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!
Tesla has reached a notable benchmark in its autonomous driving program after its Robotaxi fleet surpassed one million miles of unsupervised operation. The company made the announcement during its Cybercab event in Austin on September 3.
Tesla Vice President of AI Ashok Elluswamy told attendees he was happy to report the fleet had achieved one million miles of unsupervised Robotaxi operation as a testament to safety.
The new total marked a sharp increase from the 380,000 unsupervised miles Tesla disclosed during its second-quarter 2026 earnings update in late July.
In roughly six weeks, the company added about 620,000 miles. That acceleration followed Tesla’s decision to remove in-vehicle safety monitors from most of its operations outside the San Francisco Bay Area.
Credit: Tesla
Tesla first launched Robotaxi service in Austin in June 2025 with safety drivers present. It later began fully unsupervised rides and expanded into Dallas, Houston, Miami, Orlando, and Tampa. The San Francisco Bay Area remains the exception, where a safety monitor still rides in the vehicle under California permitting rules.
The company has not released a city-by-city breakdown of the one million unsupervised miles.
The milestone arrived as Tesla began offering public Cybercab rides in Austin. The purpose-built vehicle has no steering wheel or pedals and is designed only for autonomous ride-hailing. Production versions joined the existing fleet of modified Tesla vehicles already operating in the service.
Tesla’s unsupervised mileage is growing at a double-digit weekly rate according to earlier company comments, yet its fleet size remains modest compared with established competitors. Waymo has accumulated more than 200 million fully autonomous rider-only miles. Tesla has described its own unsupervised operations as having recorded zero notable incidents in the period leading up to the July update.
The one-million-mile figure reflects Tesla’s shift from supervised testing to broader driverless service in multiple states. It also highlights the company’s strategy of using both existing Model Y vehicles and the new Cybercab to scale its network.
Credit: Tesla
Whether the rapid recent growth continues will depend on further city expansions, regulatory approvals, and the performance of the purpose-built Cybercab in everyday paid rides. Tesla has not specified how many of the latest miles involved the new vehicle versus the rest of the fleet.
The announcement underscores Tesla’s progress toward a larger robotaxi network while illustrating the remaining gap in total autonomous experience relative to longer-operating rivals.
Tesla AI lead Ashok Elluswamy said this week that 24-hour Robotaxi service is close. Replying on X to a rider who wanted Cybercab trips all night, he wrote that the capability would arrive “next month or so” once “the next tech to merge on the v15 plan” is ready.
The comment landed on September 4, one day after Tesla opened public Cybercab rides in Austin. It is the clearest near-term timeline yet for overnight unsupervised operation. Tesla’s paid Robotaxi network currently runs from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. seven days a week across Austin, Dallas, Houston, Miami, Orlando, and Tampa.
next month or so. the next tech to merge on the v15 plan will enable it.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) September 4, 2026
That 16-hour window is shorter than the 6 a.m. to 2 a.m. schedule the company used for much of the prior year.
Elluswamy did not name the specific feature or say whether the change would apply first to purpose-built Cybercabs, the existing Model Y fleet, or both. He also offered no city-by-city rollout list. The link to Full Self-Driving v15 is nevertheless significant.
Tesla has described v15 as a step-change architecture with seven parallel improvement tracks and roughly ten times more parameters than earlier builds. Early versions of that software already operate on the Robotaxi fleet and contain about 40 percent of the planned gains.
By July 2026, the unsupervised fleet had logged more than 380,000 miles across six cities in two states with what the company called an impeccable safety record and no notable incidents caused by the vehicles themselves. Tesla has repeatedly argued that camera-based end-to-end neural networks, rather than extra sensors, are the core of the solution.
Overnight service would test that claim in lower-light conditions and would also raise vehicle utilization, a key variable for Robotaxi unit economics. The company has already begun using public Superchargers at night and is building dedicated Robotaxi charging sites.
Riders have asked why software must change if the cars already drive in the dark. The practical answer appears to be reliability and scale: Tesla has held back mass expansion until more of the v15 stack is merged, citing the need for higher confidence before putting thousands of unoccupied vehicles on streets around the clock.
If the next module arrives on the timetable Elluswamy sketched, 24-hour service could begin in October 2026 in at least some markets.
That would mark a shift from a daytime-bounded pilot to a service that can run whenever demand exists, including the late-night hours that have so far remained out of reach.
Tesla is beginning to roll out Full Self-Driving Supervised v14.3.9 with a new active safety layer that can take control even when the driver is operating the car manually.
Tesla AI said the software can activate FSD on the driver’s behalf when an imminent collision is detected and Automatic Emergency Braking may not be enough. It may also engage if the system detects heavy distraction or an accidental FSD disengagement.
FSD Supervised v14.3.9 starting to roll out shortly
This release includes a new active safety feature set: FSD Supervised can now activate on your behalf when an imminent collision is detected and Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) may not be enough.
It may also engage if we…
— Tesla AI (@Tesla_AI) September 4, 2026
The capability is essentially Automatic Collision Evasion. However, unlike conventional AEB, which mainly applies the brakes in a straight line, this feature can use steering, braking, and acceleration together if the car calculates that stopping alone will not prevent impact and a safer path exists. The system may change lanes or move toward a shoulder when conditions allow, then continue driving after the immediate threat is handled rather than simply coming to a stop.
The intervention is meant as a last-resort safety net, not a replacement for attentive driving.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.7 early review: FSD saved me from an accident
Tesla’s own description still frames FSD as supervised assistance. Secondary reports on internal release notes say the feature can fire while the car is being driven manually if cabin-camera monitoring suggests the driver is not sufficiently attentive, such as reaching toward the back seat, or if FSD appears to have been turned off unintentionally.
After the emergency maneuver, the car is expected to alert the driver and request a return to manual control.
The safety case is straightforward. Many collisions happen in the last second because a driver is looking away, fumbles a control, or faces an obstacle that braking cannot fully solve. A system that can both recognize that AEB is insufficient and execute a coordinated evasive path can reduce those remaining high-severity events.
Re-engaging after accidental disengagement also addresses a practical failure mode: a small steering nudge that drops FSD at the worst moment. The advantage is a background safety net that uses the same vision stack already running in v14, instead of leaving the car solely to emergency braking once the driver is no longer in command.
The feature still depends on FSD being enabled and, according to reports, an active FSD purchase or subscription. It does not make the vehicle unsupervised. Drivers remain responsible, and Tesla has not published how often the system is expected to intervene or how it will handle false positives.
If the rollout is conservative and the false-alarm rate stays low, the update is a meaningful step: FSD is no longer only a feature the driver turns on. In the rare moments when disaster is already forming, it can step in.
Tesla crosses major Unsupervised Self-Driving milestone
Tesla Robotaxi will be a 24/7 service: here’s when
