On 2016-06-09 12:23 Jim Birch wrote: >> Only a human can assume moral or legal responsibility, so who would be >> responsible for a death caused by the actions of a vehicle computer? > > A company has responsibilities if your electric kettle explodes, or your new > fence falls on a passing pedestrian. It's not a new legal or moral problem, > just a different product.
Suppose there's been heavy rain for three days and numerous warnings about flooding on local roads. Ignoring the warnings, I drive around a bend and hit water 30cm deep at the speed limit with the result the car aquaplanes causing an accident with multiple fatalities. With a conventional car I think there'd be no doubt about the outcome - I'd be doing porridge for negligent driving. But what person would be responsible with a driverless vehicle? Who would the relatives of the dead victims sue, or have they no comeback? If Volvo are unconditionally accepting "full liability for accidents involving its driverless cars" such questions would not arise, but it seems a very brave move indeed. I can perhaps see a place for automated low-speed vehicles in limited situations, maybe providing public transport around a CBD for example, but it will be a long, long time before some of the scenarios entertained in this thread are even technically practicable, let alone politically & economically so. David L. On 2016-06-09 12:49 rik wrote: > Some of the car makers are trying to answer this question: > > 'Volvo says it will accept full liability for accidents involving its > driverless cars, making it "one of the first" car companies to do so.' > > http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34475031 David L. _______________________________________________ Link mailing list Link@mailman.anu.edu.au http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
