this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2025
250 points (99.2% liked)

Canada

9021 readers
2689 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RozzyRhoads@lemmy.world 91 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

“There is no killswitch” is exactly what I would expect the person who installed a killswitch to say.

[–] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 29 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

"You see, there is no kill switch, but you do have to install this software license that expires every tree months. That's so we know you paid for the required service updates and software support."

"But if you don't give a license, the plane doesn't fly!"

"Well, yes, but we can't shut it down remotely so it's technically not a kill switch."

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 4 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Every flight requires inputting a password from Lockheed to use their electronic systems mentioned in article.

[–] veroxii@aussie.zone 5 points 11 hours ago

So technically an on switch, not an off switch.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 13 points 20 hours ago

Trust me bro... Just buy it, what can go wrong

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 66 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

WaaS - War as a Service. Your subscription to peace is expiring soon.

[–] robbinhood@lemmy.world 17 points 20 hours ago

I mean guys, stop freaking out. What possible could go wrong if we enshitify global geopolitics?

God, I'm so disgusted now. I never actually connected those two dots. F'ing Donald is turning into a mobster-netflix mash up demanding subscription fees or he'll break your legs.

[–] Trihilis@ani.social 8 points 19 hours ago

Reminds me of horizon zero dawn.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 47 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

There is no kill switch for the F-35, but the JPO’s statement points to the very real problems with the weapons system. In its own words, the jet “operates under well-established agreements,” its strength “lies in its global partnership,” and JPO “[remains] committed to providing all users with the full functionality and support they require.” In other words, the F-35 doesn’t fly unless JPO helps you, but don’t worry because it’s committed to helping.

The F-35 may not have a “kill switch” in the traditional sense, but the countries who bought it are locked into an irrevocable pact with Lockheed Martin and America. ALIS/ ODIN might not be able to turn off the F-35 remotely, but losing access to it can make it impossible to fly.

Only one country has escaped the F-35 software and logistics trap while still being able to fly the jet: Israel. The IDF’s contract for the jet allows it to operate its own software systems without ALIS/ ODIN and conduct its own maintenance.

[–] HonoredMule@lemmy.ca 35 points 20 hours ago (3 children)

I don't understand how Israel gets to be so special. I also don't get how any other nation would accept anything less, especially once the deal with Israel proved it (politically) can be done. Technical feasibility shouldn't even be in question.

Well, I guess it's nice that militaries get to "own nothing and be happy" too.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 15 points 19 hours ago (5 children)

It's actually a very telling carve-out, and I have no idea what it's doing so far down in the article. It should have been front and center.

The only two logical conclusions I can see are:

  • Israel is so sharp with their negotiation that they spotted and fought for something that it just didn't occur to anyone else would be something worth worrying about (possible, I guess.)
  • We already know that Israel is fucked without us, F-35s or no, so there's no particular reason we would need to separately ensure that their F-35s are fucked without us.

I very much suspect that it's the second one. Which indicates that the lock-in was an intentional decision, and one that actually would make quite a bit of sense on reflection.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] YtA4QCam2A9j7EfTgHrH@infosec.pub 12 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Israel has a very strong lobby here because the US is their only source of strength. Spain or France don’t have that kind of lobby because they aren’t entirely dependent on the US for survival.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 8 points 17 hours ago

Plus it has the backing of the Evangelicals, for their own apocalyptic reasons

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago

Very strong lobby and social media messaging operations.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 11 points 17 hours ago

There is a certain group of people in the US that continue to give special treatment to Israel because they believe that helping Israel “restore” itself will more quickly bring the rapture and Armageddon. Interestingly enough this belief tends to include the idea that Jews and Muslims won’t survive the ensuing necessary war.

[–] Dearche@lemmy.ca 37 points 17 hours ago (4 children)

Honestly, it doesn't matter if it's possible or not. The very fact that key replacement parts of the jet can only be built in the US means that the very moment they chose not to sell those parts to Canada, the F35 is on a strict time limit before becoming the world's most expensive paperweight.

And that time limit isn't even very long. Maybe two years of normal use outside of a war, as little as a month or two during a war or any sort of foreign deployment.

We're kinda locked in for the first few planes, but despite cancellation fees, we need to replace our aging fleet with something from someone that won't throw a tantrum and erase a key component of our national defense with the swipe of a pen.

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 8 points 6 hours ago (2 children)
[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 6 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I really don't want to live in the times where you have to fork "OpenJet" to protect your freedom from religion, then build your copy in your garage, but we might get to that point...

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 49 minutes ago

OpenJet

LOL what year is it, 2036? How have you not moved on to "warplane" like the rest of us?

[–] AnonomousWolf@lemm.ee 4 points 5 hours ago

Open source everything!!

[–] slickgoat@lemmy.world 6 points 1 hour ago (3 children)

During the 1960s, the Australian Army bought the Swedish 84mm Carl Gustaf rocket launchers. It was believed perfect for bunker busting. However, Sweden refused to sell us the necessary munitions because we wanted them for the Vietnam War.

If you don't own the supply chain, you don't own the weapon system.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 4 points 12 hours ago

I mean, having a few of the plane is going to be handy... it's rare that your enemies will sell you their equipment to dissect, normally you have to capture it

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 12 hours ago

and it has ultra poor flight time such that maintenance, and part replacements, are ultra frequent. Wouldn't surprise me if 3 flights is a maximum without Lockheed consultant required word.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 36 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

"The Pentagon Denies" means absolutely nothing. Their president lies 1000 times a day, and denies all kinds of wrongdoing where there are objective facts contradicting him.

Americans cannot be trusted, especially not when we are talking about military equipment that we may need to use to defend ourselves FROM THEM!

Just buy from the EU.

[–] towerful@programming.dev 8 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

Just buy from the EU.

Yes, but...
The same could happen the the EU, as with any foreign power.
It's unlikely as the EU is fundamentally built differently. But it could, no doubt a country that wanted to push through their adjenda by exploiting loopholes that haven't been discovered/exploited because of "decorum" could still happen.

Buy source-provided.
So, you get everything you need to maintain the platform with the purchase cost.
If you want updates and improvements, they have additional cost.
Like so many software licencing models. 1 year of updates - except it's source provided.
It's more expensive, but you get what you pay for.
Renew your licence every year for another year.
Stop paying? You get to use the EJ69 fighter jet platform as it was in 2019 for as long as you can manufacture parts for it.

Or you could buy the cloud-hosted fighter jets. And risk the off-switch. But it's less upfront cost, higher long-term cost

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 21 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

We should hack together a Canadian solution. The Canadian way is to replace the software with the one the Royal Canadian Navy was going to use for their warships, but planes and jets will be classified as upsidedown submarines with wheels capable of 500 knots.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 5 points 20 hours ago

Make the weapons bolt-action.

[–] athairmor@lemmy.world 5 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

You know you’ll end up putting skates on it.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 3 points 17 hours ago

Ice skates for winter landings

[–] Albbi@lemmy.ca 2 points 18 hours ago

!

collapsed inline media

You call em "fin tails", we call em air skates.

[–] HonoredMule@lemmy.ca 18 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Long before Musk's true character became widely known, this was my primary reason not to get a Tesla. In fact, Tesla's focus on proprietary software and post-purchase access to vehicles marked the sharp end to my favorable opinion of both him and the company.

Back when he was selling his EV vision and struggling to get the roadster into production, it hadn't even occurred to me that someone with such ambitions would build a closed platform. It would just be so out of line with the values supposedly driving him.

Nowadays I think my best shot at getting the sort of EV I want is either doing my own conversion or finding some small operation producing kit cars. But I need a truck or at least something that can haul heavy trailer loads up long hills.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 17 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

This aligns exactly with what I expect is the real truth. I have doubts there's any actual killswitch because that'd be dumb - but a constant devouring of proprietary parts is absolutely the case.

I maintain that what actually happened is an airforce general bragged to Trump about how every F35 sold means decades of political dependence and service fees that would act like a kill switch to keep our allies in line and Trump heard the words kill switch and just ran with that.

[–] Warehouse@lemmy.ca 13 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, what's easier?

  1. Developing a kill switch that can't be discovered and used against the States... somehow
  2. Not servicing parts.

Probably 2.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 8 points 18 hours ago

Yup! Also, Chinese intelligence work is insane - the chances that America could keep a kill switch out of Chinese hands is so vanishingly thin that anyone with a brain would prefer that such a kill switch didn't exist so it couldn't be used against the US.

[–] MadMadBunny@lemmy.ca 12 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

They’re absolutely right in that regard—technically, it’s more of a Deadman Switch.

[–] bingBingBongBong@lemm.ee 6 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Honest question because I don't know: I thought the US could only afford F35 development and purchasing cost because its supply chain was internationalized.

If all the world would suddenly decide to stop working on F35, and stopped supplying parts, wouldn't the US fleet also disintegrate after some time?

[–] KlausWintergreen@lemmy.world 3 points 21 minutes ago

The vast majority of the F-35 construction is actually done inside the US, and that's required for security requirements for things like this.

Now a bunch of countries (Canada, UK, Netherlands, and some others) did contribute to the development of the F-35 but I want to say it was only around ~10% of the total cost. And that also went towards the purchase price of their first block of airframes.

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 5 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)
[–] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 5 points 17 hours ago

"Pentagon denies"

Lol

[–] skozzii@lemmy.ca 4 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

There is no kill switch, but there is a button we can press to disable it...

[–] booly@sh.itjust.works 4 points 18 hours ago

It's not a kill switch, but a "stay alive" switch that can only be pressed by the United States, and needs to be pressed every year.

[–] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 3 points 19 hours ago

Even if there isn't right now only an idiot would buy these things given how the US treats its former allies. Only Russia should have any at this point.

[–] Yoga@lemmy.ca 2 points 19 hours ago

It doesn't have a kill switch

Yeah it's more like a life support plug.

[–] sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip 2 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Oops, turns out your purchased 100 million dollar jet aircraft is uh, reliant on DRM to function, guess you should have read the fine print.

If you have any complaints, please contact our support line at 1800FUCKYOU.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 2 points 19 hours ago

The US is gaslighting us.

[–] robbinhood@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

lmao it absolutely has kill switches. And I all but guarantee they go beyond the already onerous ecosystem and software demands.

I'd wager some of the kill switches go below software and are hardwired in at the chip level.

[–] sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip 4 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Are you implying a massive company would collaborate with a government to build hidden backdoors into its computer hardware?!

Pshaw!

That would never happen.

[–] robbinhood@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago

thanks for the link backing this up! I read about it in a book but got lazy and didn't want to try to hunt down a source lol.

load more comments
view more: next ›