yup that was my first link

but of course this administration is never going allow China-anything like low cost electric cars even if it means saving people a fortune in gas

so hopefully in 2029 it can be looked at again

or maybe Dems will also get the Senate too and can be petitioned if they run out of corruption investigations before 2029

it is critical to explain to everyone who isn't technical that GPS is "read only" and no data is being sent to China via BeiDou (just like it's not sent to Russia's Glonass) because that apparently is some kind of weird misunderstanding

on that same note if they somehow made Starlink into a lower resolution GPS backup I'd even trust that too despite personally being anti-Musk everything

▲

z2 36 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Whoops I don't know how I missed that in your links!

The weird part to me is that Glonass was not approved either, yet it's as openly as allowed as Galileo that went through a tedious FCC approval process that was invented later. Grandfathered or not, we're clearly not in a worse place using Russian tech for the last 15 years.

▲

bigfudge 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Read only or not, relying on Chinese or Russian gps data for increased accuracy even in civilian increases dependency no? That seems like a bad idea to me. I’ve thought for about 20 years that increasing our dependence on anti democratic regimes was a risk, no matter what the benefits for global development etc. It’s not isolationist to want to only rely on your friends and not enemies. (Which is why Europe needs to disentangle itself from the US as fast as possible).

	▲	z2 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		It decreases dependency on GPS and thus it decreases risk because if there's an attack on a GPS system by an adversary, it's likely that they will not be attacking their own system at the same time. I'd rather have my enemy's open source, perfectly functional clock in my back pocket than be without the time. Enjoying that the competing clock has a sub second display is optional.