News
Tesla with sleeping driver proves there’s still misunderstanding and irresponsibility surrounding autonomy
Update: 11:06 AM EST: Paragraph 7 added to show the probability of the driver having a medical emergency. California Highway Patrol saw the vehicle and noted the driver was awake after catching up to the car.
A Tesla Model Y with a sleeping driver was recently spotted on the I-15 Freeway near Temecula, California, which proves that people and media still have a vast misunderstanding and irresponsible tone regarding the capabilities of semi-autonomous vehicles.
According to a report from KTLA 5, a woman in a Tesla Model Y was followed by another driver for more than fifteen minutes on the California interstate in an attempt to wake the woman who was taking advantage of the automaker’s semi-autonomous driving functions up.
The report and the incident prove there are still huge misunderstandings in the capabilities of semi-autonomous driving suites, including Tesla’s Full Self-Driving and Autopilot, which require users to remain vigilant and be prepared to take over the vehicle at any point.
Drivers utilize semi-autonomous vehicle functionalities irresponsibly often, and social media has proven time and time again that people take advantage of the capabilities, even though they are not fully autonomous.
It is no secret that people and companies have utilized whatever they can to alleviate themselves of the responsibility of paying attention while the car operates some tasks on its own. With the introduction of advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) over the past several years, drivers have taken advantage of the functions to instead play on their phones, read books, eat food, or even catch up on sleep.
Tesla’s camera-based driver monitoring system goes through the cellphone test
However, the risks that come with this behavior are potentially catastrophic. For one, those who use these functions irresponsibly put themselves and every other driver on the road at risk because if the vehicle needs assistance or encounters a situation where it would not react safely, the driver is responsible for taking over. Additionally, if an accident occurs, it can be framed as Tesla’s, or any other manufacturer’s fault, depending on the vehicle used, and instances like this can set the future of semi-autonomous and autonomous driving back years due to skepticism.
There is the possibility that the driver had some type of medical emergency or accidentally fell asleep, in which the Tesla’s functionalities kept the operator and others safe. Police stated the driver was caught up to two minutes after receiving calls about the driver, and the driver was attentive at this time.
However, the media’s portrayal of the situation also proves that many are widely uninformed regarding the capabilities of Teslas. While Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite has caused controversy over its name, the automaker continues to remind those who use it to remain vigilant, as the cars cannot truly drive themselves.
In Tesla’s FAQ section of the Autopilot and Full Self-Driving page, the company answers the question, “Do I still need to pay attention while using Autopilot?:”
“Yes. Autopilot is a hands-on driver assistance system that is intended to be used only with a fully attentive driver. It does not turn a Tesla into a self-driving car nor does it make a car autonomous.
Before enabling Autopilot, you must agree to “keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times” and to always “maintain control and responsibility for your car.” Once engaged, Autopilot will also deliver an escalating series of visual and audio warnings, reminding you to place your hands on the wheel if insufficient torque is applied. If you repeatedly ignore these warnings, you will be locked out from using Autopilot during that trip.
You can override any of Autopilot’s features at any time by steering, applying the brakes, or using the cruise control stalk to deactivate.”
Media labeling the vehicle as “a self-driving Tesla” is a disservice to people and the company. Teslas do not drive themselves, as the vehicles are defined as Level 2, according to the Society of Automotive Engineers Levels of Driving Automation. Level 2 systems reiterate that the driver is still responsible for driving the car when these systems are activated. “You must constantly supervise these support features,” the SAE says. Level 3 to Level 5 systems maintain that the operator is not driving the car, but Level 5 systems are the only ones that are explicitly labeled as “self-driving.”
“This feature can drive the vehicle under all conditions,” the SAE table states.
Credit: Society of Automotive Engineers
Recent ratings by Consumer Reports showed that Tesla’s biggest flaw was driver monitoring. Many systems use cabin-facing cameras to monitor eye behavior to ensure the operator is keeping their eyes on the road. Teslas use a series of audible and visual cues to alert drivers of their inattentiveness, and steering wheel sensors make sure the driver keeps their hands on the wheel.
However, various cheat devices have been marketed across the internet, and in this instance, the driver appears to have their hands on the wheel while they are dozed.
Tesla activated camera-based driver monitoring in May 2021. “The cabin camera above your rearview mirror can now detect and alert driver inattentiveness while Autopilot is engaged,” Tesla said in the notes. Tests of Tesla’s driver monitoring tests showed the system was effective in some instances, especially when looking at cell phones, with alerts coming in 15 seconds.
The potential irresponsibility of users puts major risks to those on the road and the companies that develop these driver assistance programs. While there are workarounds through the previously-mentioned cheat devices, people have to know their irresponsibility could cost them, or others, their lives.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.
News
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.
SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”
This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.
Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.
Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.
Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.
If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.
The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.
The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.
Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.
The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.
Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.
Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.
Elon Musk clapped back at France’s decision to withhold the approval for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised system, projecting a clear and blunt message to French Transport Minister Phillippe Tabarot, after he publicly rejected the technology in its current form.
Tabarot outlines several concerns with Tesla Full Self-Driving in a detailed video statement, where he said, “The safety trade-offs are not yet sufficient to authorize it as it currently stands,” he said. He emphasized that FSD is not a true self-driving system and that the driver remains fully responsible.
Key issues Tabarot also brought up included allowing speeding when surrounding traffic exceeds limits and what he believes are insufficient guarantees of driver attention during complex urban maneuvers such as lane changes, intersections, and roundabouts.
Delaying the approval of FSD in France will cost lives
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 22, 2026
While acknowledging technological progress and France’s support for autonomous innovation, Tabarot stressed that deployment must prioritize road safety. He noted ongoing technical discussions with Tesla, the Netherlands, and other European partners, with further ecosystem meetings planned for the fall.
Musk’s rebuke highlights the human cost of regulatory caution. Tesla’s latest safety reports provide compelling data supporting accelerated adoption. In the most recent 12-month period, vehicles using FSD (Supervised) recorded one major collision per approximately 5.1 million miles driven, dramatically better than the U.S. national average of one crash per 698,000 miles.
Even Tesla vehicles driven manually with active safety features outperform the average by a wide margin. These figures come from billions of real-world miles of telemetry, showing FSD vehicles involved in far fewer incidents than both manual Teslas and the broader U.S. fleet.
Critics argue Tesla’s comparisons require careful scrutiny regarding reporting thresholds and fleet demographics, yet the data consistently positions FSD as a potential lifesaver. With road fatalities remaining a leading cause of death worldwide, Musk contends that proven safer technology should not face prolonged bureaucratic hurdles.
France’s measured approach reflects the broader European regulatory caution, which many, especially Musk, have been critical of in the past. However, as autonomous systems from Tesla and competitors like Waymo demonstrate superior safety in independent studies, pressure is mounting for harmonized approvals.
Musk’s warning carries the belief that every month of delay may equate to avoidable tragedies on European roads.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
Tesla stock tumbles after earnings, one of its sharpest single-day declines
