3 ms·
I think the "for-profit"" by a "multi-billion dollar corporation" thought process is clouding your judgment. It is such a trite and overused argument. Why doe
by glofish 7y ago
I think the "for-profit"" by a "multi-billion dollar corporation" thought process is clouding your judgment.
It is such a trite and overused argument.
Why does it feel so different to you if the accident was caused by negligent human texting, versus an engineer making decisions in code?
If anything that engineer was most likely operating in much better faith than the texting, perhaps drunk human driver.
- puranjay 7y agoIt's a rather complicated question. Intention matters a lot when it comes to dealing with on-road incidents. If there is no intention, we deem it an "accident", else we deem it manslaughter. The punishment - by courts and by society - are much harsher for the latter. Can code be "accidental"? Surely not. Someone had an intent to write and implement it. If it fails, its not "accidental"; the system was just programmed that way. So the question is: are we okay with for-profit companies intentionally writing software that can lead to deaths?