4 ms·

If this exact same thing had happened 20 years ago, we would all agree that the people to blame are the ones behind. The person who rear-ends another is almost

by epgui 4y ago

If this exact same thing had happened 20 years ago, we would all agree that the people to blame are the ones behind. The person who rear-ends another is almost always at fault. So even if FSD made the very poor decision to slow down or stop right there (and I will point out we have good reason to think this was not FSD, but rather autopilot or human driving), the blame still goes to the rear-ender.

wolverine876 4y ago
> I will point out we have good reason to think this was not FSD, but rather autopilot or human driving No, the actual research says otherwise > If this exact same thing had happened 20 years ago, we would all agree that the people to blame are the ones behind. No, not if someone comes to a sudden stop in a busy lane.
- epgui 4y ago
  What “actual research”? This article? There’s no source.
- int_19h 4y ago
  Coming to a sudden stop in a busy lane may well be necessary if there's some unexpected obstacle in front of you. Which is why road rules require maintaining sufficient distance to the car in front of you that if it has to brake hard, you have enough time to react and do the same thing without ramming into it. IIRC police has already said that at least some cars involved in the accident did not maintain such a safe distance, and their drivers thus bear their share of responsibility for the crash.
- cynix 4y ago
  > No, not if someone comes to a sudden stop in a busy lane. Why not? You’re meant to maintain enough distance to the car in front of you at all times that you should be able to come to a complete stop without rear-ending them.
giantrobot 4y ago
The Tesla switched fucking lanes. You're can't fault someone in the second lane for not predicting some asshole will cut them off and slam on the brakes. The robot is a laughably bad driver. If a human had the collective record of either Autopilot or FSD they'd be uninsurable and have long ago lost their license.
- epgui 4y ago
  Well, the police, the judges, and the insurance companies fault people for rear-ending others in similar situations all the time.
  - jyxent 4y ago
    Only due to the absence of other information. This is why lots of people have started using dashcams.
    - epgui 4y ago
      Yeah... But in the vast majority of cases, rear-ending is caused by some combination of inattention and tailgating rather than the malice of the leading car. Let's not forget that humans are really bad at driving in general, and that this is extremely frequent. And even if the leading car was non-malicious and merely incompetent, it's your responsibility to not hit anything in front of you. For liability, you worry about what's in front, not what's behind. The only way you get out of being liable for rear-ending someone is if the leading car maliciously caused you to rear-end them, or if something unpredictable happened that would have made it impossible for you to avoid hitting the other car.
      - jyxent 4y ago
        > The only way you get out of being liable for rear-ending someone is if the leading car maliciously caused you to rear-end them, or if something unpredictable happened that would have made it impossible for you to avoid hitting the other car. This is literally what happened in this situation. If you have a dashcam and something like this happens, you won't be found at fault.

by epgui 4y ago

wolverine876 4y ago

> I will point out we have good reason to think this was not FSD, but rather autopilot or human driving No, the actual research says otherwise > If this exact same thing had happened 20 years ago, we would all agree that the people to blame are the ones behind. No, not if someone comes to a sudden stop in a busy lane.

epgui 4y ago
What “actual research”? This article? There’s no source.
int_19h 4y ago
Coming to a sudden stop in a busy lane may well be necessary if there's some unexpected obstacle in front of you. Which is why road rules require maintaining sufficient distance to the car in front of you that if it has to brake hard, you have enough time to react and do the same thing without ramming into it. IIRC police has already said that at least some cars involved in the accident did not maintain such a safe distance, and their drivers thus bear their share of responsibility for the crash.
cynix 4y ago
> No, not if someone comes to a sudden stop in a busy lane. Why not? You’re meant to maintain enough distance to the car in front of you at all times that you should be able to come to a complete stop without rear-ending them.

giantrobot 4y ago

The Tesla switched fucking lanes. You're can't fault someone in the second lane for not predicting some asshole will cut them off and slam on the brakes. The robot is a laughably bad driver. If a human had the collective record of either Autopilot or FSD they'd be uninsurable and have long ago lost their license.

epgui 4y ago
Well, the police, the judges, and the insurance companies fault people for rear-ending others in similar situations all the time.
- jyxent 4y ago
  Only due to the absence of other information. This is why lots of people have started using dashcams.
  - epgui 4y ago
    Yeah... But in the vast majority of cases, rear-ending is caused by some combination of inattention and tailgating rather than the malice of the leading car. Let's not forget that humans are really bad at driving in general, and that this is extremely frequent. And even if the leading car was non-malicious and merely incompetent, it's your responsibility to not hit anything in front of you. For liability, you worry about what's in front, not what's behind. The only way you get out of being liable for rear-ending someone is if the leading car maliciously caused you to rear-end them, or if something unpredictable happened that would have made it impossible for you to avoid hitting the other car.
    - jyxent 4y ago
      > The only way you get out of being liable for rear-ending someone is if the leading car maliciously caused you to rear-end them, or if something unpredictable happened that would have made it impossible for you to avoid hitting the other car. This is literally what happened in this situation. If you have a dashcam and something like this happens, you won't be found at fault.