4 ms·

I agree that there is a significant monetary incentive to "move fast and kill people". In the end, paying out a few $MM to random families is financially minima

I agree that there is a significant monetary incentive to "move fast and kill people". In the end, paying out a few $MM to random families is financially minimal compared to the $BBB that are up for grabs. We will never really have executives going to jail for things like this. We've built a system of profits > anything else.

goodpoint 5y ago
This has been the status quo for the whole car industry for decades. If executives were jailed for car accidents people we would have trains and trams in every corner.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  Ordinary cars are testable, we understands quality of merials, corrosion, etc. When it comes to AI droving, noone has a fucking clue what it will do in next 50 milliseconds. Teslas literally mis-classified a semi trailer for an underpass The opportunity for shenanighans is endless
- NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
  ... and if makers of kitchen implements were jailed for knife accidents/crime then we'd be eating soup with plastic spoons for every meal. It doesn't make sense to have universal product liability in that way: there are too many creative idiots.
  - eeZah7Ux 5y ago
    In terms of complexity and security features a car is much closer to an airplane than a knife. It's very disingenuous to compare it to a knife.
    - NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
      Not really; the fact is that sharp objects and heavy objects moving at speed are both inherently hazardous because of the basic nature of the physical world, but those same attributes make them extremely useful. I don't object at all to holding manufacturers accountable for defective products; but it makes no sense to say "if your product is involved in an accident, you go to jail", which was the premise of the comment to which I responded.
      - eeZah7Ux 5y ago
        > Not really Citation needed. > was the premise of the comment to which I responded. It clearly wasn't.

goodpoint 5y ago

This has been the status quo for the whole car industry for decades. If executives were jailed for car accidents people we would have trains and trams in every corner.

ClumsyPilot 5y ago
Ordinary cars are testable, we understands quality of merials, corrosion, etc. When it comes to AI droving, noone has a fucking clue what it will do in next 50 milliseconds. Teslas literally mis-classified a semi trailer for an underpass The opportunity for shenanighans is endless
NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
... and if makers of kitchen implements were jailed for knife accidents/crime then we'd be eating soup with plastic spoons for every meal. It doesn't make sense to have universal product liability in that way: there are too many creative idiots.
- eeZah7Ux 5y ago
  In terms of complexity and security features a car is much closer to an airplane than a knife. It's very disingenuous to compare it to a knife.
  - NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
    Not really; the fact is that sharp objects and heavy objects moving at speed are both inherently hazardous because of the basic nature of the physical world, but those same attributes make them extremely useful. I don't object at all to holding manufacturers accountable for defective products; but it makes no sense to say "if your product is involved in an accident, you go to jail", which was the premise of the comment to which I responded.
    - eeZah7Ux 5y ago
      > Not really Citation needed. > was the premise of the comment to which I responded. It clearly wasn't.