3 ms·
>Asked if Uber was trying to avoid disclosing accidents involving its self-driving cars, as permit holders are required to do, Levandowski denied this ...and n
by supercanuck 10y ago
>Asked if Uber was trying to avoid disclosing accidents involving its self-driving cars, as permit holders are required to do, Levandowski denied this
...and now we see why. I'm not sure why journalists attempt to pin "intent." Enough with this "gotcha" bullshit.
Simply inform the public that one of the consequences of Uber's decision to circumvent the law is that they don't have to report accidents which then provides an advantage over its competitors.
simple.
- chronic92 10y agoLiterally the only people who care are SF fresh college grads. The public doesn't care about many things. They only care about their wallet, their family, and maybe the environment. Keep thinking that informing the public will actually change things. You need a different method.
- mannykannot 10y agoIt is very reasonable, and good journalism, to ask about motives. If it were reported as you suggest, Levandowski would probably complain of being the victim of innuendo. Providing the responses are accurately reported, asking about motives helps to protect the innocent while possibly stripping the guilty of cover, at least if they end up contradicting themselves.