News
Tesla posts stern response to Washington Post’s article on alleged Autopilot dangers
Tesla has posted a stern response to a recent article from The Washington Post that suggested that the electric vehicle maker is putting people at risk because it allows systems like Autopilot to be deployed in areas that it was not designed for. The publication noted that it was able to identify about 40 fatal or serious crashes since 2016, and at least eight of them happened in roads where Autopilot was not designed to be used in the first place.
Overall, the Washington Post article argued that while Tesla does inform drivers that they are responsible for their vehicles while Autopilot is engaged, the company is nonetheless also at fault since it allows its driver-assist system to be deployed irresponsibly. “Even though the company has the technical ability to limit Autopilot’s availability by geography, it has taken few definitive steps to restrict use of the software,” the article read.
In its response, which was posted through its official account on X, Tesla highlighted that it is very serious about keeping both its customers and pedestrians safe. The company noted that the data is clear about the fact that systems like Autopilot, when used safety, drastically reduce the number of accidents on the road. The company also reiterated the fact that features like Traffic Aware Cruise Control are Level 2 systems, which require constant supervision from the driver.
Following is the pertinent section of Tesla’s response.
While there are many articles that do not accurately convey the nature of our safety systems, the recent Washington Post article is particularly egregious in its misstatements and lack of relevant context.
We at Tesla believe that we have a moral obligation to continue improving our already best-in-class safety systems. At the same time, we also believe it is morally indefensible not to make these systems available to a wider set of consumers, given the incontrovertible data that shows it is saving lives and preventing injury.
Regulators around the globe have a duty to protect consumers, and the Tesla team looks forward to continuing our work with them towards our common goal of eliminating as many deaths and injuries as possible on our roadways.
Below are some important facts, context and background.
Background
1. Safety metrics are emphatically stronger when Autopilot is engaged than when not engaged.
a. In the 4th quarter of 2022, we recorded one crash for every 4.85 million miles driven in which drivers were using Autopilot technology. For drivers who were not using Autopilot technology, we recorded one crash for every 1.40 million miles driven. By comparison, the most recent data available from NHTSA and FHWA (from 2021) shows that in the United States there was an automobile crash approximately every 652,000 miles.
b. The data is clear: The more automation technology offered to support the driver, the safer the driver and other road users. Anecdotes from the WaPo article come from plaintiff attorneys—cases involving significant driver misuse—and are not a substitute for rigorous analysis and billions of miles of data.
c. Recent Data continues this trend and is even more compelling. Autopilot is ~10X safer than US average and ~5X safer than a Tesla with no AP tech enabled. More detailed information will be publicly available in the near future.
2. Autopilot features, including Traffic-Aware Cruise Control and Autosteer, are SAE Level 2 driver-assist systems, meaning –
a. Whether the driver chooses to engage Autosteer or not, the driver is in control of the vehicle at all times. The driver is notified of this responsibility, consents, agrees to monitor the driving assistance, and can disengage anytime.
b. Despite the driver being responsible for control for the vehicle, Tesla has a number of additional safety measures designed to monitor that drivers engage in active driver supervision, including torque-based and camera-based monitoring. We have continued to make progress in improving these monitoring systems to reduce misuse.
c. Based on the above, among other factors, the data strongly indicates our customers are far safer by having the choice to decide when it is appropriate to engage Autopilot features. When used properly, it provides safety benefits on all road classes.
Tesla also provided some context about some of the crashes that were highlighted by The Washington Post. As per the electric vehicle maker, the incidents that the publication cited involved drivers who were not using Autopilot correctly. The publication, therefore, omitted several important facts when it was framing its narrative around Autopilot’s alleged risks, Tesla argued.
Following is the pertinent section of Tesla’s response.
The Washington Post leverages instances of driver misuse of the Autopilot driver assist feature to suggest the system is the problem. The article got it wrong, misreporting what’s actually alleged in the pending lawsuit and omitting several important facts:
1. Contrary to the Post article, the Complaint doesn’t reference complacency or Operational Design Domain.
2. Instead, the Complaint acknowledges the harms of driver inattention, misuse, and negligence.
3. Mr. Angulo and the parents of Ms. Benavides who tragically died in the crash, first sued the Tesla driver—and settled with him—before ever pursuing a claim against Tesla.
4. The Benavides lawsuit alleges the Tesla driver “carelessly and/or recklessly” “drove through the intersection…ignoring the controlling stop sign and traffic signal.”
5. The Tesla driver didn’t blame Tesla, didn’t sue Tesla, didn’t try to get Tesla to pay on his behalf. He took responsibility.
6. The Post had the driver’s statements to police and reports that he said he was “driving on cruise.” They omit that he also admitted to police “I expect to be the driver and be responsible for this.”
7. The driver later testified in the litigation he knew Autopilot didn’t make the car self-driving and he was the driver, contrary to the Post and Angulo claims that he was mislead, over-reliant or complacent. He readily and repeatedly admitted:
a. “I was highly aware that was still my responsibility to operate the vehicle safely.”
b. He agreed it was his “responsibility as the driver of the vehicle, even with Autopilot activated, to drive safely and be in control of the vehicle at all times.”
c. “I would say specifically I was aware that the car was my responsibility. I didn’t read all these statements and passages, but I’m aware the car was my responsibility.”
8. The Post also failed to disclose that Autopilot restricted the vehicle’s speed to 45 mph (the speed limit) based on the road type, but the driver was pressing the accelerator to maintain 60 mph when he ran the stop sign and caused the crash. The car displayed an alert to the driver that, because he was overriding Autopilot with the accelerator, “Cruise control will not brake.”
While there are many articles that do not accurately convey the nature of our safety systems, the recent Washington Post article is particularly egregious in its misstatements and lack of relevant context.
We at Tesla believe that we have a moral obligation to continue…
— Tesla (@Tesla) December 12, 2023
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Elon Musk
Tesla Semi finally has an FSD timeline and it’s waiting on the Cybercab
Elon Musk told investors Semi self-driving should start working by early 2027, per today’s earnings.
During Wednesday’s’ Tesla Q2 earnings call, an analyst asked Elon Musk when Tesla would look at autonomy for the Semi. His answer set a real timeline for the first time, noting that self-driving on the Tesla Semi is expected to start working “around the end of this year or early next year”.
Musk framed the delay as a matter of priority, not capability. Tesla’s self-driving team is currently focused on Model 3, Model Y, and Cybercab, the vehicles that make up the overwhelming majority of Tesla’s fleet. Since Semi trucks on the road remain a small fraction of that total even after the recent Nevada factory ramp, Musk said it made more sense to keep the software team’s attention on what he called “the march of nines of safety” for the higher volume vehicles first. Autonomous Semi development is “taking a bit of a backseat for the next six months or so,” he said, before adding that it “will definitely be working next year and in time for the scale-up to high production of the Tesla Semi.”
Tesla Semi’s official battery capacity leaked by California regulators
The timeline lines up with what’s already been showing up on public roads. In June, a Tesla Semi was spotted in Sunnyvale wearing a full validation rig, the same rooftop sensor array Tesla mounts on vehicles ahead of an FSD milestone.
A second unit was seen near Fremont days later with a matching camera suite and lens washers. Separately, Tesla analyst Nic Cruz Patane posted video this month of the production Semi’s exterior camera array, ten AI4 based units built directly into the truck rather than added later.
Tesla Semi AI4 cameras. The production version has 10 cameras on its exterior.
These trucks are designed to be autonomous. pic.twitter.com/GH3BamxIBQ
— Nic Cruz Patane (@niccruzpatane) April 14, 2026
Musk also gave the reason autonomy on the Semi matters in the first place, a persistent shortage of qualified truck drivers. “There is a really serious shortage of truckers,” he said on the call, framing a self-driving Semi as important both for addressing that shortage and for improving safety and comfort for the drivers running the truck today.
The timing also tracks with the Semi’s production reality. Tesla’s Q2 shareholder letter, dropped language promising the Semi would reach volume production this year. Musk pointed to 4680 battery cell output as the near-term constraint on Semi and Cybercab production. A software timeline landing in early 2027 gives Tesla’s autonomy team room to work while the hardware ramp catches up behind it.
It’s worth nothing that this isn’t necessarily a promise the Semi ships driverless next year. Musk’s own language, self-driving “working” by early 2027, describes internal validation catching up to hardware already riding on every production truck, not a public unsupervised rollout.
Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) reported its earnings for the first quarter of 2026 on Wednesday afternoon. Here’s what the company reported compared to what Wall Street analysts expected.
The earnings results come after Tesla reported a massive beat on vehicle deliveries for the second quarter, delivering 489,126 vehicles and building 451,758 cars during the three-month span.
This was a major shock for those on Wall Street as they anticipated somewhere around 400,000 deliveries for the quarter, and showed Tesla still has plenty of demand for its vehicles around the world and in the U.S. despite losing the $7,500 EV Tax Credit last year.
Tesla Q2 2026 Earnings Results
- Non-GAAP EPS – $0.33 reported vs. $0.53 expected
- Revenues – $28.236 billion reported vs. $26.4 billion expected
- Free Cash Flow- -$1.092B
- Profit -$ 4.751B
Tesla (beat/missed) analyst expectations, so the market response to the company’s quarter is what we will look for next.
Tesla shares closed today down just over 1 percent, trading at $374.01.
In the past, it has been anyone’s guess with what Tesla shares will do after they report earnings. Strong quarters have resulted in sharp drops, while lackluster quarters have seen the stock shoot up considerably.
Tesla will hold its Q2 2026 Earnings Call in about 90 minutes at 5:30 p.m. on the East Coast. Remarks will be made by CEO Elon Musk and other executives, who will shed some light on the investor questions that we covered earlier this week.
You can stream it below. Additionally, we will be doing our Live Blog on X and Facebook.
Q2 2026 Earnings Call https://t.co/zZS6ii2TWK
— Tesla (@Tesla) July 22, 2026
Tesla is about to make parking in busy parking lots at businesses and other points of interest less stressful than ever by allowing drivers more control over where they park and how, CEO Elon Musk confirmed on X.
Tesla has been working to improve the parking performance of vehicles utilizing the Full Self-Driving suite, but now it is looking to add more customization, allowing drivers to choose the specific space they park in, but also potentially the orientation the car pulls into the spot:
It’s coming soon
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 21, 2026
Musk has reiterated on X twice over the past several weeks that Tesla is working to make things with the FSD suite based more on the driver’s specific preferences and behaviors that were seen in past drives.
Essentially, it sounds like if you tend to park away from a business to avoid other vehicles, Tesla FSD will soon recognize that preference of yours and start parking further away as well. Additionally, the prospect of assigned parking spaces has been something many owners have voiced concerns about.
Living in a community with assigned parking spaces makes using FSD incredibly difficult as it will rarely park in the correct spot when there are so many to choose from. This is also pertinent in work settings where there are sometimes assigned parking spaces.
The updates to Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite in terms of listening to driver preferences with parking are also extending to routing. Tesla announced yesterday that with the release of its 2026 Summer Update, it was adding Automatic Navigation and Preferred Routes:
Tesla reveals 2026 Summer Update with crazy fixes to Nav and more
Tesla has always maintained the idea that any human input is bad input, and that, ideally, Tesla Full Self-Driving will always make the right decision. Of course, this is all in theory, but the issue is that so many of Tesla’s interventions have come because it does something that is not necessarily wrong, but perhaps not what the driver would prefer.
Taking these preferences into account will help Tesla alleviate some of the potentially unnecessary interventions that drivers perform.
Tesla Semi finally has an FSD timeline and it’s waiting on the Cybercab
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
