3 ms·
That's not a fair comparison at all. You seem to be under the impression that the law is always up to date with technology and the times. There is no precedent
by computerex 8y ago
That's not a fair comparison at all. You seem to be under the impression that the law is always up to date with technology and the times. There is no precedent for self driving cars, and a lot of law has to be developed and precedent established before things start making sense in this context.
I need not state this, but self driving cars pose a danger quite different from airplanes.
- sokoloff 8y agoWaymo has governmental OK to operate, just as Delta has FAA approval to operate. AZ governor is trying to make Arizona a leader in the space. If his constituents disagree with their collective civilization’s decision, they should take their words to him, not their rocks and knives to mete out vigilante justice. https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/tech/2018/10/11/arizona-institute-automated-mobility-created-self-driving-cars/1594941002/ https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/tech/2018/10/... Disclaimer: I’m not particularly bullish on self-driving cars in general; I just happen to more strongly believe in laws.
- vvanders 8y agoI think a closer analogy would be if Delta was developing an experimental plane that was not certified for commercial use and they got permission to operate it over a residential area. Technically correct but you'd understand if people who lived under the flight path might have some concerns, even more so if they weren't involved and/or asked as a part of the operational endorsement.
- mulmen 8y agoAirlines can’t develop airplanes in the United States. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Mail_scandal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Mail_scandal
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]