13 ms·
> This did not result in any policy changes. Right, and why would it? The headline of the article you linked is: "Driver of N.Y.P.D. Tow Truck Is Charged Afte
by nawgz 3y ago
> This did not result in any policy changes.
Right, and why would it? The headline of the article you linked is:
"Driver of N.Y.P.D. Tow Truck Is Charged After Killing 7-Year-Old Boy"
Meanwhile, Cruise is a giant corporation who are performing research to fuel their for-profit business on public streets, which means they therefore answer to the authority of the state on the bounds of this research.
The state, seeing that the for-profit corporation is behaving in bad faith within the guidelines they've set up, are going to update policy / use the punitive actions outlined within that policy to answer to this bad faith behavior.
Can you explain to me why these seem to be comparable situations that should be treated identically to you?
- tiahura 3y agoBecause they both involve pedestrian deaths? The point being made is that we've got wildly different, possibly irrational so, expectations of safety in these two different contexts, but in the end, the consequence is the same, an innocent dead pedestrian.
- cyanydeez 3y agoone has a standard criminal procedure. the other has...?
- carlosdp 3y ago> Because they both involve pedestrian deaths? To my knowledge, the Cruise incident does not involve any deaths. The woman was taken to the ICU, but I haven't seen anything about her dying.
- ceejayoz 3y agoBoth involve pedestrians. Only one involves covering up evidence in an attempt to deceive regulators.
- emmender1 3y agoallow me.. the person is incentivized to view the events in that manner (ie works for or is associated with cruise/autopilot etc)...