Carmakers Rush To Remove Chinese Code Under New US Rules - Slashdot

Carmakers Rush To Remove Chinese Code Under New US Rules - Slashdot
Close
binspam
dupe
notthebest
offtopic
slownewsday
stale
stupid
fresh
funny
insightful
interesting
maybe
offtopic
flamebait
troll
redundant
overrated
insightful
interesting
informative
funny
underrated
descriptive
typo
dupe
error
180758654
story
"How Chinese is your car?"
asks the
Wall Street Journal
. "Automakers are racing to work it out."
Modern cars are packed with internet-connected widgets, many of them containing Chinese technology. Now, the car industry is scrambling to root out that tech ahead of a looming deadline, a test case for America's ability to
decouple from Chinese supply chains
. New U.S. rules will soon ban Chinese software in vehicle systems that connect to the cloud, part of an effort to prevent cameras, microphones and GPS tracking in cars from being exploited by foreign adversaries.
The move is "one of the most consequential and complex auto regulations in decades," according to Hilary Cain, head of policy at trade group the Alliance for Automotive Innovation. "It requires a deep examination of supply chains and aggressive compliance timelines."
Carmakers will need to attest to the U.S. government that, as of March 17, core elements of their products don't contain code that was written in China or by a Chinese company. The rule also covers software for advanced autonomous driving and will be extended to connectivity hardware starting in 2029. Connected cars made by Chinese or China-controlled companies are also banned, wherever their software comes from...
The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security, which
introduced the connected-vehicle rule
, is also allowing the use of Chinese code that is transferred to a non-Chinese entity before March 17. That carve-out has sparked a rush of corporate restructuring, according to Matt Wyckhouse, chief executive of cybersecurity firm Finite State. Global suppliers are relocating China-based software teams, while Chinese companies are seeking new owners for operations in the West.
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader
schwit1
for sharing the article.
You may like to read:
Amazon Delivery Drone Crashes into Texas Apartment Building
Does a Gas-Guzzler Revival Risk Dead-End Futures for US Automakers?
Americans' Junk-Filled Garages Are Hurting EV Adoption, Study Says
Americans are Buying Twice as Many Hybrids as Fully Electric Vehicles. Is The Next Step Synthetic Fuels?
EV Sales Keep Growing In the US, Represent 20% of Global Car Sales and Half in China
China Is Mass-Producing Hypersonic Missiles For $99,000
Submission: Carmakers Rush to Remove Chinese Code Under New Federal Rules
National Football League Launches Challenge to Improve Facemasks and Reduce Concussions
This discussion has been archived.

No new comments can be posted.
Carmakers Rush To Remove Chinese Code Under New US Rules
More
Carmakers Rush To Remove Chinese Code Under New US Rules
Comments Filter:
All
Insightful
Informative
Interesting
Funny
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Canâ(TM)t the Chinese just buy all the info a
Score:
by
fortfive
( 1582005 )
writes:
on Sunday February 08, 2026 @11:07PM (
#65976862
Maybe this is less about security and more about who gets paid?
Share
Re:
Score:
, Funny)
by
ghinckley68
( 590599 )
writes:
no the software will be written by an america company who out sources it to the same people who they took it form.
Re:
Score:
by
arglebargle_xiv
( 2212710 )
writes:
Nah, they'll vibe code it using AI, and the bot will reassure everyone that what it's generated is ASIL-D or even ASIL-E (referencing ISO 262620), so everything will be fine.
Re:
Score:
by
cayenne8
( 626475 )
writes:
How about we make this much
SIMPLER
How about removing ALL hardware and software that new cars have in them to "phone home" period.
I don't want a car with WiFi....with built in cellular....I have that on my phone if I wish in a car, I don't need the car to check in with company/govt or whomever.
I don't need or want automatic updates, I don't want features added, turned off/on at any time. I don't want the company or govt to be able to readily disable my car at the touch of a button, nor open up ways for
Re:
Score:
by
gweihir
( 88907 )
writes:
Clearly. As this is totally unworkable, anybody needs to throw money at the orange rapist to get an exception.
Re: Canâ(TM)t the Chinese just buy all the in
Score:
, Insightful)
by
ArmoredDragon
( 3450605 )
writes:
I don't see any restriction from say Japanese, Korean or European vendors. Who, specifically, do you believe is getting paid?
Honestly I see exactly the concern with this: Always available cameras with an always eye level 360 degree view high resolution camera that likely also provides distance measurement. Have them ubiquitous everywhere, and if you're a spy agency, you've got a fantastic surveillance tool. Especially great for blackmail.
The Chinese government is already well known to establish an illegal p
Re: Canâ(TM)t the Chinese just buy all the i
Score:
by
dwater
( 72834 )
writes:
> The Chinese government is already well known to establish an illegal police presence in other countries.
No, they're not.
Re: Canâ(TM)t the Chinese just buy all the i
Score:
, Informative)
by
Entrope
( 68843 )
writes:
on Monday February 09, 2026 @06:52AM (
#65977258
Homepage
Yes, they are.
[wikipedia.org]
[cnn.com]
Parent
Share
Re: Canâ(TM)t the Chinese just buy all the i
Score:
by
memory_register
( 6248354 )
writes:
Just this past year, dozens of Chinese nationals were arrested in multiple countries for harassing and intimidating Chinese dissidents in those countries. It is believed that several people were kidnapped or disappeared as well.
Re:
Score:
by
ArchieBunker
( 132337 )
writes:
It's to keep the populace busy while they're robbed blind by the ruling class. That and Epstein.
Re:
Score:
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
America is well on its way to becoming the next Belarus.
Europeans should check how American are their cars
Score:
, Interesting)
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
on Sunday February 08, 2026 @11:13PM (
#65976874
Right? Make sure that there's no American code. Make sure everything is open source if used. After all it seems that all the cars that have stopped working so far have been American cars, that have been remotely disabled, etc.
Share
Re:
Score:
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
Right? Make sure that there's no American code. Make sure everything is open source if used. After all it seems that all the cars that have stopped working so far have been American cars, that have been remotely disabled, etc.
LOL. What would be the point? How many Americans cars do you think they buy now?
Re: Europeans should check how American are their
Score:
by
Mr. Dollar Ton
( 5495648 )
writes:
The trumpistani cars that sell in Europe are either cheap, EU made utilitarian models or individual imports of "muscle car" monstrocities for the occasional connoisseur of stupid waste.
Why would you buy junk that breaks often, guzzles gas and destroys the environment when you can actually have a much nicer European, Japanese or Korean car?
Re:
Score:
, Funny)
by
Edmundo
( 10503267 )
writes:
Americans have obviously decided not to pursue quality any more. The rest of us world citizens will be driving high spec BYD and Xiaomi vehicles while you sputter along in Trump Trabants.
Re:
Score:
by
Mr. Dollar Ton
( 5495648 )
writes:
Fine, but what have I got to do with it?
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
"World citizens"? Who issues your passports?
Re:
Score:
by
test321
( 8891681 )
writes:
The argument of the AC is code sharing. For example, the Stellantis group might reuse parts of their code between Jeep and Fiat. If a mole, a suitable EO from a stakeholder government (the USA or Italy in this example), or an external bad actor, get remote access to the cars of one brand through a rootkit or a vulnerability, they could also simultaneously gain access to other other brands.
Plenty Would Take that Trade-Off . . . .
Score:
, Interesting)
by
Kunedog
( 1033226 )
writes:
on Sunday February 08, 2026 @11:17PM (
#65976878
New U.S. rules will soon ban Chinese software in vehicle systems that connect to the cloud
"Cool, disconnect my car completely then."
. . . but of course, this decision will be made by the real owners of the car, not the guy who merely "bought" it.
Share
Re:
Score:
by
sinij
( 911942 )
writes:
I had to disassemble dash to get to a data module to remove cell modem. Even then, I had to do a lot of research to make sure I wouldn't lose too much functionality, because car manufacturers disable features out of spite. In my case if the car does not connect for 3 months they disable KEY FOB REMOTE START. Toyota are fucking cunts, no other way to say that.
Re:
Score:
by
thegarbz
( 1787294 )
writes:
It's not Toyota, it's everyone. Hell we just ran a story here a few weeks ago about Porches in Russia refusing to start due to communication issues. Many car vendors implemented remote key switches. Customers kept asking for them. Well not directly, but customers wanted a car that was more theft proof.
Connected cars are a plauge
Score:
, Insightful)
by
sinij
( 911942 )
writes:
on Sunday February 08, 2026 @11:18PM (
#65976880
I can understand self-driving cars needing to be connected, but for all other cases it is simple greed and laziness. Greed is because they want to nickle and dime you with subscriptions and then sell your data on top of that. Laziness is because most automotive things can be made work without connection, but you can't release and patch later unless you can push that remotely.
Share
Re:
Score:
by
thegarbz
( 1787294 )
writes:
Yes greed and lazyness. Certainly no one every asked for connected features in a car. *Opens app hits the pre-heat cabin button because it's -5 out right now.* Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to get a coffee and stand in the window while I watch my neighbours scrape ice from their windshields in the dark.
Yeah it is lazyness, but it's mine. Some of us prefer to buy cars with lazy remote features like this. The kind that can tell me when it's full so I don't need to pay charger blocking fees, the kind which
Re:
Score:
by
sinij
( 911942 )
writes:
You don't understand the cost of this convenience. The cost of potential security compromise, because automotive suppliers don't get IT security. The cost of your data, collected from both your vehicle and smartphone used as an excuse to increase your insurance rates. The cost of increased fragility, where if everything goes down and you have to get out of the way of some disaster it isn't clear you could drive out. To me, these costs are too expensive. That is why when I recently replaced my primary vehicl
Re:
Score:
by
thegarbz
( 1787294 )
writes:
You conflate "understanding" with "caring". Yes there's a cost, but I frankly don't give a shit. We live in a world where one can reasonably be expected to be stranded in vehicles at multiple times. That's what auto associations are for. Yes I've been stranded before, and it was a minor annoyance at best. Whoop de fucking do.
Also no my data is not being collected and shared in any meaningful way by anyone who can meaningfully impact me. We have laws against that. Attempts by insurance companies to do what y
Re:
Score:
by
thegarbz
( 1787294 )
writes:
Another work day done. I tried your suggestion but it turns out my keyfob didn't reach from my desk to the parking lot on the other side of the campus. Got any other stupid ideas?
Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to get a coffee and stand in the window while I watch YOU scrape ice from your windshield in the dark because the internet/power is down.
If the internet is down I'm in literally no worse position than the position you people are promoting. I mean did you engage a single braincell when attempting to come up with a point? Don't drink and Slashdot.
Re:Connected cars are a plauge
Score:
, Informative)
by
AmiMoJo
( 196126 )
writes:
on Monday February 09, 2026 @05:24AM (
#65977178
Homepage
Journal
The original Nissan Leaf had connectivity for driving stats, charge monitoring, and remotely turning on the AC before you set off so that the car is defrosted and warm using AC power. It was free and was supposed to become a paid service, but they never got around to charging for it.
The driving stats were of limited use. The charge monitoring was useful. The remote AC/defrost is one of the best features of EVs.
What killed it in a lot of Leafs is that the originals had 2G modems, which are no longer supported by the networks. You can replace them with an open source module with a more modern modem and your own SIM.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
strikethree
( 811449 )
writes:
I can understand self-driving cars needing to be connected
I can't. I don't want to die or be left stranded because of a disruption in communications. Just no.
If they can't do this; might as well pack up.
Score:
by
fuzzyfuzzyfungus
( 1223518 )
writes:
I'm not desperately impressed by xenophobic analogs to the privacy policies we really need regardless of the nominal HQ of whoever is hoovering up the data; but this seems like a situation where, if the US techbros can't hack it, they might as well just call it a day and go home. We've definitely had years, at least a decade and probably plural decades, of US 'tech' being diverted to software faff vs. the sort of hardware and relatively low-level work that once put the 'silicon' in 'silicon valley' before i
The chinese aren't the problem
Score:
, Insightful)
by
cshark
( 673578 )
writes:
on Monday February 09, 2026 @01:53AM (
#65977020
Homepage
Our government is the problem.
They're well beyond what they're allowed to do at this point in terms of surveillance, and the law doesn't protect people like it should.
Cars shouldn't be building psychometric profiles on you and selling them to everyone and anyone who wants to know how often you've used your drink holder.
The adversaries to personal freedom here are local.
Share
Re:The chinese aren't the problem
Score:
, Interesting)
by
AmiMoJo
( 196126 )
writes:
on Monday February 09, 2026 @05:25AM (
#65977180
Homepage
Journal
You can expect the quality of these cars to drop rapidly as tested, debugged software is replaced by hastily lashed together vibe coded crap.
Maybe that's the point. Easier for the US government to hack it.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
, Troll)
by
sinij
( 911942 )
writes:
In US, you can vote someone in that would rampage through deep state and in doing so thwart their ability to effectively get into your life. The Pooh and Chinese Communist Party are there to stay regardless of what people of China think about it. That is the difference.
Re:
Score:
by
AmiMoJo
( 196126 )
writes:
I don't think Pooh and the CCP believe that. They folded over COVID lockdowns, and that's not the only example.
Re:
Score:
by
drinkypoo
( 153816 )
writes:
The US government is the biggest problem. Any adversary we're importing products from is also a problem.
If you're concerned about your government having info on you, you should be concerned that they would be able to buy it from another entity which got it from your foreign adversary, or even directly. Why not charge your adversary for
partial
information on their own citizens?
How much Chinese code in Linux?
Score:
, Interesting)
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
How much Chinese code in Linux and other car related OSS?
For example are Shawn Guo and Huacai Chen from China?
[linuxfoundation.org]
Re:
Score:
by
sikiriki
( 6723224 )
writes:
yep, they should stop using Linux in cars, mobile phones...
Sounds crazy, until...
Score:
by
misnohmer
( 1636461 )
writes:
It sounds crazy, until you dig a little deeper and realize the Chinese government has similar rules about their self-driving cars. China also has further rules about data collection (you know, data you can use to train AI), which I expect the US to duplicate (or try to one-up them) soon.
Should they reciprocate?
Score:
by
sikiriki
( 6723224 )
writes:
Tesla sells well in China, what if US software is banned?
Simple protectionism
Score:
by
zephvark
( 1812804 )
writes:
on Monday February 09, 2026 @08:00AM (
#65977310
American car makers are apparently scared sheepless that Chinese EVs would be a big hit. As usual, they employ the government to screw with the market instead of improving their vehicles. Your take on this should be to accept their evaluation that American cars aren't worth buying.
Share
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
Which is absolutely fair and correct if (as per the usual) China is subsidizing the cars in order to undercut the competition.
This will fail.
Score:
, Interesting)
by
Puls4r
( 724907 )
writes:
on Monday February 09, 2026 @11:39AM (
#65977658
Chinese companies that have been "locked out" of competition in specific areas using legal means. Their response has been to continue to do all the engineering in China, then hire a small American firm to do both the build and programming. But the 'programming' consists of grabbing code that the Chinese firm has uploaded to git-hub, and then debugging it online with the Chinese in zoom calls. And the Chinese still profit from it. Essentially, Chinese tele-presence. In the end, the product has the name of the small American firm on it, but it is a Chinese product, with Chinese code, Chinese design, and profit that goes back to the Chinese.
Share
Can't trust U.S. software for quality or security
Score:
by
techno_dan
( 591398 )
writes:
This goes both ways. Ford software in their vehicles is really bad. Quality is low, and security of information in a big unknown. Canada should implement the same rules for U.S. manufactured vehicles that have U.S. code to ensure privacy and security. Imagine the corrupt GOP forcing all U.S. built cars to shutdown?
Re:Corrected title
Score:
, Informative)
by
AuMatar
( 183847 )
writes:
on Sunday February 08, 2026 @10:59PM (
#65976854
This isn't about the ethnicity, it's about geopolitics and the different goals of our government and theirs. That said, I question the value of that when half our electronics are manufactured there and can have hardware level spying already there.
Parent
Share
Re:Corrected title
Score:
, Insightful)
by
ArchieBunker
( 132337 )
writes:
on Monday February 09, 2026 @12:23AM (
#65976954
Compared to the US government, I'm far less concerned about what China does with my data. The Chinese government can't send masked secret police to my home to abduct me.
Parent
Share
Re: Corrected title
Score:
by
HnT
( 306652 )
writes:
You DO know that the CCP literally has secret police all over the world and they actually do abduct people and bring them back to China or make them disappear or both?
In the literal sense of those words, not in the orange-man-TDS-screeching sense.
Re:
Score:
by
cascadingstylesheet
( 140919 )
writes:
The Chinese government can't send masked secret police to my home to abduct me.
Federal police can arrest you for violating federal law. Of course. (Calling an arrest an "abduction" is just lame.)
You do know that you can peacefully change federal law, right? Just elect senators and representatives who will do so to your liking. We could call it "democracy".
You would have to actually convince voters that they want the immigration floodgates to open wider though, and I think you know that you can't really do that.So you choose street violence instead.
Re:
Score:
by
ArchieBunker
( 132337 )
writes:
Federal police can arrest you for violating federal law. Of course. (Calling an arrest an "abduction" is just lame.)
My definition of armed masked men without badges snatching people off the street into unmarked vehicles is different from yours. Deportation requires a judge to sign off on a warrant. No warrants are ever produced.
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
That's because it doesn't require a warrant.
Re:
Score:
by
cmseagle
( 1195671 )
writes:
However, when these agents spot an illegal that maybe hasn't committed any further crimes, other than illegally crossing the border,, do you expect them to just let them go?
How do you "spot an illegal"? We're not talking about people apprehended sprinting away from the border.
Re:
Score:
by
smithmc
( 451373 )
writes:
Um... except that some of the people detained and abused by ICE are not here illegally. Some of them are US citizens. And some of them don't get to enjoy being thrown into vans and detained; they just get shot on the street.
AND YOU KNOW ALL OF THIS, DON'T YOU?
Re:
Score:
by
cayenne8
( 626475 )
writes:
Um... except that some of the people detained and abused by ICE are not here illegally. Some of them are US citizens. And some of them don't get to enjoy being thrown into vans and detained; they just get shot on the street. AND YOU KNOW ALL OF THIS, DON'T YOU?
Well, unfortunately with 12-20+ million illegals in the US, in sweeps you're going to get some false positives.
So, far the numbers seem to be low and once identified US citizens are quickly released.
Sucks, but due to the size of the problem, statis
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
And if Joe Biden had closed the border, or the "sanctuary" jurisdictions cooperated with Federal law enforcement, none of that would have happened. This is all fallout from horribly stupid policies that the rest of the nation voted to correct. That Minnesota thinks the outcomes of elections don't matter isn't my fault. Nor is the aftermath of their intransigence.
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
Well, they lost the election, which pretty much ended their concerns for democracy. The nation voted to do something, Minnesota said "screw you and your democracy".
Re: Corrected title
Score:
by
memory_register
( 6248354 )
writes:
Why, are you here illegally, having broken our laws and snuck over our border?
Re:
Score:
, Insightful)
by
ArchieBunker
( 132337 )
writes:
Were any of them convicted of 43 felonies? Because I know more important guy still walking free.
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
What a fun way not to answer a question! It's almost like you made a point!
Well, you got to feel like you did at least.
Re:
Score:
by
ArchieBunker
( 132337 )
writes:
34 felonies would preclude me from nearly all professional career choices. But hey you can still lead the country and the cult.
Re:Wanna bet?
Score:
, Informative)
by
dunkelfalke
( 91624 )
writes:
on Monday February 09, 2026 @02:14AM (
#65977034
[bbc.com]
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
, Insightful)
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
Not the same thing -
"The US immigration agency whose officers have been involved in a fatal shooting in Minneapolis has said it is sending agents to help support American security operations during the Winter Olympics, which start in Italy on 6 February."
Re:Wanna bet?
Score:
, Insightful)
by
thegarbz
( 1787294 )
writes:
on Monday February 09, 2026 @02:17AM (
#65977036
Sure if you narrowly define which department you mean then we can say the same thing to China. In the mean time I think Maduro will disagree about the USA operating police in other nations.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
Sure, if you move the goal posts then you can redefine your argument however you want - but if you insist...
[freedomhouse.org]
Re:
Score:
by
thegarbz
( 1787294 )
writes:
I'm only disagreeing with your arbitrary idea of where you set the goalposts in the first place. They weren't in the correct position for the ball game being played.
Re: Wanna bet?
Score:
by
simlox
( 6576120 )
writes:
If it was ICE, they wouldn't have tajen him TO the US.
Re:
Score:
by
thegarbz
( 1787294 )
writes:
No he was a drug dealer. ICE only deports normal law abiding immigrants. It's the drug dealers that get brought in front of the court, put through legal channels, convicted and then pardoned.
*yes being sarcastic here*
Re:
Score:
by
Maavin
( 598439 )
writes:
Oh look! The Anonymous Coward is defending the Homeland Gestapo, How curious!
Re:
Score:
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
Kind of -- but in the way opposite to what you meant. People get modded down for stating uncomfortable truths, and modded up for repeating politically correct fictions, because the truth hurts mods' feelings. That distortion is what makes the politics toxic, not the substantive positions.
Re: Wanna bet?
Score:
by
cusco
( 717999 )
writes:
It's a long tradition here, dating back to at least the introduction of modding.
Re:
Score:
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
ICE didn't murder people and didn't kidnap children from the streets when Obama was president
Re: Corrected title
Score:
by
sonamchauhan
( 587356 )
writes:
Then Trump needs to learn from Obama; "do it THAT way"
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
Obama didn't have to worry about States and cities deciding that they wouldn't cooperate with immigration enforcement. When he was in charge, they would just hand illegals over when they were arrested. Were that still the case, Border Patrol and ICE wouldn't have had to go into Minneapolis in such numbers. They would just pick the crooks up at the jail, and nobody would know they were there.
Re: Corrected title
Score:
by
sonamchauhan
( 587356 )
writes:
I can't speak to cause and effect, but there is a peculiar strain of cruelty about ICE under Trump. He would do well to address it, as it does a gross disservice to his agenda. People sense it and bridle at the dehumanisation
Re:
Score:
by
sonamchauhan
( 587356 )
writes:
Border Patrol agents were doing ICE work (they weren't exactly patrolling the border), so I understand the conflation.
This is not optics. These are power-drunk "Respect my authoritah!!" agents, reacting with extreme violence and executing protestors in essentially low-risk scenarios.
The US Capitol police (real police) didn't treat protestors that way.
The last border patrol agent murdered in the line of duty was in 2017. The last ICE agent murdered was in 2011. What are they so keyed up about? Where is the r
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
Wouldn't it have been nice then if the local police were doing their jobs in tandem with ICE, avoiding the issue to begin with? Neither ICE nor Border Patrol is setup to deal with mass protests. Keeping protesters from blocking the roads is a local cop job that Federal agents had to try and fill. And they aren't trained for it. They're trained to deal with violence, not unhappy civilians. The whole idea is that they are supposed to have complimentary local support so everyone is doing the jobs they are
Re: Corrected title
Score:
by
cusco
( 717999 )
writes:
Wrong. They've grabbed almost 200 US citizens already, most of whom had their ID with them (they just claimed that it "looked fake", some of them were deported to Mexico (including Native Americans who didn't even speak Spanish), and multiple people have had their Green Cards revoked and were deported to countries where they knew no one without money or valid papers.
TLDR; You have no idea what you're talking about.
Re:Corrected title
Score:
, Insightful)
by
ArchieBunker
( 132337 )
writes:
on Monday February 09, 2026 @09:25AM (
#65977392
And how many masked men did Obama deputize? How many American citizens did these masked men murder under Obama? Zero.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
drinkypoo
( 153816 )
writes:
And how many masked men did Obama deputize? How many American citizens did these masked men murder under Obama? Zero.
Right, Obama was only approving murders without due process in
other
countries.
Re: Corrected title
Score:
by
sonamchauhan
( 587356 )
writes:
Looks like it. Trump's probably surpassed him there too with the double-tap boat strikes
Re:
Score:
by
drinkypoo
( 153816 )
writes:
He surpassed him as far we know before that, but then he rescinded Obama's EO requiring notifying The People of drone strikes.
Re:Corrected title
Score:
, Insightful)
by
thegarbz
( 1787294 )
writes:
on Monday February 09, 2026 @10:13AM (
#65977484
You know Obama deported more people, then Trump...right?
No one is complaining about the number of deportations. They are complaining about the *method* of deportations.
To equate Obama's deportations with Trumps where multiple constitutional guarantees are violated and American citizens have been executed summarily in the street makes you a truly despicable piece of shit. I'm only sad that you're not being deported in lieu of the immigrants contributing to actually making American great rather than your efforts of simply tearing the country down with bullshit partisan politics.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
thegarbz
( 1787294 )
writes:
Methods that only became necessary when places declared themselves to be "sanctuaries" against Federal law.
Oh look more bullshit partisan politics. The overwhelming majority of cases where ICE have taken people have been determined to be in the country *legally* by a federal judge. You *DO* think federal law applies here right? You *DO* support the idea that we have federal judges that tell the government to release / no deport people in question right?
Also why do you care? If you support the methods which have violated 4 constitutional protections over and over again it's clear you don't give a shit about feder
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
Do you not recognize the fact that you are engaging in partisan politics?
Where's your evidence for the (clearly absurd) claim that "The overwhelming majority of cases where ICE have taken people have been determined to be in the country *legally* by a federal judge"?
Why shouldn't I care about immigration laws being flouted? Why shouldn't I care that tens of millions of people are here illegally? Why shouldn't I care that some States are concentrating them in a way that dilutes everyone else's votes wi
Re:Corrected title
Score:
, Insightful)
by
djinn6
( 1868030 )
writes:
on Monday February 09, 2026 @12:42AM (
#65976984
Sooner or later we'll have geopolitically aligned software. The Israeli pager attack showed how dangerous it is to not have a friendly superpower produce your electronics. The same problem exists in software, perhaps to an even greater degree.
In that world I expect open source to win, because that's the only way to create trustworthy software while avoiding doing a huge amount of duplicate work.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
unixisc
( 2429386 )
writes:
The Israeli pagers were very specifically targeted at a unique group of people - Hizbullah terrorists - who were out to kill them. Who in the world uses pagers these days, when one can have cellphones simulate the same effect? The reason Hizbullah used pagers was to operate under the radar, and uninterceptable by the Israelis. Instead, the latter managed to insert their operatives into that supply chain and rig them to make them explode when the Israelis sent the signals
Putting aside the question of wh
Re:
Score:
by
djinn6
( 1868030 )
writes:
If a tiny country like Israel can do it, so can anyone else. It would be grossly irresponsible to buy anything from a potential adversary or hostile-aligned nation, especially if you don't have the expertise to reverse engineer their product. And I'd argue for software, reverse engineering it to ascertain its safety is basically impossible.
As for the morality of the Middle East situation, I'm not going to judge. My government may no longer be sovereign and they have no problems ignoring the First Amendment
Re:
Score:
by
Hoi Polloi
( 522990 )
writes:
The US has been afraid of those "nefarious Asians" for over a hundred years now.
Re:
Score:
by
Dishevel
( 1105119 )
writes:
Well. You are not wrong. That said, this is a start.
China is a large and powerful adversary. Anyone that thinks that they want good things for the world are deluded.
Next, we need to remove China from all parts of our supply chain that have ANY importance to our country.
Re:
Score:
by
unixisc
( 2429386 )
writes:
Yeah, we need to move manufacturing to other countries that
don't
dictate to their companies how they can or can't build their products
Re:
Score:
, Insightful)
by
Luckyo
( 1726890 )
writes:
PRC has significantly tighter rules on cars being sold into their massive market that this.
You can't even do it. Until very recently, you had to partner with a local and give them access to your technology. Which meant local just put up a second factory with their copy of your tech next door.
Does that mean PRC can't compete or is there perhaps another reason?
Re: Corrected title
Score:
by
dwater
( 72834 )
writes:
You contradict yourself, but you don't even see it.
Re:
Score:
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
That's because you hallucinated a contradiction. Requiring companies to give to their IP to a local, and then refusing to rule against the local when they pirate that IP, is very much a higher trade barrier than this.
Re:
Score:
by
Luckyo
( 1726890 )
writes:
Totally. There are no Changan Fords in PRC, only Fords. Changan isn't real.
Same for all GAC Toyota. GAC is just there for lulz. It's totally not a company. You just hallucinated it.
P.S. PRC bots just openly lying about the most obvious shit is out of control.
Re: Corrected title
Score:
, Flamebait)
by
cusco
( 717999 )
writes:
Yep,
/. is keeping up it's long tradition of modding down unpopular truths.
Re: Corrected title
Score:
by
shm
( 235766 )
writes:
It would racist if the rules said "Chinese engineers," but it says "Chinese companies."
Nothing stops those companies from relocating to say Singapore.
Re:
Score:
by
unixisc
( 2429386 )
writes:
Also, the US has nothing against companies based in Taiwan or Singapore - both of which are majority Mandarin populations. Only problem w/ China is due to Beijing wanting to remote-control everything
Re:Corrected title
Score:
, Insightful)
by
Hoi Polloi
( 522990 )
writes:
on Monday February 09, 2026 @01:40AM (
#65977008
Journal
Replace it with homegrown spyware
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
Barsteward
( 969998 )
writes:
Yep, it's called Google, Facebook, twitter etc
Re:
Score:
by
snowshovelboy
( 242280 )
writes:
This is from the law for the tiktok ban. It uses a list of "foreign adversaries" that was set up under Obama.
Re: Corrected title
Score:
by
sonamchauhan
( 587356 )
writes:
New GEOPOLITICIST US rules
.. or is Taiwan, Japan, Korea, etc on the list too?
Re:
Score:
by
Canberra1
( 3475749 )
writes:
Looking an many insecure adsl modems and bios, they are coded and maintained in Taiwan, using American setup shims, and a good dose of open source code.
China deserves to be banned for not making things open source, or at least a copy in escrow. I remember one govt upset about Israeli security software, and the answer was 'sure you can look, but only inside the Israeli embassy. Back in my day, critical systems were never connected to the internet, and anything with an eeprom never made it to the secure pr
Re:
Score:
, Insightful)
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
"Someone once observed to me that my attitudes towards people I've never met were unfounded, and I've since spent my entire life orbiting the memory of this unjustified event"
It's sort of funny how often people with extremely niche perspectives consider them to be universal but suppressed. I'd tell you to stop telling on yourself but that ship sailed years ago.
Related Links
Top of the:
day
week
month
384
comments
Does a Gas-Guzzler Revival Risk Dead-End Futures for US Automakers?
377
comments
Americans' Junk-Filled Garages Are Hurting EV Adoption, Study Says
363
comments
Americans are Buying Twice as Many Hybrids as Fully Electric Vehicles. Is The Next Step Synthetic Fuels?
323
comments
EV Sales Keep Growing In the US, Represent 20% of Global Car Sales and Half in China
314
comments
China Is Mass-Producing Hypersonic Missiles For $99,000
next
National Football League Launches Challenge to Improve Facemasks and Reduce Concussions
61
comments
previous
Amazon Delivery Drone Crashes into Texas Apartment Building
61
comments
Slashdot Top Deals
Hackers are just a migratory lifeform with a tropism for computers.
Close
Working...