120
Biden Calls Chinese Electric Vehicles a Security Threat (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 2 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
42 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Biden Calls Chinese Electric Vehicles a Security Threat::The president ordered an investigation into auto technology that could track U.S. drivers, part of a broader effort to stop E.V. and other smart-car imports from China.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 16 points 2 years ago (1 child)

China and America are not the same but the solution works against all actors: permit users to audit and change the code so dependencies on servers can be removed or replaced with ones of our choice. Without the source code to learn what it's actually doing then all software is potentially a security threat, at best it's just not yet guilty of being malware or having anti-features.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Why should every car owner have to also be a tech nerd or security specialist just to guarantee their car is safe to drive and own? They should be guaranteed safe before they are even sold.

    Of course, consumers should have full control over the technology they buy, but it should be safe and secure before it is even sold in the first place. 

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    The only way to know it is safe is 3rd parties auditing it. The manufacture saying "trust me bro" ain't it and a government audit that doesn't show their work could be bullshit too. A single tech nerd or security specialist is in the same boat as the regular Joe - it's a group effort. Non-techies can contribute in other ways (e.g. reporting bugs).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    That’s why government agencies should be transparent and better funded

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    To be so transparent that we can actually verify the government's findings means a 3rd party is doing the same job the government did. Anything less is the government saying "trust us". [Edit to clarify what I meant] It's cheaper for a bad company to pay for lobbyists or buyout a few politicians than to somehow buyout every 3rd party.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    The job of government is to take care of the people by providing trustworthy services that protect us. If they don’t function properly, it is a job of the people to make sure that they do. I do not accept the idea that this is impossible. I’m sorry that you cannot. But I will not accept the argument that this is impossible.

    Your argument only convinces me that we must work harder to create government services that are better and more trustworthy. I will never ever accept that private industry is superior, because their interest will only ever be to serve the shareholder, and shareholders can never be trusted to serve anything other than profit. Therefore, your argument will always be flawed. Especially concerning the interest of the individual, as the shareholder and the profit holder will always want to violate that, and will never be responsible or accountable to the people or the public.

    To that end, your argument is against corruption. To that out, the only real force to do that is the public, and a publicly accountable, democratic framework can be the only feasible means to that, never a privately-shrouded, corporate shareholder model.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Non-profits and charities also create software but it's like verifying a scientific experiment: doesn't matter who did it first if we can verify their results.

    Sadly, bad incentives trend politicians to appeal to just select groups needed to win. Many countries use unrepresentative voting systems which trend to a 2 party system, permits jerrymandering, etc. What can I do about my government?

    At least I can try to avoid proprietary software - if I needed a car I would look for one which comes with open source software, or buy a dumb while I still can.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    You make the false argument that public systems can never be relied on therefore, we must only rely on private systems. In reality, private systems are always fascist, and public systems need only be purged of corruption. 

    I’d rather fight possible corruption than certain fascism. And I certainly don’t trust an interlocutor that lies and tells me only fascism can be trusted, and that the public cannot be.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •