3 ms·

I understand this is a slippery slope argument on my part, but why is this any different from the emergency services pushing a non-autonomous vehicle out of the

I understand this is a slippery slope argument on my part, but why is this any different from the emergency services pushing a non-autonomous vehicle out of the way to clear traffic? What if it’s a privately owned bus, or a taxi? Would those companies foot the bill for their disabled vehicle?

ninth_ant 2y ago
If a private company leaves operational vehicles in the middle of streets and requires city services to move them to unblock public roads... sure, let's charge them. Is that something that is happening? Is that more likely to start happening we make this change? This slope is beyond slippery.
SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
It depends on whether you see it as a piece of machinery that's broken, or a non-human driver that's choosing to violate the rules of the road. As the article mentions, it sounds like California has chosen the second and plans to begin issuing citations.
- Brian_K_White 2y ago
  A human owns and operates and is the benificiary of a company that chooses to put un-chaperoned machinery on the road. "machinery that's broken" doesn't make it ok. Where did the broken machinery come from? It's not a natural event like the weather. It came from someone who placed it there without a supervising agent to be responsible for it. It's essentially a special form of littering.
  - SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
    > "machinery that's broken" doesn't make it ok. Where did the broken machinery come from? It's not a natural event like the weather. It came from someone who placed it there without a supervising agent to be responsible for it. Sometimes making an individual responsible just isn't the right call. If you have a car that you know is a bit of a clunker, and it breaks down in the middle of the road, should you be cited? I'm not saying California's decision was bad, but I could imagine a reasonable government pursuing a different strategy too.
    - Brian_K_White 2y ago
      Yes. Of course. Most states have some form of inspections and minimum standards for safety, and a liability insurance requirement, and driver licence for that matter, just for this reason, to put limits around bad judgement and distinguish bad luck from bad practice. This is not the same as knowingly driving a car that is more likely to break down. This is not meeting part of your responsibilities because emergency services will take care of it. It's abandoning a vehicle the same as with a normal car where you didn't abandon it through no fault of your own, but because you intentionally dumped it somewhere. Waymo didn't intentionally break a car in exactly the same way a drunk driver didn't intentionally crash a car.
bonzini 2y ago
Well, they should? Or if they prefer, their insurance will pay on their behalf.

ninth_ant 2y ago

If a private company leaves operational vehicles in the middle of streets and requires city services to move them to unblock public roads... sure, let's charge them. Is that something that is happening? Is that more likely to start happening we make this change? This slope is beyond slippery.

SpicyLemonZest 2y ago

It depends on whether you see it as a piece of machinery that's broken, or a non-human driver that's choosing to violate the rules of the road. As the article mentions, it sounds like California has chosen the second and plans to begin issuing citations.

Brian_K_White 2y ago
A human owns and operates and is the benificiary of a company that chooses to put un-chaperoned machinery on the road. "machinery that's broken" doesn't make it ok. Where did the broken machinery come from? It's not a natural event like the weather. It came from someone who placed it there without a supervising agent to be responsible for it. It's essentially a special form of littering.
- SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
  > "machinery that's broken" doesn't make it ok. Where did the broken machinery come from? It's not a natural event like the weather. It came from someone who placed it there without a supervising agent to be responsible for it. Sometimes making an individual responsible just isn't the right call. If you have a car that you know is a bit of a clunker, and it breaks down in the middle of the road, should you be cited? I'm not saying California's decision was bad, but I could imagine a reasonable government pursuing a different strategy too.
  - Brian_K_White 2y ago
    Yes. Of course. Most states have some form of inspections and minimum standards for safety, and a liability insurance requirement, and driver licence for that matter, just for this reason, to put limits around bad judgement and distinguish bad luck from bad practice. This is not the same as knowingly driving a car that is more likely to break down. This is not meeting part of your responsibilities because emergency services will take care of it. It's abandoning a vehicle the same as with a normal car where you didn't abandon it through no fault of your own, but because you intentionally dumped it somewhere. Waymo didn't intentionally break a car in exactly the same way a drunk driver didn't intentionally crash a car.

bonzini 2y ago

Well, they should? Or if they prefer, their insurance will pay on their behalf.