News
Volkswagen boss Diess tells execs third-party software fix isn’t an option
Volkswagen boss Herbert Diess is adamant that the German car company must develop its electric vehicle software in-house. In a recent meeting with executives, Diess outlined Volkswagen’s core needs in the topic of software, indicating that it must be developed in-house and that sourcing effective and dependable software from a notable tech company simply isn’t an option if the company wants to remain independent.
“If we want to retain our independence,” Diess told his top managers in a recent meeting, “we have to be able to develop the software in the car ourselves. This is the only way for us to guarantee long-term success.”
Volkswagen’s EV project, which has been catalyzed by the introduction of the ID. family of vehicles has been a thorn in the side of the world’s leading car company since its introduction. While Volkswagen has made electric models before, they have not been on the company’s new MEB (Modular electric drive matrix) platform designed for electric cars. The platform requires a robustly accurate and scalable software program, something that Volkswagen has encountered several problems with early on in its electric offensive.
But the roadblocks and bottlenecks in Volkswagen’s software are not issues that Diess is willing to have someone else fix. He expects his competent software engineers and other team members to figure out the shortcomings on their own in an attempt to remain free of dependence on another company, whether it would be a tech company like Apple or a fellow electric automaker like Tesla. “We must not hand over data sovereignty, the customer interface, and ultimately the “brain” of the car to the big tech players.”
The software essentially acts as the brain of the car. To give owners a more pleasurable ownership experience, the software needs to be free of any discrepancies. The issues can cause things as small as voice recognition to go awry or things as large as software updates to be uninstallable, making a vehicle outdated and, in some cases, unusable. Volkswagen has had its fair share of issues with the MEB platform, but it claims that many of the difficulties it has encountered are solved. Additionally, it has promised owners that software updates will be ready to be downloaded to cars regularly beginning Summer 2021.
Volkswagen's software issues with the ID.3 are worse than reported: 'It is an absolute disaster'
With automakers big and small fighting to keep pace with Tesla, Diess understands the urgency of the project at hand. “This is by far the most important project for this Group in the next five, probably ten years,” he said, according to Business Insider. Automakers are being forced to adapt or be left behind as Tesla extends its lead in the sector, especially in software. While other car companies like Ford are releasing highly-competitive vehicles like the Mustang Mach-E, which has proven to be a notable adversary to the Tesla Model Y, the sector is only becoming more concentrated on what seems like a daily basis. With new companies coming around, focusing purely on electric powertrains, legacy automakers have almost dragged their feet through the proverbial mud, only delaying the inevitable: they will fall behind if they do not focus on electrification.
Volkswagen is arguably the most invested legacy automaker in the EV transition. Diess has been extremely vocal regarding VW’s transition to electric cars, recognizing that the market will only become more competitive, more robust, and more concentrated. A lead now could extend into several decades and make Volkswagen more desirable than other car companies who will confront these same issues in a few years.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new rules that the Trump Administration is aiming to enforce on autonomous vehicles. On Thursday, NHTSA, under the Trump Administration’s U.S. Department of Transportation, commenced rulemaking on the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).
This effort aims to eliminate the mandate for manual brake pedals in vehicles that are designed to be driven exclusively by automated driving systems. This would impact the Tesla Cybercab, which the company has stated would operate without a steering wheel or pedals.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
The Trump Administration is looking to revise FMVSS No. 135, which requires standard braking systems on light-duty vehicles.
Currently, the regulation requires light-duty cars to use traditional manual braking systems that allow operators to slow the vehicle. With the advent of self-driving in the U.S., these regulations need updating, and these are the changes that could come to FMVSS No. 135:
- Removes requirements for hand- or foot-operated brake controls for vehicles designed never to be operated by a human. Existing rules still apply to AVs that retain manual controls.
- All subject vehicles must still meet the same stopping distance performance criteria via alternative testing procedures.
- While this update ensures AVs can physically stop when commanded, NHTSA is separately developing safety performance requirements for AVs in real-world driving scenarios.
- NHTSA will continue to use its broad defect enforcement authority to investigate unsafe ADS behavior and oversee recalls.
As autonomy becomes a greater part of passenger travel, these types of rule adjustments will be more than reasonable. It will give manufacturers the ability to self-certify their vehicles and avoid any red tape that could ultimately delay the deployment of these vehicles.
Administrators are also incredibly excited about the opportunity to play a role in the advancement of self-driving vehicles.
“We are at the cusp of the greatest technological revolution in vehicle technology since the innovation of the Model T,” NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison said. “If we want America to lead the way, we have to reimagine our regulatory framework. That’s why under Secretary Sean Duffy’s AV Framework, NHTSA is tearing down pointless barriers to innovative designs while strengthening the fundamental safety requirements that matter and holding AV developers accountable for safe performance.”
The Cybercab entered mass production at Gigafactory Texas in April. Tesla ultimately plans to push the vehicle into its Robotaxi fleet, potentially when frameworks like these are established.
Tesla plans to boost production at its Gigafactory Berlin plant in Germany following a sharp rebound in sales and demand in Europe after a softer 2025.
The plans put Tesla in a better position to compete with strengthening companies in Europe and potentially other markets; demand indicators show Tesla is much better off than in 2025.
Last year was a tough year for Tesla in terms of overall demand in Europe. The company produced over 200,000 vehicles at the German plant last year, a soft figure compared to the 375,000 vehicles Tesla lists as its current capacity at the factory.
🚨 Tesla said this morning it will ramp up production at Gigafactory Berlin to a volume of 7,500 vehicles per week.
This is a 20 percent boost in production. Tesla will hire 1,000 new employees to help with the increase.$TSLA pic.twitter.com/kravKfRO5n
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 25, 2026
Tesla’s overall European sales dropped significantly last year due to a variety of factors. However, sales are rebounding, and demand is strong once again, and only getting stronger. Tesla is now planning to bump production of Model Y vehicles at Giga Berlin upward by about 20 percent. It will also bring 1,000 new jobs to the plant.
Tesla confirmed the details of its planned production expansion in Germany this morning. It is a strategy to keep up with strengthening demand.
In Q1, Tesla saw a record 61,000 vehicles produced at Giga Berlin. European registrations rebounded sharply, with Model Y seeing 117 percent increases in March 2026 compared to last year. Germany alone saw stark increases, with a quadrupling in registrations to 9,252 units.
This trend continued in other key European markets, including France, Denmark and Sweden. Tesla registrations were up over 46 percent in some of these markets, and Model Y continued its trend as a top BEV in the market.
Demand has been recovering strongly in 2026, giving Tesla a reason to expand production efforts at the factory. These increases signal management’s confidence in sustained or growing European pull for Berlin-built vehicles.
Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.
The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.
Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.
Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.
The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”
This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.
“Application of the accelerator pedal was found to be as high as 98.8 percent,” the NTSB said in their findings. The highest recorded speed in the five seconds leading up to the impact was 67 miles per hour. The area where the crash occurred is residential, and Texas State laws… pic.twitter.com/XGD97NHVZ2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 18, 2026
More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.
We look forward to more details being released with time.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new Trump autonomy rules
Tesla plans production boost at Giga Berlin following rebound in Europe
