The
news came out recently. A car manufacturer is designing a vehicle
system that means a car can repossess itself.
I’ll
pause while you consider that for a bit.
Car
manufacturer setting up a car with self-repossession capabilities.
Got
that?
The
basic story is actually still unfolding. While the stories I read
don’t say it couldn’t happen—automated cars are our future blah,
blah, blah—they did not suggest that cars were being set with
some kind of protocol, put in motion by the turning of two keys
and pressing of buttons in the finance department of your friendly
manufacturer. We are not going to see a car that powers up, uses
it’s 360-degree sensors and cameras to make sure there’s no activity
nearby, then slides into gear and drives itself to the nearest
secured lot owned by the car industry for just such purposes.
At
least not right now. Although that very possibility evidently
is in a patent submission from Ford that exists today.
Instead,
what I read in doing a bit of research promised a bit less. Depending
on the cars and systems involved, vehicles could be fully or partially
disabled, so anything from the engine to climate control systems
won’t work. In some cases, an alarm might be engaged, such as
one that unleashes a continuous sound. Maybe a special lock would
be triggered, preventing any type of access to vehicle use.
For
me, the thoughts didn’t land exclusively on the cars. Instead,
this set off my machines are taking over warnings. I will explain.
(Or, at least try.)
The
repossession of vehicles is a reality in our world. Happens all
the time. We are all aware of it. But the truth is, a very small
percentage of us fear it. We make our purchase, pay our bills,
and the idea of a tow truck arriving in the middle of a quiet
overnight to remove our car is not a danger.
I’m
sure mistakes do happen. Errors with the mail, online banking,
or whatever computer software is being utilized by a lender as
examples of where snafus occur. I’d guess, without in depth homework
invested in it, that there are repossessions taking place that
are incorrectly handled. But now, what this is saying, is that
it’s possible that orders to put self-driving vehicles on the
road could be set off from some centralized location. And some
of those could be initiated by mistake.
Forgive
me my leanings toward chaotic cynicism, but this doesn’t sound
like a problem in waiting at all. (Actually, is that chaotic cynicism?
Should it be cynical sarcasm? Chaotic cynical sarcasm? That last
part, about not sounding like a problem, was definitely intended
as sarcasm. It feels like that should be in there. Ok…)
I’m
sarcastically cynical about the potential chaos awaiting us.
Someone
hacks the system. Not just the Ford system, which is the company
I see universally named as having the patent submission. Instead,
any manufacturer of vehicles with autonomous or semi-autonomous
capabilities has a system hacked.
You
need to understand, I wonder about safety issues because someone
gets in a vehicle, plugs in a destination two hours away, and
slides off into a nap. We all expect that’s where fully autonomous
cruise control is headed, right? Well, this moves a bit further
down the road. This suggests that someone hundreds to thousands
of miles away could be starting the engine and programming the
destination, and that’s all happening before my chaos theory applies
of it being someone doing it that shouldn’t have the ability to
do so.
Ok.
Let’s bring this back a bit before we spiral too far off the trail.
(Before someone, probably me, wanders off into suggesting a deviously
designed hacking of autonomous cars that leads to a flash mob
of self-driving vehicles performing ballet with flashing headlights
in a massive parking lot.)
Anyone
that is deep in the rabbit holes of marketing can tell you how
information can be gathered, reviewed and applied for a ridiculous
variety of reasons. Learning where customers come from, what can
get them to spend more, and on and on and on. Plus, we live in
a society where we are constantly sacrificing privacy for convenience.
And all it takes to reinforce that is wandering into areas of
artificial intelligence and virtual reality, where again and again
we hear about things being modified and set up to our personal
preferences. We seem to enjoy handing things away for free gifts.
We seem to enjoy giving up control.
Turns
out, my question in all of this, is where are we drawing the lines
over control? When I pay off my car, and the title is in my name,
will all of this autonomous self-repossession programing be disabled?
Or, does it stay in place when the title is mailed, with a wink-nod
arrangement of promising just to never use it?
I
don’t think we should be surprised—shouldn’t be surprised at all—by
the idea that with self-driving technology, a manufacturer would
explore what all areas of vehicle operations could look like.
If they can parallel park, why shouldn’t they be able to self-repossess?
It
dives into the arena of who’s giving the orders. Thoughts about
who’s plugging things into the GPS. A general follow the entire
path to the conclusion. Far too many people base questions around
how cool it might be if we could do such and such, but they never
finish the thought off by asking what would happen if we did such
and such. I firmly believe that the “what would happen” concept
needs to be considered from the start.
I
think it’s wonderful and amazing to witness that discoveries and
accomplishments that result from the simple challenge of “can
I” do this or that. Truly brilliant stuff. But none of them excuse
the accountability and responsibility of doing it.
Is
that a bit deep for a random article about the possibility of
a self-repossessed car? Maybe. But twenty years ago I didn’t expect
my cell phone to set off an alarm when my laundry was done or
that my refrigerator would text me a shopping list. It’s a bit
foolish and naïve to not believe all options are under consideration.