5 ms·

IANAL, but it seems straightforward to me. The vehicle will have to be fully insured. While this is a strange concept in America, where each driver is insured f

IANAL, but it seems straightforward to me. The vehicle will have to be fully insured. While this is a strange concept in America, where each driver is insured for a specific vehicle, this is how insurance is done in many countries in Europe; an insured vehicle is insured no matter who drives it. So American insurance companies will just need to start insuring vehicles by themselves, and if something happens then the insurance company will pay up.

simion314 9y ago
But is not only about the money, humans can lose their freedom from major accidents, what if you get a bad update or bad sensors and your car kills some people, some engineers or managers should have to pay if they did something wrong and not point to the insurance company. I do not want some manager to think something like "don't worry about that bug, it is very rare so insurance will cover us in case something bad happens, we need to push the update now"
- dx034 9y ago
  > But is not only about the money, humans can lose their freedom from major accidents, what if you get a bad update or bad sensors and your car kills some people, some engineers or managers should have to pay if they did something wrong and not point to the insurance company. Software automation has already happened in other areas. If the bug was introduced on purpose or if there was insufficient oversight/negligence, people can go to jail. Not not any error automatically is a crime. If you kill someone with your car that doesn't mean that you'll be charged even if the accident was your fault.
  - simion314 9y ago
    I understand but is there something in place to handle this issue, you would need people that will analyze the car software, the updates, the practices and decide who is responsible, my question is there something in place or we need to wait for this laws to appear ?
    - MBCook 9y ago
      Right. How many people will be horribly injured or die in ‘the incident’ that leads to the lawsuit that gets these companies to take this stuff seriously.
- chrisseaton 9y ago
  > some engineers or managers should have to pay if they did something wrong and not point to the insurance company That's already how insurance works. You pay by paying for insurance premiums. Why do you think people shouldn't be allowed to use insurance to cover accidents in just this situation?
  - simion314 9y ago
    Say the manager knows about a bug in the AI but it consider that is more expensive to wait and properly fix it then push an update with the bug present. Should the decision of fixing or not a bug that can cause lives be influenced only by how much will insurance cost? I am not arguing that a person should pay with his freedom for a mistake, people do mistake, I am afraid that the bad behavior from software industry will apply to self driving cars, the move fast and brake things mentality,ship with known bugs etc.
    - chrisseaton 9y ago
      > Should the decision of fixing or not a bug that can cause lives be influenced only by how much will insurance cost? But the price of the insurance takes into account the risk of a bug costing a life. They know if they make riskier decisions their insurance premiums will go up. Insurance doesn't magically remove costs. It just amortises them. Loss adjusters have been experts at this for centuries.
      - simion314 9y ago
        >But the price of the insurance takes into account the risk of a bug costing a life. The possible problem is who sets this price for a life, it needs to be high enough but not absurd.
        chrisseaton 9y ago
        But this isn't a new problem at all. Loss adjusters have already been doing this for many industries where someone can be killed. Insurance for normal cars already does it even! Why are self-driving cars any different?
azag0 9y ago
Ok, that's financial liability. What about criminal liability? What if the car breaks rules and kills someone. Will the programmers be responsible? The CEO? Can companies be criminally convicted in the US? Or will it be on par with other "machine accidents", where there is typically no criminal responsibility?
- awestroke 9y ago
  I don't understand this obsession with finding someone to hold responsible for an accident before the accident happens. When an accident with self-driving cars actually happen, if someone is found to have committed a crime, that person will be charged.
  - gambiting 9y ago
    If you run a red light and kill someone, it's pretty clear who is responsible though. If a driverless car runs a red light because of a hardware defect, who is? No one? Or do you think there will be a committee trying to establish what exactly went wrong and where? With planes, when autopilot does something stupid, Boeing/Airbus will ground all planes of the same type until they can figure out what the issue is. I can't imagine we will ever hold cars to the same standard as we hold airplanes, that's just impossible.
    - awestroke 9y ago
      Sometimes, nobody should be held responsible. It's called an accident.
      - diggernet 9y ago
        And if nobody is held responsible, there is no risk for a company to put shoddy software on the street.
        ergothus 9y ago
        At which point they've crossed the line into a crime, so liability is a crime. These concepts are already in play in other industries that use software on devices that could harm or kill.
gambiting 9y ago
>> this is how insurance is done in many countries in Europe. Not all though. For example in Poland you insure the vehicle and anyone with a valid driver licence is allowed to drive it and is fully covered. As a matter of fact it's enshrined in law that insurance companies have to provide cover no matter who drives the car, as long as there is insurance on the car.
- walshemj 9y ago
  Strange normally insurance is tied to the person in the UK
  - gambiting 9y ago
    I know, it was really strange to me when I moved to UK - what do you mean, I can't just let someone else drive my car? I have to add them to my insurance? Why? I mean, I understand how it works now, but to me it still seems like an excuse to extract a lot more money from British drivers.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - jk563 9y ago
      I'm not sure about that. The flip side of that is that my standard insurance insures me on my car, but I'm also insured to drive someone else's car too without further premiums required.
      - walshemj 9y ago
        So an experienced driver is subsidizing young drivers
      - gambiting 9y ago
        Well.....that's not quite true - British insurance usually covers you for driving other cars, but only gives you 3rd party insurance....so I would never risk driving someone's car unless it was some really old beater not worth much.

simion314 9y ago

But is not only about the money, humans can lose their freedom from major accidents, what if you get a bad update or bad sensors and your car kills some people, some engineers or managers should have to pay if they did something wrong and not point to the insurance company. I do not want some manager to think something like "don't worry about that bug, it is very rare so insurance will cover us in case something bad happens, we need to push the update now"

dx034 9y ago
> But is not only about the money, humans can lose their freedom from major accidents, what if you get a bad update or bad sensors and your car kills some people, some engineers or managers should have to pay if they did something wrong and not point to the insurance company. Software automation has already happened in other areas. If the bug was introduced on purpose or if there was insufficient oversight/negligence, people can go to jail. Not not any error automatically is a crime. If you kill someone with your car that doesn't mean that you'll be charged even if the accident was your fault.
- simion314 9y ago
  I understand but is there something in place to handle this issue, you would need people that will analyze the car software, the updates, the practices and decide who is responsible, my question is there something in place or we need to wait for this laws to appear ?
  - MBCook 9y ago
    Right. How many people will be horribly injured or die in ‘the incident’ that leads to the lawsuit that gets these companies to take this stuff seriously.
chrisseaton 9y ago
> some engineers or managers should have to pay if they did something wrong and not point to the insurance company That's already how insurance works. You pay by paying for insurance premiums. Why do you think people shouldn't be allowed to use insurance to cover accidents in just this situation?
- simion314 9y ago
  Say the manager knows about a bug in the AI but it consider that is more expensive to wait and properly fix it then push an update with the bug present. Should the decision of fixing or not a bug that can cause lives be influenced only by how much will insurance cost? I am not arguing that a person should pay with his freedom for a mistake, people do mistake, I am afraid that the bad behavior from software industry will apply to self driving cars, the move fast and brake things mentality,ship with known bugs etc.
  - chrisseaton 9y ago
    > Should the decision of fixing or not a bug that can cause lives be influenced only by how much will insurance cost? But the price of the insurance takes into account the risk of a bug costing a life. They know if they make riskier decisions their insurance premiums will go up. Insurance doesn't magically remove costs. It just amortises them. Loss adjusters have been experts at this for centuries.
    - simion314 9y ago
      >But the price of the insurance takes into account the risk of a bug costing a life. The possible problem is who sets this price for a life, it needs to be high enough but not absurd.
      - chrisseaton 9y ago
        But this isn't a new problem at all. Loss adjusters have already been doing this for many industries where someone can be killed. Insurance for normal cars already does it even! Why are self-driving cars any different?

azag0 9y ago

Ok, that's financial liability. What about criminal liability? What if the car breaks rules and kills someone. Will the programmers be responsible? The CEO? Can companies be criminally convicted in the US? Or will it be on par with other "machine accidents", where there is typically no criminal responsibility?

awestroke 9y ago
I don't understand this obsession with finding someone to hold responsible for an accident before the accident happens. When an accident with self-driving cars actually happen, if someone is found to have committed a crime, that person will be charged.
- gambiting 9y ago
  If you run a red light and kill someone, it's pretty clear who is responsible though. If a driverless car runs a red light because of a hardware defect, who is? No one? Or do you think there will be a committee trying to establish what exactly went wrong and where? With planes, when autopilot does something stupid, Boeing/Airbus will ground all planes of the same type until they can figure out what the issue is. I can't imagine we will ever hold cars to the same standard as we hold airplanes, that's just impossible.
  - awestroke 9y ago
    Sometimes, nobody should be held responsible. It's called an accident.
    - diggernet 9y ago
      And if nobody is held responsible, there is no risk for a company to put shoddy software on the street.
      - ergothus 9y ago
        At which point they've crossed the line into a crime, so liability is a crime. These concepts are already in play in other industries that use software on devices that could harm or kill.

gambiting 9y ago

>> this is how insurance is done in many countries in Europe. Not all though. For example in Poland you insure the vehicle and anyone with a valid driver licence is allowed to drive it and is fully covered. As a matter of fact it's enshrined in law that insurance companies have to provide cover no matter who drives the car, as long as there is insurance on the car.

walshemj 9y ago
Strange normally insurance is tied to the person in the UK
- gambiting 9y ago
  I know, it was really strange to me when I moved to UK - what do you mean, I can't just let someone else drive my car? I have to add them to my insurance? Why? I mean, I understand how it works now, but to me it still seems like an excuse to extract a lot more money from British drivers.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - jk563 9y ago
    I'm not sure about that. The flip side of that is that my standard insurance insures me on my car, but I'm also insured to drive someone else's car too without further premiums required.
    - walshemj 9y ago
      So an experienced driver is subsidizing young drivers
    - gambiting 9y ago
      Well.....that's not quite true - British insurance usually covers you for driving other cars, but only gives you 3rd party insurance....so I would never risk driving someone's car unless it was some really old beater not worth much.