

News
Tesla’s software fixes, the NHTSA’s status quo, and an impending need for updated recall terminologies
It is no secret that Tesla is a popular topic, so much so that the coverage around the company is immense. Couple this with CEO Elon Musk’s rockstar persona and you get a company whose vehicles are looked at under a microscope constantly. It might feel unfair for some, but it’s just the way it is. Tesla — by simply being Tesla — is newsworthy.
Tesla’s newsworthiness is a double-edged sword. A look at the coverage for the company’s vehicle recalls from the NHTSA would prove this point. So notable is Tesla’s news coverage that a mainstream newsreader would likely get the impression that Teslas get recalls frequently. The opposite is true. As evidenced by Reuters in the graphic below, data from January 1, 2020, through February 17, 2022, shows that Tesla actually recalls its vehicles less frequently than some of the market’s leading automakers. Tesla is also the only carmaker performing a large share of its vehicle recalls through over-the-air software updates.
Tesla currently handles the majority of the industry’s remote software recalls, but it would soon not be the only one. New electric vehicle makers have used the idea of software updates as a means to promote their EVs’ capabilities. Rivian has performed OTA updates to its R1 vehicles, and those cars are only starting customer deliveries. Lucid is the same with its Air sedan, with the company rolling out features like Automatic Emergency Braking, Cross-Traffic Protection, Lane Departure Protection, Traffic Drive-Off Alert, and other features earlier this month through a software update. Ford has been rolling out updates called “Power-Ups” to the Mustang Mach-E as well.
Considering that software-based fixes are only bound to get more widespread over the coming years, one must then ask the question: Should software-based over-the-air fixes be dubbed and classified with the same terminologies as physical recalls, which typically involve the replacement of vehicle hardware?
A Vastly Different “Recall” Experience
Any car owner has likely experienced a recall for their vehicle at some point in their driving life. And more likely than not, one’s experience is probably not that pleasant. I certainly count myself among drivers who look at vehicle recalls with trepidation. My current vehicle, a Japanese-made van, was part of a minor fuel pump recall a couple of years ago, and even addressing that took a whole day out of my weekend. The dealer was overwhelmed with the number of cars it was fixing that day, and tempers among owners were flaring by the hour — all for a simple fuel pump replacement. I’ve been told that my experiences with vehicle recalls are not that unique.
In comparison, a software-based fix, such as the disabling of FSD Beta’s “rolling stops” feature, only required affected vehicles to be connected to the internet. There was no dealer visit, no forms to fill out, and no staff to argue with. The car was connected to the internet, a software fix was implemented, and the issue was resolved. One can argue that Tesla’s software fix to disable FSD Beta’s “rolling stops” feature was safety-related, and that’s true. But one could also argue that at least from a driver’s point of view, the experience related to software and hardware-based recalls is vastly different.
The Status Quo
Despite the different experiences involved when software and hardware-based vehicle recalls are addressed, it appears that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) will, at least for now, keep the status quo. Teslarati reached out to the NHTSA to inquire if it was considering the adoption of updated terminologies for cars whose fixes are completed through OTA software updates, but the agency suggested that this would likely not be the case, at least for now. According to the NHTSA, vehicle manufacturers must initiate a recall for any repair that remedies a safety risk, regardless of whether the issue is fixed by software update or by hardware replacement.
“The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is committed to ensuring the highest safety standards on the nation’s roadways. NHTSA is empowered with robust tools and authorities to protect the public, to investigate potential safety issues, and to compel recalls when it finds evidence of noncompliance or an unreasonable risk to safety. Manufacturers are required to initiate a recall for any repair, including a software update, that remedies an unreasonable risk to safety. NHTSA recalls can include any required repair, which includes a software update, to remedy a potential safety risk. Manufacturers are also required to submit any communications to owners, dealers, and others about any software updates that address a defect, whether it is safety-related or not,” the NHTSA stated.
Product recall specialist and associate professor at the Indiana University Kelley School of Business Professor George Ball told Teslarati that while the NHTSA’s use of similar terminologies for software and hardware-based recalls is “definitely an example of regulators and industry moving at a different pace on technology,” the agency’s hesitation in adopting new terminologies for OTA fixes is understandable. Professor Ball further explained that using terms such as “soft recall” to refer to software-based vehicle fixes might imply a reduced level of risk, and this is something that the NHTSA would likely be unwilling to do.
“I believe NHTSA would resist ‘soft recall’ terminology because it implies a reduced level of customer hazard and allows the firm to be under less scrutiny by the press and public for quality corrections. While some updates are minor, some of the Tesla software upgrades are actually quite serious, and if not done, can allow a harmful defect to persist,” the recall specialist said.
But while the NHTSA’s stance on recall terminologies is completely understandable, one cannot deny the fact that the issues covered by vehicle recalls have a very wide range of risks. Take Tesla’s recall for 817,143 vehicles, which was announced earlier this month, for example. The recall was initiated since a software error may prevent a warning chime from activating even if drivers do not have their seat belts on. From a layman’s perspective, this recall seems grave as it affects over 800,000 Teslas on the road today. However, the issue was simply addressed through firmware release 2021.43.101.1 and later, which included a remedy for the seat belt chime error.
Compare this with General Motors’ recall last year of 400,000 pickup trucks in the US. Granted, it only affected about half as many vehicles as Tesla’s seat belt chime recall, but its hardware-based nature suggested that the risk presented by the issue was great. The recall covered certain 2015 and 2016 Chevrolet and GMC Sierra 1500, 2500, and 3500 trucks, and it involved a faulty airbag inflator that may rupture without warning. To fix the issue, owners of the affected trucks were required to head to a dealer so that they could get their airbag modules replaced. Since parts were in short supply last year, however, owners were notified with a letter to inform them when their trucks’ replacement parts were available.
What Can Be Done
While the NHTSA will likely continue to maintain the status quo with its recall terminologies for the foreseeable future, Professor Ball told Teslarati that the agency can actually implement some adjustments now that can make distinguishing safety fixes and issues clearer. This would likely be extremely important in the near future as more connected cars are rolled out and software updates become the norm.
“If I were to provide advice to the NHTSA, I would recommend that they get out ahead of this issue before every car maker starts updating cars like Tesla. One way to do it is to require the automaker to send all auto updates to NHTSA when pushed out, and to classify updates as ‘minor’ or ‘major.’ Any major update that impacts customer safety would be classified as a recall. Automakers won’t like this, but it will help keep the safety fixes transparent for all, especially consumers. By sending all updates to NHSTA, the agency could assign qualified people to audit the classifications assigned by the manufacturer, to ensure they are making good decisions there.
“I think any language that de-emphasizes the importance of a safety recall is not likely to be supported by NHTSA, and it doesn’t likely help customer safety. A clear distinction needs to be made between minor updates and major updates that influence safety. Those major updates should be classified as a recall, and NHTSA needs to get their arms around these updates and keep on top of them soon, or they will fall way behind the industry,” the recall specialist said.
Recalls can affect the perception of a company to the public. Software fixes should be one of the factors that are considered an edge for automakers like Tesla, not the other way around. Gary Black, Managing Partner of The Future Fund LLC, explained this from the point of view of a Tesla investor. “Since every NHTSA recall so far has been quickly solvable via Tesla OTA updates, ‘recalls’ are noise to most investors. Tesla’s huge software edge highlights one of the key advantages of owning Tesla over every other EV manufacturer,” the Wall Street veteran told Teslarati.
OTA updates, including those related to vehicle safety, are coming. With automakers like Ford joining the group of carmakers embracing OTA updates, software-based fixes are inevitable. Ultimately, I am inclined to agree with the recall specialist. By refusing to adapt to the advent of software-based vehicle fixes, the NHTSA may risk being left behind by the automotive industry. And that’s a scenario that I believe no automaker — or government agency for that matter — would prefer.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
News
Tesla one-ups Waymo once again with latest Robotaxi expansion in Austin
Tesla’s new Robotaxi geofence measures roughly 171 square miles of Austin’s downtown and suburbs. This is more than double the size of Waymo’s geofence, which measures 90 square miles.

Tesla’s expansion of the Robotaxi geofence on Tuesday morning was a one-up on Waymo once again, as the automaker’s service area growth helps eclipse its rival in an intense back-and-forth.
A lot of conversation has been made about Tesla’s rivalry with Waymo in terms of the capabilities of its driverless ride-sharing service in Austin, Texas.
The two companies have sparred with one another, answering each other’s expansion, and continuing to compete, all to the benefit of consumers in the region.
Tesla expanded the geofence of Robotaxi once again this morning, and it is another growth that catapults it past Waymo’s service area in Austin — this time by a considerable margin.
Comparison of Tesla’s vs Waymo’s Robotaxi geofence map in Austin, Texas.
Today, @Tesla again massively expanded their geofence area, making it significantly bigger than Waymo’s. pic.twitter.com/tHLJ2qabZJ
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) August 26, 2025
Tesla’s new Robotaxi geofence measures roughly 171 square miles of Austin’s downtown and suburbs. This is more than double the size of Waymo’s geofence, which measures 90 square miles.
On July 14, Tesla officially overtook Waymo in terms of service area in Austin. But just a few days later, Waymo had responded with a bold statement, expanding from 37 square miles to 90 square miles.
Sarfraz Maredia, Global Head of Autonomous Mobility & Delivery at Uber, said the move “unlock[ed] another key milestone in Austin as our operating territory with Waymo expands from 37 to 90 square miles, which means that even more riders can experience Waymo’s fully autonomous vehicles through the Uber app.”
Tesla did not respond immediately, but it took its time with validation vehicle testing in the Austin suburbs, as we reported yesterday:
Tesla looks to expand Robotaxi geofence once again with testing in new area
Today’s expansion is perhaps the biggest step Tesla has taken in its efforts to continue to grow its Robotaxi platform. This is not only because the company has significantly expanded the size of the geofence, but also because it has ventured into suburban areas and even included Gigafactory Texas in its service area.
Waymo could come up with another timely response as it did when Tesla expanded in late July. We’ll wait to see what it comes up with, as this awesome competition between the two companies is accelerating innovation.
News
Tesla Robotaxi geofence expansion enters Plaid Mode and includes a surprise
Now, on August 26, the Robotaxi geofence has expanded once again, and is estimated to be about 130 square miles.

Tesla has expanded its Robotaxi geofence in Austin for the third time since its launch in late June, and the company added a big surprise with this new service area.
After launching on June 22, Tesla’s driverless Robotaxi service has been expanded three times. Its initial launch was about 20 square miles in size. The first expansion occurred on July 14 and was roughly 42 miles large, more than double the initial geofence size.
The second expansion occurred on August 3 and brought the total service area to roughly 80 square miles.
Now, on August 26, the Robotaxi geofence has expanded once again, and is estimated to be about 170 square miles.
🚨 Tesla has expanded its Robotaxi geofence in Austin once again!
This is the third time the service area has expanded! pic.twitter.com/ZzIWWLIgsQ
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 26, 2025
The expansion of the Robotaxi geofence seemed to show the company’s focus on getting the service to the areas East and West of downtown was an utmost priority.
We reported on the Bee Cave region of the Austin suburbs being a place where Robotaxi validation vehicles were spotted testing in recent days.
Bee Cave is included in the new geofence.
However, that is not the biggest addition to the geofence, and it’s not even close. Tesla added a major area to the new geofence, one that fans of the company will absolutely love: Tesla Gigafactory Texas.
🚨 Tesla Gigafactory Texas is now available in the new Robotaxi geofence: https://t.co/Ctcm0HNZk4 pic.twitter.com/7nyhQNYLww
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 26, 2025
The big question that remains is whether Tesla is expanding the size of its fleet of Robotaxi vehicles in Austin. There have been many questions about the expansions of the fleet and not necessarily the geofence, and while the latter is certainly considered progress, Tesla will need to enable more Robotaxi into the vehicle population to handle the additional rides.
Tesla has been planning to do so, but is still prioritizing safety and does not want to rush any part of the Robotaxi process.
Tesla is also looking to expand to new cities altogether. It is currently moving toward a Robotaxi launch in Florida, Arizona, and Nevada, and has also opened up job postings for Robotaxi operators in New York.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk reiterates his most optimistic prediction yet with “UHI” forecast
Despite his polarizing nature, Elon Musk is, at his core, an optimist.

Despite his polarizing nature, Elon Musk is, at his core, an optimist. If he were not one, he would never have founded Tesla or SpaceX, or pursued projects such as Neuralink or xAI.
Musk’s optimism was on full display on social media platform X recently, when he shared what could very well be his most optimistic prediction yet.
Robots and humans
The Tesla CEO recently responded to a post from David Scott Patterson, who estimated that all jobs will be replaced by AI and robots easily by 2030. In his post, Patterson noted that if robots are sold at the same rate as vehicles, it could result in an output of 320 million robots per year.
Musk responded that eventually, intelligent humanoid robots will far exceed the population of humans, and “there will be many robots in industry for every human to provide products & services.”
Musk is already taking steps to achieve such a future. Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot is expected to see its first “legion” produced this 2025. During an All-Hands meeting earlier this year, Musk also hinted to Tesla employees that the company will try to produce about 50,000 Optimus robots next year.
Universal High Income (UHI)
Musk has shared similar sentiments in the past, so it was no surprise that some X users asked the CEO how humans could sustain their lives when robots replace working individuals. To this, Musk responded that a Universal High Income (UHI) would be implemented, which should provide people with the best medical care, food, and transport available.
“There will be universal high income (not merely basic income). Everyone will have the best medical care, food, home, transport and everything else. Sustainable abundance,” Musk wrote in his post.
Musk’s comment about sustainable abundance seems to be a prevalent theme in his recent optimistic comments. During Tesla’s second quarter earnings call, for example, Musk hinted that his Master Plan Part Four will describe a path towards sustainable abundance in a post-autonomy world.
-
Elon Musk4 days ago
Elon Musk takes aim at Bill Gates’ Microsoft with new AI venture “Macrohard”
-
News2 days ago
Tesla offers new feature to save battery and reduce phantom drain
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla flexes its most impressive and longest Full Self-Driving demo yet
-
News1 week ago
Tesla Model Y L officially launched: price, features, and more
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla Model Y L spotted in Europe ahead of expected September China launch
-
Elon Musk1 day ago
Elon Musk argues lidar and radar make self driving cars more dangerous
-
Elon Musk6 days ago
Tesla’s Elon Musk shares optimistic teaser about FSD V14: “Feels sentient”
-
News5 days ago
Tesla Giga Berlin fire results in zero injuries and no environmental damage