Cruise recalls all self-driving cars after grisly accident and California ban | All 950 of the General Motors subsidiary’s autonomous cars will be taken off roads for a software update::All 950 of the General Motors subsidiary’s autonomous cars will be taken off roads for a software update

  • trackindakraken@lemmy.whynotdrs.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Instead of “what number of deaths is acceptable?” Ask, “who is responsible?”

    When a human driver in control of a car hits a pedestrian, the human is responsible, not the car.

    Who is responsible when a computer driven car hits a pedestrian? Also, whose insurance pays the bill?

    • trash80@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      How did you arrive at that conclusion?

      In a statement on Wednesday, the GM unit said that it did the recall even though it determined that a similar crash with a risk of serious injury could happen again every 10m to 100m miles without the update.

      • Baggins [he/him]@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Emphasis goes on “even though”.

        As in “At GM we’re so benevolent that we’re doing a software update even though we think this will only kill someone every 10m miles (which we consider an acceptable murder rate for our cars)”.

        • trash80@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          How frequently this type of incident occurs is outside the control of GM.

          In the crash, another vehicle with a person behind the wheel struck a pedestrian, sending the person into the path of a Cruise autonomous vehicle. The Cruise initially stopped but still hit the person.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      But they recalling the vehicles so clearly not.

      Unless you’re suggesting that the software update is too make the cars more efficient at killing pedestrians?

      • Baggins [he/him]@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Read what they said. That they’re doing the recall even though it’s only 1 per 10m. Implying they think that is an acceptable rate for serious injuries.

        • SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ford thought 180 dead per year was acceptable when it shipped the Pinto. GM looks like a saint by comparison, fuck.

    • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What’s acceptable?

      Every 50 million? 100 million?

      It will never be perfect, and there will never be no deaths at all, so if there is no acceptable limit you may as well ban self driving car research right now.

      The rate of pedestrians killed in 2021 was approximately 1 in every 25,000,000 miles driven manually (8000 deaths and 203 billion miles travelled collectively. Should that be the minimum target?

          • Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            It really could be zero for pedestrians if we spent the money to ensure no human and vehicle would ever share the same space. It is less about how many humans/miles driven and more about how many humans/cost to avoid sadly.

          • Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            It really could be zero for pedestrians if we spent the money to ensure no human and vehicle would ever share the same space. It is less about how many humans/miles driven and more about how many humans/cost to avoid sadly.

          • Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            It really could be zero for pedestrians if we spent the money to ensure no human and vehicle would ever share the same space. It is less about how many humans/miles driven and more about how many humans/cost to avoid sadly.

        • wahming@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          So, no human driven cars, buses, trains, planes or anything else, then?