News
Tesla’s ‘Early Access Program’ will reportedly be extended to Full Self-Driving buyers
It appears that Tesla’s Early Access Program will be automatically extended to buyers who purchased Full Self-Driving (FSD) prior to the end of February 2019, at least according to an email from the all-electric car maker to a Model 3 owner shared via Twitter.
Early purchase of FSD had previously been understood as a qualifier for the Early Access Program, but confusion over access to the program has been widespread thanks to seemingly sporadic rollouts of beta features combined with very little communication from Tesla. A March 1, 2019 announcement posted by Tesla previously confirmed this arrangement; however, that post has since been removed from Tesla’s official news/blog page.
It read as follows:“Customers who previously purchased Full Self-Driving will receive an invitation to Tesla’s Early Access Program (EAP). EAP members are invited to experience and provide feedback on new features and functionality before they are rolled out to other customers.”A Tesla owner and enthusiast well known in the community under the handle Earl of Frunkpuppy (@28delayslater/Twitter) recently received an email from Tesla which appears to clarify the matter:
“In regards to the Early Access program, we are super excited to offer the Early Access Program to our customers who had purchased FSD prior to the end of February! At this time, we are currently working on the process and timeline for this exciting feature. Once we have the appropriate information, we will communicate to our customer base! Invitations will be sent out automatically to all qualifying owners. The good news is that there are no extra steps needed on your part to receive the invitation. Thank you again for your email.”
Tesla’s Early Access Program provides beta software features for testing by an exclusive pool of owners. Invitations to join the program have been received and accepted by many in the owner community, but details are sparse on how the program is carried out. Given the secrecy mandated by Tesla for its Early Access users, this is not surprising.
What’s known generally about the program, as shared online by a few owners actively involved, is that participants receive an email prior to a beta release requiring acceptance of the software before being the update is sent over the air. At that time, the owner is also reminded of the Early Access Program’s strict rules for participation: No sharing information online and no 3rd party software reporting apps (TeslaFi, notably). Whether or not invitees are even supposed to acknowledge receiving an invite is even debated, with references being made to the first rule of “Fight Club”.
One additional thing worth noting about Tesla’s Early Access Program is that it’s not a priority system, meaning enrollment isn’t tied to receiving mass software updates before other non-participants. The program is strictly for software testing, and some features included in beta releases may never be released in the final system-wide update. The role of the participant is to provide helpful feedback to Tesla so that improvements can be made, not simply to be first in line for new features, although that is a huge benefit to weigh with the risks of using imperfect software that controls your vehicle. As the all-electric car maker moves closer towards launching its Full Self-Driving program, feedback from participants of the Early Access Program will become more essential.
Tesla has begun rolling out the final FSD computer (Hardware 3/HW3) in new production vehicles, and CEO Elon Musk recently confirmed that the company’s mobile service teams would be able to install the upgrade instead of the company’s service centers. Musk detailed the performance difference between HW2.5 and HW3 via Twitter: “The Tesla Full Self-Driving Computer now in production is at about 5% compute load for these [Navigate on Autopilot] tasks or 10% with full fail-over redundancy,” he wrote, later mentioning that the HW2.5 load was 80% with the system’s current features.
The company will be hosting an Autonomy Investor Day on April 22nd where the roadmap for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving features will be discussed and key updates will be provided. Investors will also be given test rides demonstrating FSD and Autopilot improvements, including never-before-seen features. The event will be webcast, though additional details are yet to be announced.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
