"PriusBot has detected you have been classified as a public menace. In accordance with statute XYZ-00N, you are now being driven off the nearest bridge."
This could actually be a serious concern. By riding in a self-driving car, we're putting our life directly in to a machine's hands. Of course, this isn't very new: pacemakers, for example, are controlled by computers. They can be reprogrammed, but only when you're physically near the target [1].
But a self-driving car would almost inevitably be connected to a network: an central computer could algorithmically control where all the cars are, where they're moving, how fast they're doing it, and basically make accidents nonexistent; such a system would be enormously beneficial to society at large. Yet, the downside is that all the cars are connected to a network, which an attacker could use to, as you say, send the target "off the nearest bridge".
Our investigation shows that an implantable cardioverter
defibrillator (1) is potentially susceptible to malicious attacks that violate the privacy of patient information and medical telemetry, and (2) may experience malicious alteration to the integrity of information or state, including patient data and therapy settings for when and how shocks are administered. Moreover, standard approaches for security and access control may not always be suitable for IMDs due to tensions between security (e.g., access for pre-authorized parties only) and safety (e.g., access for previously unauthorized parties in emergency circumstances)
Nsa will have e911 equivalent and warrantable backdoor to anything DMV/govt approved, though one would think.
[1] Some physical design limits were cpu and power, plus other operational concerns.
"PriusBot has detected you have been classified as a public menace. In accordance with statute XYZ-00N, you are now being driven off the nearest bridge."