2 ms·

Remember not long ago when Uber killed a pedestrian? https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-54175359 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-54175359 > Ms Vasquez wa

Remember not long ago when Uber killed a pedestrian? https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-54175359 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-54175359 > Ms Vasquez was charged on 27 August, and made her first appearance in court on 15 September. The trial is now set for February next year. > Despite the decision not to levy criminal charges against Uber itself, the company did not escape criticism. > Days before the crash, an employee had warned his superiors that the vehicles were unsafe, were routinely in accidents, and raised concerns about the training of operators. > Following the crash, authorities in Arizona suspended Uber's ability to test self-driving cars on the state's public roads, and Uber ended its tests in the state. It received permission to carry out tests in the state of California earlier this year. So despite all the safety failures by the company, just the hired driver was charged...

gruez 6y ago
>> Days before the crash, an employee had warned his superiors that the vehicles were unsafe, were routinely in accidents, and raised concerns about the training of operators. >So despite all the safety failures by the company, just the hired driver was charged... A thought experiment: if a municipality was warned about safety failures about its streets (high speed limits, poor lighting/signage, lack of pedestrian crossings), and some kid got killed in a car accident, should the municipality be liable? What if everything that uber/the municipality did was within the law, and the only thing they're guilty of is not taking additional safety measures? eg. dropping the speed limit to 20mph in suburbs will probably eliminate all pedestrian deaths, should the municipality be liable if it set the speed limit to 30mph and the kid died?