News
Tesla owners convey worries over radar loss for inclement weather
This is a preview from our weekly newsletter. Each week I go ‘Beyond the News’ and handcraft a special edition that includes my thoughts on the biggest stories, why it matters, and how it could impact the future.
Tesla’s recent decision to scrap Radar in favor of a Camera-based approach for Autopilot and Full Self-Driving aligned with the company’s plans and statements over the past few Earnings Calls. For CEO Elon Musk, the goal has been to get away from radar and depend on camera systems for Tesla’s self-driving plan, but some owners are not convinced of the decision. Over the past few days, I have received several emails and Tweets about the decision, with some owners still not completely confident in the vision-based approach Tesla will take.
During the Q1 2021 Earnings Call just a few months back, Elon Musk made it clear Tesla would be switching to a Camera-based system for AP and FSD. Comparing the cameras to human eyes, Musk’s explanation made a lot of sense.
Musk said:
“When your vision works, it works better than the best human because it’s like having eight cameras, it’s like having eyes in the back of your head, beside your head, and has three eyes of different focal distances looking forward. This is — and processing it at a speed that is superhuman. There’s no question in my mind that with a pure vision solution, we can make a car that is dramatically safer than the average person.”
Tesla Model 3, Model Y builds in May 2021 will no longer equip radar
Now, the thing is, eyes, while great for seeing things that are in the clear, are highly effective, and it makes a lot of sense to try and use this sort of approach for self-driving because it is how humans have driven for years. But when humans are confronted with low visibility and severe weather on the road, the confidence goes down, and many drivers adjust by traveling at lower speeds. Some even pull over and wait for the weather to subside, a move that is rare for many but some simply do not like driving in bad weather.
This is where radar comes in handy because it can identify and locate objects and how far they are away from the vehicle in the event of low visibility on the road, which is something that the human eyes, or cameras, simply cannot do.
An email from an Australian reader seemed to narrow in this point even further. A man named Peter emailed me and stated that his Model 3 recently identified a truck that was ahead of him but concealed in an opaque, white mist several car links ahead of his vehicle. “I assumed that visualization was created as a result of radar. In those conditions, the message multiple cameras blocked or obstructed appeared and the autopilot screamed and handed over,” Peter said.
Unless I’m in fog on I-5 and can’t see the massive collision ahead…. I’d like to understand the workaround to this. pic.twitter.com/sQXB63yWlv
— Rome Strach (@romn8tr) May 28, 2021
He then added, “On multiple other occasions I’ve noted on the visualization screen an unsighted vehicle obstructed by an SUV ahead of me.”
Without radar, the recognition of these vehicles would not be possible, so it brings some concerns to drivers who have utilized the radar system in vehicles to gain confidence in their surroundings.
Now, in a somewhat comical response to concerns, Musk posted a Reddit response from u/YukonBurger, which stated that they worked with radar a lot and were “very, very happy” with Tesla’s decision. It basically explained that trying to jive radar and cameras together is extremely difficult, and there are instances where using your eyes is just a better option because you can see how far you are away from things. Interestingly, the post does admit that “radar is really only good for reduced visibility situations where lane-keeping will probably also be degraded enough to not be worth it.” It concluded by stating that vision is still quick enough to avoid accidents or vehicles in front of the car in a short period of time, the real issue comes from cars behind you.
Not sure who wrote this, but it’s accurate pic.twitter.com/gRvWxOJZ56
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 26, 2021
It seems that the real key to vision being a better approach comes down to the fact that, in clear conditions, it won’t have an issue identifying and removing itself from danger. Even in rainy conditions, where visibility isn’t necessarily bad, the vision approach is more advantageous than using radar.
The goal, ultimately, is to make the cars act as a human would, and humans don’t have radar. Instead, they compensate for reduced visibility with less dangerous driving. Slower speeds, more cautious navigation, and less frequent lane changes. Autopilot and FSD are already pretty timid and “shy” to begin with, it’s not like they’re out there driving like pissed-off teenagers.
I think that, while this move is somewhat worrisome for some drivers, the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. This has been a part of the plan for some time, and I think that now it is becoming a reality, some are starting to put the pieces together that there won’t be any radar so visibility limitations could end up being problematic. I wouldn’t worry, because I believe the cars will adjust just as humans do, they will simply be more cautious and more courteous on the roads in these settings.
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.

The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality.
“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.
When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.
After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”
“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.
Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.
During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.
As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.