The Wild West days of self-driving are ending. Nobody told Tesla.

Even as regulatory concerns mount, Tesla continues to push its self-driving tech forward.

The Wild West days of self-driving are ending. Nobody told Tesla.

At its AI Day on Thursday, Tesla went deep on its self-driving tech.

Photo: Tesla

Tesla's "AI Day" on Thursday ended with a bang. The company unveiled the Tesla Bot, a humanoid robot intended to leverage the company's AI to navigate the world and "eliminate dangerous, repetitive, and boring tasks," as Elon Musk put it. Musk said he hoped it would help bring about a future in which "physical work will be a choice."

But while the Tesla Bot certainly stole the show, the vast majority of AI Day focused on self-driving systems. Tesla executives ventured deep in the weeds on simulation, data labeling and the proprietary Dojo chip (which promises breakthroughs in training neural networks). The event was meant as a recruiting exercise for AI experts, and the overall message was clear: Tesla is as bullish as ever on its ability to deliver full self-driving technology, and to do it fast.

That confidence comes as a bit of a surprise, though, given the mounting regulatory scrutiny surrounding Tesla.

  • The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced Monday that it would examine whether Tesla's Autopilot system has a tendency to malfunction at first responder sites, potentially due to lights, flares and reflective equipment. The investigation will center on eleven documented crashes. If the NHTSA finds fault in Tesla's systems, it could demand a recall or impose limits on driverless features for an estimated 765,000 Tesla vehicles sold in the U.S.
  • Two days later, Tesla's week went from bad to worse: Democratic Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Ed Markey sent a letter to FTC Chair Lina Khan, asking her to investigate Tesla for calling its system "Full Self-Driving" when, it turns out, it's not full self-driving.
  • Sens. Blumenthal and Markey also seemingly anticipated the bold claims at Tesla's AI Day event. They wrote in the letter: "As Tesla makes widely available its FSD and Autopilot technology and doubles down on its inflated promises, we are alarmed by the prospect of more drivers relying more frequently on systems that do not nearly deliver the expected level of safety."

The new regulatory push suggests the Wild West days of self-driving are nearing an end.

  • Until recently, federal agencies have held off on imposing strict self-driving regulations, likely out of fear that doing so would limit innovation. But in a February 2021 letter, the National Transportation Safety Board's then-chairman Robert Sumwalt expressed concerns over what he saw as the NHTSA's "willingness to let manufacturers and operational entities define safety."
  • Tesla has long adopted the "ask for forgiveness, not permission" stance toward regulators. Sometimes a lack of regulation allows for innovation: Tesla rolled out a Smart Summon feature in 2019, for example, that lets passengerless cars navigate parking lots at slow speeds. Smart Summon is pretty much the NHTSA's worst nightmare, but it's also fun and hasn't yet caused an epidemic of violent parking lot crashes (ok, maybe a few, but still).
  • But there are also cases in which underregulation has enabled reckless behavior. For instance, there aren't yet strict standards for making sure drivers pay attention with self-driving engaged. Some cars use eye-tracking to enforce driver compliance, while others (including most Tesla vehicles) simply monitor the steering wheel for occasional driver input. Critics argue that Tesla's approach has been too lax, and their case could be bolstered by several high-profile incidents in which drivers appear to have been completely disengaged.

As self-driving technology becomes more prevalent, the NHTSA can no longer afford to take a hands-off approach. Instead, the agency will likely soon set safety standards for things like driver engagement checks, hazardous conditions tests and backup crash avoidance systems.

For Tesla, complying with new regulations would also mean changing the company's culture.

  • Tesla is a polarizing company, in part because its CEO so brazenly flaunts his disdain for rules and regulations. (Musk has several ongoing Twitter beefs with regulators, and a few weeks after settling SEC fraud charges called the agency the "Shortseller Enrichment Commission.")
  • Sumwalt even once claimed that Musk hung up on him after he called to request that Musk stop disclosing information about an Autopilot crash investigation.

The renewed push for regulation sends a clear message: It's time for Tesla and Musk to get serious about safety or risk paying a hefty price. But there's no sign that Tesla's going to slow down anytime soon. Full Self-Driving is "clearly headed to way better than a human, without question," Musk said toward the end of AI Day. And that apparently goes both for cars and robots.

A version of this story will appear in tomorrow's Source Code newsletter. Sign up now.

Protocol | Policy

Why Twitch’s 'hate raid' lawsuit isn’t just about Twitch

When is it OK for tech companies to unmask their anonymous users? And when should a violation of terms of service get someone sued?

The case Twitch is bringing against two hate raiders is hardly black and white.

Photo: Caspar Camille Rubin/Unsplash

It isn't hard to figure out who the bad guys are in Twitch's latest lawsuit against two of its users. On one side are two anonymous "hate raiders" who have been allegedly bombarding the gaming platform with abhorrent attacks on Black and LGBTQ+ users, using armies of bots to do it. On the other side is Twitch, a company that, for all the lumps it's taken for ignoring harassment on its platform, is finally standing up to protect its users against persistent violators whom it's been unable to stop any other way.

But the case Twitch is bringing against these hate raiders is hardly black and white. For starters, the plaintiff here isn't an aggrieved user suing another user for defamation on the platform. The plaintiff is the platform itself. Complicating matters more is the fact that, according to a spokesperson, at least part of Twitch's goal in the case is to "shed light on the identity of the individuals behind these attacks," raising complicated questions about when tech companies should be able to use the courts to unmask their own anonymous users and, just as critically, when they should be able to actually sue them for violating their speech policies.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.

While it's easy to get lost in the operational and technical side of a transaction, it's important to remember the third component of a payment. That is, the human behind the screen.

Over the last two years, many retailers have seen the benefit of investing in new, flexible payments. Ones that reflect the changing lifestyles of younger spenders, who are increasingly holding onto their cash — despite reports to the contrary. This means it's more important than ever for merchants to take note of the latest payment innovations so they can tap into the savings of the COVID-19 generation.

Keep Reading Show less
Antoine Nougue,

Antoine Nougue is Head of Europe at He works with ambitious enterprise businesses to help them scale and grow their operations through payment processing services. He is responsible for leading the European sales, customer success, engineering & implementation teams and is based out of London, U.K.

Protocol | Fintech

When COVID rocked the insurance market, this startup saw opportunity

Ethos has outraised and outmarketed the competition in selling life insurance directly online — but there's still an $887 billion industry to transform.

Life insurance has been slow to change.

Image: courtneyk/Getty Images

Peter Colis cited a striking statistic that he said led him to launch a life insurance startup: One in twenty children will lose a parent before they turn 15.

"No one ever thinks that will happen to them, but that's the statistics," the co-CEO and co-founder of Ethos told Protocol. "If it's a breadwinning parent, the majority of those families will go bankrupt immediately, within three months. Life insurance elegantly solves this problem."

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at or via Signal at (510)731-8429.

Protocol | Workplace

Remote work is here to stay. Here are the cybersecurity risks.

Phishing and ransomware are on the rise. Is your remote workforce prepared?

Before your company institutes work-from-home-forever plans, you need to ensure that your workforce is prepared to face the cybersecurity implications of long-term remote work.

Photo: Stefan Wermuth/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The delta variant continues to dash or delay return-to-work plans, but before your company institutes work-from-home-forever plans, you need to ensure that your workforce is prepared to face the cybersecurity implications of long-term remote work.

So far in 2021, CrowdStrike has already observed over 1,400 "big game hunting" ransomware incidents and $180 million in ransom demands averaging over $5 million each. That's due in part to the "expanded attack surface that work-from-home creates," according to CTO Michael Sentonas.

Keep Reading Show less
Michelle Ma
Michelle Ma (@himichellema) is a reporter at Protocol, where she writes about management, leadership and workplace issues in tech. Previously, she was a news editor of live journalism and special coverage for The Wall Street Journal. Prior to that, she worked as a staff writer at Wirecutter. She can be reached at
Protocol | Enterprise

How GitHub COO Erica Brescia runs the coding gold mines

GitHub sits at the center of the world's software-development activity, which makes the Microsoft-owned code repository a major target for hackers and a trend-setter in open source software.

GitHub COO Erica Brescia

Photo: GitHub

An astonishing amount of the code that runs the world's software spends at least part of its life in GitHub. COO Erica Brescia is responsible for making sure that's not a disaster in the making.

Brescia joined GitHub after selling Bitnami, the open-source software deployment tool she co-founded, to VMware in 2019. She's responsible for all operational aspects of GitHub, which was acquired by Microsoft in 2018 for $7.5 billion in one of its largest deals to date.

Keep Reading Show less
Tom Krazit

Tom Krazit ( @tomkrazit) is Protocol's enterprise editor, covering cloud computing and enterprise technology out of the Pacific Northwest. He has written and edited stories about the technology industry for almost two decades for publications such as IDG, CNET, paidContent, and GeekWire, and served as executive editor of Gigaom and Structure.

Latest Stories