In the news

Why do you think it’s bullshit?

Because a) It takes away individual responsibility and b) We just don't need self driving cars, we need fewer cars.

A.) it would prevent self driving cars being released if they actually aren’t.
B.) the law has nothing to do with this.

a) It takes away individual responsibility

Individual responsibility for choosing the right software developers, testers and ethicists?

Err... that was for @Jingle_Jangle

It would make Elon liable for the Tesla that just crashed into you, as the driver can’t be held to have caused the collision, surely?

Well car companies whose cars have an inherent problem are liable so I guess so. The first time a self-driving car makes a choice to kill a pedestrian to save a driver or vice versa, the legal case is going to be interesting. Might even stop the entire industry if Tesla/Mercedes/Honda/whoever have to justify the programming of the AI every time there's an incident.

Of course the motor industry has deep pockets so I guess laws will exempt them from responsibility for the choices their cars are programmed to make.

Surely if the car has to choose it’s already at fault?

Sorry my car killed your daughter.

Not my fault though, it's some software developer in Paso Robles, go talk to him (or her).

You would, I think, if we make the assumption that the trolley problem could not have been avoided by driving in a cautious way in the first place, have to sacrifice the occupants of the vehicle over the blameless ped.

Those who got in the car can be said to have accepted responsibility for their actions. Not so the person walking down the street.

Even fictional deaths have to be female 😂 someone will notice that

Pretty sure this has all been done in the autonomous vehicles thread.

That was personal, I have x2 daughters, no sons.

Anyone watching Truss on Breakfast this morning and thinking she will be a popular Prime Minster must be drunk. Even May was quicker on her feet.

The minefield is claiming you’re not in control of the vehicle, when you’re in fact are (can easily be found out tho).

Secondly, you’re still in control, you let the car drive but still have the power to grab the steering wheel and brakes when you see a collision.

I reckon the last parts is why it’s a minefield.

space x rocket on collision course with moon

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/jan/26/out-of-control-spacex-rocket-on-track-to-collide-with-the-moon

not happy with destroying our first , we've started on the path to destroying our 2nd ball of rock
yay humans,

I think that's why even though we may see "full autonomous" the car manufacturer will have to get the driver to agree to always be aware and ready to take control. They can avoid the trolley problem if the car computer nopes out and puts the control back with the driver.

When we really have autonomous vehicles there won’t be driving controls. You’ll be a passenger in a pod not a driver. The clue is the autonomous bit.

driver to agree to always be aware and ready to take control

Which means you can't read your email or go to sleep or not have a license and the while thing has almost no point. If the car can't drive itself empty or with a 10 year old alone in the back then why bother?

Because you need some shiney new tech to get people to buy your cars?

Exactly. Thankfully the law commission have slightly brighter minds.

Oddly befitting of the current chat.

If the car can't drive itself empty or with a 10 year old alone in the back then why bother?

Because the leading cause of collisions with motor vehicles is driver error and a computer will be much safer at driving than a human, even if it isn't in full control all of the time.

Would it not be as simple as your car, your problem?

If an animal you own hurts someone, you’re liable and not the seller/breeder.

Troublesome analogy there. Dogs don't go on auto-pilot, you should always be in control of them. A better one would be, if your washing machine had a factory fault and wobbled out the door on a spin cycle and mugged your neighbour, Hotpoint would be paying out, not you.

Don't get me wrong, the thought of taking responsibility away from the car owner completely horrifies me, but I recognise that is probably in some way due to the completely alien concept of it. But there are much wider precedences for manufacturers being liable for machinery or items injuring someone (or worse) due to it not behaving in the manner intended and through no fault of the operator/owner (house fires, crane collapses, even children's furniture).