5 ms·

Why did you type three paragraphs of nothing? What is the 'correct' way to frame this question?

by Daz1 3y ago

otabdeveloper4 3y ago
The correct way is "who goes to jail if a driverless car kills a child?"
- greiskul 3y ago
  Why? Who goes to jail if a child trips and falls down stairs? Should we ban stairs? If there were no negligence from the owner in maintaining the car, and no negligence in the manufacturer, why do you care if anyone goes to jail? It won't bring the child back. If self driving cars reduce the number of fatalities, and specially if they reduce them significantly, would you really be against them just because there won't be an easy target to put in jail if an accident happens?
  - otabdeveloper4 3y ago
    If you drive a car that kills a child, you (potentially) go to jail. If you are in a car that is driven by Waymo and it kills a child, the car drives away with no repercussions. Are you really advocating a world where we change the laws to give Waymo a license to kill? That won't ever, ever happen. Also, "no negligence from the manufacturer" is very much begging the question. Read the typical software EULA, it is negligent by default.
    - brabel 3y ago
      Your argument is so terrible it's hard to understand how someone can actually believe that. Is your main concern really who is to blame for an accident, rather than how to avoid such accidents more effectively in the first place??? OMG please try to change your mindset, what a horrible way to approach this problem.
      - otabdeveloper4 3y ago
        Are you claiming we should just abandon all manslaughter laws, #yolo, in the name of "progress" and market capitalization? Really?
    - Dylan16807 3y ago
      > If you drive a car that kills a child, you (potentially) go to jail. If you weren't being negligent, the odds of going to jail are very low. We can and should have the same "potential" for the people designing the car's software. But Waymo seems to be developing their code properly so it would never trigger for them. > Are you really advocating a world where we change the laws to give Waymo a license to kill? Everyone already has a license to kill if the activity is sufficiently sanctioned and the particular death is sufficiently unforeseeable. > Read the typical software EULA, it is negligent by default. What? Disclaiming liability isn't negligence.
      - otabdeveloper4 3y ago
        > But Waymo seems to be developing their code properly so it would never trigger for them. Allow me to not trust what their marketing department says. These are legal issues, "fake it till you make it" doesn't work here.
        Dylan16807 3y ago
        Sure, don't trust them, but at least see it's very possible, and that not being punished in that case wouldn't really be different from normal drivers.
        otabdeveloper4 3y ago
        "Conduct an investigation and punish the responsible in case of criminal negligence" is very different from "shit happens, so what if somebody died, Waymo's marketing decided that total collective happiness increased anyways". Manslaugher is not the place to apply software startup disruption ideas.
        Dylan16807 3y ago
        My bigger point is that you only need to check for coder negligence every once in a while, not every time someone gets hit, it's fine if in the typical case nobody risks jail. The """license to kill""" is one that drivers already have. And you keep making the waymo side more and more of a strawman with each comment. I would appreciate the goal posts staying in place.

Why did you type three paragraphs of nothing? What is the 'correct' way to frame this question?

by Daz1 3y ago

Why did you type three paragraphs of nothing? What is the 'correct' way to frame this question?

otabdeveloper4 3y ago

The correct way is "who goes to jail if a driverless car kills a child?"

greiskul 3y ago
Why? Who goes to jail if a child trips and falls down stairs? Should we ban stairs? If there were no negligence from the owner in maintaining the car, and no negligence in the manufacturer, why do you care if anyone goes to jail? It won't bring the child back. If self driving cars reduce the number of fatalities, and specially if they reduce them significantly, would you really be against them just because there won't be an easy target to put in jail if an accident happens?
- otabdeveloper4 3y ago
  If you drive a car that kills a child, you (potentially) go to jail. If you are in a car that is driven by Waymo and it kills a child, the car drives away with no repercussions. Are you really advocating a world where we change the laws to give Waymo a license to kill? That won't ever, ever happen. Also, "no negligence from the manufacturer" is very much begging the question. Read the typical software EULA, it is negligent by default.
  - brabel 3y ago
    Your argument is so terrible it's hard to understand how someone can actually believe that. Is your main concern really who is to blame for an accident, rather than how to avoid such accidents more effectively in the first place??? OMG please try to change your mindset, what a horrible way to approach this problem.
    - otabdeveloper4 3y ago
      Are you claiming we should just abandon all manslaughter laws, #yolo, in the name of "progress" and market capitalization? Really?
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    > If you drive a car that kills a child, you (potentially) go to jail. If you weren't being negligent, the odds of going to jail are very low. We can and should have the same "potential" for the people designing the car's software. But Waymo seems to be developing their code properly so it would never trigger for them. > Are you really advocating a world where we change the laws to give Waymo a license to kill? Everyone already has a license to kill if the activity is sufficiently sanctioned and the particular death is sufficiently unforeseeable. > Read the typical software EULA, it is negligent by default. What? Disclaiming liability isn't negligence.
    - otabdeveloper4 3y ago
      > But Waymo seems to be developing their code properly so it would never trigger for them. Allow me to not trust what their marketing department says. These are legal issues, "fake it till you make it" doesn't work here.
      - Dylan16807 3y ago
        Sure, don't trust them, but at least see it's very possible, and that not being punished in that case wouldn't really be different from normal drivers.
        otabdeveloper4 3y ago
        "Conduct an investigation and punish the responsible in case of criminal negligence" is very different from "shit happens, so what if somebody died, Waymo's marketing decided that total collective happiness increased anyways". Manslaugher is not the place to apply software startup disruption ideas.
        Dylan16807 3y ago
        My bigger point is that you only need to check for coder negligence every once in a while, not every time someone gets hit, it's fine if in the typical case nobody risks jail. The """license to kill""" is one that drivers already have. And you keep making the waymo side more and more of a strawman with each comment. I would appreciate the goal posts staying in place.