24 ms·

It's an error to attribute negligence to the safety driver of an experimental car who is watching a video rather than watching the road? Obviously the system s

It's an error to attribute negligence to the safety driver of an experimental car who is watching a video rather than watching the road? Obviously the system should improve to make errors less likely, but that doesn't absolve anyone of guilt in my view.

LoSboccacc 6y ago
air lines have reached their current safety precisely because they consider the whole system as a whole and not just focus on the error. the wet bags behind the autopilot get bored, distracted, complacent, ill or reckless due a moltitude of factors some of which outside their control it is well known at this point the human modes of failure, and that there was basically no mitigation is a reasonability of the system designer
- PJDK 6y ago
  But holding individuals accountable for their actions. A better system would have spotted this person was watching their phone not the road, but it would still have held them accountable and (at minimum) fired them!
  - kevinmchugh 6y ago
    This flaw is perfectly predictable, given other experience in industrial safety, so why was the better system not built?
    - PJDK 6y ago
      A totally fair point, Uber needs to be held to account for their systemic failings. That doesn't mean that an employee being clearly negligent doesn't also need to be held accountable. Them being held accountable is one part of a good system.
infogulch 6y ago
We can discuss morality endlessly. We have (collectively) agreed to use the law to assign guilt and mete judgement -- this the court case will bear out eventually. What's left is the problem itself abstracted from the particulars of this case. And the best approach to solving this kind of problem, as evidenced by the aviation industry's miraculous safety record, is to consider the concept of assigning blame as out of scope because it shouldn't be the basis for our safety precautions. In this context, blame is something that distracts you from the real cause and can prevent you from looking more closely. Blame is a kind of 'bottom' argument which in practice is wielded to dismiss alternative perspectives and refuse to integrate their ideas.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- clairity 6y ago
  that's a good point. i'd add that even in the legal system, assigning blame is highly problematic because decisions are overwhelmingly pressured into being purely binary findings, whereas blame is nearly always shared by multiple entities. lawsuits would be much better if the "win-lose" dichotomy was entirely abolished in all its forms. in this case, the backup driver should shoulder some blame, but not the majority of it, and commensurately, should not face any of the harsh penalties associated with manslaughter.

LoSboccacc 6y ago

air lines have reached their current safety precisely because they consider the whole system as a whole and not just focus on the error. the wet bags behind the autopilot get bored, distracted, complacent, ill or reckless due a moltitude of factors some of which outside their control it is well known at this point the human modes of failure, and that there was basically no mitigation is a reasonability of the system designer

PJDK 6y ago
But holding individuals accountable for their actions. A better system would have spotted this person was watching their phone not the road, but it would still have held them accountable and (at minimum) fired them!
- kevinmchugh 6y ago
  This flaw is perfectly predictable, given other experience in industrial safety, so why was the better system not built?
  - PJDK 6y ago
    A totally fair point, Uber needs to be held to account for their systemic failings. That doesn't mean that an employee being clearly negligent doesn't also need to be held accountable. Them being held accountable is one part of a good system.

infogulch 6y ago

We can discuss morality endlessly. We have (collectively) agreed to use the law to assign guilt and mete judgement -- this the court case will bear out eventually. What's left is the problem itself abstracted from the particulars of this case. And the best approach to solving this kind of problem, as evidenced by the aviation industry's miraculous safety record, is to consider the concept of assigning blame as out of scope because it shouldn't be the basis for our safety precautions. In this context, blame is something that distracts you from the real cause and can prevent you from looking more closely. Blame is a kind of 'bottom' argument which in practice is wielded to dismiss alternative perspectives and refuse to integrate their ideas.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
clairity 6y ago
that's a good point. i'd add that even in the legal system, assigning blame is highly problematic because decisions are overwhelmingly pressured into being purely binary findings, whereas blame is nearly always shared by multiple entities. lawsuits would be much better if the "win-lose" dichotomy was entirely abolished in all its forms. in this case, the backup driver should shoulder some blame, but not the majority of it, and commensurately, should not face any of the harsh penalties associated with manslaughter.