Tesla has already deployed a software update for a recall affecting a small number of its Model X SUVs, after owners filed complaints about the headlights flickering at certain temperatures.
Earlier this month, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) launched a recall of 25 Tesla Model X units, after drivers complained that the headlights would flicker and not fully illuminate the road at certain temperatures. The affected Model X vehicles were manufactured between June 5 and August 2 of this year, and the problem is due to a specific combination of hardware and software.
Tesla has also identified the component to be the lower headlamp assemblies on the left and right headlights, as manufactured in Mexico. After identifying the issue, Tesla performed a root-cause analysis in partnership with the supplier, including an assessment to ensure design specifications were properly met. Tesla went on to determine that the issue had been from a combination of both software and hardware, and it was able to determine the 25 affected vehicles in October following the analysis.
While the problem has already been addressed with an over-the-air (OTA) software update, NHTSA plans to send official notification letters to affected owners by January 31, 2025.
You can see the full recall report for the issue below, and the NHTSA recall number is 24V-904.
Tesla, recall language and OTA software updates
Many in the Tesla and electric vehicle (EV) community have criticized the use of the term “recall” when no physical parts need to be repaired and no accidents or injuries are associated with a given recall. While some issues may require the owner to bring a vehicle in for physical service, most of Tesla’s recalls have simply required a free OTA software update that installs overnight to fix associated issues.
Elon Musk himself has criticized the use of the term in the past as being antiquated, especially as the media has widely reported on several recalls that were immediately fixed, free of charge, through the deployment of an update—often months before the NHTSA can send notification letters to owners.
Earlier this year, Musk said the term recall was “anachronistic,” adding that by this language phones were being “recalled” every few weeks.
Yeah. This “recall” literally just changes a few pixels on the screen with an over-the-air update.
By that anachronistic standard, phones are being “recalled” every few weeks.— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 2, 2024
In an email to Teslarati earlier this year, an NHTSA spokesperson highlighted that the language surrounding recalls and software updates was required by federal law when road safety risks are posed, along with the requirement that letters be mailed to owners upon a recall’s launch. You can see the agency’s full statement regarding this language below.
Defects that pose an unreasonable risk to safety are serious and should be remedied as soon as possible. Federal law requires manufacturers to issue recalls to remedy safety defects and noncompliances and issue notices to vehicle owners via first class mail. Whether a remedy can be completed at a local dealership or through an over-the-air software update makes no difference to the safety risk posed by a defect or noncompliance.
On background, a recall notification is an important acknowledgment of a safety defect or noncompliance with a safety regulation, regardless of the manner of the repair. The consumer needs to know of over-the-air remedies in case of an issue downloading the repair or if the safety defect or noncompliance persists due to an inadequate remedy.
Unlike a software update to a computer or phone, a safety defect in a vehicle can put the lives of vehicle occupants and others on the road at risk.
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.
Tesla initiates rare physical recall for 2016 Model X over appliqué issue


Elon Musk
Tesla’s Elon Musk: 10 billion miles needed for safe Unsupervised FSD
As per the CEO, roughly 10 billion miles of training data are required due to reality’s “super long tail of complexity.”
Tesla CEO Elon Musk has provided an updated estimate for the training data needed to achieve truly safe unsupervised Full Self-Driving (FSD).
As per the CEO, roughly 10 billion miles of training data are required due to reality’s “super long tail of complexity.”
10 billion miles of training data
Musk comment came as a reply to Apple and Rivian alum Paul Beisel, who posted an analysis on X about the gap between tech demonstrations and real-world products. In his post, Beisel highlighted Tesla’s data-driven lead in autonomy, and he also argued that it would not be easy for rivals to become a legitimate competitor to FSD quickly.
“The notion that someone can ‘catch up’ to this problem primarily through simulation and limited on-road exposure strikes me as deeply naive. This is not a demo problem. It is a scale, data, and iteration problem— and Tesla is already far, far down that road while others are just getting started,” Beisel wrote.
Musk responded to Beisel’s post, stating that “Roughly 10 billion miles of training data is needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving. Reality has a super long tail of complexity.” This is quite interesting considering that in his Master Plan Part Deux, Elon Musk estimated that worldwide regulatory approval for autonomous driving would require around 6 billion miles.
FSD’s total training miles
As 2025 came to a close, Tesla community members observed that FSD was already nearing 7 billion miles driven, with over 2.5 billion miles being from inner city roads. The 7-billion-mile mark was passed just a few days later. This suggests that Tesla is likely the company today with the most training data for its autonomous driving program.
The difficulties of achieving autonomy were referenced by Elon Musk recently, when he commented on Nvidia’s Alpamayo program. As per Musk, “they will find that it’s easy to get to 99% and then super hard to solve the long tail of the distribution.” These sentiments were echoed by Tesla VP for AI software Ashok Elluswamy, who also noted on X that “the long tail is sooo long, that most people can’t grasp it.”
News
Tesla earns top honors at MotorTrend’s SDV Innovator Awards
MotorTrend’s SDV Awards were presented during CES 2026 in Las Vegas.
Tesla emerged as one of the most recognized automakers at MotorTrend’s 2026 Software-Defined Vehicle (SDV) Innovator Awards.
As could be seen in a press release from the publication, two key Tesla employees were honored for their work on AI, autonomy, and vehicle software. MotorTrend’s SDV Awards were presented during CES 2026 in Las Vegas.
Tesla leaders and engineers recognized
The fourth annual SDV Innovator Awards celebrate pioneers and experts who are pushing the automotive industry deeper into software-driven development. Among the most notable honorees for this year was Ashok Elluswamy, Tesla’s Vice President of AI Software, who received a Pioneer Award for his role in advancing artificial intelligence and autonomy across the company’s vehicle lineup.
Tesla also secured recognition in the Expert category, with Lawson Fulton, a staff Autopilot machine learning engineer, honored for his contributions to Tesla’s driver-assistance and autonomous systems.
Tesla’s software-first strategy
While automakers like General Motors, Ford, and Rivian also received recognition, Tesla’s multiple awards stood out given the company’s outsized role in popularizing software-defined vehicles over the past decade. From frequent OTA updates to its data-driven approach to autonomy, Tesla has consistently treated vehicles as evolving software platforms rather than static products.
This has made Tesla’s vehicles very unique in their respective sectors, as they are arguably the only cars that objectively get better over time. This is especially true for vehicles that are loaded with the company’s Full Self-Driving system, which are getting progressively more intelligent and autonomous over time. The majority of Tesla’s updates to its vehicles are free as well, which is very much appreciated by customers worldwide.
Elon Musk
Judge clears path for Elon Musk’s OpenAI lawsuit to go before a jury
The decision maintains Musk’s claims that OpenAI’s shift toward a for-profit structure violated early assurances made to him as a co-founder.
A U.S. judge has ruled that Elon Musk’s lawsuit accusing OpenAI of abandoning its founding nonprofit mission can proceed to a jury trial.
The decision maintains Musk’s claims that OpenAI’s shift toward a for-profit structure violated early assurances made to him as a co-founder. These claims are directly opposed by OpenAI.
Judge says disputed facts warrant a trial
At a hearing in Oakland, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers stated that there was “plenty of evidence” suggesting that OpenAI leaders had promised that the organization’s original nonprofit structure would be maintained. She ruled that those disputed facts should be evaluated by a jury at a trial in March rather than decided by the court at this stage, as noted in a Reuters report.
Musk helped co-found OpenAI in 2015 but left the organization in 2018. In his lawsuit, he argued that he contributed roughly $38 million, or about 60% of OpenAI’s early funding, based on assurances that the company would remain a nonprofit dedicated to the public benefit. He is seeking unspecified monetary damages tied to what he describes as “ill-gotten gains.”
OpenAI, however, has repeatedly rejected Musk’s allegations. The company has stated that Musk’s claims were baseless and part of a pattern of harassment.
Rivalries and Microsoft ties
The case unfolds against the backdrop of intensifying competition in generative artificial intelligence. Musk now runs xAI, whose Grok chatbot competes directly with OpenAI’s flagship ChatGPT. OpenAI has argued that Musk is a frustrated commercial rival who is simply attempting to slow down a market leader.
The lawsuit also names Microsoft as a defendant, citing its multibillion-dollar partnerships with OpenAI. Microsoft has urged the court to dismiss the claims against it, arguing there is no evidence it aided or abetted any alleged misconduct. Lawyers for OpenAI have also pushed for the case to be thrown out, claiming that Musk failed to show sufficient factual basis for claims such as fraud and breach of contract.
Judge Gonzalez Rogers, however, declined to end the case at this stage, noting that a jury would also need to consider whether Musk filed the lawsuit within the applicable statute of limitations. Still, the dispute between Elon Musk and OpenAI is now headed for a high-profile jury trial in the coming months.