3 ms·

You can arrest a driver for not making space for an emergency vehicle. Who do we arrest here?

by tapoxi 7mo ago

nine_zeros 7mo ago
[dead]
KennyBlanken 7mo ago
The person who was ultimately responsible for a defective robot operating on our public streets, at a bare minimum.
- general1465 7mo ago
  A customer?
aduty 7mo ago
Start disabling and towing their cars and watch a solution magically appear.
wnevets 7mo ago
> You can arrest a driver for not making space for an emergency vehicle. Who do we arrest here? That's the best part, no one! We have finally managed to invent a system that widely disperses accountability so much no one can be held liable when something goes wrong.
- gruez 7mo ago
  >no one can be held liable when something goes wrong. No, at the very least tort laws still apply even if the driver is a corporation. Do you really need someone sitting in jail to satisfy your justice boner?
  - AngryData 7mo ago
    If someone sitting in jail doesn't help solve the problem, then maybe we should remove the jail penalty to for individuals that do it.
    - gruez 7mo ago
      >then maybe we should remove the jail penalty to for individuals that do it. We don't send everyone to jail either. You can run over people and get away scot free, if it's an honest mistake and you weren't being negligent.
      - plagiarist 7mo ago
        Or if you were being negligent but due to affluenza.
    - cwmoore 7mo ago
      Yes. Jail sentences are for a selection of some misdemeanors and not others. The person does or cooperates with X amount of harm, they ought to share similar penalties.
  - smeggysmeg 7mo ago
    Yes, I want to see real, serious punishment for corporate crimes, on par with the life disruption experienced by people who see a jail sentence. It's almost always brutal - major income disruption, job loss, etc. If it's a small fine, which it always seems to be for corporations, then there is no incentive for following the law. I'm also in favor of corporate death sentences for large-scale egregious violations - liquidate assets and jail executives. By corporatizing social harms, basically nobody is ever held accountable - except for the little guy.
    - gruez 7mo ago
      >By corporatizing social harms, basically nobody is ever held accountable - except for the little guy. Again, this is false. At the very least there's financial penalties, which the shareholders are on the hook for. Moreover the corporate malfeasance that does happen don't map nicely to human crimes. If you kill a guy, you get sent to jail for decades. But what if you're a company, that makes a machine with sloppy code[1] that unintentionally kills someone? What do you do? Jail the programmer who wrote the code? Jail the manager who did the code review? Jail the CEO who had no knowledge of it but "buck stops with him" and we hate CEOs? How does the death penalty work? If you think it through it's basically a fine equivalent to the company's market cap. If Boeing does a bad that kills one person, does that mean the US government just repossesses the entire company? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25
      - mitthrowaway2 7mo ago
        Depending on how severe the error is, it could be professional negligence. In other professions, including engineering, this can result in a loss of the professional's license and their inability to continue to work in that field. Also, for negligent drivers, a suspension of their driving license can apply. So there is precedent for severe punishment even if nobody gets a jail sentence.
      - heisenzombie 7mo ago
        In Australia it's the board of directors who are liable. They can be liable if they personally direct the company to do something illegal (obviously?) but there is also a positive obligation to exercise due diligence. This covers (but is not limited to) workplace safety and safety of customers and the public. Directors can be personally liable for breaches of this duty and the penalties extend to possible imprisonment and very substantial fines. For example: https://www.owhsp.qld.gov.au/court-report/fines-imposed-failures-protect-swimmers-airlie-beach-lagoon https://www.owhsp.qld.gov.au/court-report/fines-imposed-fail...
  - wnevets 7mo ago
    > No, at the very least tort laws still apply even if the driver is a corporation. Do they?
    - altairprime 7mo ago
      Corporations are person-like entities, so there’s a plausible argument to be made. The states seem loathe to be precedent-setters in triggering evaluations of this argument, though, so I don’t know of any supporting cases yet. Whoever’s first will see corporate tax revenue fall off a cliff once a corporation can be subjected to community service, so they have a lot of self-interest in not prosecuting these violations.
    - usefulcat 7mo ago
      Are you really asking whether corporations can be sued?
      - plagiarist 7mo ago
        It might be possible. Would have to be by someone who hadn't signed the binding arbitration, though.
      - wnevets 7mo ago
        And have actual meaningful consequences happen? I'am. Twitter is creating CSAM, Meta & OpenAI pirate millions of books and Nvidia is playing some sort of shell game to pump their stock price. If a regular person committed any of those offenses once they would be lucky to just to be sued but because of "AI" nothing happens to these companies.
        gruez 7mo ago
        Going through each of the cases: >Twitter is creating CSAM It's unclear whether generated CSAM is illegal, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_fictional_pornography_depicting_minors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_fictional_porn.... Moreover x/x.ai wasn't intentionally generating the images. Yes, someone intentionally set up grok to generate images, but nobody at x/x.ai was like "yes, let's generate some CSAM". That adds an additional layer of obfuscation that makes it harder to compare to a "regular person". >Meta & OpenAI pirate millions of books Give me a break. People on /r/datahoarders pirate millions of books all the time. Use a VPN and basically nobody bothers going after you. If anything Meta/OpenAI are getting harsher treatment than the average person because they're juicier defendants. >Nvidia is playing some sort of shell game to pump their stock price That's not even something that's illegal.
  - plagiarist 7mo ago
    I would like crimes to have consequences that actually deter the culprits from committing them. A pittance fine for a company is not what I want to see. Let's have a small percentage of net worth fine on the owners instead.
    - phyzix5761 7mo ago
      For publicly traded companies the owners/shareholders are your grandparents, teachers, all sorts of regular people. You want to take a percentage of their already small net worth?
      - plagiarist 7mo ago
        Sure, let's go. Prorated in terms of their percentage of ownership, of course. Put them in jail for a few seconds as well.
        gruez 7mo ago
        I'm sure it's a productive use of the already overburdened justice system's time to round up half the country, so they can sit in "jail" for a few minutes.
        plagiarist 7mo ago
        No shit. Maybe we let everyone with only a few seconds to serve just walk free without pursing a case on them at all. The people owning 90% of all stocks can serve 90% of all the sentencing and that'd be fine enough for society.
        phyzix5761 7mo ago
        10% of Americans own about 90% of stocks. That's 34 million people you would have to put in jail (possibly for a few seconds or minutes each) who have nothing to do with the decisions being made in these companies. Go after the executives instead.
  - grayhatter 7mo ago
    > Do you really need someone sitting in jail to satisfy your justice boner? Literally, and intentionally avoiding any attempt to examine the implications? No probably not. But reasonable punishment discourages bad behavior. And software engineers have a habit of ignoring the implications of a defective design. I think apocalyptic fines applied to the companies creating the systems for automated cars would also create the correct incentives, but I find that to be less likely than imprisonment. What I want is software and systems to not suck ass. I don't want to deal with defective... everything, because it was faster to deliver. That's especially true when it contributes to the death or injury of a person that didn't do anything wrong. I don't care what works, but people being afraid of going to jail for hurting someone absolutely does work. And 'administrative fines' don't work.
    - gruez 7mo ago
      >But reasonable punishment discourages bad behavior. And software engineers have a habit of ignoring the implications of a defective design. I think apocalyptic fines applied to the companies creating the systems for automated cars would also create the correct incentives, but I find that to be less likely than imprisonment. This just feels like the "we should make the justice system harsher to deter crime" argument but applied to software engineering. If it works, why stop at criminal cases? Maybe we should dock the pay of SWEs next time they cause a prod issue?
      - piloto_ciego 7mo ago
        A lot of people can't really get over the idea that they want to be the boss of everything.
        deleted 7mo ago
        [deleted]
      - bluefirebrand 7mo ago
        If a civil engineer designs a bridge that collapsed they can be held accountable for negligence in their duties Why not software engineers too? Why are we so special that we can never be held accountable for the damage our lack of standards causes?
  - hulitu 7mo ago
    > No, at the very least tort laws still apply even if the driver is a corporation. Do you have some examples ?
  - deleted 7mo ago
    [deleted]
- abenga 7mo ago
  We've had this ever since Corporations were invented.
musicjerm 7mo ago
The passenger
glennpratt 7mo ago
Nobody gets arrested, you get a ticket.
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
cameldrv 7mo ago
Since corporations are people, presumably you’d arrest Waymo.
seanmcdirmid 7mo ago
> You can arrest a driver for not making space for an emergency vehicle. Who do we arrest here? I get that it is technically possible, but that doesn't happen in practice.
porridgeraisin 7mo ago
This is the key. Personally I think you just have to something similar to an auditor or whatever. Demand that if a self driving taxi operates in your city, they assign one legally responsible person per $major-division-of-city. All accidents in that region are due to that guy. Naturally, this will incentivise them to improve the system that deals with edge cases in their ML model, and better yet you'll have the legally responsible guy shit himself and directly manage remote drivers for his location himself. Adds another layer of accountability.
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
hulitu 7mo ago
The CEO

You can arrest a driver for not making space for an emergency vehicle. Who do we arrest here?

by tapoxi 7mo ago

You can arrest a driver for not making space for an emergency vehicle. Who do we arrest here?

nine_zeros 7mo ago

[dead]

KennyBlanken 7mo ago

The person who was ultimately responsible for a defective robot operating on our public streets, at a bare minimum.

general1465 7mo ago
A customer?

aduty 7mo ago

Start disabling and towing their cars and watch a solution magically appear.

wnevets 7mo ago

> You can arrest a driver for not making space for an emergency vehicle. Who do we arrest here? That's the best part, no one! We have finally managed to invent a system that widely disperses accountability so much no one can be held liable when something goes wrong.

gruez 7mo ago
>no one can be held liable when something goes wrong. No, at the very least tort laws still apply even if the driver is a corporation. Do you really need someone sitting in jail to satisfy your justice boner?
- AngryData 7mo ago
  If someone sitting in jail doesn't help solve the problem, then maybe we should remove the jail penalty to for individuals that do it.
  - gruez 7mo ago
    >then maybe we should remove the jail penalty to for individuals that do it. We don't send everyone to jail either. You can run over people and get away scot free, if it's an honest mistake and you weren't being negligent.
    - plagiarist 7mo ago
      Or if you were being negligent but due to affluenza.
  - cwmoore 7mo ago
    Yes. Jail sentences are for a selection of some misdemeanors and not others. The person does or cooperates with X amount of harm, they ought to share similar penalties.
- smeggysmeg 7mo ago
  Yes, I want to see real, serious punishment for corporate crimes, on par with the life disruption experienced by people who see a jail sentence. It's almost always brutal - major income disruption, job loss, etc. If it's a small fine, which it always seems to be for corporations, then there is no incentive for following the law. I'm also in favor of corporate death sentences for large-scale egregious violations - liquidate assets and jail executives. By corporatizing social harms, basically nobody is ever held accountable - except for the little guy.
  - gruez 7mo ago
    >By corporatizing social harms, basically nobody is ever held accountable - except for the little guy. Again, this is false. At the very least there's financial penalties, which the shareholders are on the hook for. Moreover the corporate malfeasance that does happen don't map nicely to human crimes. If you kill a guy, you get sent to jail for decades. But what if you're a company, that makes a machine with sloppy code[1] that unintentionally kills someone? What do you do? Jail the programmer who wrote the code? Jail the manager who did the code review? Jail the CEO who had no knowledge of it but "buck stops with him" and we hate CEOs? How does the death penalty work? If you think it through it's basically a fine equivalent to the company's market cap. If Boeing does a bad that kills one person, does that mean the US government just repossesses the entire company? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25
    - mitthrowaway2 7mo ago
      Depending on how severe the error is, it could be professional negligence. In other professions, including engineering, this can result in a loss of the professional's license and their inability to continue to work in that field. Also, for negligent drivers, a suspension of their driving license can apply. So there is precedent for severe punishment even if nobody gets a jail sentence.
    - heisenzombie 7mo ago
      In Australia it's the board of directors who are liable. They can be liable if they personally direct the company to do something illegal (obviously?) but there is also a positive obligation to exercise due diligence. This covers (but is not limited to) workplace safety and safety of customers and the public. Directors can be personally liable for breaches of this duty and the penalties extend to possible imprisonment and very substantial fines. For example: https://www.owhsp.qld.gov.au/court-report/fines-imposed-failures-protect-swimmers-airlie-beach-lagoon https://www.owhsp.qld.gov.au/court-report/fines-imposed-fail...
- wnevets 7mo ago
  > No, at the very least tort laws still apply even if the driver is a corporation. Do they?
  - altairprime 7mo ago
    Corporations are person-like entities, so there’s a plausible argument to be made. The states seem loathe to be precedent-setters in triggering evaluations of this argument, though, so I don’t know of any supporting cases yet. Whoever’s first will see corporate tax revenue fall off a cliff once a corporation can be subjected to community service, so they have a lot of self-interest in not prosecuting these violations.
  - usefulcat 7mo ago
    Are you really asking whether corporations can be sued?
    - plagiarist 7mo ago
      It might be possible. Would have to be by someone who hadn't signed the binding arbitration, though.
    - wnevets 7mo ago
      And have actual meaningful consequences happen? I'am. Twitter is creating CSAM, Meta & OpenAI pirate millions of books and Nvidia is playing some sort of shell game to pump their stock price. If a regular person committed any of those offenses once they would be lucky to just to be sued but because of "AI" nothing happens to these companies.
      - gruez 7mo ago
        Going through each of the cases: >Twitter is creating CSAM It's unclear whether generated CSAM is illegal, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_fictional_pornography_depicting_minors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_fictional_porn.... Moreover x/x.ai wasn't intentionally generating the images. Yes, someone intentionally set up grok to generate images, but nobody at x/x.ai was like "yes, let's generate some CSAM". That adds an additional layer of obfuscation that makes it harder to compare to a "regular person". >Meta & OpenAI pirate millions of books Give me a break. People on /r/datahoarders pirate millions of books all the time. Use a VPN and basically nobody bothers going after you. If anything Meta/OpenAI are getting harsher treatment than the average person because they're juicier defendants. >Nvidia is playing some sort of shell game to pump their stock price That's not even something that's illegal.
- plagiarist 7mo ago
  I would like crimes to have consequences that actually deter the culprits from committing them. A pittance fine for a company is not what I want to see. Let's have a small percentage of net worth fine on the owners instead.
  - phyzix5761 7mo ago
    For publicly traded companies the owners/shareholders are your grandparents, teachers, all sorts of regular people. You want to take a percentage of their already small net worth?
    - plagiarist 7mo ago
      Sure, let's go. Prorated in terms of their percentage of ownership, of course. Put them in jail for a few seconds as well.
      - gruez 7mo ago
        I'm sure it's a productive use of the already overburdened justice system's time to round up half the country, so they can sit in "jail" for a few minutes.
        plagiarist 7mo ago
        No shit. Maybe we let everyone with only a few seconds to serve just walk free without pursing a case on them at all. The people owning 90% of all stocks can serve 90% of all the sentencing and that'd be fine enough for society.
        phyzix5761 7mo ago
        10% of Americans own about 90% of stocks. That's 34 million people you would have to put in jail (possibly for a few seconds or minutes each) who have nothing to do with the decisions being made in these companies. Go after the executives instead.
- grayhatter 7mo ago
  > Do you really need someone sitting in jail to satisfy your justice boner? Literally, and intentionally avoiding any attempt to examine the implications? No probably not. But reasonable punishment discourages bad behavior. And software engineers have a habit of ignoring the implications of a defective design. I think apocalyptic fines applied to the companies creating the systems for automated cars would also create the correct incentives, but I find that to be less likely than imprisonment. What I want is software and systems to not suck ass. I don't want to deal with defective... everything, because it was faster to deliver. That's especially true when it contributes to the death or injury of a person that didn't do anything wrong. I don't care what works, but people being afraid of going to jail for hurting someone absolutely does work. And 'administrative fines' don't work.
  - gruez 7mo ago
    >But reasonable punishment discourages bad behavior. And software engineers have a habit of ignoring the implications of a defective design. I think apocalyptic fines applied to the companies creating the systems for automated cars would also create the correct incentives, but I find that to be less likely than imprisonment. This just feels like the "we should make the justice system harsher to deter crime" argument but applied to software engineering. If it works, why stop at criminal cases? Maybe we should dock the pay of SWEs next time they cause a prod issue?
    - piloto_ciego 7mo ago
      A lot of people can't really get over the idea that they want to be the boss of everything.
      - deleted 7mo ago
        [deleted]
    - bluefirebrand 7mo ago
      If a civil engineer designs a bridge that collapsed they can be held accountable for negligence in their duties Why not software engineers too? Why are we so special that we can never be held accountable for the damage our lack of standards causes?
- hulitu 7mo ago
  > No, at the very least tort laws still apply even if the driver is a corporation. Do you have some examples ?
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
abenga 7mo ago
We've had this ever since Corporations were invented.

musicjerm 7mo ago

The passenger

glennpratt 7mo ago

Nobody gets arrested, you get a ticket.

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

cameldrv 7mo ago

Since corporations are people, presumably you’d arrest Waymo.

seanmcdirmid 7mo ago

> You can arrest a driver for not making space for an emergency vehicle. Who do we arrest here? I get that it is technically possible, but that doesn't happen in practice.

porridgeraisin 7mo ago

This is the key. Personally I think you just have to something similar to an auditor or whatever. Demand that if a self driving taxi operates in your city, they assign one legally responsible person per $major-division-of-city. All accidents in that region are due to that guy. Naturally, this will incentivise them to improve the system that deals with edge cases in their ML model, and better yet you'll have the legally responsible guy shit himself and directly manage remote drivers for his location himself. Adds another layer of accountability.

deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]

hulitu 7mo ago

The CEO