Tesla Forced to Change Name of "Full Self-Driving" in China, Since Its Cars Can't Fully Drive Themselves
Tesla is being forced to change the name of its so-called "Full Self-Driving" driver assistance feature in China.
As spotted by Electrek, the Elon Musk-led company is now going by the name "Intelligent Assisted Driving" in Chinese on its website.
The news comes days after the carmaker abruptly suspended a free trial of its infamous software in China.
"All parties are actively advancing the relevant process and we will push it to you as soon as it is ready," Tesla's customer support account wrote on Chinese social media platform Weibo, as translated by Reuters. "We are also looking forward to it, please wait patiently."
Tesla has run into major headwinds while trying to roll out the software in China, where regulators can have a heavier hand than in the United States. Last month, insider sources told the Financial Times that Chinese regulators had informed them that the timeline for FSD approval was "indefinite," despite previously indicating that it would be approved by this spring.
The software itself appears to be suffering from some potentially dangerous flaws. Drivers had been testing the software — before it was paused — on public streets in China, racking up a huge number of fines. Chinese Tesla owners have found that the system is misinterpreting bike lanes as right turn lanes, running red lights, and hogging bus lanes illegally, as Electrek reported last month.
The carmaker has already run afoul of regulators for its misleading naming convention — after all, as Tesla admits on its website, the "Full Self-Driving" feature doesn't make good on its promise of fully autonomous driving and requires drivers to be ready to take over at all times.
In 2022, the California DMV alleged that Tesla put out "untrue or misleading" advertisements on its website in relation to its Full Self-Driving and Autopilot tech. In 2023, former transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg also called out the company, saying that the name of the system lacks "common sense."
However, Tesla still uses both monikers in its marketing materials in the US and many other parts of the world.
Besides changing the FSD feature's name to better reflect reality, Tesla also removed the word "Autopilot" from the Chinese name, according to Electrek. The entry-level software, which is included in the base price of the vehicle, is now called "Basic Assisted Driving."
In short, it's a change that Tesla should've made worldwide years ago. For almost a decade, Tesla has been marketing its driver assistance software using misleading language.
That's likely already had severe consequences. US regulators have linked the carmaker's software to hundreds of collisions and dozens of deaths, warning that Tesla's marketing is lulling its customers into a false sense of security.
Where that leaves Tesla's attempts to bring its driver assistance features to the Chinese market remains to be seen. There's a good chance the latest name change signifies Tesla falling in line with the demands of Chinese regulators.
The company is still committed to rolling out the software in the country, pending regulatory approval — but that's turning out to be a lot easier said than done.
More on FSD: Tesla Suddenly Suspends Full Self-Driving Trial in China
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ant Group introduces AI app for entry into healthcare sector
Global digital technology provider Ant Group has introduced its AI application, AQ, for accelerating its entry into the healthcare sector. The app is designed to streamline users' daily healthcare management by offering more than 100 AI-driven services, encompassing doctor recommendations, medical report assessment, and tailored medical advice. It facilitates connections between users and digital offerings from over 5,000 hospitals and close to a million doctors throughout China. Ant Group CEO Cyril Han said: 'Ant Group hopes that through AQ, it can provide everyone with a trusted healthcare manager, advancing inclusive healthcare and bringing every Chinese citizen one step closer to a healthier life.' Driven by Ant Group's Healthcare Large Model, AQ draws on more than ten years of healthcare expertise. This model features advanced medical reasoning and multimodal interaction capabilities while prioritising user privacy and security. The Healthcare Large Model enables medical institutions and doctors to deliver more efficient, accessible, and tailored services. In March 2025, Ant Group furthered its commitment by partnering with IT industry leaders to integrate the Healthcare Large Model into All-in-One Large Model Machines for Healthcare, allowing hospitals to deploy AI models securely on-premises. Ant Group's contributions extend to assisting hospitals in creating user-facing applications. For instance, Angel, an AI agent developed in Zhejiang Province, has already catered to more than 1,000 medical facilities and managed over 50 million user interactions. The company also aids in the development of Yibaoer, an AI agent for medical insurance inquiries. In January 2025, Ant Group acquired Haodf, enhancing its healthcare offerings with the AI Doctor Assistant, which aids in AI-assisted diagnosis and patient education. Additionally, around 200 doctors are collaborating with Ant Group to develop AI Doctor Agents, providing healthcare advice to patients, especially those with limited medical access. "Ant Group introduces AI app for entry into healthcare sector" was originally created and published by Hospital Management, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What role will geopolitics play in automotive security?
The automotive industry is changing fast, thanks to advancements in AI, connectivity and autonomous technology. Modern vehicles not only include software and AI models from many different players, but they increasingly collect significant amounts of sensitive user data, and leverage cloud-based systems, to help enhance the driving experience and service delivery. As geopolitical tensions increase, security concerns are now influencing how vehicles are designed and manufactured. There are concerns over back-doors, kill switches and potential monitoring of vehicles – and by extension individuals. Equally important, standards around the globe differ, raising questions about the relative security of different players in the supply chain. Geopolitical dynamics are constantly evolving and, while the developments outlined in this piece reflect the state of play at the time of writing, circumstances can shift rapidly. For automotive leaders, the key is to stay agile and prepared, as global policy and security priorities continue to move. China: The world's largest EV market and producer China has solidified its position as the global leader in electric vehicle [EV] production and sales. As of 2023, more than half of the world's EVs were in China, making it the largest EV market and producer. This rapid expansion has largely been driven by strong, and long-term, government support, including subsidies, infrastructure investment and favourable regulations. Beyond domestic sales, China's EV exports have skyrocketed. Between 2019 and 2023, exports, including foreign brands like Tesla manufactured in China, have surged 160-fold. This rapid growth has sparked concerns over 'overcapacity', with Western markets fearing an influx of low-cost Chinese EVs. The EU, US, and Canada have responded by announcing tariffs on EVs made in China, and some analysts are calling the situation the start of a potential 'trade war'. As geopolitical tensions rise, China's dominance in the EV industry continues to reshape global trade dynamics. Despite the ever complex and growing US tariffs, Chinese innovators are continuing to push forward with their global ambitions, undeterred by the ongoing geopolitical challenges US tariffs and security concerns US tariffs on Chinese EVs have been framed as a way to combat unfair trade practices and protect domestic manufacturers, but security considerations weigh heavily on such a move. Connectivity of modern EVs, many of which rely on AI-driven software and data collection, has raised fears of potential cybersecurity threats and data privacy risks. US officials have become concerned that Chinese-made EVs, with advanced sensors and internet connectivity, might be used to collect sensitive data on American infrastructure, road networks, and even consumers. Some policymakers are concerned the Chinese government could access this data, posing a national security risk. Similar concerns have been raised in the past about Chinese telecommunications companies and surveillance technology. Apart from the potential cyber risks, the US is also wary of its growing dependence on Chinese battery supply chains. Given China's monopoly on lithium-ion batteries and key raw materials, policymakers are calling for greater investment in domestic manufacturing to reduce reliance on imports from China. As a result, tariffs on Chinese EVs are not just about protecting American automakers, they also serve, to some extent, as a wider strategy to limit China's influence in the high-tech automotive sector under the guise of national security concerns. US-UK trade agreement: Implications for the automotive sector On 8th May 2025, US President Donald Trump and UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer announced a comprehensive trade agreement. This deal significantly reduces tariffs on key UK exports to the US, including slashing car tariffs from 27.5 per cent to 10 per cent for up to 100,000 vehicles. This agreement provides a reprieve for UK automakers, particularly Jaguar Land Rover, which had paused shipments to the US due to the previously imposed tariffs. However, the broader implications for global trade dynamics and automotive security remain complex, as the deal doesn't fully restore pre-tariff conditions and maintains certain baseline tariffs. EVs and evolving security requirements Although political alliances and tariff regimes may change, cybersecurity threats remain a constant, and the risk of cyberattacks, system vulnerabilities and data breaches is ever present — and growing. By nature of having more electronics and software, EVs are exposed to a wider range of cyber security threats and attacks and, as the vehicles become more popular, cybercriminals eagerly await exploitation of digital connectivity these cars rely on. EVs today are exposed to many different types of cyber risks. For example, hackers can intercept wireless key fob signals to launch replay attacks and gain unauthorised access. Compromised charging stations may also serve as entry points for malicious software, jeopardizing vehicle safety – as demonstrated at Pwn2Own Automotive 2024, which identified multiple Zero Day vulnerabilities in a range of EV charging points. Such security vulnerabilities in charging equipment can expose sensitive user data, including credentials, and public charging infrastructure is also at risk of malware attacks, potentially disrupting essential operations. Additionally, grid-connected EV charging systems are prime targets for cyberattacks. This could lead to widespread disruptions in the electric distribution network, affecting many users and potentially causing disruption far beyond just EV owners. Ultimately, these risks clearly highlight the urgent need for robust cybersecurity measures to protect both lives and safety. Although concerns are often raised about Chinese EV imports, it's worth noting that many Chinese manufacturers are leading the way in cybersecurity implementation. In contrast, some U.S. and European vendors have been slower to adopt strong cybersecurity standards, which could introduce vulnerabilities into the EV ecosystem. To mitigate these risks, policymakers might impose stricter regulations, conduct security audits, and require compliance with cybersecurity frameworks before allowing widespread deployment of foreign-made EVs and charging systems. Final thoughts The automotive industry is navigating a complex array of regulations, trade restrictions, and security challenges. As cybersecurity threats in the EV sector escalate, alongside growing supply chain vulnerabilities, it's clear that a new, software-centric approach is essential. EVs are increasingly reliant on software, and geopolitical actors are targeting everything from infotainment systems to network gateways and operating systems. The risks of espionage, intellectual property theft and cyber sabotage are no longer just potential dangers - they are active threats. And while global politics may shift from month to month, cybersecurity risk does not wait for policy. The digital attack surface in EVs is expanding, and attackers remain constantly active. As global tensions reshape the EV market, security must be proactive, not reactive, and OEMs must now build next-generation automotive platforms with security and geopolitical resilience in mind. Only then can the industry confidently drive into the future. Claire Maslen is senior vice president of commercial and operations for Secure Platforms at "What role will geopolitics play in automotive security?" was originally created and published by Just Auto, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
2 Tech Stocks I'd Buy and Never Sell
Meta's $14.3 billion Scale AI deal signals a dramatic shift from social media to superintelligence development. Tesla's robotaxi launch and Optimus production represent the company's transformation from automaker to AI robotics powerhouse. Both companies are making massive investments that could redefine their entire business models over the next decade. These 10 stocks could mint the next wave of millionaires › Everyone thinks they know what Meta Platforms (NASDAQ: META) and Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) are -- a social media company and an electric vehicle (EV) maker. But what if I told you that's like calling Amazon a bookstore? The real story is far more intriguing, and it's unfolding right now. Here's why these two tech giants deserve a permanent spot in your portfolio. Mark Zuckerberg is spending money like a man possessed. The Facebook founder just dropped $14.3 billion to acquire 49% of Scale AI, bringing its CEO Alexandr Wang aboard to lead a new superintelligence lab. He's offering $100 million signing bonuses to poach OpenAI engineers. When Sam Altman says your rival CEO is personally emailing his team with "crazy" offers, you know something extraordinary is happening. This isn't desperation -- it's calculation. Meta has quietly built one of the most impressive artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructures on the planet. The company's Llama models pioneered the open-source approach to large language models, fundamentally different from the closed systems at OpenAI and Anthropic. While critics fixate on Meta's recent AI stumbles, they're missing the forest for the trees. Consider the talent acquisition alone. Beyond the Scale AI deal, Meta has recruited former GitHub CEO Nat Friedman and AI entrepreneur Daniel Gross. The company approached Perplexity AI, Runway, and Safe Superintelligence for potential acquisitions. Zuckerberg himself is making job offers that one AI researcher described as "at least $10,000,000 a year." This isn't hiring -- it's building an AI Manhattan Project. The strategy makes perfect sense when you understand Meta's endgame. The company forecasts its generative AI products will generate between $460 billion and $1.4 trillion in total revenue by 2035. That's not a typo. Meta sees AI agents transforming everything from WhatsApp customer service to Instagram content creation. With 3.3 billion daily active users across its apps, Meta has the distribution advantage that pure play AI companies can only dream about. Wall Street remains skeptical, with Meta's 64% AI talent retention rate trailing competitors. But that misses the point. Meta isn't trying to win the current AI race -- it's changing the track entirely. By combining massive capital deployment, open-source development, and unmatched distribution, Zuckerberg is positioning Meta to own the AI infrastructure layer of the internet. Tesla finally launched its robotaxi service in Austin on June 22, 2025. The rollout was small -- around 10 Model Y vehicles and front-seat riders serving as "safety monitors." Critics called it smoke and mirrors. They're right about the modest start but wrong about what it represents. This isn't about competing with Alphabet's Waymo, which already operates 1,500 robotaxis and provides more than 250,000 paid trips per week across its markets. It's about Tesla's fundamental transformation from an automaker into an AI robotics company. The robotaxi launch is merely the opening act of a much bigger production. The real story is Optimus, Tesla's humanoid robot. Musk plans to produce 5,000 units this year -- what he calls a "legion" of robots. By 2026, that number jumps to 50,000. The robots will start in Tesla factories, handling dangerous and repetitive tasks, before expanding to external customers at a projected price of $20,000 to $30,000 each. Here's what makes Tesla different: vertical integration. The company designs its own AI chips, writes its software, and manufactures at scale. Every component developed for Tesla vehicles -- batteries, motors, AI inference computers -- applies directly to Optimus. Competitors like Boston Dynamics build impressive demos. Tesla builds production lines. The robotaxi service provides the perfect real-world testing ground for Tesla's AI. Every mile driven generates data that improves both autonomous driving and robotic navigation. It's a feedback loop that compounds exponentially. Musk believes Optimus could eventually be "more valuable than everything else combined" at Tesla. Given that humanoid robots could address the global labor shortage while transforming manufacturing, healthcare, and home assistance, that might be conservative. Critics point to Tesla's history of missed deadlines and Musk's "corporate puffery." Fair enough. But they said the same thing about Tesla overtaking legacy automakers in electric vehicles. The company's ability to manufacture at scale, combined with its AI prowess, creates a moat that's nearly impossible to cross. Both Meta and Tesla are making audacious bets on AI that could fail spectacularly. Meta might burn billions on talent that never delivers breakthroughs. Tesla's robots might remain glorified factory tools. But that's precisely why these stocks belong in a never-sell portfolio. These aren't trades -- they're generational investments in the future of technology. And with both companies led by founders willing to risk everything on their vision, selling would be the real mistake. Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you'll want to hear this. On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a 'Double Down' stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you're worried you've already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it's too late. And the numbers speak for themselves: Nvidia: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009, you'd have $400,193!* Apple: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, you'd have $38,264!* Netflix: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2004, you'd have $687,731!* Right now, we're issuing 'Double Down' alerts for three incredible companies, available when you join , and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon.*Stock Advisor returns as of June 23, 2025 John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Randi Zuckerberg, a former director of market development and spokeswoman for Facebook and sister to Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. George Budwell has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Amazon, Meta Platforms, and Tesla. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 2 Tech Stocks I'd Buy and Never Sell was originally published by The Motley Fool
