5 ms·

From a utilitarian perspective sure, you might be right but how do you exempt those companies from civil liability and make it impossible for victims/their fami

by ywvcbk 2y ago

From a utilitarian perspective sure, you might be right but how do you exempt those companies from civil liability and make it impossible for victims/their families to sue the manufacturer? Might be legally tricky (driver/owner can explicitly/implicitly agree with the EULA or other agreements, imposing that on third parties wouldn’t be right).

Majromax 2y ago
> how do you exempt those companies from civil liability and make it impossible for victims/their families to sue the manufacturer? I don't think anyone in this thread has talked about an exemption from civil liability (sue for money), just criminal liability (go to jail). Civil liability is the far less controversial issue because it's transferred all the time: governments even mandate that drivers carry insurance for this purpose. With civil liability transfer, imperfect FSD can still make economic sense. Just as an insurance company needs to collect enough premium to pay claims, the FSD manufacturer would need to reserve enough revenue to pay its expected claims. In this case, FSD doesn't even need to be better than humans to make economic sense, in the same way that bad drivers can still buy (expensive) insurance.
- ywvcbk 2y ago
  > just criminal liability (go to jail). That just seems like a theoretical possibility (even if that). I don’t see how any engineer or even someone in management could go to jail unless intent or gross negligence can be proven. > drivers carry insurance for this purpose. The mandatory limit is extremely low in many US states. > expected claims That seems like the problem. It might take a while until we reach an equilibrium of some sort. > that bad drivers can still buy That’s still capped by the amount of coverage + total assets held by that bad driver. In Tesl’s case there is no real limit (without legislation/established precedent). Juries/courts would likely be influenced by that fact as well.
- DennisP 2y ago
  In fact, if you buy your insurance from Tesla, you effectively do put civil responsibility for FSD back in their hands.

by ywvcbk 2y ago

Majromax 2y ago

> how do you exempt those companies from civil liability and make it impossible for victims/their families to sue the manufacturer? I don't think anyone in this thread has talked about an exemption from civil liability (sue for money), just criminal liability (go to jail). Civil liability is the far less controversial issue because it's transferred all the time: governments even mandate that drivers carry insurance for this purpose. With civil liability transfer, imperfect FSD can still make economic sense. Just as an insurance company needs to collect enough premium to pay claims, the FSD manufacturer would need to reserve enough revenue to pay its expected claims. In this case, FSD doesn't even need to be better than humans to make economic sense, in the same way that bad drivers can still buy (expensive) insurance.

ywvcbk 2y ago
> just criminal liability (go to jail). That just seems like a theoretical possibility (even if that). I don’t see how any engineer or even someone in management could go to jail unless intent or gross negligence can be proven. > drivers carry insurance for this purpose. The mandatory limit is extremely low in many US states. > expected claims That seems like the problem. It might take a while until we reach an equilibrium of some sort. > that bad drivers can still buy That’s still capped by the amount of coverage + total assets held by that bad driver. In Tesl’s case there is no real limit (without legislation/established precedent). Juries/courts would likely be influenced by that fact as well.
DennisP 2y ago
In fact, if you buy your insurance from Tesla, you effectively do put civil responsibility for FSD back in their hands.