5 ms·
>speeding >didn't engage breaks >not ubers fault one of these things is not like the other. The basic expectation is that if people are on the edge of a roa
by Steeeve 9y ago
>speeding
>didn't engage breaks
>not ubers fault
one of these things is not like the other.
The basic expectation is that if people are on the edge of a roadway you slow down and pay more attention. What exactly was the person in the drivers seat doing?
- userbinator 9y agoWhat exactly was the person in the drivers seat doing? Nothing, because the car was clearly supposed to be driving itself.
- IncRnd 9y agoThe car didn't have a driver's license. The driver did, regardless of the amount of assistance provided by the car. What is troubling is that the breaks were never applied.
- dingo_bat 9y agoIt's not that simple, I believe. Many governments have issues special registrations to self-driving cars, which waive off the requirement of an active driver to some extent. In that sense, the car actually has a "license" while the person sitting in the "driver's" seat is more of an attendant.
- IncRnd 9y agoThat's a very good point. Thank you for pointing that out. AZ does allow self-driving cars without drivers, as long as they follow the traditional laws and rules of the road. I would argue that in this particular case, from the information that has been released, the car may have followed the laws of the road but it didn't appear to follow the traditional defensive driving rules of the road that parents teach their children, such as, "see that person with the bike standing on the median? Be careful. Don't hit them."
- crooked-v 9y agoIf the edge of the roadway was full of parked cars, the person might not have been visible (to either man or machine) until she walked out from between them.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]