Tesla FSD Crisis, Dollar-Stablecoin War

● Tesla FSD Crisis – Survey Shock, XAI Lawsuit, Masterplan 4 Musk’s Next Moves – Regulation, Court, Strategy Timeline

Tesla FSD Crisis and Musk’s Next Moves (Timeline of Regulation, Litigation, and Strategy) — Shocking Survey, XAI Lawsuit, and Master Plan 4

This article organizes the hidden implications of survey results, the talent and intellectual property risks posed by the XAI lawsuit, and the “regulation, trust, and business model” puzzle that Master Plan 4 must solve, in chronological order.

A key point, often overlooked by other YouTubers and news outlets, is that the “sensor-safety debate” may not be a technological competition but a conclusion driven by industry lobbying and the economic incentives of the insurance and legal markets.

By reading this article, you will gain a comprehensive understanding of the tangible impact of surveys on investment and sales, the long-term implications of the XAI lawsuit, and the practical solutions (federal legislation, data transparency, insurance pools) to expect from Master Plan 4.

1) Time Point 1 — Survey Results (Electric Vehicle Intelligence Research): Alarming Numbers and Hidden Weaknesses

The headline stated that 48% of respondents believe Tesla FSD should be outlawed.

Furthermore, 70% responded that autonomous driving requires the combined use of cameras and lidar, and 71% believe this should be legislated.

At first glance, it might seem like public opinion has completely turned. However, there are significant limitations in interpreting the results as the survey methodology, question wording, and sample recruitment channels were not disclosed.

General consumers are likely to make intuitive judgments like “lidar would make it safer,” and this psychological factor may have significantly driven survey responses.

Key Point (Not Reported by Other Media): This response is not a signal of technological distrust but a harbinger of “political regulation possibilities.”

In other words, if public pressure mounts, regulations like mandatory lidar adoption at the state level could become a reality, directly impacting Tesla’s cost structure, scalability, and product strategy.

2) Time Point 2 — XAI Lawsuit (Former Engineers, Trade Secret Leak): The Reality of Talent Wars and IP Risks

The lawsuit filed by XAI against its former engineers is not a mere case of individual misconduct.

The incident progressed from engineers’ post-resignation stock sales to joining OpenAI, and then to suspicions of confidential information misappropriation.

There are three core implications.

First, the speed and scale of AI talent movement can undermine the sustainability of corporate competitiveness (especially in models, data, and training pipelines).

Second, legal and ethical disputes can slow down technological development, and litigation costs and potential injunctions pose significant risks to both startups and large corporations.

Third (Not Reported by Other Media): Such lawsuits can expand beyond simple damages to become an issue of “platform reliability.”

Investors and consumers should not underestimate the internal data governance and IP protection capabilities of companies like XAI and Tesla.

3) Time Point 3 — Musk’s Mention of Master Plan 4: A Scaled-Down Strategy or a Declaration of a Turning Point?

Musk has previewed Master Plan 4 as a “short, simple roadmap.”

This message stems from a reflection that Master Plan 3 was complex and difficult to understand.

Key Expectations (Logic Following Chronological Order):

1) The roadmap is likely to be structured around the epochal division of “before autonomous driving vs. after autonomous driving.”

2) The integration of the hardware axis (robotaxis, Optimus, Cybertrucks) and the AI stack (data, models, safety validation) axis will be a core theme.

3) However, the real challenge (Not Reported by Other Media) is whether it will include an operational strategy (operational risk management) that encompasses “regulation, law, and insurance.”

In other words, MP4 should not be a mere product roadmap but a manual on “how Tesla will achieve large-scale commercialization (robotaxis) by securing legal and societal trust.”

4) The Timeline of Regulation and Politics: State Bills → Federal Legislation Scenario

Currently, autonomous driving regulation bills are pouring out from various US states.

If lidar mandates are introduced at the state level, Tesla’s nationwide expansion will be effectively constrained.

The reason Musk is pushing for federal autonomous driving legislation is precisely to eliminate this risk of fragmented state laws.

Important Economic Mechanism Here (Not Reported by Other Media): Lobbying by insurance companies, parts suppliers, and lidar manufacturers is likely to influence the direction of regulation.

Ultimately, technological norms are often determined by economic incentives (who profits) rather than technical feasibility.

5) Tesla’s Response Strategy (Practical Measures and Investor Checklist)

Tesla has responded with data and performance rather than media battles.

Key strategies include disclosing actual accident rate data, continuous improvement through OTA updates, and expanding robotaxi demonstrations.

However, additional measures will be necessary going forward.

Recommended Measures 1 — Standardize independent safety audits and transparent data disclosure.

Recommended Measures 2 — Simultaneously pursue federal legislation and establish a “large-scale risk pool” with insurance companies.

Recommended Measures 3 (Not Reported by Other Media) — Proactively shape regulatory standards by jointly designing consensus-based industry standards (sensors, validation, accident investigation protocols) with competitors and public institutions.

Investor Checklist — Re-evaluate FSD’s TAM (Total Addressable Market), margin sensitivity (lidar-equipped cost scenarios), and the timeline for robotaxi revenue conversion.

6) Market and Company Impact and Outlook (Short-, Mid-, and Long-Term Timelines)

Short-Term (6-12 months): PR risks and acceleration of regional regulatory initiatives due to public outcry.

Mid-Term (1-3 years): Divergent state regulations will directly impact sales and robotaxi expansion, with potential increases in insurance premiums and operating costs.

Long-Term (3-7 years): If Tesla successfully builds a trust framework with MP4 and secures federal legislation, it could be rewarded with exclusive network effects.

Conversely, if regulatory and legal defeats accumulate, the commercial value of FSD (software revenue, licensing) could significantly decline.

7) Investment and Policy Recommendations (Specific Action Items)

Investors are advised to monitor three axes—regulation, litigation, and robotaxi demonstration expansion—without getting swayed by short-term news.

Policymakers are urged to establish technology-neutral safety standards (performance-based) and urgently coordinate at the federal level to prevent the fragmentation of state-level regulations.

From a consumer perspective, utilizing robotaxi pilot services and demanding transparent accident data can have a tangible impact on rebuilding trust.

8) My View on “Musk’s Answer” — 4 Key Elements That Must Be Included in MP4 (Practical Content Missed by Other Media)

1) Legal and Insurance Integration Strategy: Pursuing federal legislation + joint risk-sharing and data-sharing agreements with insurance companies.

2) Independent Safety Verification Archive: Continuous data exchange with third-party verification organizations and public disclosure of audits.

3) Driving Standardization: Creating industry standards for sensors, accident analysis, and performance metrics to preemptively shape regulatory design.

4) IP and Talent Protection Protocols: Strengthening technical and contractual safeguards (code access control, forensic logging) in cases of talent outflow.

Without these four elements clearly included in MP4, a purely technological roadmap cannot solve the “trust” issue.

Conclusion — Key Takeaways and 3 Metrics to Watch Immediately

Key Takeaway: Surveys merely indicate the direction of public opinion; the real risks lie in competition within the regulatory, insurance, and legal arenas.

Metric 1 to Watch — Passage of state-level lidar mandate bills.

Metric 2 to Watch — The verdict and impact of the XAI lawsuit (whether it leads to talent mobility and IP precedent).

Metric 3 to Watch — The pace of Tesla’s robotaxi commercialization expansion and the release of independent safety audit reports.

Finally, one last thought (from the perspective of other media missing this): Tesla’s true battle is not for sensor technology but for preempting the “structure that makes trust economically viable.”

If this structure is mastered, technological arguments will naturally be persuasive.

< Summary >

Surveys reveal public distrust in Tesla FSD, but sample size and question limitations are significant.

The XAI lawsuit highlights AI talent and IP risks, potentially increasing trust costs across the industry.

Musk’s Master Plan 4 needs to include regulatory, insurance, and validation strategies, not just a technology roadmap, to be truly effective.

Most importantly, the “sensor debate” is likely to be resolved not through technological competition but as an economic game involving law, insurance, and lobbying.

[Related Articles…]

US Federal Reserve Interest Rate Outlook and Macroeconomic Risk Factors Summarized

Semiconductor Supply Chain Reorganization and Korea’s Strategic Opportunities

*Source: [ 오늘의 테슬라 뉴스 ]

– 충격 설문! 미국 절반 ‘FSD 불법화’ 지지, 이유는?… xAI 소송전까지, 머스크의 해답은 마스터 플랜 4?

● Dollar-Stablecoin War Resetting Debt, Dollar Hegemony, Sovereignty

The Digital Dollar & Stablecoin War: Resetting Treasuries, Dollar Hegemony, and Monetary Sovereignty — Key Takeaways (Including Undiscussed Aspects)

This article first explains the “Treasury Demand Creation Strategy” and the “Practical Mechanisms of Dollar Expansion through Private Issuance” hidden behind the spread of digital dollars and stablecoins.It details a step-by-step scenario of how monetary sovereignty in vulnerable countries is actually “disappearing” and the associated economic pain.It presents a practical checklist for policy, finance, and corporate levels that Korea (and East Asia) needs to prepare for immediately.It explains risks not well-covered by the media (e.g., indirect inflation and interest rate dynamics created by stablecoins’ inclusion in treasuries through asset-price channels) and countermeasures.It presents key inflection points and investment/policy response points in a phased manner across short, medium, and long-term timelines.

1) America’s Strategy: Why Stablecoins Become a “Weapon”

Stablecoins are not just payment methods.Through the asset composition of stablecoin issuers, new demand for U.S. Treasuries (especially short-term bills) is created.In this process, the “private issuance + regulatory approval” model provides rapid global diffusion power that central banks (CBDCs) alone cannot achieve.The Trump/Biden Administration’s Perspective: 1) Securing buyers for Treasuries (sustainability of fiscal spending), 2) Maintaining dollar hegemony (global payment rails and foreign exchange reserves).Consequently, stablecoins can effectively operate as a “privately supported digital dollar ecosystem.”

2) Core Mechanisms Not Well-Discussed Elsewhere

The Impact of Issuers’ Reserve Assets on Treasuries:When stablecoin issuers convert customer deposits into T-bills, T-bill demand artificially increases.Increased T-bill demand distorts short- and long-term interest rates and liquidity structures, lowering the cost of U.S. fiscal spending (alleviating the U.S. Treasury’s burden).Digitalization of Dollar Circulation and Distortion of Price Signals:As digital dollar circulation increases, demand for local currencies in some countries shrinks, amplifying exchange rate and inflation pressures locally.Consequently, traditional monetary policy channels leading to price stability, foreign exchange, and financial stability weaken.The Result of Network Externalities:When stablecoins are rapidly adopted for small remittances, payroll, and e-commerce, local payment infrastructure is replaced, and monetary sovereignty effectively recedes.Regulatory and Legal Loopholes (Regulatory Disaster Points):If international regulatory harmonization is not achieved, a “regulatory bazaar” will form by exploiting differences in regulations, taxes, and capital requirements among issuers.This can become a new avenue for circumventing financial security and sanctions policies.

3) Global Impact — Detailed Scenarios by Country Group

A. Emerging Markets with Weak Monetary Sovereignty (Parts of Africa & Latin America)Stage 1: Increased use of stablecoins for remittances and overseas payments.Stage 2: Widespread acceptance of stablecoins by shops and businesses → Reduced demand for local currency.Stage 3: Weakening currency value and accelerating inflation, weakening central bank policy effectiveness.Result: Potential for expanded capital outflows, rapid depletion of foreign exchange reserves, and social unrest.B. Countries in an Intermediate Position (Korea & Advanced Emerging Markets in East Asia)Stage 1: Initial adoption driven by convenience for fintechs and exporters in international payments.Stage 2: Minor shocks in financial markets (short-term rates, bond markets) → Need for policy response.Stage 3: Scenario divergence depending on active regulation and the introduction of digital currencies (Digital Won).Result: Damage can be mitigated by proactive regulation, but delays weaken the transmission channels of monetary policy.C. Developed Countries (US & EU)US: Enhanced dollar liquidity and global payment dominance through issuer-driven expansion.EU: Accelerated discussions on regulation, capital controls, and the digital euro, requiring strategic responses.Result: Reshaping of global payment norms and intensified competition for geopolitical influence.

4) Specific Impacts by Financial and Macroeconomic Channels

Treasury MarketThe inclusion of T-bills in stablecoin reserves lowers T-bill yields and distorts long-term interest rates and yield curves.Financially, it increases the U.S. government’s fiscal flexibility (securing an effective subsidy source).Inflation and PricesIncreased dollar circulation → Potential for increased pass-through of global import prices and commodity prices.Inflation in countries with weaker monetary sovereignty accelerates more rapidly.Financial StabilityPotential for cascading impacts on financial markets in case of stablecoin collapse (e.g., stablecoin runs, rapid conversion of reserves).Intensified funding competition between banks and fintechs, and a reduction in the role of intermediary institutions (incumbent finance).Geopolitics and SanctionsThe spread of U.S.-centric private digital payment networks also creates potential for reconfiguring and circumventing sanctions effectiveness.

5) Tailored Response Strategies for Korea (and Similar Economic Zones) — Policy, Financial, and Corporate Checklists

Policy (Government & Central Bank)Immediate implementation of transparency and reserve asset regulations for stablecoin issuance and circulation.Strengthening preparation of FX swaps and emergency liquidity assistance (LAP) for foreign exchange market volatility.Securing payment sovereignty through the development of the Digital Won (CBDC) and ensuring interoperability.Macroprudential and Capital FlowsStrengthening stress tests on domestic short-term capital inflows and outflows through gold.Consideration of introducing “stablecoin-linked risk buffers” (e.g., additional capital requirements) for banks and fintechs.Industry and CorporationsEstablishment of FX risk and tax risk management systems for exporters and fintechs when adopting stablecoin payments.Encouraging the use of local currency by strengthening the competitiveness of domestic payment infrastructure (merchants, consumer UX).Consumer ProtectionStrengthening regulations for deposit protection, refunds, and insurance against bankruptcy, as well as segregation of deposits.Ensuring reliability through mandatory disclosure of transparent reserve assets.

6) Regulatory Design Points — Practical Recommendations

Reserve Asset Composition Regulations: Require holding a certain percentage in safe, liquid assets (cash + central bank reserves), but impose limits on T-bill inclusion and disclosure obligations.Control of Offshore Issuance: Introduce usage restrictions or reporting requirements for offshore stablecoins intended for domestic use.Licensing and Authorization: Establish clear licensing frameworks for issuers, custodians, and payment service providers, imposing capital and liquidity requirements.International Cooperation: Pursue regulatory harmonization with key allies (especially to address AML and sanctions evasion).Digital Won Interoperability: Promote standardization of interoperability interfaces between CBDCs and stablecoins.

7) Practical Checklist for Investors and Businesses

Investors (Individuals & Institutions)Verify disclosure of reserve assets for stablecoins and assess credit/liquidity risk.Avoid indiscriminate holdings for short-term profit seeking; manage holding amounts and liquidity ratios.Businesses (Exporters & Fintechs)Mandate FX hedging strategies when using stablecoins for export payments and remittances.Conduct legal and tax reviews and establish customer protection measures before adopting merchant payments.

8) Timeline: Short-Term (2024-2026) → Medium-Term (2026-2029) → Long-Term (2030~)

Short-Term (Now ~1 Year)Acceleration of issuance and experimentation due to regulatory vacuum.Increased disclosure of reserve asset structures by major issuers (USDC, USDT, etc.) and the start of regulatory pressure.Medium-Term (2-4 Years)Attempts at international regulatory harmonization, practical diffusion of stablecoin-based payment flows.Changes in T-bill demand structure impacting interest rate and liquidity systems.Long-Term (5+ Years)Stablecoins and digital dollar-based payment networks will occupy a part of global payment standards.Monetary policy, revenue structures, and geopolitical impacts will be reshaped.

9) Risk Scenarios and Their Policy Priorities

Worst-Case Scenario: Large-scale stablecoin run → Financial market shock → Cascading collapse of emerging market currencies.Policy Priorities: 1) Reserve asset regulation & transparency 2) International cooperation 3) Preparation of domestic CBDC & payment infrastructure alternatives.Medium Scenario: Gradual integration and regional regulatory differences lead to fragmented financial structures.Policy Priorities: Expand financial stability buffers and strengthen financial consumer protection.Optimistic Scenario: A few dominant market structures emerge through regulation and market self-correction.Policy Priorities: Balance competition and innovation with supervision.

10) Practical Recommendations (7 Priority Action Items)

1) Immediately introduce a law mandating disclosure of reserve assets (including quarterly and real-time disclosures).2) Establish minimum capital and liquidity requirements for stablecoin issuers.3) Expand the Digital Won pilot program and standardize interoperability with stablecoins.4) Distribute FX hedging and stability guidelines to exporters and remittance service providers.5) Build a financial stability monitoring dashboard (tracking trading volume, reserve asset composition, liquidity indicators).6) Sign agreements for cooperation on AML and sanctions evasion response through international cooperation channels (Korea-US, Korea-Japan, EU).7) Legalize consumer protection (deposit protection, redemption regulations, bankruptcy procedures).

< Summary >Stablecoins are not just payment methods but strategic tools that support the creation of U.S. Treasury demand and dollar hegemony.The inclusion of T-bills in reserve assets can distort the global macro structure through interest rate, fiscal, and inflation channels.Countries with weak monetary sovereignty will face rapid monetary and price shocks, and Korea must respond with proactive regulation, Digital Won adoption, and international cooperation.Practical priorities: Immediately implement reserve asset transparency, issuer regulation, financial stability dashboards, and consumer protection.

*Source: [ 경제 읽어주는 남자(김광석TV) ]

– The indiscriminate proliferation of digital dollars and stablecoins exacerbates our dependence on…