Politico, had to sign non-disclosure agreement to make certain they keep all of their work confidential. Tesla, too, likes to keep internal information quiet, yet California lawmakers sent a letter to Tesla in January, 2017 asking the company to loosen its employee confidentiality agreement.

Advertisement

Major institutions want their information kept inside closed doors. Can drivers claim the right to privacy of what will become ubiquitous self-driving technology information systems of the future?

A Tesla spokesperson says the following in regards to the release of individual driver data:

“In unusual cases in which claims have already been made publicly about our vehicles by customers, authorities or other individuals, we have released information based on the data to either corroborate or disprove these claims. The privacy of our customers is extremely important and something we take very seriously, and in such cases, Tesla discloses only the minimum amount of information necessary… [We] transfer and disclose information, including personal and non-personally identifiable information … to protect the rights, property, safety, or security of the Services, Tesla, third parties, visitors to our Services, or the public, as determined by us in our sole discretion.”

 

Advertisement

Carolyn Fortuna is a writer and researcher with a Ph.D. in education from the University of Rhode Island. She brings a social justice perspective to environmental issues. Please follow me on Twitter and Facebook and Google+

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla expands crucial Supercharging feature for easier access

It is a useful tool, especially during hours of congestion. However, it has not been super effective for those who drive non-Tesla EVs, as other OEMs use UI platforms like Google’s Android Auto or Apple’s iOS.

Published

on

tesla supercharger
Credit: Tesla

Tesla has expanded a crucial Supercharging feature that helps owners identify stall availability at nearby locations.

Tesla said on Tuesday night that its “Live Availability” feature, which shows EV owners how many stalls are available at a Supercharger station, to Google Maps, a third-party app:

Already offering it in its own vehicles, the Live Availability feature that Teslas have is a helpful feature that helps you choose an appropriate station with plugs that are immediately available.

Advertisement

A number on an icon where the Supercharger is located lets EV drivers know how many stalls are available.

It is a useful tool, especially during hours of congestion. However, it has not been super effective for those who drive non-Tesla EVs, as other OEMs use UI platforms like Google’s Android Auto or Apple’s iOS.

Essentially, when those drivers needed to charge at a Supercharger that enables non-Tesla EVs to plug in, there was a bit more of a gamble. There was no guarantee that a plug would be available, and with no way to see how many are open, it was a risk.

Tesla adding this feature allows people to have a more convenient and easier-to-use experience if they are in a non-Tesla EV. With the already expansive Supercharger Network being available to so many EV owners, there is more congestion than ever.

This new feature makes the entire experience better for all owners, especially as there is more transparency regarding the availability of plugs at Supercharger stalls.

Advertisement

It will be interesting to see if Tesla is able to expand on this new move, as Apple Maps compatibility is an obvious goal of the company’s in the future, we could imagine. In fact, this is one of the first times an Android Auto feature is available to those owners before it became an option for iOS users.

Apple owners tend to get priority with new features within the Tesla App itself.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk’s Boring Co goes extra hard in Nashville with first rock-crushing TBM

The Boring Company’s machine for the project is now in final testing.

Published

on

Credit: The Boring Company/X

The Boring Company is gearing up to tackle one of its toughest projects yet, a new tunnel system beneath Nashville’s notoriously tough limestone terrain. Unlike the soft-soil conditions of Las Vegas and Austin, the Music City Loop will require a “hard-rock” boring machine capable of drilling through dense, erosion-resistant bedrock. 

The Boring Company’s machine for the project is now in final testing.

A boring hard-rock tunneling machine

The Boring Company revealed on X that its new hard-rock TBM can generate up to 4 million pounds of grip force and 1.5 million pounds of maximum thrust load. It also features a 15-filter dust removal system designed to keep operations clean and efficient during excavation even in places where hard rock is present.

Previous Boring Co. projects, including its Loop tunnels in Las Vegas, Austin, and Bastrop, were dug primarily through soft soils. Nashville’s geology, however, poses a different challenge. Boring Company CEO and President Steve Davis mentioned this challenge during the project’s announcement in late July.

“It’s a tough place to tunnel, Nashville. If we were optimizing for the easiest places to tunnel, it would not be here. You have extremely hard rock, like way harder than it should be. It’s an engineering problem that’s fairly easy and straightforward to solve,” Davis said.

Advertisement

Nashville’s limestone terrain

Experts have stated that the city’s subsurface conditions make it one of the more complex tunneling environments in the U.S. The Outer Nashville Basin is composed of cherty Mississippian-age limestone, a strong yet soluble rock that can dissolve over time, creating underground voids and caves, as noted in a report from The Tennessean.

Jakob Walter, the founder and principal engineer of Haushepherd, shared his thoughts on these challenges. “Limestone is generally a stable sedimentary bedrock material with strength parameters that are favorable for tunneling. Limestone is however fairly soluble when compared to other rack materials, and can dissolve over long periods of time when exposed to water. 

“Unexpected encounters with these features while tunneling can result in significant construction delays and potential instability of the excavation. In urban locations, structures at the ground surface should also be constantly monitored with robotic total stations or similar surveying equipment to identify any early signs of movement or distress,” he said.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk shares ridiculous fact about Optimus’ hand demos

It appears that Optimus’ V3 iteration is still very much under wraps.

Published

on

Elon Musk recently revealed something quite shocking about the Optimus demonstration hand that was showcased at the 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting. As per the CEO, the complex robotic hand that impressed the event’s attendees was not a component of Optimus V3 at all. 

Needless to say, it appears that Optimus’ V3 iteration is still very much under wraps. 

Optimus’s hand

Even in Tesla’s We, Robot event last year, the company showcased a robotic hand that seemed capable of performing complex tasks. A similar hand was showcased at the recent investor event. It was then no surprise that some attendees and EV community members assumed that the robotic component, which was very dexterous, was a preview of Optimus V3’s hand. 

As per Elon Musk in a recent post on X, however, this was not the case. While the robotic hand that Tesla showcased at the 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting was already very impressive, it was still a V2 component. In response to a quote post from his mom Maye Musk, who noted that “Elon told me a few times that the hand is the most difficult part of the robot,” Elon Musk clarified that the impressive component was still from Optimus V2.

“This is just the V2 Optimus hand. The V3 hand is another level beyond this. Exquisite engineering,” Musk wrote in his post on X.

Advertisement

Not like Tesla

Tesla is designing Optimus to be a potential replacement for humans in some of the world’s most delicate tasks, such as surgery. It is then extremely important for Optimus’ hand to be very dexterous and refined in its movements. This is something that even companies that are also producing humanoid robots have yet to accomplish fully. Musk highlighted this during the Annual Shareholder Meeting, when he discussed how Tesla is really the only company that can scale humanoid robots properly.

“You will see certainly many companies showing demonstration robots. There’s really three things that are super difficult about robots. One is the engineering of the forearm and hand because the human hand is an incredible thing, actually. It’s super dexterous. 

“So, engineering the hand really well, the real-world AI, and then volume manufacturing. Those are generally the things that are missing. One or more of those things are missing from other companies. So Tesla is the only one that has all three of those,” Musk said.

Continue Reading

Trending