How is a car's computer in this way any different than any other modification to the car? What's your point here? If I remove the brakes from my car or install them incorrectly, I may not be able to brake before hitting you. Does that mean it should be illegal to repair your own car? I really don't understand what your point is.
It's hard to introduce a bug into mechanical systems like brakes. Most home mechanics can tell immediately if they did something wrong.
It's hard not to introduce bugs into programs. How many "tinkerers" can debug and safety-check a complex embedded computing system that manages complex electrical and mechanical systems in real time?
Aircraft avionics and software are subject to rigorous testing and qualifications. Why should automotive control systems be different?
You may hack your Mustang, your Tesla, whatever if it never leaves your driveway or the dragstrip, but those checksums from production better match for any CAN network connected subsystem if you want to roll out onto a public, controlled road. You should be free to modify anything that is airgapped from velocity or direction management though.
> Why should automotive control systems be different?
Perhaps because you can't just pull a plane over on the side of the road if something goes wrong?
A lot of things on a car are held to different (lesser) standards than aircraft. For example, you don't see magnetos on a car, though you will frequently see two on an private aircraft engine so it can keep firing if the electrical system goes out.
Thinking that through, we can expect post-collision
inspections (by insurance companies or police) to
include a dump of the state of the current code(s) in
a vehicle as well as any available data from
just before a collision - speed profile, braking,
signaling, etc. - which might be used in court to argue liability claims.
I would not be surprised. Insurance investigators already have access to black box performance metrics leading up to accidents (last X seconds of RPM level, brake pedal force, accelerator position, accelerometer readings, seatbelt indicators). Getting software versions, checksums, etc would be trivial.
Right, but then people doing so would only be able to be arrested after someone gets hurt. It's not really preventable crime. I just see this as being open to negligence and misuse.
I would rather live in a society that severely punishes bad behavior after it happens as a deterrent to others who would be tempted to do the same than live in a society that imposes ever more restrictions in an effort to prevent misbehaviors from happening in the first place.
Obviously neither is good if taken to its most extreme, but I feel we should skew heavily towards the former.
This is just not true. You can absolutely be cited or arrested for various infractions on the road without actually hurting anyone. The two that come to mind are following too closely (typically not cited until an accident occurs but that's not statutory) and aggressive driving.
