There is no software locks to prevent modification to existing mechanical cars that can and are modified to be dangerous and there is inspection processes etc and laws to deal with it. It’s even easier to scan for modified software than look inside an engine.

There are places for safe experimentation like tracks, so I don’t see why this fear isn’t irrational or a ploy for control.

In many US states, there is not even a meaningful safety inspection. In some there is no inspection required at all.

People won't intentionally make their vehicles dangerous, but it's easier to make bad software than to completely bodge a physical repair using manufactured parts.

I don't know how vehicle software works, but hopefully they don't crash like consumer software. Someone here knows the answer -- is there like a supervisory manager/kernel that keeps all the subsystems running? And modular separation so that bad changes to the fuel injection system won't take out the fly-by-wire brakes?

It’s extremely hard to figure out whether modified software poses a security risk. I wouldn’t trust experts spending long hours to get it right, I certainly wouldn’t trust people at TÜV doing spotchecks to find the bugs.

I wouldn't trust the original developers either.

> Imagine people had the option when buying a car, truck or minivan of having it be open and tinkerable?

[...]

> There are places for safe experimentation like tracks, so I don’t see why this fear isn’t irrational or a ploy for control.

I don't think many people track modded minivans. "No the Subaru WRX is my DD, my main track car is a Honda Odyssey"