Volkswagen didn’t make a faulty car: they programmed it to cheat intelligently. The difference isn’t semantics, it’s game-theoretical (and it borders on applied demonology).
Arriving via Tom Hoffman at Tuttle SVC
I find myself quoting the same, on-the-money paragraph:
“So the fact is that our experience of the world will increasingly come to reflect our experience of our computers and of the internet itself (not surprisingly, as it’ll be infused with both). Just as any user feels their computer to be a fairly unpredictable device full of programs they’ve never installed doing unknown things to which they’ve never agreed to benefit companies they’ve never heard of, inefficiently at best and actively malignant at worst (but how would you now?), cars, street lights, and even buildings will behave in the same vaguely suspicious way. Is your self-driving car deliberately slowing down to give priority to the higher-priced models? Is your green A/C really less efficient with a thermostat from a different company, or it’s just not trying as hard? And your tv is supposed to only use its camera to follow your gestural commands, but it’s a bit suspicious how it always offers Disney downloads when your children are sitting in front of it.”
The issue here, as always, is a political one: who controls? I think we don’t unless we open up the software that runs the Internet of Things in such a way as it is only controlled by the user/owner. And, as many a maker manifesto has insisted, if you can’t open it you don’t own it. If VW software had been open does anyone think they would have gotten away with what they did for even a hot minute? I don’t.
Great post. Read this and think about the consequences, unintended and otherwise, of hacking the Internet of Things when you buy that cool, wirelessly connected refrigerator