News
Tesla fires back at Fortune with cheeky “Misfortune” blog post
The drama continues between Tesla and Fortune after the media outlet published a story questioning Tesla’s ethics claiming the company sold $2 billion worth of stock but failed to disclose that it was under investigation by the National Highway Transport Association (NHTSA) after Joshua Brown was killed when his Model S in Autopilot mode crashed into a tractor trailer.
Since the story was published, Tesla CEO Elon Musk defended the company’s position that news surrounding the Autopilot related death was not material to its stock price. Fortune disagreed citing that the stock price dropped $6 per share after news broke that the NHTSA was in fact investigating evidence surrounding Brown’s death. That’s when Musk fired back via email picking choice words with Fortune’s writer and stating, “Indeed, if anyone bothered to do the math (obviously, you did not) they would realize that of the over 1M auto deaths per year worldwide, approximately half a million people would have been saved if the Tesla autopilot was universally available. Please, take 5 mins and do the bloody math before you write an article that misleads the public.”
The Tesla vs Fortune debacle spilled over into the public Twittersphere between Fortune’s Editor Alan Murray and Elon Musk. The tweets continued throughout Wednesday with Alan Murray defending the media outlet’s position that Tesla did not disclose news of the Autopilot death. Fortune went as far as quoting statements made in an SEC filing by Tesla which warned investors that a fatal crash related to its Autopilot feature would be a material event to the company’s brand, business, and operating results. Tesla would later bring to light that Fortune mischaracterized the quote within the SEC filing.
Tesla has since released a blog post on this matter titled “Misfortune”.
Misfortune
Fortune’s article is fundamentally incorrect.
First, Fortune mischaracterizes Tesla’s SEC filing. Here is what Tesla’s SEC filing actually says: “We may become subject to product liability claims, which could harm our financial condition and liquidity if we are not able to successfully defend or insure against such claims.” [full text included below] This is just stating the obvious. One of the risks facing Tesla (or any company) is that someone could bring product liability claims against it. However, neither at the time of this SEC filing, nor in the several weeks to date, has anyone brought a product liability claim against Tesla relating to the crash in Florida.
Next, Fortune entirely ignores what Tesla knew and when, nor have they even asked the questions. Instead, they simply assume that Tesla had complete information from the moment this accident occurred. This was a physical impossibility given that the damage sustained by the Model S in the crash limited Tesla’s ability to recover data from it remotely.
When Tesla told NHTSA about the accident on May 16th, we had barely started our investigation. Tesla informed NHTSA because it wanted to let NHTSA know about a death that had taken place in one of its vehicles. It was not until May 18th that a Tesla investigator was able to go to Florida to inspect the car and the crash site and pull the complete vehicle logs from the car, and it was not until the last week of May that Tesla was able to finish its review of those logs and complete its investigation. When Fortune contacted Tesla for comment on this story during the July 4th holiday, Fortune never asked any of these questions and instead just made assumptions. Tesla asked Fortune to give it a day to confirm these facts before it rushed its story to print. They declined and instead ran a misleading article.
Here’s what we did know at the time of the accident and subsequent filing:
- That Tesla Autopilot had been safely used in over 100 million miles of driving by tens of thousands of customers worldwide, with zero confirmed fatalities and a wealth of internal data demonstrating safer, more predictable vehicle control performance when the system is properly used.
- That contrasted against worldwide accident data, customers using Autopilot are statistically safer than those not using it at all.
- That given its nature as a driver assistance system, a collision on Autopilot was a statistical inevitability, though by this point, not one that would alter the conclusion already borne out over millions of miles that the system provided a net safety benefit to society.
Given the fact that the “better-than-human” threshold had been crossed and robustly validated internally, news of a statistical inevitability did not materially change any statements previously made about the Autopilot system, its capabilities, or net impact on roadway safety.
Finally, the Fortune article makes two other false assumptions. First, they assume that this accident was caused by an Autopilot failure. To be clear, this accident was the result of a semi-tractor trailer crossing both lanes of a divided highway in front of an oncoming car. Whether driven under manual or assisted mode, this presented a challenging and unexpected emergency braking scenario for the driver to respond to. In the moments leading up to the collision, there is no evidence to suggest that Autopilot was not operating as designed and as described to users: specifically, as a driver assistance system that maintains a vehicle’s position in lane and adjusts the vehicle’s speed to match surrounding traffic.
Fortune never even addresses that point. Second, Fortune assumes that, putting all of these other problems aside, a single accident involving Autopilot, regardless of how many accidents Autopilot has stopped and how many lives it has saved, is material to Tesla’s investors. On the day the news broke about NHTSA’s decision to initiate a preliminary evaluation into the incident, Tesla’s stock traded up, not down, confirming that not only did our investors know better, but that our own internal assessment of the performance and risk profile of Autopilot were in line with market expectations.
The bottom line is that Fortune jumped the gun on a story before they had the facts. They then sought wrongly to defend that position by plucking boilerplate language from SEC filings that have no bearing on what happened, while failing to correct or acknowledge their original omissions and errors.
Full text referenced above:
We may become subject to product liability claims, which could harm our financial condition and liquidity if we are not able to successfully defend or insure against such claims.
“Product liability claims could harm our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition. The automobile industry experiences significant product liability claims and we face inherent risk of exposure to claims in the event our vehicles do not perform as expected resulting in personal injury or death. We also may face similar claims related to any misuse or failures of new technologies that we are pioneering, including autopilot in our vehicles and our Tesla Energy products. A successful product liability claim against us with respect to any aspect of our products could require us to pay a substantial monetary award. Our risks in this area are particularly pronounced given the limited number of vehicles and energy storage products delivered to date and limited field experience of our products. Moreover, a product liability claim could generate substantial negative publicity about our products and business and would have material adverse effect on our brand, business, prospects and operating results. We self-insure against the risk of product liability claims, meaning that any product liability claims will have to be paid from company funds, not by insurance.”
News
Tesla Cybercab display highlights interior wizardry in the small two-seater
Photos and videos of the production Cybercab were shared in posts on social media platform X.
The Tesla Cybercab is currently on display at the U.S. Department of Transportation in Washington, D.C., and observations of the production vehicle are highlighting some of its notable design details.
Photos and videos of the production Cybercab were shared in posts on social media platform X.
Observers of the Cybercab display unit noted that the two-seat Robotaxi provides unusually generous legroom for a vehicle of its size. Based on the vehicle’s video, the compact two-seater appears to offer more legroom than Tesla’s larger vehicles such as the Model Y, Model X, and Cybertruck.
The Cybercab’s layout allows Tesla to dedicate nearly the entire cabin to passengers. The vehicle is designed without a steering wheel or pedals, which helps maximize interior space.
Footage from the display also highlights the Cybercab’s large center screen, which is positioned prominently in front of the passenger bench. The display appears intended to provide entertainment and ride information while the vehicle operates autonomously.
Images of the vehicle also show an additional camera integrated into the Cybercab’s C-pillar. The extra camera appears to expand the vehicle’s field of view, which would be useful as Tesla works toward fully unsupervised Full Self-Driving.
Tesla engineers have previously explained that the Cybercab was designed to be highly efficient both in manufacturing and in operation. Cybercab Lead Engineer Eric E. stated in 2024 that the Robotaxi would be built with roughly half the number of parts used in a Model 3 sedan.
“Two seats unlocks a lot of opportunity aerodynamically. It also means we cut the part count of Cybercab down by a substantial margin. We’re gonna be delivering a car that has roughly half the parts of Model 3 today,” the Tesla engineer said.
The Tesla engineer also noted that the Cybercab’s cargo area can accommodate multiple golf bags, two carry-on suitcases, and two full-size checked bags. The trunk can also fit certain bicycles and a foldable wheelchair depending on size, which is quite impressive for a small car like the Cybercab.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk’s xAI wins permit for power plant supporting AI data centers
The development was reported by CNBC, citing confirmation from the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ).
Mississippi regulators have approved a permit allowing Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI to construct a natural gas power plant in Southaven. The facility is expected to support the company’s expanding AI infrastructure tied to its Colossus data center operations near Memphis.
The development was reported by CNBC, citing confirmation from the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ).
According to the report, regulators “voted to approve the permit” of xAI subsidiary MZX Tech LLC to construct a power plant featuring 41 natural gas-burning turbines “after careful consideration of all public comments and community concerns.”
The Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality stated that the permit followed a regulatory review process that included public comments and community input. Jaricus Whitlock, air division chief for the MDEQ, stated that the project met all applicable environmental standards.
“The proposed PSD permit in front of the board today not only meets all state and federal permitting regulations, but goes above and beyond what is required by law. MDEQ and the EPA agree that not a single person around our facilities will be exposed to unhealthy levels of air pollution,” Whitlock stated.
The planned facility will help provide electricity for xAI’s AI computing infrastructure in the Memphis region.
The Southaven project forms part of xAI’s efforts to scale computing capacity for its artificial intelligence systems.
The company currently operates two major data centers in Memphis, known as Colossus 1 and Colossus 2, which provide computing power for xAI’s Grok AI models. xAI is also planning to build another large data center in Southaven called Macrohardrr, which would be located in a warehouse previously used by GXO Logistics.
Large-scale AI training requires substantial computing power and electricity, prompting technology companies to develop dedicated energy infrastructure for their data centers.
SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell previously stated that xAI plans to develop 1.2 gigawatts of power capacity for its Memphis-area AI supercomputer site as part of the federal government’s Ratepayer Protection Pledge. The commitment was announced during an event with United States President Donald Trump.
“As part of today’s commitment, we will take extensive additional steps to continue to reduce the costs of electricity for our neighbors. xAI will therefore commit to develop 1.2 GW of power as our supercomputer’s primary power source. That will be for every additional data center as well. We will expand what is already the largest global Megapack power installation in the world,” Shotwell said.
“The installation will provide enough backup power to power the city of Memphis, and more than sufficient energy to power the town of Southaven, Mississippi where the data center resides. We will build new substations and invest in electrical infrastructure to provide stability to the area’s grid.”
Elon Musk
Tesla China teases Optimus robot’s human-looking next-gen hands
The image was shared by Tesla AI’s account on Weibo and later reposted by Tesla community members on X.
A new teaser shared by Tesla’s China team appears to show a pair of unusually human-like hands for Optimus.
The image was shared by Tesla AI’s account on Weibo and later reposted by Tesla community members on X.
As could be seen in the teaser image, the new version of Optimus’ hands features proportions and finger structures that look strikingly similar to those of a human hand. Their appearance suggests that they might have dexterity approaching that of a human hand.
If the image reflects a new generation of Optimus’ hands, it could indicate Tesla is continuing to refine one of the most critical components of its humanoid robot.
Hands are widely viewed as one of the most difficult engineering challenges in robotics. For Optimus to perform complex real-world work, from manufacturing tasks to household activities, its hands would need to be the best in the industry.
Elon Musk has repeatedly described Optimus as Tesla’s most important long-term product. In posts on social media platform X, Musk has stated that Optimus could eventually become the first real-world Von Neumann machine.
In theory, a Von Neumann machine is a self-replicating system capable of building copies of itself using available materials. The concept was originally proposed by mathematician John von Neumann in the mid-20th century.
“Optimus will be the first Von Neumann machine, capable of building civilization by itself on any viable planet,” Musk wrote in a post on X.
If Optimus is expected to carry out complex work autonomously in the future, high levels of dexterity will likely be essential. This makes the development of advanced robotic hands a key step towards Musk’s long-term expectations for the product.