Tesla Inc. AI chief Ashok Elluswamy stated on August 3, 2026, that the company’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) system should learn individual driver preferences rather than relying on manual maximum-speed controls, which he termed an "anti-pattern." This strategic pivot signals a move toward personalized autonomy that adapts to user behavior, potentially impacting how regulators view Tesla’s Level 2 driver-assistance system in markets like Europe where speed compliance is scrutinized.

Elluswamy made the comment on X in response to Tesla enthusiast David Moss, who argued that capable autonomy should not require repeated manual correction. "We are working on better learning of users’ implied preferences," Elluswamy wrote. The approach aligns with recent statements by Elon Musk, who said FSD would remember drivers’ "specific interventions" to match individual preferences. This development extends Tesla’s roadmap to replace manual menus and overrides with software that predicts intent, including recent work on remembering parking preferences and accepting voice commands for neighborhood navigation.

User Feedback and System Design

The exchange highlights a divide among Tesla owners regarding manual controls. Supporters of the AI-first approach argue that true autonomy should minimize human input. However, other owners have pushed back, noting that FSD sometimes travels below legal limits or accelerates beyond their comfort levels. These users have repeatedly requested a simple user-set speed ceiling.

Currently, Tesla’s documentation indicates that FSD (Supervised) selects an appropriate maximum speed based on detected limits, driving profile, and surrounding traffic. Depending on the software version and market, owners can adjust speed using the steering-wheel scroll control or select profiles ranging from "Chill" to "Mad Max." Despite these features, Tesla maintains that drivers must remain attentive and responsible for vehicle speed, as FSD remains a Level 2 system under National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) guidelines.

Regulatory Pressure in Europe

The removal of manual speed controls carries significant regulatory implications. Sweden’s transport authority has urged European regulators to oppose a wider FSD rollout unless Tesla disables behaviors that permit speeds above legal limits. Reuters recently reported that Tesla uses "Contextual Max Speed" and a "Speed Offset" features, which have drawn scrutiny. France has also raised concerns regarding speeding and driver attention, adding pressure to Tesla’s European expansion plans.

Market Reaction

Investor sentiment reflected cautiously positive news flow, with Tesla shares rising 0.60% to $324.02 during pre-market trading on Tuesday. While Benzinga Edge Rankings indicate that Tesla stock scores poorly on Momentum and Value metrics, it provides satisfactory Growth and Quality scores. The shift toward learned preferences may influence long-term valuation as the company navigates the balance between user customization and regulatory compliance.

Key Developments

What the Numbers Show

The divergence between Tesla’s technical strategy and regulatory requirements presents a material risk. While the company aims to reduce friction by removing manual overrides, European authorities view manual controls as a necessary safeguard for legal compliance. If Tesla proceeds with removing these controls without addressing regulatory concerns, it could face delays in European market access, directly impacting revenue growth projections for the region.

Tesla Inc. (NASDAQ:TSLA) CEO Elon Musk sharply criticized New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s proposal to establish city-owned grocery stores across the five boroughs on Monday. Musk labeled the initiative as theft and called Mamdani a "thief and a liar," arguing that advancements in artificial intelligence and robotics will render such government programs obsolete by delivering free goods and services.

The controversy erupted after All-In Podcast host Jason Calacanis shared a video on X showing Mamdani discussing a Request for Proposal (RFP) to select operators for the stores based on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) principles. Calacanis argued that the administration lacked business acumen, noting that Costco Wholesale Corp (NASDAQ:COST) already operates with minimal profit margins in groceries.

Musk’s Rebuttal on X

Responding to Calacanis, Musk stated that the city’s efforts "won’t matter" because technology would supersede them. "AI & robots will actually deliver the free goods & services that those thieves pretend to offer," Musk wrote, adding that the administration was "actually stealing from others." In a separate post, he accused Mamdani of seeking a "propaganda tool to undermine the free market" while ignoring logical arguments.

Broader Vision for AI and Robotics

Musk has frequently asserted that productivity surges from AI and robots could outperform Earth’s total output. He previously stated that Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot and space-based AI might generate such wealth that governments would need to issue money to citizens, effectively rendering currency irrelevant. This vision aligns with Tesla’s recent operational shifts, including transitioning its Fremont, California facility from producing Model S and X vehicles to manufacturing Optimus robots. The company targets annual production of 1 million units, with at least 40 production lines planned due to the robot’s complexity.

Competitive Landscape

While Musk promotes his technological roadmap, competitors are advancing similar initiatives. BYD Co. Ltd. (OTC:BYDDY; OTC:BYDDF) recently unveiled its first humanoid robot, scheduled to debut later this month. Meanwhile, critics remain skeptical of Musk’s predictions. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) recently challenged Musk to support a wealth tax if he truly believes money will cease to matter by 2036, referencing earlier comments from the billionaire.

What the Numbers Show

The debate highlights a divergence between public policy proposals and private sector technological forecasts. While Mamdani’s plan relies on traditional retail margins—cited by Calacanis as 1-2%—Musk’s argument rests on the assumption of zero-marginal-cost production through automation. No financial data supports the immediate viability of either model, but the conflict underscores growing tension between municipal welfare strategies and tech-led utopianism.