Connect with us

News

Is Tesla Motors disruptive or disturbing?

Published

on

Tesla-Store-NJTesla Motors stands out in many ways, leaving many wondering how disruptive is it and how disturbing it is for corporations. One thing is for certain, Tesla reflects a need in society, that of a deep fundamental change. The problem is, are giant corporations ready for this change and can they adapt?

To disrupt, or not, that is not longer the questions.

Tesla Motors disrupts and irritates the way corporations operate. Elon Musk and Martin Eberhard didn’t invent the wheel, they both used what entrepreneurs are best at, that of asking what is needed. They wanted a cool and fun car that didn’t use dirty polluting petroleum. They went to see what AC Propulsion was working on with their incredible t-zero, the grandfather of the Roadster and the Tesla Roadster born soon after.

Tesla Motors didn’t reinvent the wheel, but disrupted the automotive world by using old and tested technologies, an electric motor and off the shelf batteries. On the flip side, automakers build vehicles with planned obsolescence and constant maintenance, which perpetuate a thriving cash flow through after market and distribution. Tesla introduced an electric car that required close to no maintenance, sold directly to buyers who choose to buy it or not. That was the disruptive part, now let’s look at the disturbing part for automakers.

Steady as she goes down the drain.

We often fault carmakers for everything wrong in the automotive industry, but their worn out business model that won’t adapt to our fast changing needs is really what is wrong. The biggest mistake they made was to over-rely on the market it created in the first place. It simply didn’t see the electric car technology progressing faster than their gasoline one and doubted this new market was ready. They simply didn’t understand people want a real fundamental change, which means taking a step back from bottom line profits.

The Tesla Motors business model frightens established companies because it operates outside their reality and shifts the emphasis back to the consumer. We can debate how much hype there is around a Roadster and a Model S, but fundamentally, one either buys cars because of its superior performance over a gasoline car, or because of the freedom of energy use, with its convenience and reliability and finally, or because it just darn changes things a lot.

Advertisement

Now flash back to the post 2008 era, when the financial world was partying as if there were no tomorrow and carmakers sued any states imposing better fuel economy. Carmakers perpetuated the belief we wanted cars with more cup holders than we truly needed, and favored creature comforts over performance and evolution. The advent of the electric wrestled that grip on the lulled market away from them, the way only a silicon valley startup could with its different business model.

Who’s disturbing now?

So, who’s disturbing now? When we look back in time, almost all big corporations were at one point disruptive. AT&T gave us Unix, Microsoft gave us the potential of the personal computer, but we certainly can’t call them disruptive anymore. They are disturbing in the fact they no longer innovate, but stubbornly pursue a path of pure profitability. Unfortunately, Apple is also following the same trend. The company once famous for stellar customer service and extremely well made computers is now more focused on profits than innovations. It’s Apple store is no longer fun to visit, and manufacturing problems are happening often.

It doesn’t take much extrapolation to see that one day too, Tesla Motors will be in the same situation. Are there exceptions? Certainly IBM made the right change. After decades of focusing on manufacturing, it made the boldest move to go back to consulting. Look at where IBM is now, and compare it to other personal computer makers. So what can companies learn from newer players and what can newer players learn from older companies having come full circle?

Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

The Boring Company’s Music City Loop gains unanimous approval

After eight months of negotiations, MNAA board members voted unanimously on Feb. 18 to move forward with the project.

Published

on

The-boring-company-vegas-loop-chinatown
(Credit: The Boring Company)

The Metro Nashville Airport Authority (MNAA) has approved a 40-year agreement with Elon Musk’s The Boring Company to build the Music City Loop, a tunnel system linking Nashville International Airport to downtown. 

After eight months of negotiations, MNAA board members voted unanimously on Feb. 18 to move forward with the project. Under the terms, The Boring Company will pay the airport authority an annual $300,000 licensing fee for the use of roughly 933,000 square feet of airport property, with a 3% annual increase.

Over 40 years, that totals to approximately $34 million, with two optional five-year extensions that could extend the term to 50 years, as per a report from The Tennesean.

The Boring Company celebrated the Music City Loop’s approval in a post on its official X account. “The Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority has unanimously (7-0) approved a Music City Loop connection/station. Thanks so much to @Fly_Nashville for the great partnership,” the tunneling startup wrote in its post. 

Advertisement

Once operational, the Music City Loop is expected to generate a $5 fee per airport pickup and drop-off, similar to rideshare charges. Airport officials estimate more than $300 million in operational revenue over the agreement’s duration, though this projection is deemed conservative.

“This is a significant benefit to the airport authority because we’re receiving a new way for our passengers to arrive downtown at zero capital investment from us. We don’t have to fund the operations and maintenance of that. TBC, The Boring Co., will do that for us,” MNAA President and CEO Doug Kreulen said. 

The project has drawn both backing and criticism. Business leaders cited economic benefits and improved mobility between downtown and the airport. “Hospitality isn’t just an amenity. It’s an economic engine,” Strategic Hospitality’s Max Goldberg said.

Opponents, including state lawmakers, raised questions about environmental impacts, worker safety, and long-term risks. Sen. Heidi Campbell said, “Safety depends on rules applied evenly without exception… You’re not just evaluating a tunnel. You’re evaluating a risk, structural risk, legal risk, reputational risk and financial risk.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla announces crazy new Full Self-Driving milestone

The number of miles traveled has contextual significance for two reasons: one being the milestone itself, and another being Tesla’s continuing progress toward 10 billion miles of training data to achieve what CEO Elon Musk says will be the threshold needed to achieve unsupervised self-driving.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has announced a crazy new Full Self-Driving milestone, as it has officially confirmed drivers have surpassed over 8 billion miles traveled using the Full Self-Driving (Supervised) suite for semi-autonomous travel.

The FSD (Supervised) suite is one of the most robust on the market, and is among the safest from a data perspective available to the public.

On Wednesday, Tesla confirmed in a post on X that it has officially surpassed the 8 billion-mile mark, just a few months after reaching 7 billion cumulative miles, which was announced on December 27, 2025.

The number of miles traveled has contextual significance for two reasons: one being the milestone itself, and another being Tesla’s continuing progress toward 10 billion miles of training data to achieve what CEO Elon Musk says will be the threshold needed to achieve unsupervised self-driving.

The milestone itself is significant, especially considering Tesla has continued to gain valuable data from every mile traveled. However, the pace at which it is gathering these miles is getting faster.

Secondly, in January, Musk said the company would need “roughly 10 billion miles of training data” to achieve safe and unsupervised self-driving. “Reality has a super long tail of complexity,” Musk said.

Training data primarily means the fleet’s accumulated real-world miles that Tesla uses to train and improve its end-to-end AI models. This data captures the “long tail” — extremely rare, complex, or unpredictable situations that simulations alone cannot fully replicate at scale.

This is not the same as the total miles driven on Full Self-Driving, which is the 8 billion miles milestone that is being celebrated here.

The FSD-supervised miles contribute heavily to the training data, but the 10 billion figure is an estimate of the cumulative real-world exposure needed overall to push the system to human-level reliability.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Cybercab production begins: The end of car ownership as we know it?

While this could unlock unprecedented mobility abundance — cheaper rides, reduced congestion, freed-up urban space, and massive environmental gains — it risks massive job displacement in ride-hailing, taxi services, and related sectors, forcing society to confront whether the benefits of AI-driven autonomy will outweigh the human costs.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla | X

The first Tesla Cybercab rolled off of production lines at Gigafactory Texas yesterday, and it is more than just a simple manufacturing milestone for the company — it’s the opening salvo in a profound economic transformation.

Priced at under $30,000 with volume production slated for April, the steering-wheel-free, pedal-less Robotaxi-geared vehicle promises to make personal car ownership optional for many, slashing transportation costs to as little as $0.20 per mile through shared fleets and high utilization.

While this could unlock unprecedented mobility abundance — cheaper rides, reduced congestion, freed-up urban space, and massive environmental gains — it risks massive job displacement in ride-hailing, taxi services, and related sectors, forcing society to confront whether the benefits of AI-driven autonomy will outweigh the human costs.

Let’s examine the positives and negatives of what the Cybercab could mean for passenger transportation and vehicle ownership as we know it.

The Promise – A Radical Shift in Transportation Economics

Tesla has geared every portion of the Cybercab to be cheaper and more efficient. Even its design — a compact, two-seater, optimized for fleets and ride-sharing, the development of inductive charging, around 300 miles of range on a small battery, half the parts of the Model 3, and revolutionary “unboxed” manufacturing — is all geared toward rapid production.

Operating at a fraction of what today’s rideshare prices are, the Cybercab enables on-demand autonomy for a variety of people in a variety of situations.

Tesla ups Robotaxi fare price to another comical figure with service area expansion

It could also be the way people escape expensive and risky car ownership. Buying a vehicle requires expensive monthly commitments, including insurance and a payment if financed. It also immediately depreciates.

However, Cybercab could unlock potential profitability for owning a car by adding it to the Robotaxi network, enabling passive income. Cities could have parking lots repurposed into parks or housing, and emissions would drop as shared electric vehicles would outnumber gas cars (in time).

The first step of Tesla’s massive production efforts for the Cybercab could lead to millions of units annually, turning transportation into a utility like electricity — always available, cheap, and safe.

The Dark Side – Job Losses and Industry Upheaval

With Robotaxi and Cybercab, they present the same negatives as broadening AI — there’s a direct threat to the economy.

Uber, Lyft, and traditional taxis will rely on human drivers. Robotaxi will eliminate that labor cost, potentially displacing millions of jobs globally. In the U.S. alone, ride-hailing accounts for billions of miles of travel each year.

There are also potential ripple effects, as suppliers, mechanics, insurance adjusters, and even public transit could see reduced demand as shared autonomy grows. Past automation waves show job creation lags behind destruction, especially for lower-skilled workers.

Gig workers, like those who are seeking flexible income, face the brunt of this. Displaced drivers may struggle to retrain amid broader AI job shifts, as 2025 estimates bring between 50,000 and 300,000 layoffs tied to artificial intelligence.

It could also bring major changes to the overall competitive landscape. While Waymo and Uber have partnered, Tesla’s scale and lower costs could trigger a price war, squeezing incumbents and accelerating consolidation.

Balancing Act – Who Wins and Who Loses

There are two sides to this story, as there are with every other one.

The winners are consumers, Tesla investors, cities, and the environment. Consumers will see lower costs and safer mobility, while potentially alleviating themselves of awkward small talk in ride-sharing applications, a bigger complaint than one might think.

Elon Musk confirms Tesla Cybercab pricing and consumer release date

Tesla investors will be obvious winners, as the launch of self-driving rideshare programs on the company’s behalf will likely swell the company’s valuation and increase its share price.

Cities will have less traffic and parking needs, giving more room for housing or retail needs. Meanwhile, the environment will benefit from fewer tailpipes and more efficient fleets.

A Call for Thoughtful Transition

The Cybercab’s production debut forces us to weigh innovation against equity.

If Tesla delivers on its timeline and autonomy proves reliable, it could herald an era of abundant, affordable mobility that redefines urban life. But without proactive policies — retraining, safety nets, phased deployment — this revolution risks widening inequality and leaving millions behind.

The real question isn’t whether the Cybercab will disrupt — it’s already starting — it’s whether society is prepared for the economic earthquake it unleashes.

Continue Reading