Slashdot Mirror
When Should Cops Be Allowed To Take Control of Self-Driving Cars?
HughPickens.com writes: A police officer is directing traffic in the intersection when he sees a self-driving car barreling toward him and the occupant looking down at his smartphone. The officer gestures for the car to stop, and the self-driving vehicle rolls to a halt behind the crosswalk. This seems like a pretty plausible interaction. Human drivers are required to pull over when a police officer gestures for them to do so. It's reasonable to expect that self-driving cars would do the same. But Will Oremus writes that while it's clear that police officers should have some power over the movements of self-driving cars, what's less clear is where to draw the line. Should an officer be able to do the same if he suspects the passenger of a crime? And what if the passenger doesn't want the car to stop—can she override the command, or does the police officer have ultimate control?
According to a RAND Corp. report on the future of technology and law enforcement "the dark side to all of the emerging access and interconnectivity (PDF) is the risk to the public's civil rights, privacy rights, and security." It added, "One can readily imagine abuses that might occur if, for example, capabilities to control automated vehicles and the disclosure of detailed personal information about their occupants were not tightly controlled and secured."
According to a RAND Corp. report on the future of technology and law enforcement "the dark side to all of the emerging access and interconnectivity (PDF) is the risk to the public's civil rights, privacy rights, and security." It added, "One can readily imagine abuses that might occur if, for example, capabilities to control automated vehicles and the disclosure of detailed personal information about their occupants were not tightly controlled and secured."
So, the car can detect gestures.
How does it detect a police officer?
An automated car could be programmed to be pre-empted by emergency vehicles using lights in the standard manner, but how, exactly, would police stops be handled, especially when the stop is a gesture from the side of the road? There is going to have to be a device which police carry that broadcasts a standardized signal to pull over and stop. It will have to be secure against being imitated by criminals, perhaps with frequently-changed security keys.
Just deploying these to all the agencies that will need them is a non-insignificant problem. And cities are going to require that the devices, deployment and maintenance be paid for by the manufacturers.
Never mind the possible abuses from police, if the cops can take control, you've left a security hole that can be exploited. While cars may drive themselves, it's still necessary to have a human who can take control if needed. If the police need to pull a car over, the person in the car should take control, manually drive, and pull over. Let's not make cars with huge security holes like that. Current cars have enough security holes already.
The big red button. If you press it, the car will continue to your destination unless physically disabled or completely blocked, regardless of non-traffic signals. It needs to be there for times when it is unsafe, or the occupant feels unsafe, with questionable external conditions (fake emergency vehicle signals, etc). And cops should be just fine with that because self-driving cars will otherwise obey the rules of the road (i.e. not speeding or running traffic signals), so if they really need to stop the car they can (a) surround it and slow down/stop to prevent the car from moving or (b) follow it to its destination - which in an emergency should be selectable by the operator as the original destination, the closest police precinct, or closest hospital emergency room entrance. There is no need or reason to offer electronic remote kill capabilities.
By choosing a fully automatic car, you give up a level of independence in return for convenience. I, for example, don't carry a sidearm or wear protective body armor today. That puts me in an inferior position to those who do, or those who have greater physical strength. It doesn't bother me because I evaluate the chance of needing such things is smaller than, say, being struck by lightning. I trade the convenience of lower kitted weight and bulk for an inferior defensive position.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
The hierarchy of control should go this way:
1. Owner (should have an override that can shut off the engine even if not driving)
2. Driver (If they're behind the wheel only an owner can shut them off)
3. Police (can shut off any car not being piloted or directly controlled)
4. The AI
Here is how police should work... THE SAME WAY they do with normal drivers. A police car does not shoot your engine out or something. What they do is flash their lights and tell you pull over. And you DECIDE to pull over because you don't want to be in violation of more laws.
And that is how the AI should operate. If the AI is just zipping down the road and an AI police officer pulls you over (does anyone see that coming?). The AI in your car should DECIDE to pull over. It isn't being forced to do it. I can say "HA HA YOU"LL NEVER TAKE ME ALIVE COPPER!"... but it should only do that if you told it to do that. Otherwise it should pull over like a law abiding AI.
We've all discussed to death the issue with police overrides and how hackers can use them take control of your car.
So here is the solution. Rather than just have the AI comply immediately, you can have the AI PING the cockpit or cabin and say "Police request pull over". Then you have ten seconds in the car to reject that. If you don't reject it... then the car pulls off to the side of the road. Where likely as not a friendly Securitron will roll up wearing mirrored sunglasses and tell you to respect its authoritah!
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
Who owns your car? Who does it serve? Who does it obey?
We lost the war for our pocket and portable computers (cell phones and tablet). We lost the war for our TVs, movie players, DVRs, etc. We lost the war for the computers that are already in our cars.
Most disturbing, we are in the process of losing the war for our desktop computers, the very heart of general purpose computing as an individual right.
If we want to own our cars, we need to stop losing control of our computers, pronto.
See that "Preview" button?
Don't know about where you live but failure to stop for a Police man/woman is an offence in the U.K. That is if an officer of the law indicates you should pull over you better dam well pull over otherwise you are facing a 5000GBP fine and a discretionary ban. Why on earth anyone thinks that a self driving car should be any different to a human driven car is really beyond me.
I disagree vehemently with the assumption that police should individually have control over vehicles once they've become automated.
Police have control over vehicles now primarily to stop the behaviour of drivers who are breaking motor vehicle laws. At least conceptually, self-driving vehicles should not break any laws, removing this incentive.
Self-driving cars will also be networked, providing central command-and-control capability on an infrastructure level. So for those situations where vehicle movements need to be regulated (construction, etc.), the central authority will handle modifications to ordinary traffic patterns and flow.
There are two completely irrelevant pieces of information in the summary. 1) "the occupant looking down at his smartphone". Why would this matter? And 2) the person being 'barrelled' towards is a police officer. It shouldn't matter who is at that end - the vehicle should recognise a living being and react accordingly. That is or is not police makes no difference.
I can't think of a valid reason an individual LEO should be allowed control of an individual self-driving vehicle, ever. There is simply too much potential for abuse.
Automate the cop. The car can drive by itself, but traffic control at the intersection needs a human?
At most it should go "I see a cop trying to pull us over should i call 911 for you?" aka the same thing I tell my child to do.
In any event the person in the vehicle needs to be able to quickly override the computer's or 2 people can corner any car to carjack it.
No sir I dont like it.
In the U.S. many police departments suggest that women (and sometimes men) should go to a well lighted area rather than pull over immediately.
Sometimes it is also suggested that you call the P.D. to make sure it's really a cop before you pull over.
It seems very risky to have a car automatically pull over in the middle of nowhere when signaled, particularly when police have put such a warning out. At the least, the car should allow the passenger to override.
So, here's the problem with this ... if the car detects gestures, or has a "bypass" mode for law enforcement ... then this can, and will, be exploited by someone else.
Every time law enforcement and government demand a special exemption in the operation of something, what they do is administratively poke a hole in the integrity of it, and then say that nobody else is allowed to use it. And stupidly believe that nobody else will.
It's like saying you're not allowed to lock your doors in case of an emergency, and demanding that nobody else takes advantage of it.
If there is a mechanism by which a police officer, with or without a justifiable reason, can take control of these vehicles ... then it is pretty much a certainty someone else will also do this.
As you say, this will be hacked at some point. Because you can't put something in which acts as a bypass and then act like it's only the people you intended to have this who will use it.
And every corner case you come up with which says "well, we need a special case here because of this" is a demonstration of why this stuff will never actually work in the real world.
There will always be cases in which the self driving car stops working. And you really can't rely on humans to take over when the system suddenly has no idea what to do. What happens in those gaps is always going to be a problem ... and I'm not sure we're anywhere close to figuring that out.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Automate the cop. The car can drive by itself, but traffic control at the intersection needs a human?
I don't know any place you'd put a cop instead of a traffic light, but there are quite a few scenarios where a cop needs to ad hoc direct traffic like near the scene of an accident so emergency services get through. No matter what you do you won't get away from it entirely.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings