this post was submitted on 10 May 2025
66 points (90.2% liked)

Canada

9700 readers
662 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Canada relies on foreign auto executives for its auto industry. It already provides huge taxpayer subsidies per job. There is certainly a possible future where all of those foreign loyal companies side with US to destroy Canadian auto production/investment.

  1. China could help save Canadian auto industry by providing motors and batteries for Canadian made EVs. Chinese investment to make goods from Canadian resources in Canada is a path for scale that includes global export potential of autos and other industrial goods to whole globe including China.

  2. If it doesn't make economic sense to make our own tube socks, it doesn't make sense to make overly expensive cars, either. There is a stronger national security argument for apparel, that needs yearly replacements, than solar, batteries, and autos that last 20+ years. More so, when they are not dependent on continuous international fuel supply chains/geopolitics.

Pressure on foreign executives to support Canadian production includes access to Canadian market. The stability of status quo will appeal to most people. But the threat/plan B of cooperation with China is both a path to manufacturing and resource FDI paid by China instead of taxpayers, and better quality of life through better value goods.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (6 children)

https://www.theverge.com/2015/7/21/9009213/chrysler-uconnect-vulnerability-car-hijack

I mean, it's literally already happened, and this was a hacker doing it so it's even easier for a car company to do it.

Any vehicle with OnStar can also be remotely disabled as well, it's literally advertised as an anti-theft feature. https://www.onstar.com/tips/stolen-vehicle-assistance-helps-stop-thieves

If your car can be contacted remotely (almost every modern vehicle) I guarantee you that it's possible for the manufacturer to brick it. It may not even require an update, there could be a hidden command in the existing software since the software is not publicly available to validate, nor is it being validated by the regulatory authorities.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (5 children)

It depends on exactly what you mean by 'bricked'. Take over the operation of the car, or just cause it to stop functioning? Teslas are easy to disable remotely. Just botch up the navigation system. But to cause them to deliberately crash? Takeover the complete control of the car?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Takeover the complete control of the car?

Maybe not complete control, but maybe taking away breaks yes: https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/

Miller and Valasek’s full arsenal includes functions that at lower speeds fully kill the engine, abruptly engage the brakes, or disable them altogether. The most disturbing maneuver came when they cut the Jeep's brakes, leaving me frantically pumping the pedal as the 2-ton SUV slid uncontrollably into a ditch.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

There is always the purely mechanical emergency brake.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)