Isn't OP about a moving infraction it caused, despite its programming? Arguing the probabilities of an outcome is an engineering-centric approach to selling th

Isn't OP about a moving infraction it caused, despite its programming? Arguing the probabilities of an outcome is an engineering-centric approach to selling these cars to the public, and it doesn't land well IMO/in this thread from others. It makes a false equivalence b/t how we value human agency's role in outcomes, and something other-than-human. Most people seem to prefer the risk outcomes of something I decided, vs. a faceless control system.