Elon Musk
Tesla Robotaxi deemed a total failure by media — even though it hasn’t been released
Nearly two weeks before it is even set for its planned rollout, Tesla Robotaxi has already been deemed a failure — even though it is not even publicly released.
Tesla Robotaxi is among the biggest tech developments of the year, and its June launch date has not yet arrived.
This does not matter to skeptics of the company, as they have already deemed the rollout a “failure,” “an enormous mess,” and plenty of other adjectives. No matter what, several outlets are already leaning on biased opinions and a lack of true evidence that points in any direction.
Futurism posted an article this morning claiming that Robotaxi is “already an enormous mess,” citing the opinions of Dan O’Dowd, perhaps Full Self-Driving’s biggest critic. There is no mention of any of the excitement or prosperity that would come from the opposite side of the argument.
Instead, it included that O’Dowd felt it was a failure in an 80-minute drive around Santa Barbara.
This is fair to include: Full Self-Driving is not perfect, which is why Tesla will implement safeguards like teleoperation at first. However, it’s not like it’s so awful it isn’t even remotely close. Personally, my experience with FSD was incredibly successful, responsible, and it was something I still wish I had on my car to this day. I wish the article would have included a quote from someone who is as equally passionate about FSD, just from the other side of the argument.
Credit: Tesla
There is no mention of Tesla’s most recent Vehicle Safety Report, which showed Autopilot-enabled cars are nearly 10x less likely to be involved in an accident compared to the national average. This might not be the same as Full Self-Driving, but it is still a testament to what Tesla has achieved with its driver assistance systems.
To be fair, Tesla has been a company that has missed timelines, especially when it comes to FSD. I used to roll my eyes a bit when CEO Elon Musk would say, “We’ll have Full Self-Driving finished by the end of the year,” or “We’ll have a million robotaxis on the road next year.” I was always skeptical.
However, Tesla has handled things differently this year. They’ve admitted the Robotaxi rollout will be controlled at first, including a fleet of only 10-20 Model Y vehicles. It will be private at launch, and only the lucky invited will have the opportunity to experience it in Austin in June.
It might be less than a public rollout, which of course, for people like you and me, is disappointing. But let’s be real: if Tesla launched a full-blown Robotaxi platform with no regulations or small-batch testing, there would be criticism of that, too.
Some media outlets are pointing to the recent NHTSA request for more information on how Tesla’s tech will “assess the ability of Tesla’s system to react appropriately to reduced roadway visibility conditions.” This seems more than reasonable as Robotaxi will be among the first driverless ridesharing programs in the United States.
Tesla gets new information request from NHTSA on Robotaxi rollout
It’s no more than a request for information on how things will be handled and how the tech works.
It is sad to see so many outlets already deem something that could be the next big thing as a failure, despite there being no real indication of it being that or a success. Let’s be fair and give Tesla an opportunity to meet its June target and Robotaxi some time to operate and prove to be a reliable ride-share option.
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.
Elon Musk
Music City Loop could highlight The Boring Company’s real disruption
The real story behind the tunneling startup’s Nashville tunnel project is the company’s targeted $25 million per mile construction cost.
Recent commentary on social media has highlighted what could very well prove to be The Boring Company’s real disruption.
The analysis was shared by tech watcher Aakash Gupta on social media platform X, where he argued that the real story behind the tunneling startup’s Nashville tunnel project is the company’s targeted $25 million per mile construction cost.
According to Gupta’s breakdown, Nashville’s 2018 light rail proposal was priced at roughly $200 million per mile. New York’s East Side Access project reportedly cost about $3.5 billion per mile, while Los Angeles Metro expansion projects have approached $1 billion per mile.
By comparison, The Boring Company has stated it can construct 13 miles of twin tunnels in the Music City Loop for between $240 million and $300 million total. That implies a cost near $25 million per mile, or roughly a 95% reduction from industry averages cited in the post.
Several technical departures from conventional tunneling allow the Boring Company to lower its costs, from its smaller 12-foot diameter tunnels to its fully electric Prufrock machines that are designed to mine continuously with no personnel inside the tunnel and their capability to “porpoise” for easy launch and retrieval.
Tesla and Space CEO Elon Musk responded to the post on X, stating simply that “Tunnels are so underrated.”
The Boring Company has seen some momentum as of late, with the company recently signing a construction contract in Dubai and the Universal Orlando Loop progressing. Recent reports have also pointed to tunnels potentially being constructed to solve traffic congestion issues near the Giga Nevada area.
While The Boring Company’s tunnels have so far been used for Loop systems publicly for now, Elon Musk recently noted that the tunneling startup’s underground passages would not be limited only to ride-hailing vehicles.
In a reply to a post on X which discussed the specifications of the Music City Loop, Musk clarified that “any fully autonomous electric cars can use the tunnels.” This suggests that vehicles potentially running systems like FSD Supervised, even if they are not Teslas, could be used in systems like the Music City Loop in the future.
Elon Musk
SpaceX IPO could push Elon Musk’s net worth past $1 trillion: Polymarket
The estimates were shared by the official Polymarket Money account on social media platform X.
Recent projections have outlined how a potential $1.75 trillion SpaceX IPO could generate historic returns for early investors. The projections suggest the offering would not only become the largest IPO in history but could also result in unprecedented windfalls for some of the company’s key investors.
The estimates were shared by the official Polymarket Money account on social media platform X.
As noted in a Polymarket Money analysis, Elon Musk invested $100 million into SpaceX in 2002 and currently owns approximately 42% of the company. At a $1.75 trillion valuation following SpaceX’s potential $1.75 trillion IPO, that stake would be worth roughly $735 billion.
Such a figure would dramatically expand Musk’s net worth. When combined with his holdings in Tesla Inc. and other ventures, a public debut at that level could position him as the world’s first trillionaire, depending on market conditions at the time of listing.
The Bloomberg Billionaires Index currently lists Elon Musk with a net worth of $666 billion, though a notable portion of this is tied to his TSLA stock. Tesla currently holds a market cap of $1.51 trillion, and Elon Musk’s currently holds about 13% to 15% of the company’s outstanding common stock.
Founders Fund, co-founded by Peter Thiel, invested $20 million in SpaceX in 2008. Polymarket Money estimates the firm owns between 1.5% and 3% of the private space company. At a $1.75 trillion valuation, that range would translate to approximately $26.25 billion to $52.5 billion in value.
That return would represent one of the most significant venture capital outcomes in modern Silicon Valley history, with a growth of 131,150% to 262,400%.
Alphabet Inc., Google’s parent company, invested $900 million into SpaceX in 2015 and is estimated to hold between 6% and 7% of the private space firm. At the projected IPO valuation, that stake could be worth between $105 billion and $122.5 billion. That’s a growth of 11,566% to 14,455%.
Other major backers highlighted in the post include Fidelity Investments, Baillie Gifford, Valor Equity Partners, Bank of America, and Andreessen Horowitz, each potentially sitting on multibillion-dollar gains.
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
