4 ms·
Who goes to jail when the self-driving truck kills someone?
by lgieron 10y ago
Who goes to jail when the self-driving truck kills someone?
- brixon 10y agosame as a self driving car
- lgieron 10y agoHow does it work for self-driving cars then? In case of regular cars, you go to jail for vehicular manslaughter when you brake the traffic laws and in effect kill someone. My guess is that, if the driver of a self-driving car decides to press the "auto drive" button and the car violates traffic laws and kills someone, it's still the driver who's responsible. The self-driving features are not deemed safe by law and are not meant to replace a driver. It may change when self-driving cars are actually legalized as a thing (as it is currently discussed in California), but I can't imagine the current designs being close to passing a proper homologation process.
- joncrocks 10y agoIf I buy a car, it malfunctions in such a way that was not predictable by a reasonable driver and I use the vehicle in a completely reasonable way. As a result of the fault someone dies. Am I responsible for the death? The answer for the moment is that we haven't figured out the ethical and legal questions in this area yet.
- jhall1468 10y ago> In case of regular cars, you go to jail for vehicular manslaughter when you brake the traffic laws and in effect kill someone. But the truck won't do that. Break the law, that is. Unlike humans, its knowledge of traffic laws will be complete. It won't "break the law" in the sense that you are using the phrase. However, there are other ethical/moral issues (do we program a car to kill 1 person if it saves 3?).
- bitJericho 10y agoI wrote a satirical article about this once. http://witscience.org/wit-helps-produce-safe-driverless-cars/ http://witscience.org/wit-helps-produce-safe-driverless-cars...
- dragonwriter 10y ago> Unlike humans, its knowledge of traffic laws will be complete. Its knowledge of the text may be, its knowledge of what that means in practical terms will probably not be; the law often specifies that action be "reasonable" or similar terms, in light of the conditions. A human trier of fact may well find that the actions of an automated system -- especially in combinations of circumstances its creators did not specifically account for -- is unreasonable.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- true_religion 10y agoWhy must someone go to prison? If the vehicle is operating normally and regulation allows it to operate without a driver in command, then there is no crime.
- lgieron 10y agoI agree that if the regulation allows it, then the self-driving car is a device like any other. I wonder if startups such as Otto will actually wait till such legislation passes in entire country, which is arguably going to take at least a decade (and they declare they don't want to be acquired, but sell to end customers).
- shkkmo 10y agoThat same as when a trucker-driving truck kills someones, usually nobody. But it will happen less often, so that's a good thing.
- akgerber 10y agoThe same people who went to prison when this vehicle's automated control system failed and killed people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_2009_Washington_Metro_train_collision https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_2009_Washington_Metro_tra... In practice, sober automobile drivers who stay at the scene of a crash can kill people in an astoundingly negligent fashion without facing jail time: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/30/opinion/why-drivers-get-away-with-murder.html http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/30/opinion/why-drivers-get-aw... This is a major reason I am excited about automated vehicles, along with the potential to unclog the madness that is urban parking politics, which is one of the major factors preventing the building of new neighborhoods that are truly urban.