3 ms·

Again, who is going to be put in jail when the first person is murdered by a driverless car? Because that's the only motivation for keeping things safe, if it'

by ck2 5y ago

Again, who is going to be put in jail when the first person is murdered by a driverless car? Because that's the only motivation for keeping things safe, if it's just a fine corporations will just cut a check and write it off and shrug. Cyclist on side of road, pedestrian wearing the wrong thing crossing the road, etc. Sure a human could have killed them too. But that human will be put on trial/jail.

lazide 5y ago
Well, technically murder requires a human assailant and intent, which the car won’t have. Unless the programmer intends it anyway, then they are the murderer. Same as a lion can’t murder a human. It’s just being a lion, doing lion things.
- DarkUranium 5y ago
  On the other hand, crows commonly partake in murders. ((I had to.))
Jensson 5y ago
Already happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Elaine_Herzberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Elaine_Herzberg The end result is that Uber ended their self driving car program and paid the family money, while the grunt worker who was put in the car without proper training got charged with negligent homicide and that trial is still going. The person responsible for that program should be charged, not the safety driver, but that is how things goes. You can't just put random people in a car and call them safety drivers, and charging such a person with homicide doesn't really get to the root of the problem.
- mavhc 5y ago
  The problem is the justice system assumes 1 person kills 1 other person. In reality there were 100s of people in the chain of events, from the safety driver being bored and watching their phone, to the person who hired them and didn't train them properly, to the person who invented the safety driver system and didn't think people would get bored. Then you have the people who made the decision to turn off some of the subsystems of the car and then test it at night with no extra precautions, and every programmer who let that happen. The the management of the company who provided the wrong incentives to their employees. And that's before you get to the people who designed the roads, and the lack of social care to look after people who for some reason are homeless
- dheera 5y ago
  > The person responsible for that program The problem is it's not really that person's fault either if they were pressured by executives to have a demo in 2 weeks for some investors. If the investors were of the "demo or die" mindset then the investors bear part of the fault as well.
rcxdude 5y ago
The thought that drivers will be put in jail for killing someone (especially a pedestrian or cyclist) already seems optimistic. Often they aren't even charged, even in cases of extreme road rage where the collision is deliberate.
zppln 5y ago
In my part of aviation (not in the US) we have a person responsible for each subsystem, and they very much risk going to jail if it turns out they've been negligent. If it's not safe, you don't sign the papers saying it is. People wouldn't dream of doing the equivalent of putting a prototype car on public roads with an aircraft here.

by ck2 5y ago

lazide 5y ago

Well, technically murder requires a human assailant and intent, which the car won’t have. Unless the programmer intends it anyway, then they are the murderer. Same as a lion can’t murder a human. It’s just being a lion, doing lion things.

DarkUranium 5y ago
On the other hand, crows commonly partake in murders. ((I had to.))

Jensson 5y ago

Already happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Elaine_Herzberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Elaine_Herzberg The end result is that Uber ended their self driving car program and paid the family money, while the grunt worker who was put in the car without proper training got charged with negligent homicide and that trial is still going. The person responsible for that program should be charged, not the safety driver, but that is how things goes. You can't just put random people in a car and call them safety drivers, and charging such a person with homicide doesn't really get to the root of the problem.

mavhc 5y ago
The problem is the justice system assumes 1 person kills 1 other person. In reality there were 100s of people in the chain of events, from the safety driver being bored and watching their phone, to the person who hired them and didn't train them properly, to the person who invented the safety driver system and didn't think people would get bored. Then you have the people who made the decision to turn off some of the subsystems of the car and then test it at night with no extra precautions, and every programmer who let that happen. The the management of the company who provided the wrong incentives to their employees. And that's before you get to the people who designed the roads, and the lack of social care to look after people who for some reason are homeless
dheera 5y ago
> The person responsible for that program The problem is it's not really that person's fault either if they were pressured by executives to have a demo in 2 weeks for some investors. If the investors were of the "demo or die" mindset then the investors bear part of the fault as well.

rcxdude 5y ago

The thought that drivers will be put in jail for killing someone (especially a pedestrian or cyclist) already seems optimistic. Often they aren't even charged, even in cases of extreme road rage where the collision is deliberate.

zppln 5y ago

In my part of aviation (not in the US) we have a person responsible for each subsystem, and they very much risk going to jail if it turns out they've been negligent. If it's not safe, you don't sign the papers saying it is. People wouldn't dream of doing the equivalent of putting a prototype car on public roads with an aircraft here.