2 ms·

Yet lawyers are stratospherically known for arguing anything that will win their case. Being reasonable is not any defense, not for a computer. And, this argum

• bell-cot 3y ago
  > ...reasonable is not any defense, not for... ...any case where the lawyer knows there could be Deep Pockets in play. Quite true. And there is a wide gulf between "X would be a reasonable engineering and regulatory standard", and "X is the current standard". OTOH... > Example: a truck stops in front of the autodriving car, too quickly for it to stop in time. It knows this; it understands its vehicle handling to many decimal places ... a likely-fatal accident ... This is not a "well-understood traffic situation", and it may not be physically possible without a crazy assumption or few. The autodriving car has brakes, a crumple zone in front, air bags, etc. Cars generally have much shorter braking distances than trucks, and the autodriving car presumably has quick reactions. Was the autodriving car blindly approaching the truck at already-lethal (even if the truck had not stopped) speeds? Is the truck loaded with high-sensitivity explosives, that a fairly minor collision will set off?