An automated car does not give access to the government. It is self-contained and does not depend on remote input. In fact, in the video I posted they talked about how they don't even really need GPS input.
“And some cars have a remote network connection. You wouldn’t NEED a physical hands on with those cars. You just need to be close enough. {Think ‘OnStar’ style stuff where they can remotely kill the car.}”
Again, a remote access kill switch is completely segregated from the other control functions of the car. By that I mean physically separated in the hardware. You've watched too many movies if you think a hacker can overcome that barrier remotely.
“An automated car does not give access to the government. “
And the NSA laughed.
Go on.
“It is self-contained and does not depend on remote input.”
OnStar ring any bells?
“Again, a remote access kill switch is completely segregated from the other control functions of the car.”
Not all that much.
They need to segregate it more.
And if it can talk to the in car network at all, that is an instant nogo.
And guess what?
Car makers aren’t following that suggestion all that much.
And yes, CARS HAVE AND CAN BE HACKED.
Unless the government MANDATES that any automated car has that access in order to be approved to operate on public roads.
The real danger as the technology starts to become more common is the government trying to force installation of remote-control capability using the usual pretexts (i.e. “We need to be able to shut down cars to stop child abductions / terrorists / whatever”). See the current official moaning and gnashing of teeth over secure data encryption for a present-day example.