Tesla's self-driving murder case again, why only question Huawei's safety?
Recently, a Tesla car accident has once again sparked questions and discussions about the safety of electric vehicles. A Tesla Model 3 suddenly lost control while driving itself on a California highway and crashed into a roadside guardrail, killing one person in the car.
The accident is reminiscent of another fatal Tesla crash in Southern California late last year. At that time, a Tesla Model S was driving itself on the highway when it was suspected that it did not recognize a trailer crossing the lane in front of it in time, resulting in a fire and explosion after the impact, and the two people in the car were killed on the spot.
In the face of these distressing accidents, Tesla's explanation is that their self-driving system is only an assisted driving system, and cannot completely replace human driving, and the driver still needs to maintain attention at all times. However, this explanation obviously makes many car owners unhappy.
When Tesla advertises its own models, it always blows the "full self-driving" function into the sky, making people think that these cars have achieved true driverless. Now it seems that Tesla's exaggeration of self-driving technology has brought great misleading to consumers and buried major safety risks.
Another company that has been criticized for its security concerns is Huawei. In recent years, the U.S. government has been aggressively cracking down on Huawei, citing concerns that Huawei equipment poses security risks and could be used by the Chinese government to steal intelligence.
The U.S. accusations against Huawei's security are groundless, and the double standards of public opinion have raised questions
Unlike Tesla's case, the security issues of Huawei's devices are more based on suspicion and unfounded accusations, and there have been no large-scale actual security incidents like Tesla.
The U.S. government has been trying to play up Huawei as a "national security threat," but it has never produced conclusive evidence. Their main reason is nothing more than that Huawei, as a Chinese company, may implant a "backdoor" in its equipment and accept instructions from the Chinese government to engage in secret theft.
This statement is pure speculation and speculation. Huawei equipment is widely used in more than 170 countries and regions around the world, including the United Kingdom, Germany and other allied countries, but there has never been an alleged security incident.
Local technology companies in the United States, such as Google and Facebook, have been repeatedly questioned and criticized for leaking user privacy and being monitored by the government. However, we have rarely seen such a large number of questions and criticisms of the safety of these companies.
It is clear that there is a double standard in the treatment of local and foreign companies by the US government and public opinion. For local companies, even if there are serious safety risks, they will be regarded as "individual cases", but for foreign companies, especially those from China, they will be infinitely magnified and demonized.
To a large extent, the existence of such double standards stems from the wariness and suspicion of the United States regarding Huawei and the scientific and technological strength of China it represents. As the world's leading 5G communications equipment manufacturer, Huawei's technical strength and market share have surpassed that of traditional Western technology giants, which undoubtedly makes the United States feel an unprecedented threat.
Public opinion should look at technology companies objectively and rationally Security issues need to be realistic
When judging the safety of a technology company, we should abandon stereotypes and biases, and use an objective and rational attitude to judge based on facts and figures, rather than being swayed by political or ideological factors.
For companies like Tesla, we certainly need to take the safety flaws of their products seriously and urge them to correct them, rather than ignore or cover up the problems. However, we must also recognize that any emerging technology will inevitably have some problems and shortcomings in the early stage of development, which requires the joint efforts of the industry and society to improve and improve.
We should not be too harsh on Tesla's self-driving technology, but should be tolerant and understanding. There's no doubt that driverless cars will ultimately be able to dramatically reduce the incidence of traffic accidents, thereby saving more lives.
For a company like Huawei, we should also use the same standard to measure. If their products and services really have serious security risks, they should naturally be criticized and punished. But it would be unfair if it was based only on suspicion and unfounded accusations.
We should not be blinded by political factors and have unreasonable wariness and prejudice against companies like Huawei. In the field of cybersecurity, U.S.-based technology companies also have serious problems, and we should apply the same standards to correct them.
In this era of rapid development of science and technology, each of us should use an open, inclusive and rational mindset to objectively look at the opportunities and challenges brought about by various emerging technologies, and strive to seek a balance between security and development, instead of being blinded by prejudices and prejudices, and having unreasonable suspicion and suppression of the technological strength of certain companies or countries.