Tesla is banking on travelers wanting to hang out with themselves rather than an Uber driver.
The company announced that its Texas production facility, known as Gigafactory Texas, is ready to start preparing for a world without drivers.
'A personalized driverless experience.'
Elon Musk's company is diving further into the autonomous auto sector by not only ramping up its production of driverless vehicles, but by pairing specific vehicles with its taxi app that will compete with existing services like Waymo and GM's Cruise.
"Purpose-built for autonomy," Tesla wrote on X, promoting its new line called Cybercab. The vehicles are a new production of a battery-electric Tesla with neither steering wheels nor pedals available inside the car.
It was first shown off in 2024 and boasted futuristic wireless charging capabilities, with a rumored target range of 200 miles per charge.
RELATED: 5 cars from the 2026 New York International Auto Show you might actually want to buy
Cybercab will be combined with Tesla's existing Robotaxi app — launched in 2025 — to create "a personalized driverless experience."
Currently, the rides are offered on Tesla Model Y cars, but Tesla expects its new autonomous rides to target customers who grow tired of their human experiences. In this sense, Tesla notes how their rides differ from some of the most annoying parts of riding in someone else's car.
Heating and cooling settings are saved in the passenger's profile in the app, which means vehicles will automatically adjust to their settings across different rides. Other features target the aggravation of having to hear another person's music selection, as the Robotaxi allows riders to stream their own.
There are some limitations though. For example, children under 8 years old, which of course includes infants, are not permitted to ride in the taxis. Guests between 8 and 17 years old are permitted in the cars, but minors cannot ride in the vehicle alone, per Robotaxi Rider Rules.
Riders must also adhere to applicable laws regarding small children, meaning a child safety seat may be required (provided by the customer) to bring them along.
Pets are also not permitted unless they are service animals.
RELATED: Anti-Trump Indian investor wants you to use this hat that reads your thoughts
Only three passengers at a combined weight of 800 pounds may ride in the vehicle at one time, and no one can sit in the front seat, Tesla says.
Smoking, vaping, and alcohol consumption are also not allowed.
The company also lists strict rules about recording or collecting any data from inside the vehicle.
"Instruments or equipment intended to record, measure, reverse engineer, collect information about, or conduct surveillance of any feature, equipment, component, or area of our Robotaxi are strictly prohibited."
The service is currently only available to residents in Austin, Dallas, and Houston, Texas.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
An American company is pushing science fiction to its limits by introducing a mind-reading product, backed by a controversial investor from India.
The product falls under the new category called brain-computer interface technology, with the investor saying he sees his product as the best path to push people into using the brain-tapping gadgets.
'Securely and wirelessly, understands your thoughts and what you attempt to speak.'
The Silicon Valley startup is backed by venture capitalist Vinod Khosla, an AI and software investor from Bombay State, India. The new company is called Sabi, and it is developing the Sabi Cap, a beanie that reads the wearer's thoughts and puts them into text on a connected device.
In remarks to Wired, Khosla said that a noninvasive wearable device was the only way to get a lot of people to use the BCI technology.
"The biggest and baddest application of BCI is if you can talk to your computer by thinking about it," Khosla explained. "If you're going to have a billion people use BCI for access to their computers every day, it can't be invasive."
The technology works by using metal disks placed on the wearer's scalp that can record their brain's electrical activity through a technology called electroencephalography. The process is called decoding "imagined speech."
RELATED: Is Trump's new White House app unsafe for your security and privacy?
- YouTube
Given that the sensors on the beanie (or a planned baseball cap product) would have to work through hair, skin, and bone, the company plans on increasing the amount of sensors to piece together the required data; 70,000 to 100,000 miniature sensors per beanie have been suggested.
"Given that high-density sensing, it pinpoints exactly what and where neural activity is happening. We use that information to get much more reliable data to decode what a person is thinking," said CEO Rahul Chhabra.
Sabi's website describes the "brain reading" process as starting with "brain imaging" with "neuroimaging sensors."
The company notes that it collects "a lot of brain imaging data" and maps signals into thoughts.
"Securely and wirelessly, understands your thoughts and what you attempt to speak," the website boasts, touting how one could connect his or her brain to AI.
"AI agents do whatever you can think of. Literally."
RELATED: Yes, smart TVs are spying on you — and one state is finally fighting back
Investor Khosla has been vocally opposed to President Trump on his X page while having a public feud with Elon Musk, who is in the same field with his product Neuralink.
Khosla claimed that Musk wanted to make "white America great again" while saying Musk finds racism "desirable."
This was in response to Musk stating that white people are a diminishing population.
"Vinod, you're not just such a pompous asshole that you tried to stop the public from using a public beach near your house, you've also gone full retard," Musk replied.
At the same time, entrepreneur Palmer Luckey mocked Khosla for saying that "decent whites should quit" Tesla and SpaceX and join his own company.
Khosla has also called Trump "not fit to be President" and advocated against his anti-DEI positions by championing a "dire US need" to bring in international students.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
On April 1, when Artemis II launched from NASA's Kennedy Space Center to embark on its historic 10-day lunar flyby, Glenn Beck was sitting in the audience section designated for people who work in the space program and journalists invited to attend the launch.
As he chatted with various scientists and fellow journalists, he noticed a husband and wife sitting among the group who were clearly not part of either world. He soon struck up a conversation with them and inquired about how they received an invitation.
“They started telling me a story that was as impressive as the rocket going off itself,” he says.
The story was about their 15-year daughter Olivia "Liv" Perrotto, who died of a rare and aggressive childhood cancer in January this year.
A bright, space-obsessed girl who dreamed of becoming an astronaut or fighter pilot, Liv’s illness didn’t quell her courage to pursue her passions.
“That 15-year-old lived more of a life than most of us could ever dream of,” says Glenn.
Elon Musk and NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman are largely to thank for that.
On this heart-wrenching episode of “The Glenn Beck Program,” Glenn shares a little-known story he says will “break your heart and then heal it right back up.”
“This is a story that neither [Musk nor Isaacman] ... would tell you. They didn't do it for the credit, and I didn't ask [them] for permission to tell,” says Glenn, noting that it was Liv’s mother who “wanted the world to know what they did and what it meant.”
When Liv was just 10 years old, she was diagnosed with undifferentiated sarcoma — a rare and malignant cancer. Overnight, her life went from normal childhood circumstances to “chemo, radiation, surgeries, [and] clinical trials.”
“It was a really dark time until she heard about a SpaceX mission … called Inspiration 4. This one was commanded by a guy that most people didn't know at the time named Jared Isaacman,” says Glenn.
“The crew of Inspiration 4 heard about this little girl with cancer, and Jared Isaacman paid to bring her and her family to the launch."
"And this was the beginning of just a life-changing relationship,” he recounts.
Isaacman’s involvement with Liv didn’t conclude with her attendance at the Inspiration 4 launch. “He became committed to her care and to her dreams,” says Glenn. “Without anyone knowing, without anyone asking, much to the family's surprise, this guy just threw himself in.”
A few months after the Inspiration 4 launch, Isaacman asked Liv to design a “zero-gravity indicator” for his next mission. She quickly sent in a sketch of a Shiba Inu dog in an astronaut suit named Asteroid.
The Polaris Dawn team, commanded by Isaacman, took Liv's hand-drawn sketch and turned it into an actual plush toy that they brought with them on the mission. A video taken by the team captured Asteroid floating in the cabin as the crew reached microgravity.
“Nobody on that mission forgot about this little girl in Pennsylvania. They sent her a birthday cake on her birthday. They sent flowers to the hospital. They all got together on a Zoom call just days before she died,” says Glenn through tears.
“Jared chartered his own plane to fly Liv cross-country so she could get treatments, personally called St. Jude to review her case,” he continues.
But that was just the beginning.
Isaacman also took Liv “up in a fighter jet, which he flew,” and introduced her to Charlie Duke, William Shatner, and many other big names from the broader space community.
“The whole space world opened its arms to this little girl — somebody you’ve never heard of,” says Glenn, “and they didn't do it for the press; they just did it because her passion was contagious, so full of love.”
Because of the kindness of Isaacman and others, “the space world was [Liv’s] world, not hospitals.”
One of Liv’s other dreams was to speak to Elon Musk. At a town hall event he hosted in October 2024, she briefly got the chance. Liv had just learned earlier that day that her cancer had returned aggressively, but that didn’t deter her from standing in line all night just to ask Musk when he planned to send kids to space.
After learning of her worsening condition, Musk planned a phone call with Liv in January 2026 so that she could ask him all her pressing questions. But the night he arranged to call her, Liv was too exhausted to carry on a conversation, so she requested that the call be moved to the next day. Musk agreed and immediately sent flowers and a kind note to the hospital.
Tragically, Liv passed before the call came.
“Both the notes and the flowers were put in this little girl's casket,” says Glenn.
Liv’s legacy lives on through the courage she showed in the face of unimaginable pain, the Asteroid plush toy that now flies on SpaceX missions as the company’s official mascot, thanks to Elon Musk honoring her final wish, and the way her story continues to remind the world that acts of kindness and compassion are happening all around us — even when we can’t see them.
Liv’s mother published her own article about the life of her courageous daughter. You can read it on glennbeck.com.
To hear Glenn’s version of Liv’s beautiful story, grab your tissue box and watch the video above.
To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
The artificial intelligence revolution is here, and it arrives charged with the capacity to fundamentally change society for better or worse.
America is currently leading the world in AI development. U.S. companies are building the most advanced models, attracting the most capital, and designing the infrastructure that will shape the next century. But there is one increasingly obvious constraint standing in the way: electricity accessibility.
The political consequences of rapid automation could be just as transformative as the technology itself.
Energy scarcity is only half the story. Even if we succeed in generating the power required to fuel the AI revolution, we must confront a deeper challenge. The same technology that promises medical breakthroughs and economic growth also carries profound societal and even existential risk.
If America wants to win the AI race, we will need to consider a massive expansion of energy production and an equally massive expansion of vigilance.
Modern AI models are trained and deployed in massive data centers packed with tens of thousands of high-performance graphics processing units running continuously. Training a single frontier model can require weeks or months of nonstop computation, while everyday AI tools used by millions of people must process queries around the clock.
These facilities consume electricity at industrial scale, rivaling entire cities in their power demands. In fact, the hyperscale Stargate data center in Saline Township is projected to consume the same amount of electricity as 1.17 million homes.
The understanding of just how much energy is needed to power the AI revolution is still unfolding across the industry. Just a few years ago, Silicon Valley leaders were still thinking in megawatts.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, speaking on a podcast less than two years ago, said his company would build larger AI clusters “if we could get the energy to do it,” describing 50-to-100-megawatt facilities and speculating that 1-gigawatt data centers were probably inevitable someday.
Today, 1-gigawatt facilities are on the smaller end of planned AI infrastructure, with projects up to 5 gigawatts already in motion throughout the United States, including but not limited to the following:
And this list barely scratches the surface. Dozens more large-scale facilities are planned or under construction across the country, and every single one of them will require enormous flows of reliable electricity to operate.
Elon Musk recently stated at Davos that “the limiting factor for AI deployment is, fundamentally, electrical power.” He warned that while AI chip production is increasing exponentially, electricity generation is not.
“Very soon, maybe even later this year,” Musk said, “we will be producing more chips than we can turn on.”
In Santa Clara, California, reports indicate newly built data centers may sit idle for years because the local grid cannot handle the load.
According to a report published by the global consulting group McKinsey & Company, U.S. demand for AI-ready data center capacity could grow from roughly 60 gigawatts today to 170 to 298 gigawatts by 2030.
The International Energy Agency reports that data centers consumed more than 4% of total U.S. electricity in 2024. This amounts to 183 terawatt-hours. IEA projections suggest this number could increase by 133% to 426 TWh by 2030.
To put that in perspective, 426 TWh is roughly equivalent to the annual electricity consumption of more than 40 million American homes.
The dilemma is obvious. If we do not have reliable energy, AI innovation will be compromised and could potentially migrate elsewhere. Worse, American households could find themselves competing with Big Tech for increasingly scarce power, driving up electricity costs for families and small businesses.
But energy is only the first layer of this story.
RELATED: States should work with AI, not against it
AI is not your typical technological advancement. It is a general-purpose intelligence system capable of transforming nearly every sector of society. In the coming years, AI could accelerate drug discovery, personalize medicine, supercharge logistics, automate research, and unlock new materials and engineering breakthroughs, just to name a few potential benefits. The economic upside is staggering.
Artificial intelligence is a powerful tool and a dangerous weapon. While promising efficiency and innovation, AI also threatens disruption on a historic scale. Job displacement could occur faster than previous technological revolutions. Entire professions, from legal research to software development, could be reshaped or automated.
If widespread job displacement occurs, there will inevitably be calls for sweeping government intervention. The political consequences of rapid automation could be just as transformative as the technology itself.
Exponential technological developments have changed political operations throughout history. As a recent example, social media algorithms have dominated political discourse over the past decade. Political polarization has subsequently skyrocketed as people on all sides of the aisle are trapped in online echo chambers and subjected to a panopticon of surveillance.
Artificial intelligence has the frightening capabilities of supercharging mass surveillance while baselessly boosting preconceived biases without an objective basis in truth.
There is certainly reason for concern about the potential bias and coercive nature of AI. In recent years, we have already witnessed how tech companies can shape narratives and suppress viewpoints on popular media platforms. Embedding ideological bias into AI systems would mean embedding that bias into education, finance, health care, and governance.
If AI becomes the invisible infrastructure of society, who writes its rules? Who determines its boundaries? And who holds it accountable?
Beyond economic and cultural disruption lies an even deeper uncertainty.
We are introducing a form of intelligence that even its creators admit they do not fully understand. There are already documented cases of advanced AI systems behaving in deceptive or strategically manipulative ways. In controlled environments, some models have been observed lying to human evaluators, scheming to achieve assigned goals, or resisting shutdown instructions.
OpenAI’s stated ambition is to create artificial superintelligence — systems that surpass human capability across virtually every domain. There is no telling where this path may lead. Humanity has never had to grapple with the prospect of a man-made intelligence that is superior to our own.
And remarkably, some of the leading figures in the field openly discuss the possibility of catastrophic outcomes.
Elon Musk has suggested there is “only a 20% chance of annihilation.” Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has estimated roughly a 25% chance that AI development goes “really, really badly.” Geoffrey Hinton, often referred to as the “godfather of AI,” has placed the odds of extinction-level consequences somewhere between 10 and 20% over the coming decades.
Those numbers still imply that positive outcomes are more likely than not. But when the downside is losing human civilization itself, percentages matter.
We are advancing a technology with transformative power while relying largely on overzealous corporate discretion to steer its trajectory. Humanity finds itself fiddling with the key to Pandora’s box, and we have no rational means of gauging what will happen if the box is opened.
RELATED: AI’s PR is in the toilet — for good reason
As stalwart advocates for smaller government, we hesitate to call for slamming the brakes on AI development, but it is important to have sober discernment moving forward. America is in a strategic competition with geopolitical rivals who would gladly dominate both this field and us if we retreat.
Reliable energy production is necessary to promote competition and American innovation. Yet it is arguably more important that society engages in serious dialogue surrounding this emerging technology. Government cannot, and should not, be the only voice in this conversation.
Independent institutions dedicated to transparency, accountability, and the defense of individual liberty need to rise and challenge the current trajectory.
Technological revolutions have always reshaped society. The difference this time is scale and speed. AI is a decision-making engine that may soon operate faster and more broadly than any human institution.
America can power the AI revolution. The real question is whether we can power it without surrendering control over our economy, institutions, and ultimately, our freedom.
The future may well belong to artificial intelligence. But whether that future advances prosperity or undermines humanity depends on the vigilance we exercise today.
The announcement of Terafab was made at a decommissioned power plant, reflecting Elon Musk’s understanding of stagecraft: The ruined infrastructure of one era makes a convenient altar for the next. On March 21 and 22, 2026, at the Seaholm Power Plant in Austin, Musk presented Terafab. It is either the most ambitious semiconductor manufacturing project in history or a very expensive project that may not come to be.
Terafab is a plan to build vertically integrated chip-manufacturing capacity in Austin, combining under one roof the design, fabrication, packaging, and testing of advanced semiconductors. Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI are the collaborating entities. The announced investment figure is $20 billion. The stated long-run target is one terawatt of compute capacity per year, a number that converts the language of performance into the language of power.
Terafab is a cultural event as much as a technical announcement.
Measuring compute in watts means that the limiting factor is energy throughput. The International Energy Agency has described data centers as a fast-growing fraction of global electricity demand; by 2030, in its base case, that demand could roughly double.
The technical core of Terafab is its most defensible part. The pitch is about iteration speed: If you can design a chip, fabricate it, package it, test it, and revise the mask, all inside one building, without shipping components between specialized facilities in different countries, you can improve faster than anyone who does not. In conventional semiconductor manufacturing, these functions are geographically and organizationally scattered. A mask set travels; a wafer ships; a packaged part crosses an ocean. Each journey is a delay, and delay is the enemy of the feedback loop. Terafab is a wager that learning velocity beats static node leadership.
Advanced fabs are among the most expensive and complex structures human beings have ever built, typically $10 billion and several years for a single facility, dependent on supply chains for equipment that cannot be wished into existence by ambition or capital alone. Extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, to name one critical dependency, cost hundreds of millions of dollars apiece and are manufactured by a single Dutch company. The closed loop is a compelling engineering idea. The project will involve equipment lead times, utility provisioning, the yielding of learning curves, and the peculiar physics of building things in the real world.
There is a second Terafab nested inside the first. The announcement includes chips, named D3, designed for space environments, paired with a vision of solar-powered orbital compute satellites, initially around 100 kilowatts and scaling toward the megawatt range. Terrestrial compute is constrained by land, power, cooling, and local political opposition to enormous data centers. Space has sunlight and no neighbors to complain about the noise.
RELATED: Bernie Sanders and AOC propose law to shut down future AI data centers
Of course, space also has no air. In vacuum, heat cannot leave a system by convection, only by radiation, which requires very large radiator surfaces at high power levels. The International Space Station’s thermal control system requires radiators the size of tennis courts to reject the heat generated by its systems. Radiation poses its own complications: The energetic particles of the space environment induce bit flips and long-term degradation in electronics not specifically hardened against them. The orbital vision is not impossible. It is simply a different problem than the earthbound one, even when presented in the same breath, as though the same momentum carries the project from Austin to low Earth orbit without friction.
Terafab’s “everything under one roof” approach has an ancestor in the great vertical integration projects of industrial capitalism, such as Ford’s River Rouge complex, which turned raw materials into finished automobiles inside a single, vast geography, its own power plant humming at the center.
The global semiconductor supply chain is highly concentrated: Roughly 92% of the world’s most advanced chip manufacturing capacity sits in Taiwan. To build end-to-end domestic capability is simultaneously a resilience project and a power project, a bid to internalize a strategic resource inside one corporate constellation rather than depend on the broader market of specialized suppliers.
Terafab is a cultural event as much as a technical announcement, and its cultural work is to naturalize a particular diagnosis: that intelligence is infrastructure, infrastructure is energy, and energy is the horizon of meaning for civilizational progress. Whether or not the fab gets built on schedule, whether or not the orbital satellites ever achieve megawatt-scale compute, the frame has been installed. The factory is where the future lives, and the future needs power.
Democrats are currently on track to take the House of Representatives in the 2026 midterms. If this happens, they will empower resistance bureaucrats to slow down all Trump administration initiatives. Of course, they’ll not only impeach Trump, but will also pursue impeachment proceedings against many Trump officials. This will substantially drain momentum from the administration and increase it for Democrats heading into the crucial 2028 presidential election.
The Democrats are already putting together plans, formulating a narrative, and accumulating evidence, which they will use against Republicans should they retake power. We’ve seen this movie before.
Since the billionaires do not know how to wield their potential power, they have become targets.
The Marxist machine has had time to learn from its mistakes during 2020-2024. The Democrats will likely pursue criminal prosecution against key targets in the MAGA orbit, including big donors like Elon Musk, the DOGE bros, and even junior Trump staffers. We’ve already seen in Arctic Frost an effort to spy on sitting Republican United States senators — they’ll be on the target list, too.
This is power. Force is power. Politics is the management of force. For his tech-oriented publication Pirate Wires, Mike Solana recently published “Theory of Power,” which outlines how the left will replicate California’s wealth tax to target billionaires nationwide. He believes that the left is targeting billionaires because wealth is power. He’s half right.
Wealth itself is not power — it is the means to power. The left seeks to redistribute the wealth of the billionaire class to the people living in America in exchange for power. Leftists are not targeting the billionaires because their wealth poses a threat to the left’s power — they want to seize the power of that wealth for themselves. Since the billionaires do not know how to wield their potential power, they have become targets. If they did, the California wealth tax wouldn’t even be an issue.
Wealth cannot protect its holder from force. If politics is the management of force, then political influence is power. There are plenty of people with political influence and no wealth who have more power than billionaires. There are 20-something political staffers who have more political power than billionaires. There is a legion of bureaucrats with more political power than billionaires. Who has more power, a billionaire or the IRS lawyer investigating him? Of course, it’s the IRS lawyer, because the IRS lawyer is backed by regime power.
The billionaire class has largely abdicated regime power — the question of who is in charge — with a few notable exceptions, such as Elon Musk’s 2024 election engagement and purchase of Twitter. The wealthy are quite good at influencing politics for their discreet business interests, with one analysis finding that they receive a 220-times return on investment through their lobbying efforts (other analyses attribute the rise in corporate profits to lobbying).
However, regime politics is not fundamentally about lobbying for an appropriation or a carve-out in the tax code, which puts generating wealth above gaining political power. Machiavelli warned against this in “The Prince”:
And, on the contrary, it is seen that when princes have thought more of ease than of arms, they have lost their states. And the first cause of your losing it is to neglect this art.
Wielding political influence for higher corporate profits to buy another jet or a fifth vacation home is thinking of ease more than of arms.
If politics is the management of force, then political influence is the “arms.” The billionaires are on track to lose their “state,” because they’ve neglected the art of influencing regime politics.
RELATED: The case against ‘principled conservatism’
For all its faults, the left understands regime politics. Billionaire wealth extraction is just one part of its plan to sustain and deepen its regime-level power. If its only opposition, the MAGA political class, is destroyed by regime politics, the left’s wealth extraction scheme is not only inevitable, but it will also be the least of the billionaires’ worries.
All of this means that right-aligned billionaires should move immediately to gain regime-level political influence. To be clear, wealth can be a strong amplifier of political influence. Still, political influence has a simple recipe: It requires access, credibility, leverage, and the ability to change behavior. In other words, donating to campaigns is not enough. Elected officials must be lobbied to act in the interest of those who support them, or someone else will lobby them for their own interests.
Before a politician is elected, the benefactor has the leverage. But once the politician has regime-level power, the benefactor is subject to the beneficiary’s power. If right-wing billionaires want to survive what’s coming, they must have a well-run machine to influence politicians after they are elected. Solana makes this point — with which I fully agree: They must “respond as if [their lives depend] on it, because my reading of what these people are saying, casually, cheerfully, and increasingly out loud, is…it does.”
But power is fickle. Any billionaires who wield political influence strictly for their own benefit rather than on behalf of the people will find themselves burdened with all the paranoia and stress of a tyrant. To that end, Xenophon’s “On Tyranny” provides relevant advice: “Consider the fatherland to be your estate, the citizens your comrades, friends your own children, your sons the same as your life, and try to surpass all these in benefactions. For if you prove superior to your friends in beneficence, your enemies will be utterly unable to resist you.”
Editor’s note: This article appeared originally at the American Mind.
'The Commission agrees that it may not consider irrelevant factors in performing its function and specifically agrees that it will not take into account the perceived political beliefs, political speech, or labor practices of SpaceX or its officers.'
While innovations in robotic automation may create new and exciting economic opportunities, a world without work is something none of us should desire.
www.theblaze.com