This is a preview from our weekly newsletter. Each week I go ‘Beyond the News’ and handcraft a special edition that includes my thoughts on the biggest stories, why it matters, and how it could impact the future.
Tesla’s strong financial spreadsheet that has culminated in seven consecutive quarters of profitability has launched the electric car company into a more stable fiscal situation. For years, especially in my early days at Teslarati, I can remember the big narrative being Tesla’s Quarter-over-Quarter growth, but the fact that profitability wasn’t achieved very often made the company one of the more risky investments at the time.
Since then, Tesla has managed to work out a profitable quarter seven times in a row. Unbelievably, the company that has only been mass-producing vehicles since Summer 2017 is already a shoo-in for money-making quarters, at least that’s what it seems like. There never seems to be a glimmer of doubt when it comes to Tesla reporting strong financials. But, it became clear earlier this week that Tesla, despite having such strong financials quarter after quarter, isn’t willing to spend money on things that owners and customers don’t use. The company’s phase-out of the passenger lumbar support feature in the Model 3 and Model Y is a prime example of the way Tesla is simplifying its vehicles to improve profitability and margins, making their cars even more of a money-making machine than they were previously.
On May 31st, a tweet from @Ryanth3nerd showed his discontent for Tesla’s removal of the lumbar support option on the passenger’s seat. It was noticed by a Model Y owner on Reddit initially that the lumbar support option was removed from the side of the seat, only leaving the reclining option and seat adjustment levers for passenger adjustment.
“I really don’t like the direction @tesla is going raising prices of vehicles but removing features like lumbar for the Model Y. On top of rumors of FSD increase to $14k without any real added features to FSD unless you’re a beta tester,” the tweet said.
It is true that Model 3 and Model Y prices alike have increased in the past several months. This is likely due to the semiconductor or microcontroller shortage that has plagued much of the automotive industry for the past few quarters. Additionally, Musk said raw material costs are also affecting Tesla’s prices.
According to Musk, Tesla had a good reason for phasing out the lumbar support module, and it had to do with data usage logs that showed the lumbar support wasn’t utilized by passengers very often. In fact, it was used so infrequently that Tesla decided to scrap the module altogether in the 3 and Y.
“Moving lumbar was removed only in front passenger seat of 3/Y (obv not there in rear seats). Logs showed almost no usage. Not worth cost/mass for everyone when almost never used. Prices increasing due to major supply chain price pressure industry-wide. Raw materials especially.”
Moving lumbar was removed only in front passenger seat of 3/Y (obv not there in rear seats). Logs showed almost no usage. Not worth cost/mass for everyone when almost never used.
Prices increasing due to major supply chain price pressure industry-wide. Raw materials especially.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 31, 2021
Now, while this is a good point for Tesla to use as justification for their seat modification decisions, there are a few things that sort of confused me about the decision. First off, once a seat is adjusted, I think very few people want to change it. I know that when I get into a friend’s car, I rarely adjust the seat because that is probably the way their significant other prefers the seat to be set. As a driver in my own car, I know that I have only adjusted my seat on two or three occasions since I got it. Very rarely does it move, because the adjustments I made when I bought it were how I felt it was most comfortable, so I didn’t move it.
I think there could have been some confusion about whether the lumbar support is actually used, or whether it is a “set and forget” type of reasoning. I think many people find the way they like their seat, and it rarely changes over the course of the ownership experience.
While I doubt too many people will not buy a Tesla because they can’t adjust lumbar support, I think that there are some people who will look at it as a real disadvantage because there are plenty of people who need to utilize it for comfortability, especially if they have back problems. Nevertheless, it could be a temporary removal if enough people raise concerns to Musk via Twitter.
The biggest lesson here seems to be that Tesla’s use of data and analytics gives the company an extreme advantage when it comes to saving money on even the most trivial of parts. While Tesla will save some money from its recent decision to not equip Model 3 and Model Y cars with radar, the lumbar support removal also summarizes the company’s mission to take out what is not needed. Teslas are already so minimalistic as it is, and many people enjoy the lack of knobs and buttons on the interior. However, this is one knob that many owners may not be happy not having, but it remains to be seen if it saves Tesla’s enough money to justify keeping the feature left out from its two mass-market vehicles. -JK-
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!
-Joey
Elon Musk
Elon Musk proposes Grok 5 vs world’s best League of Legends team match
Musk’s proposal has received positive reception from professional players and Riot Games alike.
Elon Musk has proposed a high-profile gaming challenge for xAI’s upcoming Grok 5. As per Musk, it would be interesting to see if the large language model could beat the world’ best human League of Legends team with specific constraints.
Musk’s proposal has received positive reception from professional players and Riot Games alike, suggesting that the exciting exhibition match might indeed happen.
Musk outlines restrictions for Grok
In his post on X, Musk detailed constraints to keep the match competitive, including limiting Grok to human-level reaction times, human-speed clicking, and viewing the game only through a camera feed with standard 20/20 vision. The idea quickly circulated across the esports community, drawing commentary from former pros and AI researchers, as noted in a Dexerto report.
Former League pro Eugene “Pobelter” Park expressed enthusiasm, offering to help Musk’s team and noting the unique comparison to past AI-versus-human breakthroughs, such as OpenAI’s Dota 2 bots. AI researcher Oriol Vinyals, who previously reached Grandmaster rank in StarCraft, suggested testing Grok in RTS gameplay as well.
Musk welcomed the idea, even responding positively to Vinyals’ comment that it would be nice to see Optimus operate the mouse and keyboard.
Pros debate Grok’s chances, T1 and Riot show interest
Reactions weren’t universally optimistic. Former professional mid-laner Joedat “Voyboy” Esfahani argued that even with Grok’s rapid learning capabilities, League of Legends requires deep synergy, game-state interpretation, and team coordination that may be difficult for AI to master at top competitive levels. Yiliang “Doublelift” Peng was similarly skeptical, publicly stating he doubted Grok could beat T1, or even himself, and jokingly promised to shave his head if Grok managed to win.
T1, however, embraced the proposal, responding with a GIF of Faker and the message “We are ready,” signaling their willingness to participate. Riot Games itself also reacted, with co-founder Marc Merrill replying to Musk with “let’s discuss.” Needless to say, it appears that Riot Games in onboard with the idea.
Though no match has been confirmed, interest from players, teams, and Riot suggests the concept could materialize into a landmark AI-versus-human matchup, potentially becoming one of the most viewed League of Legends events in history. The fact that Grok 5 will be constrained to human limits would definitely add an interesting dimension to the matchup, as it could truly demonstrate how human-like the large language model could be like in real-time scenarios.
Tesla has passed a key milestone, and it was one that CEO Elon Musk initially mentioned more than nine years ago when he published Master Plan, Part Deux.
As per Tesla China in a post on its official Weibo account, the company’s Autopilot system has accumulated over 10 billion kilometers of real-world driving experience.
Tesla China’s subtle, but huge announcement
In its Weibo post, Tesla China announced that the company’s Autopilot system has accumulated 10 billion kilometers of driving experience. “In this respect, Tesla vehicles equipped with Autopilot technology can be considered to have the world’s most experienced and seasoned driver.”
Tesla AI’s handle on Weibo also highlighted a key advantage of the company’s self-driving system. “It will never drive under the influence of alcohol, be distracted, or be fatigued,” the team wrote. “We believe that advancements in Autopilot technology will save more lives.”
Tesla China did not clarify exactly what it meant by “Autopilot” in its Weibo post, though the company’s intense focus on FSD over the past years suggests that the term includes miles that were driven by FSD (Beta) and Full Self-Driving (Supervised). Either way, 10 billion cumulative miles of real-world data is something that few, if any, competitors could compete with.
Advertisement
–>
Elon Musk’s 10-billion-km estimate, way back in 2016
When Elon Musk published Master Plan Part Deux, he outlined his vision for the company’s autonomous driving system. At the time, Autopilot was still very new, though Musk was already envisioning how the system could get regulatory approval worldwide. He estimated that worldwide regulatory approval will probably require around 10 billion miles of real-world driving data, which was an impossible-sounding amount at the time.
“Even once the software is highly refined and far better than the average human driver, there will still be a significant time gap, varying widely by jurisdiction, before true self-driving is approved by regulators. We expect that worldwide regulatory approval will require something on the order of 6 billion miles (10 billion km). Current fleet learning is happening at just over 3 million miles (5 million km) per day,” Musk wrote.
It’s quite interesting but Tesla is indeed getting regulatory approval for FSD (Supervised) at a steady pace today, at a time when 10 billion miles of data has been achieved. The system has been active in the United States and has since been rolled out to other countries such as Australia, New Zealand, China, and, more recently, South Korea. Expectations are high that Tesla could secure FSD approval in Europe sometime next year as well.
News
Elon Musk’s Boring Company reveals Prufrock TBM’s most disruptive feature
As it turns out, the tunneling startup, similar to other Elon Musk-backed ventures, is also dead serious about pursuing reusability.
The Boring Company has quietly revealed one of its tunnel boring machines’ (TBMs) most underrated feature. As it turns out, the tunneling startup, similar to other Elon Musk-backed ventures, is also dead serious about pursuing reusability.
Prufrock 5 leaves the factory
The Boring Company is arguably the quietest venture currently backed by Elon Musk, inspiring far fewer headlines than his other, more high-profile companies such as Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI. Still, the Boring Company’s mission is ambitious, as it is a company designed to solve the problem of congestion in cities.
To accomplish this, the Boring Company would need to develop tunnel boring machines that could dig incredibly quickly. To this end, the startup has designed Prufrock, an all-electric TBM that’s designed to eventually be fast enough as an everyday garden snail. Among TBMs, such a speed would be revolutionary.
The startup has taken a step towards this recently, when The Boring Company posted a photo of Prufrock-5 coming out of its Bastrop, Texas facility. “On a rainy day in Bastrop, Prufrock-5 has left the factory. Will begin tunneling by December 1. Hoping for a step function increase in speed,” the Boring Company wrote.
Prufrock’s quiet disruption
Interestingly enough, the Boring Company also mentioned a key feature of its Prufrock machines that makes them significantly more sustainable and reusable than conventional TBMs. As per a user on X, standard tunnel boring machines are often left underground at the conclusion of a project because retrieving them is usually more expensive and impractical than abandoning them in the location.
As per the Boring Company, however, this is not the case for its Prufrock machines, as they are retrieved, upgraded, and deployed again with improvements. “All Prufrocks are reused, usually with upgrades between launches. Prufrock-1 has now dug six tunnels,” the Boring Company wrote in its reply on X.
The Boring Company’s reply is quite exciting as it suggests that the TBMs from the tunneling startup could eventually be as reusable as SpaceX’s boosters. This is on brand for an Elon Musk-backed venture, of course, though the Boring Company’s disruption is a bit more underground.
Tesla is being accused of infringing robotics patents by a company called Perrone Robotics, which is based out of Charlottesville, Virginia.
The suit was filed in Alexandria, Virginia, and accuses Tesla of knowingly infringing upon five patents related to robotics systems for self-driving vehicles.
The company said its founder, Paul Perrone, developed general-purpose robotics operating systems for individual robots and automated devices.
Perrone Robotics claims that all Tesla vehicles utilizing the company’s Autopilot suite within the last six years infringe the five patents, according to a report from Reuters.
Tesla’s new Safety Report shows Autopilot is nine times safer than humans
One patent was something the company attempted to sell to Tesla back in 2017. The five patents cover a “General Purpose Operating System for Robotics,” otherwise known as GPROS.
The GPROS suite includes extensions for autonomous vehicle controls, path planning, and sensor fusion. One key patent, U.S. 10,331,136, was explicitly offered to Tesla by Perrone back in 2017, but the company rejected it.
The suit aims to halt any further infringements and seeks unspecified damages.
This is far from the first suit Tesla has been involved in, including one from his year with Perceptive Automata LLC, which accused Tesla of infringing on AI models to interpret pedestrian/cyclist intent via cameras without licensing. Tesla appeared in court in August, but its motion to dismiss was partially denied earlier this month.
Tesla also settled a suit with Arsus LLC, which accused Autopilot’s electronic stability features of infringing on rollover prevention tech. Tesla won via an inter partes review in September.
Most of these cases involve non-practicing entities or startups asserting broad autonomous vehicle patents against Tesla’s rapid iteration.
Tesla typically counters with those inter partes reviews, claiming invalidity. Tesla has successfully defended about 70 percent of the autonomous vehicle lawsuits it has been involved in since 2020, but settlements are common to avoid discovery costs.
The case is Perrone Robotics Inc v Tesla Inc, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, No. 25-02156. Tesla has not yet listed an attorney for the case, according to the report.
Elon Musk proposes Grok 5 vs world’s best League of Legends team match
Elon Musk’s Boring Company reveals Prufrock TBM’s most disruptive feature
