289
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by TheOneWithTheHair@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] cmbabul@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago

How relieved the original drive must feel

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 21 points 2 years ago

"I didn't cause those injuries, it was the driverless cars" might actually work here...

maybe. eh. the car company probably has better lawyers.

[-] cmbabul@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

Yeah but the focus will be on the driverless car, I’m not saying they are blameless, just that the general heat and attention will probably not be on them now

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Im not sure that is a problem.

Autonomous vehicles are still mostly half baked, and the question of liability of who gets the blame hasn’t even preheated the oven.

The reality is company’s like waymo are using their cars in SF precisely to harvest training data because they can’t finish it without real world data- the physical driving a car is easy; interacting with humans is not.

[-] nocturne213@lemm.ee 12 points 2 years ago

One of my son’s coworkers was just killed in a similar incident. Woman hits a pedestrian, she freaks out and calls her boyfriend instead of emergency services, boyfriend arrives and runs over the injured pedestrian ensuring he was dead.

They are unsure which vehicle actually killed him.

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Cupid's arrow was dead on target however.

[-] medgremlin@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 years ago

I hope both of them are getting brought up on first degree murder charges for that.

[-] JoBo@feddit.uk 4 points 2 years ago

Why? Hit and run is a serious offence and the driverless car has it all on camera.

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago

Yeah, but the general public are morons who tend to blame the wrong thing.

[-] JoBo@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago

What have the general public got to do with it? This is a criminal offence, not a viral bit of gossip.

[-] Hillock@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago

The general public is irrelevant here. If it weren't for the self driving car the hit and run wouldn't even have made the news. If it all this makes it worse for the driver.

And I don't think there is a wrong party to blame. Both are equally fucked up.

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago

If it weren't for the self driving car the hit and run wouldn't even have made the news.

That is exactly the kind of thing I am talking about.

[-] FireTower@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Perhaps he's implying that due to the second car it may obfuscate if the first driver's actions would have been lethal or just left the person injured. He'd probably rather be tried for a hit and run resulting in injury than a hit and run resulting in a death.

this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2023
289 points (97.7% liked)

News

35849 readers
729 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS