That's a fallacious argument. It's like saying using a laptop made in 2026 is the exact same as using a laptop made in 2010 for privacy standards. News flash, it ain't.
The killswitches in question wouldn't apply to all new vehicles, or well, they would just be EVs, because they're planning to ban regular vehicles.
Please restate concisely, then.
Appreciate the perspective
Not all GPT users are American/residing in America
Even foss is under attack. Linux (amongst other OS) are being forced to comply with integrating OS-level age verification checks, which means invading privacy and contributing to mass surveillance.
People have been arrested for developing end-to-end encryption too.
Alright, it's good to hear some data about their population distribution.
Them being electric/having digital components lets companies monitor your vehicles the same way they do monitor your online presence.
You can look up the killswitch thing, it's planned in Europe iirc. It's being sold as being introduced so as to "reduce drunk driving", but obviously once that's in place it can be used to manufacture car accidents and the sort.
Any time someone says these "technological advancements" are anything but innocuous, they get rammed as "fear-mongering".
It says this is in cities only. That seems to neglect rural areas, no?
Why exactly? What reasons?
Gonna get blasted for this, given the overall sentiment here in the comments towards EVs, but EVs are going to be used to monitor people everywhere they go and have killswitches, and other shit I'd not wanna deal with.
You can say that individual police members aren't more likely than mass shooters to kill people, sure.
However, it is still true that the police is that big and they still killed much more people.
Goodbye!