3 ms·
You'd be surprised. I think Waymo have already proven this; not perfectly safe, but below the care threshold. And the demand for childcare is huge. Of course, w
by pjc50 5mo ago
You'd be surprised. I think Waymo have already proven this; not perfectly safe, but below the care threshold. And the demand for childcare is huge. Of course, what then happens is how the ensuing child neglect case falls out.
We're probably going to end up with the situation where the burden "it is considered criminal child endangerment to leave your child alone with the robot" falls on the parents, not on the robot manufacturers.
- gamblor956 5mo agoThat's not how product liability laws work in the U.S. or in the E.U. The first time a child gets harmed by a robot, the company making that robot will go spectacularly bankrupt. If a child gets killed by a robot, it would likely end the consumer robotics industry for a decade or more.
- chatmasta 5mo agoTeslas have killed probably hundreds of people at this point and the only changes to self-driving laws have been to allow more of it.
- gamblor956 5mo agoTesla sales have cratered in all but 2 countries.
- pjc50 5mo agoPeople tried to hold gun manufacturers liable for dead children, and the law was simply changed to exempt them. Robots and AI have too much money to be held liable.
- ben_w 5mo agoPerhaps, but also the US has the 2nd amendment and it seems (from the outside) to be a big part of their culture. I don't think AI in general has that benefit despite people occasionally trying to criticise AI companies who restrict the output of LLMs by reference to the 1st amendment; robotics in particular definitely doesn't have that benefit.