Tesla has unexpectedly opened its cards. After almost a year of hidden descriptions, Elon Musk's company has finally disclosed details of 17 traffic incidents on its Robotaxi network - and two of them happened when the vehicle was being controlled by a remote operator rather than the machine autopilot.

Both tele-incidents took place in Austin, Texas, at low speeds and with a safety supervisor at the wheel, no passengers. The first, in July 2025, when the autonomous system stalled and couldn't continue - the remote operator stepped in and, instead of moving the car away, ran it onto the kerb and into a metal barrier. The second, in January this year - the car hit a temporary construction barrier at around 14 km/h, scraping the front-left bumper and a wheel.

What were these remote operators doing? According to the company's explanation to lawmakers, they "take over control to move the vehicle into an uncompromised situation", with a speed limit of 16 km/h. "That removes the need to wait for a first responder or Tesla representative to manually retrieve the vehicle," the company said. Sounds reasonable - until you realise it was exactly those operators who caused two of the incidents.

What's more interesting is that the company up to now redacted all incident descriptions involving Robotaxi, claiming it was a trade secret. Every other firm running autonomous vehicles filed full descriptions. Tesla alone played the exception - until this week, when it suddenly decided to publish them. Who forced their hand and why now - that's the question.

For European regulators, this is the opening scene. The EU already has stricter rules on autonomous vehicles and tele-supervision than the US. How long will it take regulators in Brussels to demand the same publicly available descriptions from every manufacturer planning to drive through European cities? And an even better question - can a vehicle being driven by a person from a remote room actually be called "autonomous" at all?