The fallout in China is nothing to poke at as if it is ‘China’.
The USA once had as independent companies that failed or got gobbled up and then dismantled -
Some of the names are questionable as never having risen to critical mass, and filtering the surprisingly long list to recent decades shortens it but that is not the point.
Incentives are rife but regardless the consolidation is just capitalism at work.
Yes, the new vehicle industry of early last century would’ve been in a somewhat similar condition to now, with a lot of startups – and few survivors, in the end.
It’ll be interesting to see which ones survive the current era.
The other scary thought is that there are credible reports that Chinese EVs can be operated remotely, to stop them functioning or to collect data. This article discusses this potential:
This isn’t limited to the Chinese. Manufacturers such as Telsa also have similar ability.
The other scary thought is a vehicle is often the highest or second highest priced product bought by consumers. EV businesses going bankrupt and disappearing will mean manufacturer warranties also disappear . This also applies to ICE vehicles, if a EV manufacturer also makes ICE vehicles (especially since EVs and Chinese made vehicles aren’t leaders in reliability). Ongoing service and support would be problematic if those selling the vehicles in Australia also end up closing. There may be avenues to take the seller to task with Australian Consumer Guarantees under the Australian Consumer Law, but, this assumes that the seller is still operating when a manufacturer goes bankrupt. It is worth noting that some EV manufacturers are also the sellers in Australia, so if they disappear, it may be a nightmare for owners.
Possibly has already happened?
It appears it may be less sinister and self induced by design. If true, what a design! From the article, without comment.
The issue is reportedly linked to the automaker’s Vehicle Tracking System (VTS), which automatically shuts a vehicle down if it loses its satellite signal, sending the vehicle offline and disabling its fuel systems.
Well, I will comment. I can’t imagine a benign reason for these vehicles to need a built-in kill switch activated by not consistently receiving a particular satellite signal.
Edit: It seems it’s a security feature that’s designed to protect Porsche vehicles from theft by using satellite technology to monitor their location. The point being that it should be under the owner’s control. It shouldn’t suddenly disable the vehicle that’s being used by its owner. This incident sounds like a malfunction of the tracking system or perhaps the Driver Cards. However, the system might also be hackable …
It would be great if Choice could advocate for the government and car manufacturers to offer well provisioned options that aren’t reliant on internet connectivity. Ie not smart cars. The most they might need would be inbuilt GPS.
The same could be applied to TVs and household appliances etc. There is no need for them to have always on internet connectivity. Everything should be capable of operating offline.
I often wonder what would happen if both major telcos had an outage. Would everything stop working?
Yes it’s a BIG problem. Recently I solved this by:
Buying a car that is just old enough that the manufacturer can’t ‘stop’ it. (5 years old, low mileage). The car is almost new but it’s not controlled by its software, I can volunteer to hook up to a ‘rent’ scenario, but I ain’t going to! It has every electronic wizz-bang feature you could ever want, but I’m not going to let it OWN ME!
Less than half the price of a new one of the same model. Any initial problems will have been well sorted by the previous owner.
I think people who want to buy new, need another think.
That’s one option. Another would be to legislate a minimum 20 years of security updates from date of manufacture for connected cars. That would encourage manufacturers to consider other options or have a way to function without them once support has ended.
I guess if you want to use the self-driving functionality, there could be legitimate reasons for the vehicle to insist on knowing where it is at all times. (What happens in a tunnel though?)
I’d still like to see them with a compulsory option to turn off internet connectivity and operate off it.
I designed and wrote automation software for over 30 years. The idea that installations were connected back to base at all times was never considered, and when the technology did become available it was a luxury and used only to connect and accommodate the clients wishes to control new equipment, or make changes to the logic or the user interface. It was, and still should be, the client/owner’s prerogative to make changes.
Software writers these days include so called “features”, mostly unnecessary and often unwanted, because the communications technology enables it. Often driven by demands from bosses or marketing, this creates lazy programmers who release software before it has been extensively tested, because it can always be updated later.
Regulations should be in place to ensure cars, refrigerators, vacuum cleaners, etc. work at all times without an internet connection. This would have the added advantage of not needing so many “security updates”, and any other changes should only be made by authorised dealers.
Electric cars are the future, but I won’t be getting one until they work autonomously. I have recently had a solar/battery power system installed and the only way to control it is through an internet based app on my phone. I am currrently trying to change that, and will probably have to write my own software to control the system directly.
I have a Holden Astra and the Apple CarPlay no longer works with latest versions of Apple IOS on our iPhone. Due to Holden no longer paying Apple for CarPlay updates because Holden no longer sells cars. As told to me when I take our Astra to a Holden approved dealer for regular service. So subscriptions do matter to even “old”cars.
While I am in general agreement with the spirit of this, there are two additional considerations:
For the first bullet point, we could try to advocate that Australian Standards for cars mandate that an internet connection is not even possible.
The safety and theft arguments can be partially countered by observing that any device that is connected to the internet presents a risk of being hacked, which introduces new safety risks and may disable any anti-theft measures.
To me, the important point would be that the vehicle’s access to and accessibility from the internet are entirely visible to the owner and under their control.
For example, this should be very easy to access (eg, not buried several levels down in the menus) and the setting retained until changed manually (eg, not automatically reverting to the manufacturer’s preference after some period of time or whenever the vehicle’s turned back on).
It should also be possible to be selective about what’s enabled and disabled. For example, to allow the vehicle to call out in an emergency.
I think a point is getting missed while the internet aspects are being discussed.
A vehicle should continue to operate normally when the internet/online system goes missing. Features like remote locking/unlocking/etc, remote starting, and ‘find me I am stolen (or the kids are out for a joy ride where?!)’ would become inoperative but per the Porsches in Russia, if the explanation is The Explanation, they are bricked regardless if for an hour or forever.
I can not imagine someone wanting a vehicle that will brick itself if the mobile service internet goes missing for more than a brief time. Imagine parking it in a garage in a black spot and returning to ‘a brick’. That aspect suggests ‘The Explanation’ might not be the real explanation, at least in part.
Yes, I should have added that, too! 
One is tempted to say that “it goes without saying” that a vehicle should be a fully-functioning vehicle without being 'connected’ … except that Porsche has shown that it doesn’t.
The key question there is around transparency. Assuming that the driver has a good understanding of computer networking, is there even sufficient documentation for the driver to understand what functionality is being exposed, how that is done and what risks are being taken? That level of detail would be atypical but it is necessary for informed consent.
Sadly, we don’t have enough information: even to the extent that “satellite signal” is ambiguous. Does “satellite” refer to “GPS receive” or to “send to data satellite e.g. Starlink” or to “receive from data satellite e.g. Starlink”? Or, in true non-technical journo style, does it actually mean “mobile signal”?
Regardless though it is a good illustration of how an expensive asset can become a brick through no fault of the owner … unless the authorities step in to require that this does not and cannot happen.
Wild speculation on possible Explanations follows.
Note: GPS is a specific positioning satellite network, operated by the US. There are other equivalent satellite networks. GPS tends to be used as a generic term to refer to any or all of them. However if GPS is relevant here, we would need to know which specific positioning satellite network or networks the cars are attempting to receive from. (The correct generic term is GNSS or, where more limited in scope, RNSS.)
The positioning satellite networks are not necessarily compatible and not all receiving units necessarily support all networks.
For example, Russia has its own network, GLONASS, so as not to be dependent on those untrustworthy Americans (GPS) 
. Do cars sold to Russian buyers have to use GLONASS or have to be capable of using GLONASS?
OT but the US Department of War (previously Department of Defense) used to interrupt the GPS to test ability to reroute incoming ICBMs and other tourist passenger vehicles (/S). The effect was the GPS receiver would have ‘new and disimproved accuracy’ so an incoming would hit ‘not the intended target’.
As GLONASS, Galileo and BeiDou were deployed it was less important and I believe they stopped the practice since their adversaries no longer depended on it for targetting. In the early days aircraft using GPS always had backup VOR (etc) and followed the air routes just in case. Today point to point lat-lon GPS flight plans are a norm.
Decades ago I was flying along SE Texas and for about 20 seconds my IFR certified GPS put me in Northern Africa. It gets one’s attention very quickly if the autopilot is slaved to it.
Open source offers potential solutions. Legislation might also be necessary. If a manufacturer collapses or stops supporting a vehicle, it’s taken as abandoning all associated intellectual property rights, for example.
All that’s needed then is replacement software and a way to hack the vehicle.
And
