techno-ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

oh no said:

---

Not surprised at China's dominance in this space.

I visited Beijing in 2007, when they were preparing to host the 2008 summer Olympic games. The smog around that city was disgusting and unhealthy. Never a clear day. Always hazy and smokey. They had recently instituted a new rule that cars with even and odd number-ending license plates could only drive on the roads on certain days to alleviate traffic and help with pollution.

Since then, China has taken over things like Lithium and Cobalt mining operations around the world in Asia, S. America, and Africa and their cheap EVs from companies like BYD - made like everything else in China with hacked and stolen IP - are taking over around the globe everywhere but here.

Last time I went to Beijing, it was clear and sunny. Amazing difference in little over a decade.


also not surprised the tax credits and electrification mandates like those in California, as well as fraudulent and wasteful government grants were driving a lot of the growth here. Electrification of a lot of fleets and everyday driver use cases will happen on its own eventually with free market capitalism. It was pushed too soon with government intervention before charging infrastructure and battery capacity technology made the use cases sell themselves to most consumers and companies and the market is rejecting it and slowing the growth for now.

---

Chi-coms don't care about pollution. They want to control the drivers. Did you post something unkind about Dear Leader? Your EV won't start until you attend re-education camp.

---

First, let's see proof of your claim. Second, if this is there push, they can do that with any powertrain via existing connections and/or mandating all cars have a connection allowing them to cut off a car.

---

You doubt there's a social credit system in China? I'm not going to do your homework I don't really care if you don't believe me. Google it yourself.

My claim they could use it to disable an EV is logical. Tesla is usually the most recalled car, top of the lists. But their recalls are mostly over the air updates. It's easy to see the possibility for a remote kill switch.

They call me … techno-ag.

---

Once again you deflect when you can't prove your point. See my post above, you don't need internet to drive an EV. You do to get an update but you know those recall/updates aren't really issues that would keep people from driving the car if they are done. (Ok, you would stop driving if the font size is too small for the government regulators)

As for credit scores, they absolutely existing in China. If they want to stop someone from traveling, they have numerous ways to stop someone for doing it given the extensive surveillance they have of their people. EVs are a straw dog people like you throw out to get an emotional response.

There are valid reasons to oppose EVs but the remote bricking of them isn't one of them.

---

Alas, there we must disagree. Citizen control via EVs is easier than with ICE. Remote bricking is indeed possible as are other software limitations such as speed and range controls and perhaps other things we haven't thought of yet.

Look I get it you're an EVangelist. But it's ok to discuss how these technologies can be used against us. ALL technologies are double-edged, even the ones you are passionately in love with.

---

Again, a governement can brick essentially all new cars with your theory because they are all connected to the internet. EV mandates/new cars aren't creating this capability, it is all of the technology that has been added to cars to allow for navigation, remote start and unlocking, emergency calling in case of accidents, etc.

Please enlighten us as to why they can shutdown EVs but not ICE vehicles that are also connected to the internet. Essentially all cars built in the last decade use computers and now they are almost all connected to the internet. Shutdown the computer and all cars stop running.

ETA. From Nissan, there is ability to kill ignition remotely. Note, it has nothing to do with powertrain type. GM has similar ability with other onStar and did it as early as 2007. Long before EVs were on the scene.
https://www.riverheadnissan.com/2025/03/04/can-police-remotely-turn-off-a-nissan/#:~:text=Some%20car%20brands%20have%20worked%20with%20police,but%20not%20all%20work%20the%20same%20way.

Kansas Kid said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

oh no said:

---

Not surprised at China's dominance in this space.

I visited Beijing in 2007, when they were preparing to host the 2008 summer Olympic games. The smog around that city was disgusting and unhealthy. Never a clear day. Always hazy and smokey. They had recently instituted a new rule that cars with even and odd number-ending license plates could only drive on the roads on certain days to alleviate traffic and help with pollution.

Since then, China has taken over things like Lithium and Cobalt mining operations around the world in Asia, S. America, and Africa and their cheap EVs from companies like BYD - made like everything else in China with hacked and stolen IP - are taking over around the globe everywhere but here.

Last time I went to Beijing, it was clear and sunny. Amazing difference in little over a decade.


also not surprised the tax credits and electrification mandates like those in California, as well as fraudulent and wasteful government grants were driving a lot of the growth here. Electrification of a lot of fleets and everyday driver use cases will happen on its own eventually with free market capitalism. It was pushed too soon with government intervention before charging infrastructure and battery capacity technology made the use cases sell themselves to most consumers and companies and the market is rejecting it and slowing the growth for now.

---

Chi-coms don't care about pollution. They want to control the drivers. Did you post something unkind about Dear Leader? Your EV won't start until you attend re-education camp.

---

First, let's see proof of your claim. Second, if this is there push, they can do that with any powertrain via existing connections and/or mandating all cars have a connection allowing them to cut off a car.

---

You doubt there's a social credit system in China? I'm not going to do your homework I don't really care if you don't believe me. Google it yourself.

My claim they could use it to disable an EV is logical. Tesla is usually the most recalled car, top of the lists. But their recalls are mostly over the air updates. It's easy to see the possibility for a remote kill switch.

They call me … techno-ag.

---

Once again you deflect when you can't prove your point. See my post above, you don't need internet to drive an EV. You do to get an update but you know those recall/updates aren't really issues that would keep people from driving the car if they are done. (Ok, you would stop driving if the font size is too small for the government regulators)

As for credit scores, they absolutely existing in China. If they want to stop someone from traveling, they have numerous ways to stop someone for doing it given the extensive surveillance they have of their people. EVs are a straw dog people like you throw out to get an emotional response.

There are valid reasons to oppose EVs but the remote bricking of them isn't one of them.

---

Alas, there we must disagree. Citizen control via EVs is easier than with ICE. Remote bricking is indeed possible as are other software limitations such as speed and range controls and perhaps other things we haven't thought of yet.

Look I get it you're an EVangelist. But it's ok to discuss how these technologies can be used against us. ALL technologies are double-edged, even the ones you are passionately in love with.

---

Again, a governement can brick essentially all new cars with your theory because they are all connected to the internet. EV mandates/new cars aren't creating this capability, it is all of the technology that has been added to cars to allow for navigation, remote start and unlocking, emergency calling in case of accidents, etc.

Please enlighten us as to why they can shutdown EVs but not ICE vehicles that are also connected to the internet. Essentially all cars built in the last decade use computers and now they are almost all connected to the internet. Shutdown the computer and all cars stop running.

ETA. From Nissan, there is ability to kill ignition remotely. Note, it has nothing to do with powertrain type. GM has similar ability with other onStar and did it as early as 2007. Long before EVs were on the scene.
https://www.riverheadnissan.com/2025/03/04/can-police-remotely-turn-off-a-nissan/#:~:text=Some%20car%20brands%20have%20worked%20with%20police,but%20not%20all%20work%20the%20same%20way.

---

Alas, I never said that. It looks to me like you're looking for a "gotcha." But no, I would agree modern ICE vehicles are subject to disabling too.

But EVs with their advanced technology and recharging requirements are far more susceptible to government monitoring and control, which is why China loves them.

That is where I and the real world evidence disagree with you. There is no difference based on power trains and you have provided absolutely no evidence to the contrary.

Do you think there aren't license plate readers at gas stations to track who fills when and where or on many roads to track all cars including EVs and ICE? With any internet connection, it is easy to track someone and/or a vehicle. Go see how governments use cell phone pings to track people.

"Chi-coms don't care about pollution. They want to control the drivers. Did you post something unkind about Dear Leader? Your EV won't start until you attend re-education camp." Sure sounded like you think only EVs can be locked out by the government.

Quote:

---

Go see how governments use cell phone pings to track people.

---

And geofencing certain locations which we were assured by Bill Barr was not possible and it was just taxis and Uber drivers going to the same ballot drop box locations dozens of times, even in the middle of the night.

Kansas Kid said:

---

That is where I and the real world evidence disagree with you. There is no difference based on power trains and you have provided absolutely no evidence to the contrary.

Do you think there aren't license plate readers at gas stations to track who fills when and where or on many roads to track all cars including EVs and ICE? With any internet connection, it is easy to track someone and/or a vehicle. Go see how governments use cell phone pings to track people.

"Chi-coms don't care about pollution. They want to control the drivers. Did you post something unkind about Dear Leader? Your EV won't start until you attend re-education camp." Sure sounded like you think only EVs can be locked out by the government.

---

You're making separate points here. It's not that a powertrain matters so much that everything in an EV is electronic. It's not really a car so much as a robotic monitoring device. All those monitoring technologies you mentioned are already built into Teslas, or the ability to accomplish the same thing is. Old school ICE vehicles with no or low tech can't be bricked as easily. Really old ones are theorized to be able to survive a large scale EMP attack, but I digress.

Again I think y'all are just looking for a gotcha. There is little doubt why governments that want to control their populations foist EVs on them.

Quote:

---

Do you think a government can't control gasoline and diesel distribution? Do you have your own well and refinery?

---

They can and do. Petroleum is just a lot more portable and energy dense than battery storage. If it seems appropriate to me, I can fill enough Jerry cans of gas or diesel to power my vehicle far enough to go a meaningful distance or to run a generator for a few days to keep the refrigerator, lights, and AC running after a hurricane takes out the power grid. Petroleum is alao a lot more useful in cold climates than battery stored electricity.

Quote:

---

But EVs with their advanced technology and recharging requirements are far more susceptible to government monitoring and control, which is why China loves them.

---

This is purely opinion

GeorgiAg said:

---

cecil77 said:

---

You mentioned it in passing, but route options are restricted for you. They're not for me. One long trips (2 -3 per year, long meaning 1000+ miles, more 500+) we decide where we go, I don't want my car deciding.

As to the advantage on local trips, refueling time is negligible as in a few minutes a couple times per month. In aggregate you spend about the same time plugging/unplugging.

Also, for anyone who can afford a Tesla, ICE fuel isn't a budget item so the savings for an EV is functionally meaningless.

As long as it's a free market choice, it's all just a two beer discussion.

---

Yeah a 1000 mile trip in a Tesla is not recommended. And I have to stay on the interstate to get Superchargers. There is another app that lists all the chargers, but those other EV chargers are not as fast as the Tesla Superchargers. Definitely wouldn't want to rely on that.

I drove down to the family house on the very rural Georgia coast from Atlanta this fall. Stopped once about halfway for a charge - about 15 minutes. When I made the right turn heading south down the coast on I-95 it started getting antsy because I was low on charge and there were no superchargers "in range" (it did not know I had a 240 plug at the destination vacation house my sister installed for her camper.)

Minor annoyance of the car freaking out, but yes Tesla is not the best option for long trips. In the summer I take my Nissan Titan Diesel because I tow jet skis and we have a large boat in a garage there that I may have to put in. I didn't buy the Tesla for long trips, but I took it on that trip because i wanted to see how it operates on a long trip like that. And it was fall, so no boats/skis or truck needed.

As far as full service driving, it can be a little unnerving when traffic is heavy. I can't really relax having a computer drive in heavy traffic going 80 mph. But when I got past Macon, Georgia, I-16 heading to Savannah is not crowded and the full service driving is awesome. I have a phone mount that I put on my dash just under the steering wheel, so I can watch sports or a movie while the car drives. (There is an internal camera that watches your eyes, so this phone mount tricks it to think you are looking at the road. You can shift your eyes up really quickly if you need to, but this stretch of road is straight with no traffic.)

It's a commuter car.

---

So, as to that FSD part…

You're saying that the software that is in charge of the driving can easily be fooled by a simple device?


Hmmm

Quote:

---

It's not that a powertrain matters so much that everything in an EV is electronic.

---

Everything in a modern ice vehicle is just as dependent on electronics too.

The EMP thing is also silly. Unless you want to drive something made in the 60's or before youre out of luck.

This scene is from the 1983 movie The Day After. Go to the 2:00 minute market to see how your car would fare from 40 years ago.

Ag with kids said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

cecil77 said:

---

You mentioned it in passing, but route options are restricted for you. They're not for me. One long trips (2 -3 per year, long meaning 1000+ miles, more 500+) we decide where we go, I don't want my car deciding.

As to the advantage on local trips, refueling time is negligible as in a few minutes a couple times per month. In aggregate you spend about the same time plugging/unplugging.

Also, for anyone who can afford a Tesla, ICE fuel isn't a budget item so the savings for an EV is functionally meaningless.

As long as it's a free market choice, it's all just a two beer discussion.

---

Yeah a 1000 mile trip in a Tesla is not recommended. And I have to stay on the interstate to get Superchargers. There is another app that lists all the chargers, but those other EV chargers are not as fast as the Tesla Superchargers. Definitely wouldn't want to rely on that.

I drove down to the family house on the very rural Georgia coast from Atlanta this fall. Stopped once about halfway for a charge - about 15 minutes. When I made the right turn heading south down the coast on I-95 it started getting antsy because I was low on charge and there were no superchargers "in range" (it did not know I had a 240 plug at the destination vacation house my sister installed for her camper.)

Minor annoyance of the car freaking out, but yes Tesla is not the best option for long trips. In the summer I take my Nissan Titan Diesel because I tow jet skis and we have a large boat in a garage there that I may have to put in. I didn't buy the Tesla for long trips, but I took it on that trip because i wanted to see how it operates on a long trip like that. And it was fall, so no boats/skis or truck needed.

As far as full service driving, it can be a little unnerving when traffic is heavy. I can't really relax having a computer drive in heavy traffic going 80 mph. But when I got past Macon, Georgia, I-16 heading to Savannah is not crowded and the full service driving is awesome. I have a phone mount that I put on my dash just under the steering wheel, so I can watch sports or a movie while the car drives. (There is an internal camera that watches your eyes, so this phone mount tricks it to think you are looking at the road. You can shift your eyes up really quickly if you need to, but this stretch of road is straight with no traffic.)

It's a commuter car.

---

So, as to that FSD part…

You're saying that the software that is in charge of the driving can easily be fooled by a simple device?


Hmmm

---

Was thinking the same thing. Would love to read and do TexAgs while the car drives itself. (I know some of you do that already without FSD. Shame, shame!)

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Both of those were stupid and wrong (ESPECIALLY the C4C). The C4C was basically a masterclass example of Bastiat's Broken Window Fallacy...

But, those are significantly different that having subsidies to encourage purchasing of their vehicles.

---

Not really, just semantics.

---

The bailouts were dumb. But, arguing whether or not they should have been done is OOS for this thread.

However, they weren't done to help encourage purchasing vehicles like the subsidies for EVs are..

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

It's not that a powertrain matters so much that everything in an EV is electronic.

---

Everything in a modern ice vehicle is just as dependent on electronics too.

The EMP thing is also silly. Unless you want to drive something made in the 60's or before youre out of luck.

This scene is from the 1983 movie The Day After. Go to the 2:00 minute market to see how your car would fare from 40 years ago.

---

Cars and airplanes can withstand lightning strikes while driving and flying. I doubt an EMP would affect them.

Maybe if your vehicles is a supercar made from a non-conductive carbon fiber monocoque it would be susceptible to an EMP, but in most cars the metal bodies will act as a faraday cage.

bmks270 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

It's not that a powertrain matters so much that everything in an EV is electronic.

---

Everything in a modern ice vehicle is just as dependent on electronics too.

The EMP thing is also silly. Unless you want to drive something made in the 60's or before youre out of luck.

This scene is from the 1983 movie The Day After. Go to the 2:00 minute market to see how your car would fare from 40 years ago.

---

Cars and airplanes can withstand lightning strikes while driving and flying. I doubt an EMP would affect them.

---

Yep

It's a commonly held misbelief that cars, even the fanciest one from today, would be affected.

Jalopnik had a good article on this a while back....maybe a decade or more ago....showing that VERY few vehicles would actually be affected by an EMP.

Nuclear fireball? Sure. EMP? No.

Me personally, I am waiting on fuel cell powered cars. So, damn it, auto makers get your act together, I am 74 years old hurry your asses up, I've not that many years to see my vision.
https://www.techbuzzer.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Hydrogen-Fuel-Cell-Cars-jpg.webp

Ag with kids said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

sam callahan said:

---

All you EV evangelicals have convinced me.

And since it's such a great option - let's let the free market handle it.

Deal?

---

Sure. Lift tariffs on lithium batteries and $25,000 300 mile range EVs from China. Yall think that the greatest force in the auto market is in support of EVs. It's the opposite.

---

Wait...

He said "let the FREE MARKET handle it" and you brought CHINA into the discussion???

---

Tariffs are not free market. China manipulating their market and pursuing a technology that can't survive in a free market by endlessly subsidizing it is a recipe for failure on their part. Accept their gift if it's doomed to failure. Contrarily prices are falling in China and abroad (lithium batteries down 13% in China last year, 8% in Europe, 4% in U.S. due to non-free market tariffs).

It is not a "let's bring China vehicles here" statement. It's a critique of the claim that the market is in anyway free and the non-sense claim that but for EV tax credits or emissions standards it would be. People that cry free market are not advocates for the free market, they claim they are because it sounds better than "don't regulate things I like, regulate other things."

Ulysses90 said:

---

Quote:

---

Do you think a government can't control gasoline and diesel distribution? Do you have your own well and refinery?

---

They can and do. Petroleum is just a lot more portable and energy dense than battery storage. If it seems appropriate to me, I can fill enough Jerry cans of gas or diesel to power my vehicle far enough to go a meaningful distance or to run a generator for a few days to keep the refrigerator, lights, and AC running after a hurricane takes out the power grid. Petroleum is alao a lot more useful in cold climates than battery stored electricity.

---

And with solar and battery storage one could actually be fine off grid. You're not getting more gas if a government decides it doesn't want you to have it. The entire argument of ICE = freedom and EV = control is silly.

hph6203 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

sam callahan said:

---

All you EV evangelicals have convinced me.

And since it's such a great option - let's let the free market handle it.

Deal?

---

Sure. Lift tariffs on lithium batteries and $25,000 300 mile range EVs from China. Yall think that the greatest force in the auto market is in support of EVs. It's the opposite.

---

Wait...

He said "let the FREE MARKET handle it" and you brought CHINA into the discussion???

---

Tariffs are not free market. China manipulating their market and pursuing a technology that can't survive in a free market by endlessly subsidizing it is a recipe for failure on their part. Accept their gift if it's doomed to failure. Contrarily prices are falling in China and abroad (lithium batteries down 13% in China last year, 8% in Europe, 4% in U.S. due to non-free market tariffs).

It is not a "let's bring China vehicles here" statement. It's a critique of the claim that the market is in anyway free and the non-sense claim that but for EV tax credits or emissions standards it would be. People that cry free market are not advocates for the free market, they claim they are because it sounds better than "don't regulate things I like, regulate other things."

---

I didn't say tariffs were free market.

But, if you're agreeing that we need to let the "Free market" handle this (which was the premise of the post you responded to), then CHINA cannot be involved in any way at all. They are the antithesis of free market.

It's hard to compete on price when one country has to pay for their labor force and the other country has slaves.

THAT is not "free market" in any way, shape or form.

He's talking about removing government interference in the market, like subsidies, and you're talking about having that same industry (post US govt interference) compete with China, who is nothing BUT government interference in the market.

How about this - WE do true free market with no government interference AND China does no government interference, too. THEN we let them into the US auto market. (Yes I know they will cheat horribly, though, so this scenario is actually fictional).

And your last sentence is horse***** All of us on here are calling for less regulation EVERYWHERE...

1. "I didn't say tariffs were free market."

2. "We should let the free market decide."

3. "We can't let China participate in that market."

See: 1.

I am not an advocate for the free market. I don't pretend to be. I don't agree with the subsidies for EVs, I think some aspects of the tariffs are good policy. I don't say let the free market decide like a mantra, because it makes what I say sound more rational or benevolent. That is what people that say "let the free market decide" are doing. Living in a fiction where any market is actually free. The governments of the world are involved in every market.

The free market only exists in textbooks.

Chinas low cost batteries and solar panels are not primarily a function of ongoing subsidization, it's a result of a foresight on their part that they would be a more viable future for their country and competitive globally and injecting tons of money into those industries to share the upfront capital burden and increase production. If all government interference in those industries stopped in China (to the degree they can), their cars would still be cheaper than the domestic versions and still cost competitive with ICE vehicles.

Hilarious

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

But EVs with their advanced technology and recharging requirements are far more susceptible to government monitoring and control, which is why China loves them.

---

This is purely opinion

---

Yup. An opinion based in fact.

This is from 2018. I doubt it's gotten much better since then:

https://www.thedrive.com/news/25203/automakers-are-helping-chinas-government-track-electric-car-owners-report-says

Quote:

---

More than 200 auto manufacturers are beaming information to the Shanghai Electric Vehicle Public Data Collecting, Monitoring and Research Center in real time, including BMW, Daimler, Ford, General Motors, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Tesla, Volkswagen, and more. This data includes statistics for upwards of 222,000 vehicles charted on live maps.

In order to remain compliant with Chinese regulatory requirements, manufacturers must provide, at minimum, 61 different data points on every connected electric vehicle it sells. This includes the car's location, Vehicle Identification Number, statistics about the motor functionality, and even the battery's current charge. All of this information is at the government's fingertips and searchable at-will. This data flows from the car to the manufacturer where it is parsed to be compliant and then forwarded to Shanghai for review.

---

And nothing in your article makes it solely EV.

Modern ICE vehicles are just as dependent and susceptible to remote electronic monitoring and control as EV's.

Teslag said:

---

And nothing in your article makes a distinction as to whether it's affected by powertrain.

Modern ICE vehicles are just as dependent and susceptible to remote electronic monitoring and control as EV's.

---

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

And nothing in your article makes a distinction as to whether it's affected by powertrain.

Modern ICE vehicles are just as dependent and susceptible to remote electronic monitoring and control as EV's.

---

---

And the typical Techno gif give up when he can't defend his opinions

Teslag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

And nothing in your article makes a distinction as to whether it's affected by powertrain.

Modern ICE vehicles are just as dependent and susceptible to remote electronic monitoring and control as EV's.

---

---

And the typical Techno gif give up when he can't defend his opinions

---

Dude you're not even disputing what I said. It's a perfect gif. If you don't think China is monitoring their EVs I can't help you. This is one of the reasons people don't like to engage in discussions with you on here. When it comes to EVs something just clicks inside you I guess.

No one is disputing China is monitoring EV's. We are trying to get it through your head that it doesn't matter because they (and anyone else) could just as easily monitor and control modern ICE vehicles as well.

Basically it's a completely irrelevant argument but you for some reason you can't grasp that. At all. With any ability whatsoever.

Quote:

---

EVs with their advanced technology and recharging requirements are far more susceptible to government monitoring and control,

---

To be clear, this is your opinion. And it's not supported by any article you posted.

Teslag said:

---

No one is disputing China is monitoring EV's. We are trying to get it through your head that it doesn't matter because they (and anyone else) could just as easily monitor and control modern ICE vehicles as well.

Basically it's a completely irrelevant argument but you for some reason you can't grasp that. At all. With any ability whatsoever.

---

I will try again. Read the part quoted above. The Chi-coms specifically monitor EVs. They have a bureau for it called the Shanghai Electric Vehicle Public Data Collecting, Monitoring and Research Center. No one is disputing that ICE vehicles can't also be monitored. I know why you keep hammering away on that but that's the goal posts moving. ICE vehicles don't get the same level of OTA updates. Nowhere near as much. EVs are far more capable, more connected, have more cameras, etc. etc. etc.

My point stands. China loves EVs for a reason.

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

EVs with their advanced technology and recharging requirements are far more susceptible to government monitoring and control,

---

To be clear, this is your opinion. And it's not supported by any article you posted.

---

And that is YOUR opinion.

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

EVs with their advanced technology and recharging requirements are far more susceptible to government monitoring and control,

---

To be clear, this is your opinion. And it's not supported by any article you posted.

---

And that is YOUR opinion.

---

It's not our obligation to prove your baseless opinions true. It's yours.

Simply making up things and posting them as fact doesn't help the discussion.

Teslag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

EVs with their advanced technology and recharging requirements are far more susceptible to government monitoring and control,

---

To be clear, this is your opinion. And it's not supported by any article you posted.

---

And that is YOUR opinion.

---

It's not our obligation to prove your baseless opinions true. It's yours.

Simply making up things and posting them as fact doesn't help the discussion.

---

Dude, they have a bureau to monitor EVs.

I give up.

Quote:

---

EVs are far more capable, more connected, have more cameras, etc. etc. etc.

---

My GMC truck is just as connected as my Tesla. Both get OTA updates. Both are unlockable from my phone. Both can be started and stopped from my phone. Both have cameras. The GMC even has radar. And it's arguable the Onstar on my GMC is even more controlled and intrusive than my Tesla.

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

EVs with their advanced technology and recharging requirements are far more susceptible to government monitoring and control,

---

To be clear, this is your opinion. And it's not supported by any article you posted.

---

And that is YOUR opinion.

---

It's not our obligation to prove your baseless opinions true. It's yours.

Simply making up things and posting them as fact doesn't help the discussion.

---

Dude, they have a bureau to monitor EVs.

I give up.

---

Again. No one cares about your thoughts on China. It's your claim that EV's are easier to control than modern ICE vehicles.

I admire your patience. It took like two pages for him to understand there's a difference between a drop in sales and slowed growth.

GAC06 said:

---

I admire your patience. It took like two pages for him to understand there's a difference between a drop in sales and slowed growth.

---

Where did I say that?

On the bigger thread of terrible EV takes