4 ms·

I disagree, and I think a jury would as well. Drivers have personal liability. Self-driving cars have corporate liability. I'd expect a big judgment if someone

I disagree, and I think a jury would as well. Drivers have personal liability. Self-driving cars have corporate liability. I'd expect a big judgment if someone is killed because of a known issue.

freehunter 10y ago
But there are already laws governing that. This petition is calling for the cars to be banned until new regulations are invented but we already have those regulations. They're called the "Highway Code". Every regulation that a self driving car has to follow is printed right in that book, specific to each state and locality. Making a new law that says "that, but in a self driving car" is pointless. The law already exists. If it's being broken, it's being broken. Yes, if a car is on the road and it's breaking the law, it should be removed from the road. But again, we already have laws that govern this. "But with a self driving car" isn't a special case. We've already written every law they need to follow. People are killed from known issues with non-autonomous cars today, and companies are getting punished for them. There is already precedent. There are already laws. They exist.
- jim-greer 10y ago
  I'm not advocating a new law, and neither is the article. I just want Uber to take these cars off the road until they've fixed known safety issues.
jdminhbg 10y ago
Corporate-owned cars and trucks get into fatal accidents all the time now. There's a large body of civil law about liability, and (not coincidentally) a requirement to carry liability insurance. I don't see why this is different.
- jim-greer 10y ago
  You don't? UPS can't stop its drivers from making mistakes. Uber can absolutely fix known issues in its vehicles. If you have more control, you have more liability. Edit: Uber probably has product liability. Which is very different from liability for an employee's actions.
  - jdminhbg 10y ago
    You're sort of begging the question with the phrasing "known issues." If UPS knows but doesn't care that its drivers are knocking back 4 beers at lunch, that's a separate problem from a simple distracted driver rear-ending someone. Here, once Uber found out there was an issue with right hook turns, they took steps to mitigate (instructing human drivers to take over in those situations and working on a software fix), so they're not ignoring known issues.

I disagree, and I think a jury would as well. Drivers have personal liability. Self-driving cars have corporate liability. I'd expect a big judgment if someone is killed because of a known issue.

freehunter 10y ago

But there are already laws governing that. This petition is calling for the cars to be banned until new regulations are invented but we already have those regulations. They're called the "Highway Code". Every regulation that a self driving car has to follow is printed right in that book, specific to each state and locality. Making a new law that says "that, but in a self driving car" is pointless. The law already exists. If it's being broken, it's being broken. Yes, if a car is on the road and it's breaking the law, it should be removed from the road. But again, we already have laws that govern this. "But with a self driving car" isn't a special case. We've already written every law they need to follow. People are killed from known issues with non-autonomous cars today, and companies are getting punished for them. There is already precedent. There are already laws. They exist.

jim-greer 10y ago
I'm not advocating a new law, and neither is the article. I just want Uber to take these cars off the road until they've fixed known safety issues.

jdminhbg 10y ago

Corporate-owned cars and trucks get into fatal accidents all the time now. There's a large body of civil law about liability, and (not coincidentally) a requirement to carry liability insurance. I don't see why this is different.

jim-greer 10y ago
You don't? UPS can't stop its drivers from making mistakes. Uber can absolutely fix known issues in its vehicles. If you have more control, you have more liability. Edit: Uber probably has product liability. Which is very different from liability for an employee's actions.
- jdminhbg 10y ago
  You're sort of begging the question with the phrasing "known issues." If UPS knows but doesn't care that its drivers are knocking back 4 beers at lunch, that's a separate problem from a simple distracted driver rear-ending someone. Here, once Uber found out there was an issue with right hook turns, they took steps to mitigate (instructing human drivers to take over in those situations and working on a software fix), so they're not ignoring known issues.