4 ms·

There’s a lot of stupid to unwind here, but I'll just leave at this: your plan would leave a tremendous amount of ambiguity that skilled lawyers would wriggle t

There’s a lot of stupid to unwind here, but I'll just leave at this: your plan would leave a tremendous amount of ambiguity that skilled lawyers would wriggle through. That is, “what is an accident?” Is it an accident if the driver takes control of the automated system and drives straight into a wall? Is it an accident if a non-automated truck truck with a huge branch sticking out the back obscures the automated car’s cameras, leading to a crash? Maybe you're a cowboy coder like me who bristles at detailed project specs and prefers some sort of goal or vision to work for. I totally get that. But when it comes to accountability, nothing beats a checklist. Bad law can be either broad and vague to the point of endless litigation and uselessness (what you're proposing), or hopelessly detailed and self-contradictory (the kind of law you're likely reacting against). This article is celebrating a good, readable middle ground. That's exactly what we want out of law.

paulmd 10y ago
These are common questions of fault that are trivially resolved in any motor accident. Someone or something is in control of the vehicle and can be assigned fault. Or in some situations, everyone is at fault and the shares of fault are determined. If the system is operating autonomously, then the fault lies with the system. Failing to leave sufficient following distance is a common cause of accident and almost always results in fault being found with that driver. This would not change if the driver was a computer system. However - side note - objects that project from the rear of a vehicle must be flagged using a red cloth. So if the truck were operating with an unflagged load then they could be the party at fault! If the occupant takes the vehicle out of autonomous mode, then fault would lie with the occupant, unless it was to avoid some kind of impending accident in which cause the situation would have to be examined in detail.

paulmd 10y ago

These are common questions of fault that are trivially resolved in any motor accident. Someone or something is in control of the vehicle and can be assigned fault. Or in some situations, everyone is at fault and the shares of fault are determined. If the system is operating autonomously, then the fault lies with the system. Failing to leave sufficient following distance is a common cause of accident and almost always results in fault being found with that driver. This would not change if the driver was a computer system. However - side note - objects that project from the rear of a vehicle must be flagged using a red cloth. So if the truck were operating with an unflagged load then they could be the party at fault! If the occupant takes the vehicle out of autonomous mode, then fault would lie with the occupant, unless it was to avoid some kind of impending accident in which cause the situation would have to be examined in detail.