3 ms·

* 10:05am: Wood and VP of Global Government Affairs Prashanthi Raman have virtual meeting with Mayor of SF's transpo advisor. Wood shows full video, "reportedly

* 10:05am: Wood and VP of Global Government Affairs Prashanthi Raman have virtual meeting with Mayor of SF's transpo advisor. Wood shows full video, "reportedly with internet connectivity issues from his home computer"; neither Wood nor Raman brings up or discusses pullover or dragging * 10:30am: Virtual meeting with NHTSA. Wood shows full video, "again having internet connectivity issues causing video to freeze and/or black-out in key places including after initial impact" and again not bringing up or discussing pullover or dragging * 11:05am: Cruise regulatory, legal, and systems integrity employees have pre-meeting for DMV and California Highway Patrol (CHP) briefing; Cruise team doesn't discuss pullover and dragging * 11:30am: hybrid in-person and virtual meeting with DMV and CHP. Wood shows full video, again with internet connectivity issues and again not bringing up or discussing pullover or dragging Internet connection issues, can happen to anyone

dpflan 3y ago
Oh indeed, at least the presenter wasn’t stuck as a cat avatar. That would make the coincidental recurrence of connectivity issues even funnier, but shouldn’t the authorities have received a copy of the video, devoid of “internet connection” issues? Or was it not in legal position to demand the artifact and just have it shown over Zoom?
- rsynnott 3y ago
  They claim the NHTSA got one. However, if, ah, connectivity issues obscure the video of the Bad Thing in the meeting, and the Bad Thing is not mentioned in the meeting, then the chances of it being noticed even if a video was sent do decline.
  - dpflan 3y ago
    True, I would expect someone to review the footage in entirety without the presenter biasing the presentation.
    - rsynnott 3y ago
      I'm sure someone did. It may not necessarily have been someone who had attended the meeting and thus was aware that the key fact had not been disclosed in the meeting, tho. With stuff like this you want to be absolutely crystal clear what happened in your written and verbal reports. You can't just rely on a video that you may or may not have emailed over after previously showing it in such a manner as to obscure the key info.

dpflan 3y ago

Oh indeed, at least the presenter wasn’t stuck as a cat avatar. That would make the coincidental recurrence of connectivity issues even funnier, but shouldn’t the authorities have received a copy of the video, devoid of “internet connection” issues? Or was it not in legal position to demand the artifact and just have it shown over Zoom?

rsynnott 3y ago
They claim the NHTSA got one. However, if, ah, connectivity issues obscure the video of the Bad Thing in the meeting, and the Bad Thing is not mentioned in the meeting, then the chances of it being noticed even if a video was sent do decline.
- dpflan 3y ago
  True, I would expect someone to review the footage in entirety without the presenter biasing the presentation.
  - rsynnott 3y ago
    I'm sure someone did. It may not necessarily have been someone who had attended the meeting and thus was aware that the key fact had not been disclosed in the meeting, tho. With stuff like this you want to be absolutely crystal clear what happened in your written and verbal reports. You can't just rely on a video that you may or may not have emailed over after previously showing it in such a manner as to obscure the key info.