Lifestyle
Does the Tesla Network have any serious self-driving competitors?
Elon Musk has made it clear that the Tesla Network’s potential is no joke.
“The fundamental utility of your vehicle will increase by a factor of 5,” he told the audience during Tesla’s Investor Autonomy Day earlier this year. Then, during a broad investor call in May, he reportedly said that self-driving would give Tesla a $500 billion dollar market cap with vehicles worth up to $250,000 in the next few years thanks to their Robotaxi capabilities. Each car will be capable of doing about 100 hours of self-driving hours of work per week to their owners’ benefit. Musk’s even more astounding prediction was that Tesla’s Full Self-Driving chip and real-time development data being fed by current vehicles on the road will lead to some 1 million Robotaxi-capable Tesla cars by next year.
Of course, Tesla isn’t the only company vying for autonomous taxi riders. Is there anything Tesla Network competitors are supposed to do that gives them a competitive edge? I’ve become curious recently and decided to have a look. These kinds of questions can’t be left unanswered, you know!
Waymo is probably one of the most well known Robotaxi companies making headway in the self-driving arena. Their vehicle program aims to “help…people run errands, commute to work…[and]…drop off kids at school,” among other things shown on the company’s website. I’m seeing lots of family focus in their marketing, and Waymo’s pitch even includes giving elderly and disabled people more mobility options. It’s all very ‘feel good’ and great, but not quite distinct from what Tesla aims to do with the Robotaxi. I mean, just owning a Tesla will provide those capabilities, and if you don’t own one, you can rent one to do all those tasks just the same.
Next, there’s Uber, whose self-driving cars are part of the company’s ultimate goal of becoming the “one-stop shop for the movement of people and powering local commerce around the world,” according to its CEO Dara Khosrowshahi. Actually, Uber is totally banking on the Robotaxi concept for survival. Former CEO Travis Kalanick made some comments to that effect in 2016. “What would happen if…we weren’t part of the autonomy thing? Then the future passes us by, basically, in a very expeditious and efficient way,” he told Business Insider in an interview.
Uber is definitely taking aim at a similar audience as the Tesla Network, or the ride-hailers anyway. The biggest difference between the two companies, however, is the assumption by Uber that people will gradually move away from vehicle ownership altogether, including the people it currently pays to drive other people around. Drivers are expensive! So, Uber hopes to get rid of them in favor of a fleet of company-owned autonomous vehicles.
Elon Musk has argued that this semi-traditional one owner, one gazillion cars approach is unwieldy. Also, if a certain percentage of those riders are financially capable of owning an autonomous car, why would they pay Uber to constantly hitch rides when their own car could do the same thing and earn that money for themselves? Well, that’s the point of the Tesla Network. If people are taking privately-owned self-driving cars from place to place via a company like Uber, why wouldn’t they be a private owner themselves if given access to a connective network?
Lyft is more or less in the same boat as Uber on this, but with a twist. They’ve recently begun offering Waymo rides via their app in Phoenix, Arizona, which is a pretty cool development for the future of Robotaxis. It does have a similarity with the Tesla Network in that Waymo’s vehicles are privately owned by someone other than the ride sharing app provider. If, say, Tesla owners could put their cars onto the Lyft app for service, there would be a one-to-one similarity with the Tesla Network. That doesn’t look like it’s Lyft’s preferred approach, though, as the company is developing its own self-driving system. Perhaps there will be a mixed approach? I’m sure Tesla will take note of competing connectivity apps and have incentives to purchase a Tesla for Robotaxi duties over other self-driving cars.
Tesla does, of course, intend to compete directly with Uber and Lyft in ways outside of private owners on its network. “Tesla will for sure operate its own ride-hailing service. We’ll compete directly with Uber and Lyft, obviously. There will be a company-owned fleet where there aren’t enough customer cars to be rented out. So if we find in a particular metro (where) there aren’t enough customers who are willing to add their car to the shared fleet, that’s where we’d supplant with the company-owned fleet,” Elon Musk said during the company’s Q3 call in 2018.
Waymo’s fully self-driving Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid minivan on public roads. | Image: WaymoGM Cruise might be building vehicles that could be competitive in something akin to the Tesla Network. Their cars are purpose-built to be self-driven, similar to how Tesla’s cars are built electric from the ground up, and it looks like there could be individual ownership instead of only company ownership. There’s a big disadvantage for GM Cruise, though. They’re not Tesla.
Musk’s famous goal with the company was to build an amazing car that just happened to be electric, and he’s succeeded on an incredible scale which has been recognized by test agencies and auto publications time and time again. I’d argue that GM will have to have something either much more appealing or much less expensive than a Tesla if they want to eventually compete with a future Tesla Network of private owners. Otherwise, they’re in the boat with Uber and Lyft and competing with millions of Robotaxi-capable… Teslas.
What about chip companies that are developing self-driving solutions? Any good ideas there?
NVIDIA looks to be developing super amazing computing hardware and software for automotive brands to license for their own vehicles rather than developing in-house. Considering the expenditure a self-made system requires, this isn’t surprising, and even Tesla (i.e., Musk) was criticized for deciding to go this route for the Full Self-Driving computer. NVIDIA’s partners, however, look to be interested in owner-initiated self-driving rather than a money making capability in and of itself, i.e., regular drivers using their cars for regular things. Aurora, too, is developing their own autonomous driving system with the intention of licensing it to other partners in the hopes that their product will become the “nerve center” of self-driving vehicles, but nothing that gives their Robotaxi capabilities a nudge over Tesla.
It goes without saying that the software and technology needs to build a successful AI are significant, and a car maker will probably save a lot of money using someone else’s system initially. Perhaps those companies could use Aurora’s or NVIDIA’s system to keep themselves in the running or catch them up for a while where they’ve fallen behind consumer demand. There’s just one problem, though, for legacy auto companies doing the catching up – they’re not all electric.
In his Autonomy Day remarks, Musk wasn’t very kind about Tesla’s gas-guzzling brethren and their Robotaxi hopes. Any non-electric venture will not be competitive, he said flatly. Considering Tesla’s battery upgrades giving them a 1 million mile life cycle and the lower cost of plugging in for juice vs. filling up, this makes sense even without a deep analysis (although Musk has done plenty of that for sure).
Between Robotaxi competitors not making the case for single-party ownership of self-driving fleets and the low cost of electric vehicle taxis, Musk certainly seems to be right about the whole “buying any car besides a Tesla is like buying a horse” thing. I’m not seeing the case for another brand’s strategy having more benefit than the Tesla Network for those who own Tesla vehicles.
How about you?
Elon Musk
Elon Musk talks Tesla Roadster’s future
Elon Musk confirmed the Roadster as Tesla’s last manually driven car, with a debut coming soon.
During Tesla’s Q1 2026 earnings call on April 22, Elon Musk made a brief but notable comment about the long-awaited next generation Roadster while describing Tesla’s future vehicle lineup. “Long term, the only manually driven car will be the new Tesla Roadster,” he said. “Speaking of which, we may be able to debut that in a month or so. It requires a lot of testing and validation before we can actually have a demo and not have something go wrong with the demo.”
That single statement is the entire Roadster update from yesterday’s call, and while it represents another timeline shift, it comes as no surprise with Tesla heads-down-at-work on the mass rollout of its Robotaxi service across US cities, and the industrial scale production of the humanoid Optimus.
The fact that Musk specifically framed the Roadster as the last manually driven Tesla is significant on its own. As the rest of the lineup moves toward full autonomy, the Roadster becomes something rare in the Tesla-sphere by keeping the driver in control. Driving enthusiasts who buy a $200,000 supercar are not doing so to be passengers. They want the physical connection to the road, the feel of acceleration under their own input, and the experience of controlling something with that level of performance. FSD, however capable it becomes, removes that entirely. The Roadster signals that Tesla understands this distinction and is building a car specifically for the people who consider driving itself the point.
Tesla isn’t joking about building Optimus at an industrial scale: Here we go
The specs for the Roadster Musk has teased over the years are genuinely unlike anything in production. The base model targets 0 to 60 mph in 1.9 seconds, a top speed above 250 mph, and up to 620 miles of range from a 200 kWh battery. The optional SpaceX package takes it further, rumored to add roughly ten cold gas thrusters operating at 10,000 psi, borrowed directly from Falcon 9 rocket technology. With thrusters, Musk has claimed 0 to 60 mph in as little as 1.1 seconds. In a 2021 Joe Rogan interview he went further, stating “I want it to hover. We got to figure out how to make it hover without killing people.” Tesla filed a patent for ground effect technology in August 2025, suggesting the hover concept has not been abandoned. The starting price remains $200,000, with the Founders Series requiring a $250,000 full deposit. Some reservation holders placed those deposits in 2017 and are approaching a full decade of waiting.
With production now targeted for 2027 or 2028 at the earliest, the Roadster remains Tesla’s most audacious promise and its longest-running delay. But if what Musk is testing lives up to even half of what he has described, the demo alone should be worth waiting for.
Elon Musk says the Tesla Roadster unveiling could be done “maybe in a month or so.”
He said it should be an extraordinary unveiling event. pic.twitter.com/6V9P7zmvEm
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 22, 2026
Elon Musk
Tesla isn’t joking about building Optimus at an industrial scale: Here we go
Tesla’s Optimus factory in Texas targets 10 million robots yearly, with 5.2 million square feet under construction.
Tesla’s Q1 2026 Update Letter, released today, confirms that first generation Optimus production lines are now well underway at its Fremont, California factory, with a pilot line targeting one million robots per year to start. Of bigger note is a shared aerial image of a large piece of land adjacent to Gigafactory Texas, that Tesla has prominently labeled “Optimus factory site preparation.”
Permit documents show Tesla is seeking to add over 5.2 million square feet of new building space to the Giga Texas North Campus by the end of 2026, at an estimated construction investment of $5 billion to $10 billion. The longer term production target for that facility is 10 million Optimus units per year. Giga Texas already sits on 2,500 acres with over 10 million square feet of existing factory floor, and the North Campus expansion is being built to support multiple projects, including the dedicated Optimus factory, the Terafab chip fabrication facility (a joint Tesla/SpaceX/xAI venture), a Cybercab test track, road infrastructure, and supporting facilities.
Credit: TESLA
Texas makes strategic sense beyond the existing infrastructure. The state’s tax structure, lower labor costs relative to California, and the proximity to Tesla’s AI training cluster Cortex 1 and 2, both located at Giga Texas and now totaling over 230,000 H100 equivalent GPUs, means the Optimus software stack and the factory producing the hardware will share the same campus. Tesla’s Q1 report also confirmed completion of the AI5 chip tape out in April, the inference processor designed specifically to power Optimus units in the field.
As Teslarati reported, the Texas facility is intended to house Optimus V4 production at full scale. Musk told the World Economic Forum in January that Tesla plans to sell Optimus to the public by end of 2027 at a price between $20,000 and $30,000, stating, “I think everyone on earth is going to have one and want one.” He has previously pegged long term demand for general purpose humanoid robots at over 20 billion units globally, citing both consumer and industrial use cases.
Elon Musk
Why SpaceX just made a $60 billion bet on AI coding ahead of historic IPO
SpaceX has secured an option to acquire Cursor AI for $60 billion ahead of its historic IPO.
SpaceX announced today it has struck a deal with AI coding startup Cursor, securing the option to acquire the company outright for $60 billion later this year, while committing $10 billion for joint development work in the interim. The announcement described the partnership as building “the world’s best coding and knowledge work AI,” and comes just days after Cursor was separately reported to be raising $2 billion at a valuation above $50 billion.
The move makes strategic sense given where each company currently stands. Cursor currently pays retail prices to Anthropic and OpenAI to the same companies competing directly against it with Claude Code and Codex. That means every dollar of revenue Cursor earns partially funds its own competition. With SpaceX bringing computational infrastructure to the Cursor platform, that could reduce Cursor’s dependence on OpenAI and Anthropic’s Claude AI as its providers. Access to SpaceX’s Colossus supercomputer, with compute equivalent to one million Nvidia H100 chips, gives Cursor the infrastructure to run and train its own models at a scale it could never afford independently. That one change restructures the entire unit economics of the business.
Elon Musk teases crazy outlook for xAI against its competitors
Cursor’s $2 billion in annualized revenue and enterprise reach across more than half of Fortune 500 companies gives SpaceX something its xAI subsidiary currently lacks, which is a proven, fast-growing software business with real enterprise distribution.
For Cursor, SpaceX’s $10 billion in joint development funding is transformational. Cursor raised $3.3 billion across all of 2025 to reach that $2 billion in revenue. A single $10 billion commitment from SpaceX, even as a development payment rather than an acquisition, dwarfs everything Cursor has raised in its entire existence. That capital accelerates product development, enterprise sales infrastructure, and proprietary model training simultaneously.
The timing is deliberate. SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC on April 1, 2026, targeting a June listing at a $1.75 trillion valuation, in what would be the largest public offering in history. The company is expected to begin its roadshow the week of June 8, with Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, and Morgan Stanley serving as underwriters. Adding Cursor to the portfolio before that roadshow gives IPO investors a concrete enterprise software revenue story to price in, alongside rockets and satellite internet.
The deal also addresses a weakness that became visible after February’s xAI merger. Several xAI co-founders departed following that acquisition, and SpaceX had already hired two Cursor engineers, signaling where its AI talent strategy was heading. Cursor, for its part, faces a pricing disadvantage competing against Anthropic’s Claude Code.
Whether SpaceX exercises the full acquisition option before its IPO or after remains the open question. Either way, this deal reshapes what investors will be buying into when SpaceX goes public.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Tesla plans to resolve its angriest bunch of owners: here’s how
