Volkswagen has a long and storied tradition of building world-class vehicles. While they have managed to make a legacy off of offering affordable, stylish, and effectively-performing models for 84 years, their next big challenge comes in the tall task of creating and engineering electric vehicles that are functional. While this sounds like an easy task for the legendary German car company, it has encountered several problems over the course of its MEB platform’s development. The narrative of the problem solving has changed several times in the past year.
The software issues for Volkswagen have been evident since the initial development of the ID. family of vehicles. Now, Volkswagen has been relatively transparent regarding the issues with its software in the past. Recently, there has been a trend, however, in how the company’s software project is being portrayed because for a while, Volkswagen was pawning off its software as “fixed.” It is obvious this isn’t the case.
Yesterday, a report came out that indicated CEO Herbert Diess was interested in keeping the software fixes in-house and that he wasn’t interested in having some other company, whether it be another automaker or a tech company, fix the issues they were encountering. It doesn’t seem like a great idea to push the software problems onto another company, especially if Volkswagen attempts to set the precedent that it is a leader in electric powertrains and EV manufacturing. The only real way to establish any sort of narrative that proves your worthiness in this sector is to solve things yourself, it seems. If Tesla had given its software issues early on to Apple or Microsoft, for example, to fix, you can bet they wouldn’t be looked at as some automotive marvel. They’d just be another company out there trying to establish a presence in a quickly growing field of EV competitors. The vertical integration that Tesla has been able to display, through not only its hardware but also through its development of software. The complete expertise in software especially is advantageous in the event of Software Updates being rolled out in an Over-the-Air fashion as Tesla does. When even the smallest bug or issue is revealed in the coding, engineers can quickly solve the problem and roll out a new update in a matter of minutes.
Diess is right, it is absolutely imperative that Volkswagen solves these issues in-house. However, there needs to be more consistency in the story that is being portrayed, in my opinion. For the past year, we’ve heard that Volkswagen has admitted Tesla has a 10-year advantage, then the ID.3 software issues were worse than initially reported, then that software was so bad it had moved onto other vehicles.
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!
Then, all of a sudden, Volkswagen suddenly made Markus Duesmann, the ICE-supportive CEO of Audi, the person responsible for solving the software issues. Finally, the company came out in December and claimed that it had overcome all of the issues it had with the ID. family’s software.
It all seems like a plan to save face, and it should be. Volkswagen has held this reputation for years for making quality gas cars. Apart from the Dieselgate scandal, which inevitably tarnished the reputation of the company, Volkswagen has done a reasonably good job of creating cars that are dependable. My first car was a Volkswagen with 198,000 miles on it. It was dependable, and I was sad to see it go when I finally had to say goodbye.
However, it is quite alarming to see that Volkswagen is still years away from solving these issues. For a year, there have been so many different narratives regarding the company’s software, and it seems like a cause that perhaps just needs more time. There is no doubt in the world that they can figure it out eventually, but is it worth keeping the faith for five or ten more years? Is it worth waiting until 2025, 2030, or even longer to have effective electric vehicle software just to say “We developed it ourselves!”
It seems like the big issue coming to fruition now is the fact that Volkswagen has set another narrative forward that it will be ready to deliver software updates this Summer. All I have to say is, the electric vehicle community has a great memory, they are very unforgiving, and they don’t want to hear excuses. If Volkswagen cannot figure out a way to develop effective software for its vehicles by the Summer, roll out OTA updates, and provide proof that its vehicles are worth a damn, it may be time to consider other options.
Diess has a great relationship with Elon Musk, and it may not be too late to consider seeking help from Tesla in this sense. I don’t think it would be the worst thing in the world to have a guy who is your friend and the CEO of the most successful EV company in the world help your company solve some issues. Volkswagen would gain plenty of credibility with Tesla’s software infrastructure if it chooses to go that way. I hope they can somehow solve the issues in-house, but I am more prone to believe that if things don’t come around this Summer like VW has promised with the OTA updates, it will be a bad look once again, and VW could remain the laughing stock of the EV industry.
“If we want to retain our independence, 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,” Diess said. Is that a hill VW is willing to die on?
On behalf of the entire Teslarati team, we’re working hard behind the scenes on bringing you more personalized members benefits, and can’t thank you enough for your continued support!
Elon Musk
SpaceXAI just launched into your kitchen with their new app
SpaceXAI just powered its first consumer app and it predicts what you want to buy.
SpaceXAI just made its first move into consumer AI, and it involves your grocery cart. On June 3, 2026, Gopuff and SpaceXAI announced the launch of Go, a Grok-powered shopping assistant built directly into the Gopuff app that predicts what you need before you even start searching for it.
Gopuff is an instant delivery platform that operates more than 400 micro-fulfillment centers across the U.S., delivering everyday essentials, snacks, drinks, and household items in as little as 15 minutes. It is not a restaurant delivery app or a marketplace. It owns its inventory, controls its warehouses, and handles its own logistics, which means it has built one of the most detailed consumer behavior datasets in retail over its 13-year history.
Go combines SpaceXAI’s advanced reasoning, voice, and image generation models with Gopuff’s dataset of hundreds of millions of orders and real-time cultural signals from X to prepare a suggested cart the moment a customer opens the app. It learns each shopper’s habits and automatically builds a personalized cart based on time of day, location, order history, and real-time indicators. Returning customers can check out with a single tap.
Rather than searching for specific items, users can describe a situation like a game-day party or the desire for a healthy breakfast and Go will assemble a cart automatically. It can also predict when shoppers are running low on items like coffee or paper towels and have them packed and delivered in under 15 minutes. Grok voice integration lets users talk to the app in plain conversational language and check out completely hands-free.
Gopuff co-founder and co-CEO Yakir Gola said: “Today, we believe the greatest friction left in commerce is not delivery or instantaneous access to the essentials customers need. It’s the moment before: the thinking, the deciding, the remembering. We’re combining Gopuff’s demand intelligence with xAI’s frontier reasoning to create an everyday shopping experience that feels like a true extension of you.”
Why SpaceX just made a $60 billion bet on AI coding ahead of historic IPO
The timing carries context beyond the product launch. SpaceXAI was formed after SpaceX completed an all-stock merger with Elon Musk’s xAI earlier this year, folding one of the most advanced AI labs in the world into the same corporate structure as the company preparing what could be the largest IPO in history. SpaceXAI is dipping into consumer-focused AI just as it prepares for its public debut, and while Musk has openly discussed building an everything app, this launch uses Grok to power another company’s product rather than launching a standalone consumer platform. Every consumer-facing deployment of Grok ahead of the IPO roadshow adds tangible evidence that SpaceXAI is not just an infrastructure play but a direct competitor in the AI application layer where OpenAI and Google are already fighting for dominance.
Tesla has introduced an enhanced visualization in its Supercharger navigation system, building directly on the Site Maps feature rolled out a few months ago.
This latest software update adds detailed 3D icons that represent specific vehicle models parked at charging stalls, offering drivers a more precise view of site occupancy and layout.
The Site Maps debuted in Tesla’s 2025 Holiday Update, providing 3D overviews of select Supercharger locations with real-time stall availability.
Tesla supplements Holiday Update by sneaking in new Full Self-Driving version
Drivers could see which spots were open, occupied, or out of service when navigating to supported stations.
Now, the system takes this capability further by rendering accurate representations of Tesla vehicles, including distinctions between models such as the Model 3, Model Y, Model S, Model X, and Cybertruck. These icons appear as lifelike 3D renderings, complete with recognizable shapes and proportions that match the actual cars charging at the site:
Supercharger update now shows type of Tesla at charger as well.
Pretty cool. pic.twitter.com/J3NRSIgM0m
— DennisCW | wen my L (@DennisCW_) June 2, 2026
This refinement improves the user experience during road trips and daily charging stops. As drivers approach a Supercharger, the navigation display now shows not just generic occupied markers but identifiable vehicle types plugged into each stall.
Blue indicators highlight active charging sessions, while other visual cues denote availability or maintenance status. The feature integrates seamlessly with the existing map interface, allowing quick assessment of the best available spot based on vehicle size and positioning.
Tesla continues to expand the availability of these detailed Site Maps across its global network. Initially piloted at a limited number of locations, the rollout has progressed steadily, with more stations gaining support in recent software versions.
Owners benefit from better planning, as the system helps identify compatible stalls and reduces uncertainty upon arrival. The update reflects Tesla’s ongoing commitment to refining its navigation and charging ecosystem through iterative software improvements.
In addition to model-specific icons, the enhanced maps maintain all prior functionalities, such as integration with nearby amenities and energy usage predictions. This ensures a comprehensive tool for efficient Supercharging.
As Tesla’s fleet grows and the network scales, such features play a key role in optimizing the overall ownership experience. Future updates may extend similar visualizations to additional sites and incorporate even more data points for drivers.
With this piggyback enhancement, Tesla demonstrates how small but thoughtful additions can elevate an already useful tool, making Supercharger visits smoother and more informed for its customers. The company is expected to broaden the feature’s reach in upcoming releases, further solidifying its leadership in EV charging infrastructure.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.3 driver monitoring was reportedly scaled back in recent releases, but a new version that was released in the early hours of June 3 aimed to do a better job of keeping those in control of their cars honest, according to release notes.
The release notes for FSD v14.3.3, via Software Version 2026.14.6.7 added:
“Improved driver monitoring system sensitivity with better eye gaze tracking, eye wear handling, and higher accuracy in variable lighting conditions.”
However, Tesla said this was already enabled in the first rollout of FSD v14.3.3 in late May. We tested it anyway, especially as the Standard Speed Profile seemed less-than-worried about what you were doing during operation.
I decided to try out the Hurry and Mad Max Speed Profiles for this test, and it gave me results that I would have expected. Tesla has evidently ramped up driver monitoring based on the Speed Profile you are using to travel.
The more aggressive the Speed Profile, the more on the hook you will be for taking your attention away from the road. Our testing showed that Mad Max was less likely to allow you to do normal things like change music or adjust navigation without getting an on-screen warning or nag from the driver monitoring system.
Hurry Mode Results
On Hurry, the driver monitoring system on FSD v14.3.3, via Software Version 2026.14.6.7, was more restrictive than Standard but less restrictive than Mad Max. I found that I could scroll through music options for a considerable amount of time, more than 30 seconds:
Roughly :31 between first touching the center screen and getting the first nag
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 3, 2026
Standard gave me about 80 seconds of phone scrolling with absolutely no nags or warnings in a previous test. It is worth noting that this was a previous branch of v14.3.3, but Standard is such a goodie-two-shoes on the road that it is my impression it would not change much.
Here’s an 80-second phone nag test on Tesla FSD v14.3.3.
No alerts, no nagging, no annoyance. https://t.co/1dxvTOw5Cn pic.twitter.com/vYViFpjfoK
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) May 29, 2026
Mad Max Results
I spent the majority of the drive on Mad Max to see how it truly reacted to the driver having their attention elsewhere. While I did do a short phone test, I am aiming to steer away from those and use the center screen. I think it is a valid criticism that the phone test is dangerous and, not to mention, illegal in Pennsylvania. Changing the navigation and music is a more reasonable, more responsible, and safer test.
With Mad Max being the fastest and most aggressive Speed Profile, I anticipated this being the quickest mode to give me an alert that I needed to look at the road. That was the case with music:
🎥 Testing Tesla FSD v14.3.3 (via 2026.14.6.7) nags on Mad Max https://t.co/qZALU2OujY pic.twitter.com/XddOJ0D47x
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 3, 2026
As well as adjusting Navigation, when I received two nags:
🎥 Testing Tesla FSD v14.3.3 (via 2026.14.6.7) nag while adjusting navigation
Two nags here https://t.co/qZALU2OujY pic.twitter.com/xa3dtaDG1L
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 3, 2026
These nags were more than reasonable, and I think it’s probably good that Tesla is ramping up the driver monitoring. I do believe that it should be relatively strict across all of the Speed Profiles, especially with phone use. When using the center screen, the nag intervals should be based on the speed profile you are utilizing at the time.
These driver monitoring adjustments are a great thing to have while FSD is still under its “Supervised” moniker, but I expect Tesla to continue pushing the limits on what it will allow, especially considering CEO Elon Musk has hinted that phone use is capable with the more recent versions.
You can watch the full drive on YouTube below:
SpaceXAI just launched into your kitchen with their new app
Tesla piggybacks recent Supercharger feature with update that takes it further
