"This car will never speed in construction zones anymore"

"This car is now property of pWnz0r. Pay 20btc to {address} to reclaim your car"

"This car will only fill up at TSA approved electric stations"

"This car will not turn on for anyone with a recent DUI"

"This car will not turn on during the Snow Emergency"

Some of these are probably not risks given the current capabilities of Tesla's, but future cars might have enough cameras and sensors to enforce such updates.

Future generations will have all sorts of amazing technology and vehicles, but their experiences and freedoms will just never match what we have today...

to them we'll be bad-asses who lived danger ever minute of every day on our terms. The way we make movies about the future they'll make movies about our time. And the few of us still remaining we'll make up all sorts of stories to make it sound like everyone alive was an action star. They will be repulsed by what they have become.

that or...

to them we'll be wreckless and inefficient neanderthals. They'll be just happy to have their governments. Like having this monolithic antivirus installed on society, to keep everyone 'safe'.

This could even be applied to how we currently view our more recent history of "cowboys" and the "wild" west. Imagine the freedom those men had!

Yea but they couldn't tweet about their day so you know, its the same.

same as you can have, just stand up and walk away from treadmill... oh wait, cash, security, not dying from appendicitis and whatnot is so comfortable, right? :)

/rant

You can walk away from the treadmill.......and still have cash, security, and not die from a healthcare issue. Live below your means, save, invest, and then move somewhere nice but with a lower cost of living (Costa Rica, Panama, and Uruguay are my short list).

This will not happen if you live somewhere paying $3K/month for a studio though ;)

... you can get off the treadmill.

Just run faster that's the ticket.

You can also just get off. Lower your spending and you don't need to work a full time job 48 weeks a year.

ex: If you want to live in a cabin in the woods, the forst service pays some people to watch for fires in some really remote areas.

>to them we'll be wreckless and inefficient neanderthals. They'll be just happy to have their governments. Like having this monolithic antivirus installed on society, to keep everyone 'safe'.

Does the current society view the people in the past as wreckless and inefficient neanderthals? On average, no. Sure, we view their lives as more dangerous, but we do not view them as wreckless or inefficient neanderthals.

When I was a kid in the 70's, nobody wore a bike helmet. If we saw a kid wearing a helmet riding a bike, we'd probably beat him up. Today, my wife won't let me ride without a helmet. I've either been civilized or emasculated. In retrospect, I don't think we were neanderthals. But we definitely should have been wearing helmets.

When I was a kid in the 70's, there were three kids in my town who died due to bike accidents. I'm betting that at least one of them would have not happened if the kid was wearing a helmet.

Survivor bias is real.

On the downside, there's less cost for being stupid which I think is probably bad for influencing cause-effect considerations, even though one effect is potentially death.

When I was a kid there was no nerf-padded society (late 70's into the 80's). If you made a stupid move on a bike, you bled on the ground and thought it over for a while. From that you got a very real sense of the implications of your actions and relied on your wits more, as not doing so would get you really screwed up.

Ask yourself honestly, are you using your wife as a convenient excuse? Or would you be wearing a helmet now anyway? :-) I'd go with civilized over emasculated.

I think the awareness campaigns of the 80's, as well as generally "growing up", in addition to quite a few near-deadly accidents, have changed my (in hindsight, ridiculously stupid) viewpoint on helmets.

In the last 12 months two friends have broken helmets, but survived. If they weren't wearing them, who knows...

You've been emasculated. But you can take solace in knowing your head is less likely to explode like a melon.

90's for me :)

In such a future, Demolition Man may actually have ended up being known as a scion of things to come, Marco Brambilla heralded in the Smithsonian for his foresight and ingenuity in taking on the project.

"Due to your inebriated state the car has been placed in chauffeur mode and is driving you home. After you pay pWnz0r."

DJI just pushed an update that enforces no-fly-zones for their UAVs over parts of Washington. You have to assume similar types of things will be pushed to cars as they become more automated and connected.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/drone-maker-to-disable-some-d-c-...

...and that was about when I decided I didn't have upgrade fever after all.

Honestly, I find this a lot scarier than rogue AI that Elon worries about, and definitely more of an imminent danger.

This is present, not future:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2014/09/25/starter-i...

> "This car will not turn on for anyone with a recent DUI"

This one's already happening.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignition_interlock_device

There's some difference between a court order and a software update.

Also an IID is for a current DUI risk (it's there to prevent DUI), not because you've gotten a DUI recently.

Technically it is because you've gotten a DUI recently. But yes, it is there to prevent (another) DUI.

You can get the IID because you've gotten a DUI "recently", but the IID doesn't refuse to start the car just because you've recently gotten a DUI.

Already happened, after the Tesla fires the cars quit dropping auto-lowering their suspension on the highways for a while. They eventually added it back as a feature you can turn on with a warning.