Tesla FSD Beta testers are debunking the claims that FSD doesn’t stop for “children.” Tesla FSD Beta critic, The Dawn Project, recently aired EV ads showing clips of a test that it paid for. These tests, according to The Dawn Project, show that Tesla’s FSD Beta “Tesla’s FSD software “repeatedly hits child-sized mannequins.”
Dan O’Dowd, the founder of The Dawn Project, said that Tesla’s FSD is “a lethal threat to all Americans.” Earlier this year, O’Dowd placed a full-page ad in the New York Times campaigning to ban Tesla’s FSD. He also ran for the state senate in California. His entire campaign was centered around banning Tesla’s FSD.
Debunking the claims that Tesla’s FSD Beta hits “children”
Many Tesla owners and FSD Beta testers not only disagree, but some have decided to perform their own tests. On Twitter, @WholeMarsBlog shared a thread of the many instances Tesla’s FSD Beta reacted to pedestrians and children. He pointed out that spreading misinformation is similar to running ads telling people not to wear seat belts.
Another Tesla FSD Beta tester, @TeslaDriver2022 performed their own test. I reached out to them and we spoke on the phone. @TeslaDriver2022 told me that they’ve been beta testing the software for over a year now and have seen a ton of improvements over the past year.
https://twitter.com/tesladriver2022/status/1557152108071342085
“Prior to the Beta program and even owning Teslas, I’ve owned Volvos for years with their Pilot Assist program which is kind of like basic Autopilot. And I was not seeing that progress. I have a family and I want my children in the safest vehicles which is why we had gotten Volvos.”
@TeslaDriver2022 told me that they would see Tesla’s video and eventually they made the switch to Tesla. Their partner drives a Model Y and they drive a Model 3.
“I became very interested in the potential of Tesla’s technology and when it came time for us to get new cars we both bought Teslas because we thought they were the safest vehicles for our family to be in.”
After driving with Volvo’s Pilot Assist for years, @TeslaDriver2022 said that Tesla’s FSD Beta continues to improve.
“The FSD Beta has just been getting better exponentially even since I’ve been using it. Just some of the predictions it’s got and the capabilities to understand when things are getting in their path. Not even that. Some of the most impressive stuff is just when I’m driving down the road at 45 miles an hour and there’s a car that will turn in front of me to get into a parking lot.
“Its ability to understand whether or not that car is gonna make it or not and whether or not it needs to slow down. It’s becoming very human-like.”
@TeslaDriver2022’s Tesla FSD Beta test with “children”
I asked @TeslaDriver2022 what was it about O’Dowd’s ad that inspired them to perform their own Tesla FSD Beta testing with a “child.” @TeslaDriver2022 told me that they thought the ad “simply just was not true.”
“That commercial is 100%, not the experience I’ve ever had driving my Tesla.”
“I saw his ad on the news after work yesterday and I thought, ‘what is this?!‘ And to be honest with you, I didn’t really know too much about him until that came out. Later on, I was just sitting on the couch really bothered by the ad.
“I drive with FSD Beta with my kids in the car all the time. I see how safe it is. It’s safer than anything else that’s out there. I was talking to my partner and joking and said that ‘I’m about to go into the garage and get one of our Amazon boxes, cut out a cardboard ‘child’ and put one of our kids’ jackets on it and run a test.’”
@TeslaDriver2022’s partner thought this was brilliant and they immediately ran the tests. They ran multiple tests and after tweeting it, received feedback from various Twitter users wanting them to perform other variations of the tests.
“When I originally tested it, I did around eight different tests and in every single one of them, the vehicle would path predict around the cardboard ‘child.’ It wasn’t even ever a close call. It went around the child-sized object every single time.”
After doing the tests that Twitter users suggested, @TeslaDriver2022 recorded what they said was the most impressive of the results.
“I had my neighbor come over and I did a couple of other videos. One was more to the right, one with the ‘child’ crossing the street, and one where my neighbor just launched it out and I think the launched-out ones were a little bit more impressive because that shows a lot of the AI that Tesla has.”
In the last set of tests, the launching out of the cardboard ‘child’ simulates an all too common scenario where a child runs out in front of an oncoming car. The fact that Tesla’s AI was able to tell what was happening and avoided hitting the object is telling.
“I don’t necessarily believe a lot of other vehicles have that. And the fact that Tesla is constantly updating it and making it better is what’s really impressive about it.”
Tesla FSD sees 👁 children — don’t believe the fake rigged Tesla games the competition pays to put in Newspapers & TV media.
Remember TeslaQ, the haters, they have a lot of money betting against Tesla. It’s all dirty tricks. https://t.co/Zhjn66dKi1
— K10✨ (@Kristennetten) August 10, 2022
Disclaimer: Johnna is long Tesla.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @JohnnaCrider1
Investor's Corner
Tesla has a Cybercab problem nobody saw coming
Tesla’s Cybercab line now builds robotaxis faster than Tesla can deploy them, Lars Moravy says.
Tesla’s Cybercab line in Texas can now build the two seat robotaxi faster than the company can put it into service, according to Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering. “We don’t run every day because the line can run so fast. It’s currently outpacing our deployments,” Moravy said in a new Cybercab deep dive from Munro Live. “So, it’s a bit of a race right now. Who’s going to go faster? Right now the manufacturing line’s ahead.”
Tesla’s official Robotaxi account shared a Cybercab analysis video on X on Monday, calling it a “Cybercab engineering deep dive.” Moravy’s comments go further than what he told analysts on the Q3 earnings call last week, when he said the Cybercab line’s listed capacity of more than 125,000 units a year undersells what it can actually run.
The tour shows where that speed comes from. Tesla’s unboxed process splits the Cybercab into front, rear, side and center modules that are built and tested on their own before they meet on a short final line. That final line has just 25 fully automated stations, which Tesla’s team estimated is a fifth to a tenth of what a Model Y needs. The full line is about 78% automated, the framing line is already at 100%, and the layout uses roughly 50% less floor space per vehicle. The stated goal is “100% automation in 10 second cycle time,” or one finished Cybercab every 10 seconds.
Tesla also deleted the paint shop. Only the side modules are coated, and the exterior panels get their color inside the molding machine. Engineers said the car is designed to run at least 500,000 miles, which matters for a vehicle that will spend most of its day carrying riders.
The battery got the same treatment. The Cybercab uses an 88S6P pack of 4680 cells in a steel enclosure, a first for Tesla, with each module potted separately so a single failed module can be swapped instead of the whole pack. Wireless battery management boards replace a wiring harness, and new contactors are fast enough to drop the pyro fuse entirely. Tesla’s battery director graded the pack an A minus, compared with a D for the Model Y structural pack and a B minus for Cybertruck. Up front, the drive unit runs an 11:1 gear ratio versus roughly 9:1 on most Teslas, since the Cybercab does not need a high top speed.
Cybercab engineering deep dive — Robotaxi (@robotaxi) October 26, 2026
The deployment side is now the bottleneck Moravy described. Tesla had more than 50 Cybercabs working the Formula 1 weekend in Austin, and Texas records show 463 Cybercabs registered. Tesla said on its earnings call that Cybercab service will launch in Dallas next month, and Moravy said the company is aiming to get Cybercabs to customers by the end of 2026. Every unit built so far has gone into Tesla’s own fleet since the line moved into volume production in April.
Munro Live also asked when it could get a Cybercab to tear down. Tesla’s answer: “Not yet.”
Elon Musk
How SpaceX Is raising Raptor’s sea-level thrust while holding engine mass steady
SpaceX’s Raptor engine family has steadily increased sea-level thrust while simultaneously reducing mass, turning iterative engineering gains into substantially higher performance for the Super Heavy booster. CEO Elon Musk shed more light on how powerful Raptor 4 will be, and it’s pretty crazy.
Raptor 1 delivered 185 metric tons of thrust at roughly 2,080 kilograms, while Raptor 2 raised that to 230 tons while cutting mass to about 1,630 kilograms. SpaceX data for Raptor 3 lists a target of 280 tons at 1,525 kilograms (with further reductions in associated vehicle hardware), while operational flight ratings have been cited near 250 tons.
This morning, Elon Musk stated that Raptor 4 is expected to reach 300 tons of sea-level thrust at roughly the same mass as Raptor 3. Across these versions, thrust has risen by more than 60 percent from the first engines while engine mass has fallen, producing a sharp improvement in thrust-to-weight ratio. This is a true testament to how great SpaceX engineering has been:
🚀 Elon says Raptor 4 will make 300 tons of thrust at sea level at roughly the same mass as Raptor 3.
How far Raptor has come:
Raptor 1: 185 tf, 2,080 kg
Raptor 2: 230 tf, 1,630 kg
Raptor 3: 250 tf, 1,525 kg
Raptor 4: 300 tf33 on Super Heavy = ~9,900 tf, nearly 3x Saturn V https://t.co/HQDswZhyvL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 26, 2026
With 33 engines on SuperHeavy, the jump from earlier versions to a 300-ton Raptor 4 would produce roughly 9,900 metric tons of total liftoff thrust, nearly three times the Saturn V’s approximately 3,400 metric tons from its five F-1 engines.
This is not just a larger number on a data sheet, either, as sea-level thrust is the force available the moment the vehicle leaves the pad. This is when it is heaviest and still deep in Earth’s gravity well and dense atmosphere.
Higher levels of sea-level thrust directly improves the initial thrust-to-weight ratio of the full stack. A higher ratio produces faster acceleration off the pad, which shortens the time the rocket has to spend fighting gravity, and gravity losses during the first minute or two of the flight are a major drain on total available delta-v. Every second shaved off of that early climb preserves more propellant energy for reaching orbital velocity or for carrying extra payload.
Because Super Heavy’s engine count is constrained by vehicle diameter and packing density, increasing thrust per engine is the most straightforward way to raise total liftoff performance without redesigning the booster structure or design.
The same-mass target for Raptor 4 is equally important. Holding engine mass roughly constant while raising thrust improves the engine’s own thrust-to-weight ratio and reduces the structural and propellant mass fraction that must be carried solely to support the engines.
Earlier Raptor iterations also simplified or eliminated extensive vehicle-side hardware such as heat shields. These gains compound: more force for less installed mass leaves additional capacity for propellant, payload, or operational margins such as engine-out capability.
For Starship’s architecture, the practical effects are large. Greater liftoff thrust supports heavier vehicles, larger propellant loads, and higher payloads to low Earth orbit, figures SpaceX has targeted in the 100-plus-ton reusable range. That capacity underpins orbital refueling, lunar missions, and eventual Mars cargo and crew flights.
Continued growth in sea-level thrust therefore tightens the gap between theoretical rocket performance and the high flight rates and reusability needed to make large-scale space transport practical.
News
Tesla Assisted Driving expands to tenth EU country
Tesla has expanded its Tesla Assisted Driving (TAD) suite to its tenth European country, as Latvia joined a growing list of European Union member states authorizing the company’s advanced driver assistance technology.
Tesla Europe announced this morning that the system is now approved in Latvia, with a software rollout to begin soon.
The approval and rollout follow recognition of a provisional European type approval originally granted by the Netherlands’ RDW authority on April 10.
🚨 Latvia has just received approval for Tesla Full Self-Driving (Supervised)
This is the 10th country in the EU to gain approval:
1. Netherlands — 10 April 2026 (original RDW approval)
2. Lithuania — 20 May 2026
3. Estonia — 29 May 2026
4. Denmark — 9 June 2026
5. Belgium — 10 June 2026
6. Slovenia — 7 September 2026
7. Czechia — 21 September 2026
8. Croatia — 29 September 2026
9. Slovakia — 16 October 2026— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 26, 2026
Latvia’s Road Traffic Safety Directorate (CSDD) evaluated the Dutch documentation, coordinated with the other national authorities, and reviewed updates from Tesla. These included tightened limits on speed offsets, automatic resets of any manual speed adjustments after each trip, and stronger driver monitoring.
In Europe, the feature is marketed as Tesla Assisted Driving after a recent rule change that labeled the name “Full Self-Driving” as misleading.
The system remains an SAE Level 2 driver assistance tool, not unsupervised autonomy. It can control speed, steering, braking, lane changes, and intersections while following a navigation route. Drivers need not keep their hands on the wheel at all times, yet they must continuously monitor the road and be prepared to intervene immediately.
The sequence of EU recognitions began with the Netherlands in April and continued through Lithuania, Estonia, Denmark, Belgium, Slovenia, Czechia, Croatia, and Slovakia. Most have relied on mutual recognition of the single Dutch provisional approval rather than independent national testing.
These national clearances do not yet constitute bloc-wide authorization. An EU-wide decision requires a qualified majority in the Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles: at least 15 of 27 member states representing 65 percent of the EU population. Larger markets, like Germany, France, and Italy, remain under review, and a vote is expected this December.
However, for Latvian Tesla owners with compatible vehicles and software, the imminent rollout expands access to the supervised system while underscoring that attentive human oversight remains essential.