Andrew Miller

On the one side, you've got...

You've got labor interests, and you've got Democratic lawmakers who are sensitive to labor concerns, wanting to go slow, but you've also got Democratic lawmakers who are sensitive to the plight of the most vulnerable, and they identify Uber drivers as one of those classes that isn't worthy of protection.

But on the other hand, you also have people who are concerned about

Spying.

The nature of a modern vehicle, and certainly a self-driving car, as we've already talked about it, it's got sensors going all the time.

It's collecting data of everywhere it goes all the time.

Who has access to that data?

Certainly the operator of the vehicle, the Waymos or the Teslas or the Zuxes of this world do.

And that means that a sufficiently motivated bad actor could get them as well.

Or, I mean, General Motors, just with conventional vehicles, was selling all the data of everyone driving a GM car onto third parties, arguing that, well, we collected this data.

It's ours now.

We can sell it.

With a Waymo or a self-driving car, it's so much richer.

There's so much more potential for data capture.

And so civil libertarians and people with national concerted concerns have got, well, they've got questions.

So in that scenario, yeah, certainly the advent of LLMs means that we've unleashed super hacking.

The two points to make are, one, you couldn't control every car.

You'd have to hack into every one.

And as previously mentioned, the car is driving itself, so you'd need to find a very sophisticated way to confuse the car about its environment.

I know, technical expert, I think it could be done, but I think it'd be really hard to do.