    > It's why we can't buy BYD cars

are you sure it has nothing to do with the fact that those cars are very heavy, potentially fire-making (battery firmware) computers on wheels that can be rooted (or are already) at any time by their manufacturers in China?

▲ kajman 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Is the idea that we're just one OTA update from them turning into bombs? Considering the quality of software in the auto industry, I would be about as worried about any domestically assembled EV.

▲ antonvs 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> potentially fire-making (battery firmware) computers on wheels

Is Tesla any different?

	▲	teravor 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		`> Is Tesla any different?` if you are adversary of the US and the possibility of a hot conflict with it exists, it is not.

▲ wat10000 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

What makes BYD different from, say, Volvo, which sells EVs freely in the US?

▲ teravor 10 hours ago | parent [-]

    Headquarters Gothenburg, Sweden

▲ wat10000 9 hours ago | parent [-]

    Parent Geely Holding (78.7%)

▲ teravor 9 hours ago | parent [-]

and if you see the parent starting to replace Volvo engineers with Chinese nationals you will witness sudden change of heart by US officials; until then it really is just a financial fiction

▲ wat10000 9 hours ago | parent [-]

How exactly does the fact that this goes through a subsidiary in Sweden change the things you mentioned?

▲ cwel 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Apparently, whether or not the engineers are Chinese is the deciding factor. as long as Nicklas Backstrom is designing the EV, its all good. Or in other words, Chinese scary!

▲ teravor 5 hours ago | parent [-]

    > Chinese scary!

Chinese nationals should be assumed to act on behalf of China, it really isn't difficult to understand even for pathologically empathetic people.

▲ inigyou an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Swedish nationals should be assumed to act on behalf of Sweden.

▲ cwel 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Chinese nationals should be assumed to act on behalf of China

I acknowledged this, you quoted it.

> it really isn't difficult to understand...

Where does 'it' end? Is the subsidiary not operating at the behest of their parent? I need to know when it's safe to no longer be scared.

▲ teravor 4 hours ago | parent [-]

    > Where does 'it' end? Is the subsidiary not operating at the behest of their parent?

corporations are financial fictions. the risk I am discussing is literally the mass destruction and murder of civilians during a time of war. individuals carrying it out will be subject to sanctions (including elimination), only those who are protected by their government will carry out such instructions.

and therefore national security focuses on firms which have engineers that are protected thus.

	▲	cwel 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Oh, so the point is that cars are scary. true, you have unlocked +1t in funding for the DoD.

▲ wat10000 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That's fine, but what stops those Chinese nationals at Geely from messing with their cars now?

	▲	teravor 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		do you have evidence that if they wanted to do that they would not be giving orders to European or American engineers? as I said, financial fictions don't matter in matters such as these. if you have evidence that they have Chinese nationals working as engineers without oversight, you should submit it to the government.