>If modern cars have been fully remotely controllable for years, why can't police stop often-deadly car chases?

They want to retain the power of discretionary action. If the powers that be employed their 1984 stuff all the time over trivial things people wouldn't support them. Part of this means they don't give the beat cops those toys.

Also, there's a difference between "can be" and "are". Like there's god knows how many numbers of compatibility layers and intermediary systems I bet even if the capability exists it's broken more often than it's not. Diverse software systems take a ton of constant work to maintain.

During the "last years of XP" era you probably could have theoretically taken down half the world's industry on paper but if you tried to do so at scale without literal years of prep and testing you'd have been foiled by the 50% of machines where you payload just didn't work for some obscure reason.

If the internet has all the information and you are on the internet, why don't you know this already?

The tests done on the buses showed that they can be stopped as well as otherwise controlled remotely from China. This is way more than diagnostics, and remote control is _not_ something which is common in road vehicles.

International politics does matter. So, yes, a country that is historically hostile, or allied with countries that are hostile, towards yours, gets different treatment.

Having "a sim card" is less than saying your car "has an on-board computer". In no way does that imply remote control.

Even you admit that most of them aren't for remote control, so what are you agreeing with?

I wasn't aware of that, thanks. But still, if you go buy a car right now, I doubt they are going to make it a sales pitch that you are not the only one who can control your car.