3 ms·
We can argue all day about whether Cruise was in the wrong here, but the fact is, with autonomous cars becoming more common, this kind of situation is going to
by annexrichmond 3y ago
We can argue all day about whether Cruise was in the wrong here, but the fact is, with autonomous cars becoming more common, this kind of situation is going to happen - an autonomous car blocking a vehicle in an emergency - and protocols/regulations need to be in place for handling these situations.
- macinjosh 3y agoIt is not a fact we have to allow these corporate experiments on the roads with our sons and daughters.
- phpisthebest 3y agoLike with most things autonomous cars my question would be what is the over/under on how autonomous cars compare to the human population because I see Human drivers blocking emergency vehicles all the time... So the question is not, imo, if autonomous cars will be perfect, all the time. But if they are better than human drivers.
- jinkiesScoob 3y agoHow about instead of thinking about it from a statistical perspective we think of it from a liability one. A human driver has direct liability for the motor vehicle they operate. Meanwhile Cruise is a social construct literally designed to avoid liability. If a human kills someone accidentally they are almost certain to apologize and be obviously distraught. Cruise will deny everything, never apologize. While that is technically valueless by your metric, in the real world that has a lot of intangible value for those involved.
- phpisthebest 3y agoIn what way are they not liable, or designed to avoid liability. >human kills someone accidentally they are almost certain to apologize and be obviously distraught you start out wanting to use reason, then quickly jump to an emotional argument. I really dont care if if they feel distraught or not, I really do not care if they apologize or not. I care if they are likely to be a danger to others in the future, I care if there is a pattern of dangerous behavior, and I care that they (to the extent possible) make the victims hole. None of which requires them to express remorse, or be "obviously distraught" nor should any that be different between human and automated drivers. For example new laws in TN and TX will require someone that kills a person while driving drunk to pay child support if the victim has a child. That concept could also easily be adopted to automated driving. We do not need special laws, special regulations, etc. Human drivers and automated drivers should be held to the same standard. the Same standard.
- nickthegreek 3y agoA human can be held accountable. When another vehicle causes harm to a person, I want accountability. When things go wrong, and they will, who is being held liable. The answer cannot be no one.
- phpisthebest 3y agoI dont believe I or anyone else has ever suggest no accountability. I think the cars should be ticketed, fined, even have a points system just like normal drivers. I fail to see why that is not an option? I fail to see why we new all new regulation, all new laws when what we have can just be applied to them...
- bob_theslob646 3y ago[flagged]
- dang 3y agoPlease edit out swipes and personal attacks from your comments, regardless of how wrong someone is or you feel they are. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html