The Head of Tesla's Humanoid Robot Program Says That He DEFINITELY Wasn't Fired and Is Only Leaving to Spend Time With His Family, Not Because Elon Musk Is on the Warpath
Fresh on the heels of Elon Musk's dubious return to Tesla, the head of the company's humanoid robot program is departing — but he swears the decision was his alone.
According to an insider who spoke to Bloomberg, Milan Kovac, the head of engineering for the Optimus robot program, informed colleagues at the end of this past work week — the same one that saw Musk and president Donald Trump explode at each other on social media — that he would be leaving effectively immediately.
Soon after, Kovac posted a lengthy and heartfelt missive on X about his alleged choice to end his nine-year tenure at Tesla, where he initially worked on artificial intelligence programs like Autopilot before transitioning to the lead Optimus engineer in 2022.
"This week, I've had to make the most difficult decision of my life and will be moving out of my position," the ex-Tesla-er tweeted. "I've been far away from home for too long, and will need to spend more time with family abroad."
He also included an unusual disclaimer.
"I want to make it clear that this is the only reason, and has absolutely nothing to do with anything else," Kovac continued. "My support for [Musk] and the team is ironclad — Tesla team forever."
The gentleman, it seems, doth protest too much — and Musk's response doesn't inspire confidence about the veracity of Kovac's claim, either.
"Milan, thank you for your outstanding contribution to Tesla over the past decade," the billionaire, who himself was newly sacked, replied. "It was an honor working with you."
"Enjoy the time with family," Musk wrote. (The "and don't let the door hit you on your way out" might have been implied.)
While there's no concrete evidence suggesting that Kovac's resignation was forced, there are plenty of context clues that make you wonder.
Beyond Musk's no-good very bad week, Kovac's leadership of Tesla's humanoid robot program has left much to be desired. Despite some seemingly impressive prototypes — one of which was actually remote-controlled, and another of which was made to look cooler via sneaky video editing tricks — Optimus doesn't appear anywhere near ready for prime time in any economically viable sense, regardless of what Musk claims on investor calls about the robotic Hail Mary.
If Kovac is telling the truth about his departure, it would make sense for him, as a seeming true Tesla believer, to resign of his own volition because he failed to deliver a bona fide humanoid robot.
Given how volatile his now-ex-boss is, however, there's a pretty good chance the decision to leave was not Kovac's alone.
More on Tesla: Tesla Seems Terrified These Messages About Its Robotaxi Rollout Will Be Released
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gavin Newsom And AG Rob Bonta Outline Lawsuit Against Donald Trump Over President's Order To Federalize National Guard To Respond To Protests
California Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta outlined their lawsuit against Donald Trump and his order to federalize the National Guard, now in Los Angeles to respond to protests of the administration's ICE raids. The lawsuit will allege that Trump's order exceeds his authority and violates the Tenth Amendment. More from Deadline Donald Trump Responds To Gavin Newsom's Dare To Arrest Him, Says He "Would Do It" If He Were The Border Czar Angry Newsom Challenges Trump Administration To "Arrest Me" As Conflict Grows In L.A. - Updated John Oliver Likens Trump-Musk Feud To 'Real Housewives': "If Either Of Them Isn't The Center Of Attention For A Single Second, They'll Die" Trump's order authorized the calling up of 2,000 National Guard troops into federal service for a period of 60 days. In the lawsuit, Newsom and Bonta will ask the court to find Trump's order unlawful. They contend that federal statute requires that the governor give his consent. They also argue that the order violates the state's sovereign right to control. Bonta said in a statement, 'Let me be clear: There is no invasion. There is no rebellion. The President is trying to manufacture chaos and crisis on the ground for his own political ends. Federalizing the California National Guard is an abuse of the President's authority under the law – and not one we take lightly. We're asking a court to put a stop to the unlawful, unprecedented order.' Newsom said, 'Every governor, red or blue, should reject this outrageous overreach. This is beyond incompetence — this is him intentionally causing chaos, terrorizing communities, and endangering the principles of our great democracy. It is an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism. We will not let this stand.' More to come. Best of Deadline 2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery Tony Awards: Every Best Musical Winner Since 1949 Tony Awards: Every Best Play Winner Since 1947
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk, the Budget, and the Coming Labor Crisis
Other than the president himself, no one has had a greater impact on the first months of the new Trump administration than Elon Musk. Not only was Musks support critical in getting Donald Trump elected, but his empathy-free approach at the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) made headlines that dominated news cycles while helping flood the zone with contentious and newsworthy actions designed to overwhelm an already exhausted public. Even after departing his government role, Muskcontinued - in rather spectacular fashion -exerting outsized influence on American politics. His incendiary opposition to the administrations "big beautiful" budget bill significantly complicates the path for congressional Republicans eager to prove their loyalty to the president. Until Musks spectacular split with the president, support for the worlds richest man broke almost entirely along partisan lines. For Republicans, he was lauded for a willingness to tackle the difficult and thankless task of taking on an entrenched bureaucracy. For Democrats, he was an oligarch looking to use his government role to enrich himself while callously demeaning civil servants. But there was always more nuance to what the worlds richest man was doing in Washington. While Elons DOGE efforts were often ham-handed, his opposition to the Republicans expensive budget bill reinforces the belief that he genuinely wants to help the government become more effective stewards of taxpayer dollars. Musks detractors have suggested his efforts were entirely self-serving, an attempt to curry favor with Trump to benefit all the companies in his orbit. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, for instance, recently released a report outlining as many as 130 instances where Musk "potentially" used his government role and proximity to Trump to enrich himself. But there was less to this critique than meets the eye. A close reading of Warrens report reveals that most of the items listed are related to things that might benefit Musk and his companies in the future. They were speculative benefits, in other words. Moreover, Musk swiftly eroded the goodwill he had accumulated with the president, likely eliminating those speculative benefits while simultaneously reinforcing the view that his approach to DOGE was principled, regardless of its effectiveness. In raw dollar terms, no one has sacrificed more financially to serve in the U.S. government. From the time of Trumps inauguration to April 22, the date Elon Musk announced in a Tesla analyst call that he would be returning to the automaker, Tesla stock fell by more than 45%. In the process, it erased more than $80 billion from Musks net worth - an amount that, by some analysts estimates, exceeds the net savings from the DOGE efforts. Yes, a few of Musks other businesses may have benefited from his government service, but the magnitude of any such gains is far less than the loss he suffered on Tesla stock. While more than half of those paper losses have been recovered since Musk signaled a return to his company, its not clear Teslas fortunes in the auto business will ever rebound. Teslas impact on Musks net worth is, however, a less relevant issue than what the company is signaling about the direction of American life. Despite single-handedly transforming the automobile industry, Teslas dominance in the electric vehicle space is now gone. So, why does the company still command a trillion-dollar valuation in the equity markets? A simple analysis of its stock suggests its value is not about its car business. That realization is a window into the future. As of the end of May, Teslas market capitalization exceeded $1.1 trillion - more than the value of the next nine auto companies combined. This is despite the fact that Tesla sells fewer cars than all but three of those companies. With a brand in free fall, declining sales and profitability, and rising competition from Chinese manufacturer BYD, it would be hard to argue that Teslas auto business should trade at a premium to other manufacturers. Assuming Teslas auto business is worth roughly the same amount as Mercedes Benz, General Motors, or BMW (all companies with unit sales at least 30% greater than Teslas and lacking Teslas significant brand issues), the selling of cars would account for a paltry 5% of Teslas implied value. Solar City, on the other hand, could be worth as much as twice its rival First Solar, given its relative size. Assuming thats correct, another $30 billion or 3% of Teslas valuation is explained by the worth of Teslas solar power and energy storage division. Even adding in the $24 billion of net cash Tesla has on its balance sheet, we have a company worth between $100 and $110 billion - one-tenth of what the market says Tesla is worth. So, why has the market rewarded Tesla with a valuation thats roughly 10 times the sum of its operating businesses? What do investors see in Tesla that they dont see in other similar companies? The answer would seem to be Musks investment in future technologies, most notably humanoid robots (Musk says hes going to sell a million devices at $30,000 a piece by 2030 and is positing a future where there is one humanoid robot for every person on the planet) - not to mention self-driving vehicles. In short, 90% of Teslas valuation is about one thing - eliminating jobs currently held by Americans. This isnt a future entirely inspired by Musks vision alone. Dozens of major companies are charting a course in this direction. In some ways, its a natural evolution of a number of technological advances in material science, artificial intelligence, energy storage and management, and sensors and perception. So, while Musk has been a lightning rod for all sorts of criticism and approbation, our leaders would be wise to examine what his company is telling us about the future - and legislate appropriately. From a policy standpoint, the questions that need to be answered are obvious. How will Americans feed themselves and their families when the job they depend upon is being done by a machine? How will the job destruction from these technological advances affect tax receipts, which are overly dependent on income taxes? How will Americans find fulfillment in life without work? How can we best share the benefits of this fourth industrial revolution to ensure they arent overly concentrated in a few hands? Policymakers failed to realize the impact of early automation and offshoring on average Americans, leading to significant income and wealth concentration. They cant make the same mistake again. Our leaders ushered in an era of globalization, during which imports as a percentage of GDP increased by three times from 1970 to the present. We now have $4 trillion of imports flooding our shelves, giving Americans access to low-cost electronics, clothing, and other consumer goods. While average Americans benefited from these price reductions, as a country, we largely overlooked those Americans who lost their jobs as a result of these import gains. In fact, weve never spent more than a billion dollars annually on trade adjustment assistance, 4,000 times less than the imports we have coming on shore every year. Compounding the mistakes of globalization by neglecting the implications of whats about to come will lead to an even more alienated and divided electorate. America wont survive the outcome of that policy failure. Greg Orman is a Kansas entrepreneur, author of 'A Declaration of Independents,' and a former independent candidate for governor and senator of his state. His website is
Bloomberg
17 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Stock Movers: Tesla, Meta, Warner Bros
On this episode of Stock Movers: - Tesla (TSLA) shares fell after the EV-maker was hit with a pair of downgrades on Monday, underscoring mounting concerns on Wall Street about the electric-vehicle maker's outlook following last week's clash between Chief Executive Elon Musk and President Donald Trump. Both Argus Research and Baird cut the stock to the equivalent of hold ratings, cementing Tesla's reputation as the least-loved megacap stock among analysts. Shares fell 1.6% in premarket trading. - Meta (META) rose on the news over the weekend that it is in talks to make a multibillion-dollar investment into artificial intelligence startup Scale AI, according to people familiar with the matter. The financing could exceed $10 billion in value, some of the people said, making it one of the largest private company funding events of all time. The terms of the deal are not finalized and could still change, according to the people, who asked not to be identified discussing private information. Scale AI, whose customers include Microsoft Corp. and OpenAI, provides data labeling services to help companies train machine-learning models and has become a key beneficiary of the generative AI boom. The startup was last valued at about $14 billion in 2024, in a funding round that included backing from Meta and Microsoft. Earlier this year, Bloomberg reported that Scale was in talks for a tender offer that would value it at $25 billion. - Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) shares slid after it announced it would be splitting itself in half, unshackling its fast-growing streaming business from the struggling legacy media channels and setting up two independent companies that could pursue deals on their own. The new Global Networks business will include entertainment, sports and dozens of cable television brands such as CNN, TNT and TBS and will be headed by Chief Financial Officer Gunnar Wiedenfels. It will hold a 20% stake in the other Streaming and Studios business, headed by Chief Executive Officer David Zaslav, and use proceeds from that entity as a way to cut debt, the company said in a statement on Monday. The move unwinds much of the 2022 merger that combined AT&T Inc.'s WarnerMedia, which houses iconic film studios and TV franchises, and Discovery Inc., home to nonfiction documentaries and reality TV. The deal created a company weighed down with debt at a time when cable TV, its largest business, was hemorrhaging viewers and advertising dollars.
