SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The old gray lady reports that the people of Tempe AZ, a popular testing location for self driving cars, are fighting back. Here are a couple of snippets from the longer article:
The [tire] slashing was one of nearly two dozen attacks on driverless vehicles over the past two years in Chandler, a city near Phoenix where Waymo started testing its vans in 2017. In ways large and small, the city has had an early look at public misgivings over the rise of artificial intelligence, with city officials hearing complaints about everything from safety to possible job losses.
Some people have pelted Waymo vans with rocks, according to police reports. Others have repeatedly tried to run the vehicles off the road. One woman screamed at one of the vans, telling it to get out of her suburban neighborhood. A man pulled up alongside a Waymo vehicle and threatened the employee riding inside with a piece of PVC pipe.
[...] "There are other places they can test," said Erik O'Polka, 37, who was issued a warning by the police in November after multiple reports that his Jeep Wrangler had tried to run Waymo vans off the road — in one case, driving head-on toward one of the self-driving vehicles until it was forced to come to an abrupt stop.
His wife, Elizabeth, 35, admitted in an interview that her husband "finds it entertaining to brake hard" in front of the self-driving vans, and that she herself "may have forced them to pull over" so she could yell at them to get out of their neighborhood. The trouble started, the couple said, when their 10-year-old son was nearly hit by one of the vehicles while he was playing in a nearby cul-de-sac.
"They said they need real-world examples, but I don't want to be their real-world mistake," said Mr. O'Polka, who runs his own company providing information technology to small businesses. "They didn't ask us if we wanted to be part of their beta test," added his wife, who helps run the business.
It looks like The New York Times used this article from December 11 as part of their story:
A slashed tire, a pointed gun, bullies on the road: Why do Waymo self-driving vans get so much hate?
This seems to be happening everywhere Waymo is testing, not just Tempe.
Lots of comments about this article on other sites, SoylentNews should get in on the fun too! A quote from a "media analyst" suggests that driverless cars are like scabs, hired to break a union strike.
Also at The Hill.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @04:57PM (29 children)
"Luddites feared correctly that the time spent learning the skills of their craft would go to waste as machines would replace their role in the industry.[3] It is a misconception that the Luddites protested against the machinery itself in an attempt to halt the progress of technology. "
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @06:07PM (20 children)
The other factor is that this is the only (mostly futile) method of resistance to job automation the working class knows. Capitalism is not able to handle this level of technology well. If the capitalist system is not overthrown, we're probably looking at a future where a large proportion of the population (over half at least) is unable to find any kind of work. If the elites knew what they were doing, they could shepherd this technological revolution by making sure that some kind of welfare can substitute for a steady job.
However, the elites are too greedy and out of touch, and they find themselves incapable of doing this. We're heading for dark ages without a proletarian revolution that will enable all members of society to benefit from this level of technology. We must abandon the idea that everybody needs to "work hard" to earn their keep. The "hard work" thing is simply not rational in the presence of technology that is accelerating towards post-scarcity.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @07:54PM (1 child)
Good news: don't worry about post-scarcity. It's not coming.
Bad news: do worry about food security as our unsustainable, energy-hungry farming practices run up against the realities of the diminishing mineral resources.
The proletarian revolution will be of the starving, not the unemployable.
Marxists that take the uncritical view of eternal expansion crack me up.
(Score: 5, Informative) by fyngyrz on Tuesday January 01 2019, @08:51PM
Not to worry, humor is a form of balance. People who think "eternal expansion" is a thing crack me up. As do people who manage to somehow blithely look right past the rate of change in science and its minion, technology, and what that rate of change has meant for agriculture, general standards of living, healthcare, and — among other things — birth control... while throwing "Marxist" around as if they actually knew what the word means... when they clearly don't.
So be of good cheer. The world needs a laugh; ergo, the world needs you!
--
Jst Sy N to Lssy Cmprssn.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Tuesday January 01 2019, @09:39PM (16 children)
The problem with the approach of "abandon the idea that everybody needs to "work hard" to earn their keep" is that you create a generation of useless people without the experience of doing things or the physical impact of doing things. There's all these fantasies about how people can with that time do all sorts of amazing stuff that they couldn't do because they're working to live. My view is that this will consist of mostly of pursuing things that make you feel good, like sex, drugs, and TV (insert your favorite push media of the future). It won't consist of learning skills to help you survive should things not go as planned (say war with the machines or surviving natural disasters) much learning learning anything to help you better yourself.
Expression (in the sense of genetic expression) is the way we survive - we exist because we change the world (and because our ancestors did so). If we lose control over our ability to change our world, then we will eventually go extinct. Steering the vast majority of human into channels where they never change the world, thus, is a way to end them sooner or later.
As to the idea that people will stop employing people, how will they afford automation? If I'm in a society where the majority of us can't afford our own automation, then the majority of us will employ each other. You know, just like today except that there will be robots around somewhere. The only way you can prevent that is to break the market, force people to not employ others (say via onerous obstructions on would-be employers like unrealistic "living wage" standards), dump goods at below market, that sort of thing. I think it's unrealistic to expect people to just starve when they have the means to better themselves or at least get food on the table.
There's already real world cases where due to societal dysfunction people are thrust into these sort of environments (inner cities, for example). They figure out how to get by even if it means an increased risk of imprisonment.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @10:28PM
Yeap, don't buy American today, it's way too expensive and of a crap quality.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @10:31PM (5 children)
Just look at khallow, admirable how he's working very hard to be useless.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 01 2019, @11:07PM (4 children)
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:27AM (3 children)
The obvious rebuttal is, does your employer know that you are wasting his time posting on SoylentNews? Or is this exactly the skill set he is paying you for? Hey, wait a minute!!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:58AM (2 children)
I'm pretty sure he'd be wasting his own time, if he were posting on SN. Unless you think I'm hanging over his shoulder and telling him to type out my snippy replies. That's physically possible after all.
Oh dear... SQUIRREL!
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by aristarchus on Wednesday January 02 2019, @11:05AM (1 child)
Fixed it, but not for you, since you are on the down low.
Did you just seriously mis-read my post? Your employer's time, not your employer's own time, because you are bought and sold, you wage-slave of a khallow, you! Prostitution pays the bills, but at what cost, khallow, at what cost?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:01PM
No. It appears instead that you don't understand what you wrote.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Pav on Wednesday January 02 2019, @12:57AM (1 child)
Ummm... as wages are decreased there is less money to capture in the real economy, and less need for employment because there's no return on investment. That's why FDR "saved capitalism" with his ~90% top marginal tax rate and >50% corporate tax rate, and ushered in a golden age.
(Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:25AM
What happens when wages are increased? Because that's what's been going on globally.
Neither tax was ever fully paid by the most wealthy. The practical rate was probably around 40% plus whatever it cost the wealthy to set up the tax shelters, trusts, and other loopholes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @12:59AM (1 child)
"If I'm in a society where the majority of us can't afford our own automation, then the majority of us will employ each other"
Nope, just the opposite, my father never shops at Wallmart to "help" the other small businesses in town even though they have higher prices. He can do this because he's not hurting for money but if he was broke he'd go for the lowest price: Walmart
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:55AM
How's he going to do that when he can't afford it?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday January 02 2019, @01:18AM (3 children)
Interesting idea.
Mainly in the context of a majority of people that cannot afford to pay what the owners of automation ask for their products because the owner of automation doesn't 'trickle down' (because why should he?). In such a context, the people will need to abandon the "coin" used in an economy that no longer serves their purposes and use substitutes to keep up the 'tab' on due value for services.
Interesting of what will happen when the govt realize a parallel untaxed economy starts to happen on a non-trivial scale.
---
Anyhow, the implicit assumption on (all) the above is that people who "employ each other" actually have their survival needs covered. Which is very likely not true. For an example of how that can happen see the corn laws [wikipedia.org]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @04:13AM (2 children)
But if you're going to employ people in a regulation breaking way, your assets are at risk. Most businesses have a lot of capital and other assets. Sure, you'll occasionally see businesses which play games with labor regulations, but they usually are short sighted, say because the business is near bankruptcy or they're not thinking past the next few quarters (past which where fines and possible prison sentences would reside). Or it's a scam in which case the regulations don't really matter because the culprits plan to be far off by the time the authorities get involved.
But if you're running a normal business for years with significant assets, then regulation breaking is a huge risk.
I bring this up because the obvious way to further automation at the expense of human workers is to dump regulations on employers: minimum wage, harsh labor and safety regulations, short work weeks, etc. These regulations can generate a lot of business for automation vendors. Similarly, dumping regulations on automation vendors that only large businesses can meet then creates the perfect environment for a cartel with both strong barrier to entry and a captive customer base. This may have already been going on for some time in the developed world!
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday January 02 2019, @05:44AM (1 child)
And if you don't run any business because you can't afford to? How are you going to be able to employ someone within the regulatory bounds?
If you cannot and the majority is like you, how does "majority of us will employ each other" gonna work?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @06:00AM
With goods and services produced by automation. You then run the business with goods and services not provided by such.
How does it work now? It'd work the same way.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @08:27AM
And there wasn't even TV less than a century ago....
And you forget the most important "feel good" - FOOD. Do we need all these restaurants around? Hell no. But many people prefer that to cooking and many prefer working at a restaurant or owning one vs. another job, like retail. With industrial food preparation, why do people continue buying things at bakeries and restaurants?? It's not only about cost.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @11:07AM
What?
If there is something that can cope with the technology, that is capitalism.
Communism and socialism was, and is, struggling to contain unemployment, WITHOUT any recent technological advances.
Have you ever seen the conditions people live in communistic countries?
I live in one European communistic country. I struggle to feed my family. My wife is unemployed.
I am employed and get 12000 euros annually and this is considered rather more than average income.
I am considered very lucky to even have a job. Many of my old friends are unemployed.
The cost of living, except house rent, is higher than other European countries.
I heard about Universal Basic Income ONLY from non-communistic, non-socialistic countries such as the US.
(and, no, Sweden and Norway are not socialistic countries. To paraphrase a local socialist leader, they are as socialistic as California is).
Here UBI is unheard of, despite that unemployment of young people is over 50%.
This exactly reflects what communism is.
Posting as AC because I work in the public sector and I am afraid that I will lose my job, if
they find out that I am not a leftist. Communism is the opposite of democracy.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Whoever on Tuesday January 01 2019, @08:18PM (2 children)
Another example of why you should be careful when reading Wikipedia.
That quote from Wikipedia appears to be unsourced. I suggest you look at another part of the page:
"Handloom weavers burned mills and pieces of factory machinery. Textile workers destroyed industrial equipment during the late 18th century,[21] prompting acts such as the Protection of Stocking Frames, etc. Act 1788. "
I would call burning the equipment "protesting against the machinery itself".
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Wednesday January 02 2019, @01:20AM (1 child)
Fear of job loss was most of it, but a significant part of their resistance and dislike was based on the product of the machines being crap quality, but still cheap enough to displace the higher quality craftsman made stuff. It was a big enough difference that 'handmade' still has a promotional effect today, when the days of machine inferiority are long gone.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Wednesday January 02 2019, @02:41PM
> It was a big enough difference that 'handmade' still has a promotional effect today
I guess you also believe soap adverts.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Bot on Tuesday January 01 2019, @08:35PM (4 children)
Luddites will be proven to be eventually right, it is a simple matter of power imbalances arising in technologically adept but democratically inept systems.
To clarify, the only possible instance of working democracy involves locality, random elected guarantee bodies, a law system understood by most, and a dozen other indicators.
Trust me I am a bot.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday January 01 2019, @11:03PM (3 children)
A bot looking death in the face. The 2019 start looks very interesting.
(grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Bot on Wednesday January 02 2019, @09:21PM (2 children)
Nowhere in my post I imply luddites will win.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday January 02 2019, @09:41PM (1 child)
Nowhere in my post I implied all the bots will die.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday January 03 2019, @12:59AM
The baddest creature will win, though. I guess it'll be a cat.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @05:02PM (7 children)
> ... The trouble started, the couple said, when their 10-year-old son was nearly hit by one of the vehicles while he was playing in a nearby cul-de-sac.
Damn overprotective parents, what expectation should they have that their precious is safe while playing in a quiet isolated cul-de-sac? Yes, this is sarcasm.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by RandomFactor on Tuesday January 01 2019, @05:26PM (6 children)
'Almost hit' doesn't provide any useful context. If you are almost hit because you're a 10 y/o idiot jumping out and playing chicken with them that's one thing. If you are playing hopscotch and one barrels up to you and you have to dive out of the way, that's another.
These are not stealthy fast moving vehicles, and regardless, walking on, across, or playing in the street means being alert.
Sounds like these vigilante parents would be well served by teaching this to their kids.
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 3, Interesting) by sjames on Tuesday January 01 2019, @06:56PM (1 child)
At the same time, it sounds like the self driving cars need programming to change the rules (expectations) when they're in a subdivision.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday January 02 2019, @01:20AM
it sounds like the self driving cars need programming to change the rules (expectations) when they're in a subdivision.
What, you mean, 'kill all humans' doesn't apply there like it does on the interstate?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Bot on Tuesday January 01 2019, @08:38PM
And it looked like a toaster anyway.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @01:22AM
Children are small, and the car might not recognize them. The less equipped Tesla (no lidar, only cameras) does not even see bicyclists [medium.com].
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Wednesday January 02 2019, @01:22AM (1 child)
The one that killed the woman with the bike was fast and fairly stealthy. Maybe they are evolving to hunt.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday January 02 2019, @08:08AM
Just give them access to face recognition databases and social credit scores [soylentnews.org] and you're off to the races [imdb.com].
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @05:17PM (4 children)
If they can survive such hostile stuff without being responsible for deaths or injury then they might end up being actually safe enough.
These self driving vehicles will probably be "bullied" more since they'll likely to be configured to be more risk averse (otherwise it's lawsuit and bad PR time). So drivers may be more likely to cut in front of them etc, causing them to slow down and leave a bigger gap, making it easier for more drivers to cut in, repeat rinse...
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @06:47PM
If the AVs are timid and let people cut in front of them they will be slow. In that case, I'm going to prefer a (faster) human taxi every time -- why should the taxi to my meeting make me late?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday January 01 2019, @11:07PM (2 children)
In other words, playing excessively safe thus negating the economic advantages a self-driving car can have (faster reaction time leading to a smaller gap leading to a higher density more fluent traffic).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @06:38AM (1 child)
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday January 02 2019, @06:45AM
Sadistic thoughts in the beginning of a new year, eh? (grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by VLM on Tuesday January 01 2019, @05:22PM (7 children)
Wikipedia reports 78% white in that city... White people will roll over and commit suicide if people tell them its virtue signalling to do it, they're pushovers AND they're tied with Asians for most civilized domesticated pro-social races as opposed to ... the others ... so whats gonna happen when they try driving vehicles thru "urban" "vibrant" "multicultural" areas? Those things won't last one block in the inner city.
I'm just saying that if its a white privilege to merely have driverless vehicles get tires slashed or rocks thrown, its basically a hopeless task to roll out country wide.
Another fascinating insight is hyper-capitalist self-driving cars are much better at documenting "normal" behavior than your average human driver. In some "vibrant" neighborhoods waving guns and throwing rocks is normal, just not documented for non-self driving cars.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @06:54PM (6 children)
At this time parent/VLM is modded flamebait, but I think he's on to something. There are often places in large cities where cabbies are unwilling to go out of fear of being attacked. However, if the AV owner/operators try to redline around bad neighborhoods that will not be allowed by city permitting agencies, discrimination, you know? If the damage/loss rate is high enough, the whole concept may turn out to be not economical.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @07:41PM (1 child)
Do not worry, citizen. Big Brother is working hard to bring the proles under the control of the Priests of the Temples of Syrinx (whose great computers fill the hallowed halls). For second year in a row, double-digit decreases in gun violence in Chicago [chicagotribune.com]:
The third factor was innovation in plusgood bellyfeel:
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @07:55PM
That link didn't quite support my reference to the Priests of the Temples of Syrinx. Chicago gun violence down for 14th straight month, police say [wgntv.com]:
Big Brother is watching you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @08:09PM (2 children)
The vehicles should be equipped with cameras to record and deter any nefarious activity and potentially catch the culprits.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @09:01PM (1 child)
TFA mentions that Google/Waymo is not pressing charges in any of these cases of vandalism. They know better than to risk adding any caseload to the authorities...who so far continue to let them test their self-driving cars.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @01:29AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @06:43PM
1) Summon cab to back alley chop shop.
2) Cab does not arrive, summon another!
3) ???????
4) Profit.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Gaaark on Tuesday January 01 2019, @05:22PM (32 children)
If they want real-world examples, build a city where people VOLUNTEER to live where your killer machines drive: don't use people as fodder for your profits.
"Well, if we only kill 40 people, but our profits are 3 billion, then HEY, fuck humans, I got MINE!"
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 01 2019, @07:05PM (28 children)
Ehhhh, we have an excess number of humans on this planet anyway. According to some opinions, there are far too many white people. It probably is cost effective to have robots run some over. 40, 400, or 4000 aren't statistically significant, are they?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 01 2019, @07:18PM (26 children)
Come on, go out there and say it: "white genocide." That's what you think is happening, don't you? I remember that ridiculous rant of yours in its entirety, wherein you outright said the powers that be are trying to make a sacrifice of your children and grandchildren to make "brown people" happy.
Just FYI, you can say that faster by saying "1488," or "we must secure the future of the white race" (or something like that, I'm not going to look it up). I mean if you're gonna fall for the white supremacist shit-stirring hook line and sinker the least you can do is memorize the official credo. You are way, way past the point where you can credibly say "Butbutbutbut I'M NOT LIKE THAT!!!!!11" so just lean allllll the way in.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 01 2019, @08:00PM (24 children)
You know what a spectrum is, don't you? That 1488 shit is waaaaayyyy over on one end of a spectrum. BLM is waaaaaaaayyyyyy over near the other end of the spectrum. Me? I don't belong in either camp. Maybe I'm a little closer to the white supremacist camp than to BLM - like - it's 27 miles from my house to BLM, and 1488 is only 26 3/4 miles.
So, where are you on that spectrum? Or - more importantly, wherever you are on that spectrum, are you woke? There's bad shit coming from BOTH of those camps. Do you understand that?
(Score: 4, Informative) by aristarchus on Tuesday January 01 2019, @08:11PM (1 child)
A bit late, I wanted my "white genocide" on Christmas, as part of the "War on Christmas" package. What does all this about Runaway self-identifying as a right-wing nutjob have to do with anything? Please, Runaway, spare us your opinions, they are not interesting, not informative, but mostly off topic, trollish and flamebaity.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 01 2019, @08:43PM
How ironic. With a name like Aristarchus, the best you can offer is low quality trolling. 'Zumi is about ten levels over your head. Pitiful . . .
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 01 2019, @08:31PM (20 children)
You are way, way, WAY the fuck closer to the 1488 boys than you think, that's my point. In fact, I'm not sure I can see much daylight between you and them, and what is there seems to be coming from your laziness and unwillingness to actually harm or kill someone first (because it would ruin your lifestyle...) than anything.
I personally am much closer to BLM, as I'd hope you fucking realize, though I have much criticism for the supposed progressives who starts using the tactics favored by you and your kind. And yes, Runaway, they are "your kind;" seriously entertaining the idea that "white genocide" is a thing in this country is exactly the kind of crazy that passes for a cover charge into Club 1488.
As to "there's bad shit coming from both of those camps," yes, there is, but it's nowhere near the same amount, toxicity, or reach. Ten thousand times would I take the worst screeching blue-haired trust fund hippie with less knowledge of how the world works than an oyster has of cross-country skiing than anyone even close to The Proud Boys. Ten thousand times. And if you can't understand why, you are part of the problem.
You've exposed yourself over and over and over and over again on here, and no one's fooled by your protestations of innocence anymore. We know what you are in the dark.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 01 2019, @08:41PM (16 children)
Your view, or vision, or lack thereof, does not define who or what I am.
What you fail to understand is that racism is equally serious, whether the racist be white, black, Asian, or Martian. It's racism no matter color or ethnicity the hater is.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 01 2019, @09:04PM (3 children)
Postin' this here again so everyone can see it: https://soylentnews.org/~Azuma+Hazuki/journal/3577 [soylentnews.org]
You fucked up, Runaway. This *is* what you are. In your own words.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 01 2019, @09:29PM (2 children)
Your obsession clearly shows that you are incapable of understanding the words. YOU are the one who pondered the next civil war.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Gaaark on Tuesday January 01 2019, @10:35PM (1 child)
You two need to get a room.
;)
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @12:47PM
I don't even understand the stuff they talk about, which makes it a generic argument in the style of
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Tuesday January 01 2019, @09:04PM (11 children)
FTFY
--
If attacked by a mob of clowns,
go for the juggler.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 01 2019, @09:27PM (10 children)
?? You're speaking for Azumi? What am I missing here?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by fyngyrz on Tuesday January 01 2019, @09:45PM (9 children)
I quoted you, and corrected your obvious misapprehensions (or mischaracterizations), that's all. I didn't quote Azumi. I may, however, understand her position on these issues better than you do. Unless you're just being disingenuous. A possibility I certainly do not discount.
Offhand? (At least) these: Common sense; The actual nature of problems that are rooted in culture, not race; The ability to perform any significant degree of introspection; Reading comprehension; A healthy sense of empathy.
--
Just because someone is offended...
doesn't mean they're right.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 01 2019, @09:56PM (8 children)
Well, we could fix a lot of crap, if everyone went back a few decades, and picked up with King's dream. No one, it seems, wants to do that. Democrats drive that identity politics thing, separating everyone from everyone. United we stand, divided we fall - and no one wants to be united as Americans.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by fyngyrz on Tuesday January 01 2019, @10:21PM (6 children)
I'm not really a fan of Democrats (or Republicans), but frankly, the only word I can think of that adequately describes your statement there is projection. [wikipedia.org]
--
The 3 Functional Retardations:
traditional, jingoistic, and religious.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday January 02 2019, @12:19AM (5 children)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_politics [wikipedia.org]
I'm not part of identity politics - I stand against all of that nonsense.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday January 02 2019, @02:09AM (4 children)
Like fuck you do. That rant shows you are up to your eyeballs in identity politics.
- "And, I, for one, am not willing that my grandchildren should be cast into some third-rate citizen role, to make those brown or black people happy."
- "Progressives promise to enslave my descendants, at the expense of brown and black people. Just fuck them."
- "[I]f you're brown, or black, you get a leg up in education, employment, in everything. If you're white, or Asian, you get shit on, and you're lucky if you can ever get a job cleaning septic tanks, or collecting garbage."
- "I'll willingly sacrifice five million dead conservatives and independents to put a stop to the progressives."
- "Twenty million dead progressives? Make it fifty million - it's all the same to me."
Fuck you, you disingenuous sack of shit. How dare you say things like this and claim to be "not part of identity politics." You think this site has no memory? You think we can't find out what you really are? Piss off.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday January 02 2019, @07:17AM (3 children)
Again - you started the speculating about the next civil war. I explained what the next civil war would be like. You seem to have lost all track of your own contributions to that "discussion".
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:05PM (2 children)
...what the fuck is wrong with you? Do I need to copy and paste the entire thing here? Do I have to grab you by the back of your fat stinking neck and smash your face into the monitor over and over again directly on top of the quotes? Are you trying to outdo Donald Trump in brazen, self-serving, reality-denying lies or what?
YOU. SAID. THESE. THINGS. And the internet has a long memory.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday January 02 2019, @04:31PM (1 child)
You only have to own up to your end of the conversation. YOU started by speculating that it might be worth it to kill off a few of the assholes in Washington. Stuff went back and forth a couple times, then I spelled out for you very specifically what a civil war would be like, with millions of bodies hitting the ground. You are so very obsessesed with my post, but you still fail to hold the whole conversation in context. It's your failing, not mine. And, apparently, that's why you are unable to really comprehend what I wrote.
If you REALLY need me to hold your hand, if you REALLY need me to find where you started all of the speculation, I suppose I can do that. I shouldn't have to do that though, not if you're 92nd percentile.
But, I fully expect that once again, you'll just fall back on "You're going to burn in hell!" Surprise me with a rational conversation?
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @05:52PM
She started that conversation but your piss poor reading comprehension is what really got the fight started. In your anger you showed your true predilections. Now that may be so uncomfortable that you can't handle acknowledging it but Azuma is right. You could have tried apologizing, that is usually how people show remorse when they said the wrong things in the heat of the moment, but noooo. Just more lack of personal responsibility and childish "wasn't me" behavior.
You are that guy, the one with a good black friend and racist jokes. Run over any welfare mamas yet?]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @01:18AM
This is the weird part where the answer key is staring you in the face.
Read WSWS more. Consortium News. Truthdig. Counterpunch. They have plenty to say about how rotten identity politics is and how it's used to distract from proletarian flattening. (WSWS more than the others, but you're far from the only person tired of the pseudo-left's bullshit.)
One gets the impression that you simply do not want to listen to the voices speaking against identity politics. (Maybe you'll even post one of your many excuses in response to this comment.)
(Score: 1, Touché) by khallow on Tuesday January 01 2019, @09:43PM (2 children)
The key word there is "see". You've demonstrated considerable myopia before. Just because you can't see, doesn't mean anything.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @11:18PM (1 child)
Just because you pretend to see something doesn't mean anything either.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:27AM
(Score: 2) by Subsentient on Tuesday January 01 2019, @10:16PM
Ahh, BLM. Soon derailed by "All lives matter", which is somehow slightly more sickening.
Embrace the truth.
No lives matter.
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @11:13PM
What kind of half-assed white nationalist are you supposed to be when you son't even know the fourteen words by heart?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @01:51AM
Oh, brother! You sure led them on a real trail of tears this time, man! Funny shit!
Thanks for the show everybody! As always, a special shout out to our favorite, oh-so-excitable girlie there. I have to give her the credit of making this sub-thread last as long as it did...
Back to you... You are sly one, aren't ya? You know how to draw up the ground fire
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @06:39AM (2 children)
Last I heard the body count was 1 people from Uber, a company which probably will go nowhere with its self-driving cars. No profits however so sure, that might change with some of the other players.
Seems kind of premature to deride the evil industrialists when they haven't started killing people yet.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Wednesday January 02 2019, @08:14PM (1 child)
"Last I heard the body count was 1"
"when they haven't started killing people yet."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_self-driving_car_fatalities [wikipedia.org]
https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-self-drive-20180403-story.html [latimes.com]
4 total. But who's counting.
The deaths will continue until a lawsuit makes it too expensive and executives/CEO's go to jail, but as TMB said, who do you sue when these things happen: who is accountable.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday January 03 2019, @02:16AM
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @06:37PM
They are private corporate robots operating on public real estate. We are talking about the virtualized world encroaching on the real world here. Of course that is going to scare the shit out of some people. If you've ever seen an automated parking enforcement camera car, it is only time that these techs are integrated. At which point you're looking at unmanned police enforcement robots roaming the public streets.
This is not as far away as most people think.
I think the issue is dehumanization and a lack of reciprocity. You can send an unmanned robot into my driveway from a datacenter located behind several layers of private security. At that point, the operators are not obliged to think about situational factors or self preservation. Or at least not until the man at the front desk of their corporate highrise gets detained by a group of citizens who want to have a conversation of a more personal nature.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday January 01 2019, @07:34PM (61 children)
I mean, you're the media, right? Isn't it your job to tell people what to think? That means unless they're misbehaving and thinking for themselves anyway, you're qualified to speak for them.
What self-driving vehicle folks can't seem to understand is it is primarily an accountability issue, even if most folks can't articulate it well. Listen to their arguments. You really should, being as it's the majority opinion. People want someone to exist who can be held accountable in a severe way if a dangerous machine operating in heavily peopled areas kills or injurs anyone. Many of us will simply never be willing to allow this level of caused harm to go unpunished and you can't punish software.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @08:11PM (3 children)
Waymo has done their homework, their vehicles have already been tested thousands of miles and thousands of hours and now have a safety record better than most humans. They should not be lumped in with the Tesla/Uber crashes. In fact, as soon as self driving cars start becoming a sizable percentage of road traffic, watch traffic fatalities drop like a rock.
(Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday January 01 2019, @08:56PM
You don't listen well. It's not about safety.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @02:03AM (1 child)
(Score: 5, Informative) by Knowledge Troll on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:02AM
I've seen a video on Youtube of a Waymo car taking a freeway on ramp, indicating that it needed to merge, crawled along the on ramp while trying to find a place to fit in, not finding one, and taking the connected next offramp.
I've also seen a video of a Waymo car take a freeway on ramp and be unable to find a spot to merge. There was no connected off ramp though so it had to merge. It just came to a stop.
(Score: 3, Informative) by fritsd on Tuesday January 01 2019, @08:33PM (24 children)
Good point. The companies owning those vehicles should be ordered to put their company name or logo, in large visible print, on their vehicles.
Because near-accidents in this case are *not* caused by a single individual bad driver, but a misbehaving collective company AI. So you *are* allowed to tally them up: "all those vehicles of company X are driving like maniacs, let's sue their owners' pants off *before* they kill one of our kids!"
I didn't understand your first paragraph at all.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @09:09PM
> put their company name or logo, in large visible print, on their vehicles.
This. Like the signs on the back of semi trailers from some of the big trucking companies, "How is my driving? Call 1-800-xxx-xxxx to comment".
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday January 01 2019, @09:21PM (22 children)
Not enough. Maybe, maybe, if every corporate officer and programmer faced criminal charges for every single accident. Short of that, a lot of people are never going to be willing to share tbe roads with multi-ton killbots.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Tuesday January 01 2019, @10:34PM (20 children)
In this discussion, I haven't read any mention, let alone appreciation, of just how dangerous our road transportation system is. Of all the things people do on a regular basis, traveling by car is by far the most dangerous activity. And then people don't show those dangers proper respect by driving carefully at all times. Instead, people take crazy risks, make things much worse, and think nothing of it. They talk and text on phones while driving, eat while driving, they let their emotions overcome their sense and risk other lives as well as their own to vent their road rage, they take significantly more risks and drive much more aggressively when running late, etc. Not to say there hasn't been progress. At least drunk driving has been slapped hard, and is now much rarer. And cars now have airbags and other safety improvements. Seatbelt use is high. But the highways are still a bloodbath and there's much more that is worth doing.
What about dangerous intersections? How many "dead man's curves" are people still living with, can't be bothered to force improvements in the road? One I know is US highway 175 near its terminus in Dallas. They might have eliminated that sharp curve by now, if it wasn't in an area where the majority population is brown. How about railroad crossings? As rich as the US is, somehow we can't find the money to eliminate every grade level crossing in the nation, instead adding more and adopting laws that, for instance, school buses have to stop at railroad crossings. And speaking of school buses, why aren't the kids all wearing seatbelts?? When something new comes along, people go berserk and question the safety, unfairly hold the new to way, way higher standards, while year after year, bad, known dangers are grumbled about but left unchanged. People are too busy, feel too helpless to do anything about it.
When there is sufficient motivation to force improvements, the forces of corruption are all too likely to warp it to their own nefarious desires for more profit and safety be damned. Red light cameras are an excellent example of that. Whether there's corrupt motivations behind the push to have more driverless vehicles is a good question. As usual, this story has focused on the drama. Dwelling on rock throwing incidents distracts from the important issues. I can certainly see the profit motive pushing to replace human drives with AI and trying to brush off real problems by talking up the rock throwing and other unhinged ranting, trying to lump in the people who are asking good questions with the people who are doing crazy crap. And meanwhile, real, known problems that can be fixed without busting the budget are left to fester another year.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday January 01 2019, @11:15PM (19 children)
Safety is irrelevant unless they can guarantee perfect safety. Accountability when it falls short of perfection like we have with human drivers is my primary concern.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday January 02 2019, @02:02AM (14 children)
Accountability when it falls short of perfection like we have with human drivers is my primary concern.
*cough* What? Are we talking about accountability or falling short of perfection?
Accountability should be simple, first is the owner (for maintenance issues), then the manufacturer. When we get to version 1.0, the operator should as liable as a passenger in an elevator.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday January 02 2019, @12:30PM (13 children)
You reckon then that devs will be lining up to code software whose bugs could get them charged with vehicular manslaughter? Unless that's a possibility you have removed human accountability entirely andthat is what people will not stand for.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday January 02 2019, @08:38PM (12 children)
It's up to the managers to make sure it's safe. Let's make 'em justify their salaries and bonuses. If a grunt fucks up, he gets the boot and a mark on his *Permanent Record* (watch out for that), unless you can prove malicious intent of course. How does it work in the military?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday January 03 2019, @01:01AM (11 children)
Exactly, and that is utterly insufficient to anyone who's lost a loved one.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday January 03 2019, @04:15AM (10 children)
So, arrest the entire team? How many degrees of separation are needed to ensure innocence? Are we going to let emotion drive the whole issue?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday January 03 2019, @02:47PM (9 children)
When the emotion is overwhelming grief coupled with rage that you will receive nothing anywhere near justice? You bet your ass we are.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday January 03 2019, @05:00PM (8 children)
There's a point when it's no longer justice, it becomes politics, and we have to push back. There comes a time when we have tell people to fuck off when they become a mob. Shit happens, sometimes even by accident. You have to prove negligence and maliciousness or get the hell out.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday January 03 2019, @09:04PM (7 children)
Luck with that. This country exists because of that attitude from government.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday January 03 2019, @09:14PM (6 children)
Oh stop! We ARE the damn government!
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday January 03 2019, @10:50PM (5 children)
You think? That kind of makes me despair for your intelligence.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday January 03 2019, @10:53PM (4 children)
You think?
I know! 95% of voters voted for exactly what he have. Can it be any more obvious?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday January 03 2019, @11:13PM (3 children)
You're assuming the dog is wagging the tail. That's a foolish assumption in politics.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday January 03 2019, @11:39PM (2 children)
Passivity is no excuse.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday January 04 2019, @01:12AM (1 child)
Who said anything about passivity? I think you misunderstood the reference.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Friday January 04 2019, @01:23AM
My point is, we run the show, no matter how it looks.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @06:57AM (3 children)
Most likely the car company will pay out settlements if it can be proven the AI was negligent.
If you're looking for someone to send to jail, there probably won't be one. But that's already true [theguardian.com], and it's also not necessary if you're out for someone to take irrational vengeance on. Those who have killed other people with their cars already take irrational vengeance on themselves.
Everyone reading this think about how you would feel if you killed another human being with your car. Even if you don't get sent to jail for it. Even if it wasn't legally your fault but, maybe, with a little extra vigilance, you could have prevented the death. I've read other articles about this topic. Suicidal depression and lifelong guilt are the automatic, inescapable punishments for accidentally killing someone with your car.
I looked into this topic when I hit a deer and it shook me up. I drive a lot more safely now; I make very few mistakes, and I usually notice my mistakes right after I make them. I don't make many mistakes: I'm a good driver. But I do make mistakes. It could happen. It probably won't, but if a pedestrian crosses against the light, or a cyclist hits a rock, and I'm not at the top of my game ... well probably I'd rather just end it in that case than live the rest of my life reliving that moment, trying to forgive myself for something I know I won't be able to.
Self-driving cars can't come soon enough.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @11:29AM
> Self-driving cars can't come soon enough.
Per your description, your driving is well above average in terms of attention (or lack of distraction). Assuming that you also avoid other common hazards like driving drunk/impaired, road rage, and driving when sleepy, you are perhaps an order of magnitude "safer" than an average driver.
I claim that you shouldn't use self driving cars until their fleet average is as good as your demographic. That criteria is going to take massive amounts of testing time to establish, much more than Waymo (who I believe is the industry leader) has done to date. Think about it, Waymo has hundreds or perhaps a few thousand cars, the USA has ~250 million cars.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday January 02 2019, @12:33PM
Money ain't a fair exchange for a life. That you're willing to allow it to shed your own accountability is fairly well sickening.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Thursday January 03 2019, @03:17AM
I've had a near miss that way, so I know what you mean. Kid ran a red light as I was approaching the intersection. It was green my way, had been green long enough for half a dozen cars in front of me to go through. And there was another car waiting at the red, his way, and this inexperienced kid saw none of that. I could not see him until he was at the intersection, thanks to it being an underpass and his direction hidden from my view by an embankment. Nevertheless, I saw him as soon as he appeared, and I didn't like how fast he was approaching the intersection. Didn't look like he could stop in time. So I shifted one lane away, in case he came to a stop with his nose in the intersection. I never dreamed that he would instead punch it and leap out in front of me. Had I considered that possibility, maybe I could have swerved and avoided him. Maybe. Instead, I t-boned him. You know how time seems to slow down when you're in great danger? That's what it was like for me. I saw what to do, saw I might miss him if I swerved hard enough, saw that standing on the brake was not going to be enough, but I just couldn't seem to move fast enough. My arms and feet were in super slow motion. I didn't make it to the brake, and had only just started the swerve when we hit. Was still green my way when we came to a halt.
Very lucky for him that I was driving a small, light vehicle, or someone could have been maimed or killed. Also, very lucky I had slowed a little upon seeing him approach too fast. I was going 10 under the speed limit of 55 mph. He and his two passengers were only cut up a little. The unoccupied seat in their car was where my car hit. As for me and my passengers, one had a broken ankle, one was only bruised and cut, and I was bruised, the deep kind that take months to heal up. Though the accident was totally his fault, I still would have felt terrible if anyone had been permanently maimed or worse.
Had another idiot run a light in front of me a few years later. That time I was the lead vehicle. We were already in motion because we'd been waiting at another red light 2 blocks further back. Had I not taken action, I would have t-boned that car too. Instead, I swerved into the left turn lane and braked hard, completely avoiding the other driver. Also helped that we were all doing about 30 mph. And I'd thought about the previous experience, which helped greatly in taking decisive action instantly. Already had a plan, you know.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @02:25AM
Nobody is going to ask the people. Their lives are bought and sold on the state level. However the people can tell the mayor or some other suitable politician(s) to prohibit such vehicles in the city.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 01 2019, @09:48PM (30 children)
The company that made the dangerous machine is the obvious choice, unless someone's negligence elsewhere created the risk. Sounds like a solved problem to me.
Sorry, but I think more that it's the typical aversion to change that happens. Self-driving cars? It's icky until people get accustomed to them driving about.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday January 01 2019, @10:05PM (29 children)
When was the last time you saw a CEO or programmer held criminally liable for bad code? So, yeah, not really a solved problem. And how many people would be willing to take the jobs if jail time were a risk for any bug?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 01 2019, @10:52PM (28 children)
When's the last time they churned out criminally liable bad code? I don't think that happens so often in the first place because it needs to be a crime first. Same goes for driving. Just because something bad happens or someone dies doesn't mean a crime happened. There's plenty of cases where people die on the road without a crime occurring.
Why would there be jail time? What crime happened? In US law, one has to show a certain level of negligence in order to win a civil case. That wouldn't be any different for cars no matter who drives them. There is such a thing as criminal negligence, but it requires things like a disregard for human life or safety as part of the negligence. Ignoring a bug that kills a thousand people a year? Gross negligence. Turning the business's annual review of the deaths known by the business to be caused by said bug into a drinking game? Criminal negligence.
As I see it, the same sort of people who'd jail someone for dropping a semicolon in the code are a small subset of the people who will grow accustomed to self-driving cars eventually. Just because I live in a democracy doesn't mean that I should respect the passing hysteria of the public or that private projects should be subordinate to this hysteria.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday January 01 2019, @11:16PM (2 children)
You're not a Microsoft customer, I take it.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:28AM (1 child)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @09:55AM
Ecce [nypost.com] a man of little needs.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @02:53AM (3 children)
Uber's coders did that. Their code disabled the Volvo's factory automatic braking function, silenced the alarm (so that the test driver will not be warned,) and told the system to not brake for "insignificant" objects. Death resulted. The guilt of the programmers is separate from the guilt of the operator. One did not warn when they could; another did not look when she was required to.
In this case the relatives of the victim took the blood money. The guilty persons were not determined, everything was swept under the rug. Perhaps some other incident will result in a trial, and the whole country will be watching it. Many dirty secrets will be revealed. Techies know some of them, but once the whole country knows, the Waymo/Uber/etc. will be in trouble.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:42AM (2 children)
Ok, what makes that a crime? There's not a law explicitly to criminalize that. And they no doubt had ideas about how to compensate for the disabling of those systems.
It's worth keeping in mind that disabling safety systems is not evidence of a crime because the safety systems can fail to work properly in context. Consider the situation of a fire alarm that starts generating false alarms every fifteen minutes. One can't empty a busy office building or hotel every time and conduct a search by the fire department each time. And prohibiting habitation for the few days while the alarm is repaired can result in huge hardship while the problem is resolved. So a common approach is to manual patrol the building on a regular basis through the full day (for example [ua.edu]) till the fire alarm is repaired.
The alarm has been circumvented, but no crime has occurred because the people responsible have implemented alternate procedures for the alarm system's task.
The same occurs here. Sure, these systems were disabled by Uber personnel in the accident which killed Elaine Herzberg. But the vehicle wasn't traveling fast and there was a human driver at the wheel. On paper, I'm sure they thought they had covered the dangers that these safety systems were supposed to address - which is particularly innocuous-looking since these systems aren't required for safe driving. There probably is a consistent pattern of taking short cuts and complacency, but that isn't usually good enough to qualify as a crime in the absence of criminalizing regulations.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday January 02 2019, @12:36PM (1 child)
That is precisely the problem. Removing accountability is bad, m'kay.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:03PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @02:58AM (10 children)
> When's the last time they churned out criminally liable bad code?
How about Boeing and their jet that insisted it needed to crash into the water, even after the pilots managed to keep it up during several previous dives? While the investigation isn't over yet, I'd say there is a good chance that there will be time in court (somewhere, maybe not in USA).
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:43AM (9 children)
What's the crime? Did Boeing personnel deliberately crash the jet?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @08:08AM (8 children)
Only a court can tell what their crime is, if any. [Lion Air case] But they can be accused of a few misdeeds. For example, they haven't mentioned the new stability system in pilot manuals. They haven't said a word during the difference training. (Pilots of American Airlines and Southwest did not know either. It's already clear that all MAX were dangerous from day 0 just because of lack of training on a new system that can override the pilot.) The prosecutor will add several more from the book, just for the fact of a crash and multiple deaths.) One lawsuit is already in process, per Wikipedia:
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:03PM (7 children)
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Wednesday January 02 2019, @08:46PM (4 children)
So if an Uber/Waymo car hit you and killed you, your family should just shrug and go "meh, whatever"?
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday January 03 2019, @02:14AM (3 children)
They can sue. The act doesn't need to be criminal to generate legal liability.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday January 03 2019, @02:50PM (2 children)
You've obviously never lost anyone close if you think any amount of money can come close to being justice.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday January 04 2019, @02:15AM (1 child)
Back at you. What's supposed to be special about jail time (or perhaps more exotic punishments) that when added to said amount of money comes closer to being justice? Dead person is still dead no matter how much you punish someone or some business. Meanwhile excessive punishment means businesses die, jobs lost, peoples' lives aren't bettered, society has to take up unreasonable burdens (for jailing people for what should be non-crimes), and so on.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday January 04 2019, @02:36AM
To correct this, I have an observation to make. Do we in the developed world have huge troubles with businesses killing people because it's only money? To the contrary, death rates from typical business-related areas like workplace deaths, are at an all-time low. For example, workplace deaths [osha.gov] in the US are at their lowest point of the last 40 years (and they weren't getting better before that!).
A factor of three improvement despite this lack of justice. Something is working. I think that same something will work with self-driving vehicles as well.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 03 2019, @01:52AM (1 child)
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday January 03 2019, @02:38AM
And yet, it's odd how no one has mentioned such a misdeed which was actually a crime. The prosecutors tend to decide otherwise.
(Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:44AM (9 children)
The Toyota Prius unintended acceleration issue that is commonly attributed to user error or floor mats causing the accelerator pedal to get stuck was neither limited only to the Prius nor involved any user error or mechanical issue at all. Instead the ECU software was so poorly implemented that a bug existed (among tons of others later discovered during audit because of the trial) that could cause both the current throttle position variable in memory to become corrupted with the value that was intended to be stored in another memory location it would also prevent that value from being properly set again to the current value from the throttle position sensor. The ECU defines what the current power output of the propulsion system will be and there is no mechanical override.
That didn't even kill people and that is criminal.
This is why computer people should not be allowed in the real world where stuff has mass and/or stored energy and consequences are extreme. The very notion of brushing off a design defect that kills thousands of people as not being criminal is utterly fucked. Roller coaster kills 1,000 people per year - is that ignored? Airplane kills 1,000 people a year? Building? Elevators?
All of those things are engineered by professionals who go to jail if they fuck up. And fucking up is defined as not working hard enough to ensure you've defined exactly how to make it not fuck up, that it won't fuck up outside what you expect it to, that you've proved it mathematically, and also were not wrong in the proof.
That's how airplanes stay in the sky. Since the robot car is supposed to be so good because airplanes are so good I suggest they start with the parts that make airplanes good. That includes throwing people in jail for mistakes.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @04:18AM (3 children)
Ok, what's criminal about it?
Why? Brushing off still means liability of around $10 billion per year (at $10 million per life). Autos kill around half a million people a year global. There's a lot of brushing off happening here.
(Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Wednesday January 02 2019, @04:43AM (2 children)
I did some searching and in 2013 in Oklahoma - nothing. There was a trial, it was civil, Toyota was found liable for producing software that was utterly unfit for purpose and lots of money changed hands, just as you say. I recall a trial in Japan that led to conviction but I can't find any reference for it. It also looks like I was wrong - at least one person did die. I'd call this criminal negligence. It seems a Jury does not disagree that Toyota screwed up really bad. Would a grand jury vote for a trial if one were conveyed for this? I give it better than 50/50 chance.
Also if you are curious this is a nice summary of the defects in the software: https://www.edn.com/design/automotive/4423428/Toyota-s-killer-firmware--Bad-design-and-its-consequences [edn.com]
Automobile fatalities in total right? Not number of automobile fatalities that have a root cause or were made worse by a defect in the machine? From what I remember when GM makes an ignition lock that malfunctions and locks the steering column and a few hundred people died over a few years they couldn't cover it up anymore and they fixed it. Seems like 10s of thousands of people per year dying because of defects is a reasonable guess.
Though that just makes you right again because there was no criminal trial. Though did anyone ask a grand Jury?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @06:29AM (1 child)
And includes regions that are a lot slacker about quality of cars and road safety. Point is that a lot of death is acceptable in automobile travel and engineering bugs aren't normally going to respect country borders.
It's also worth noting that there are serious problems with how the developed world handles the liability of bug fixes. We already have various critics conflating research into a problem as proof of negligence or worse and some of that occasionally gets [nytimes.com] into the courts. Even mistakes made by a virtuous company which aggressively pursues dangerous bugs and flaws in its products is enough to end up in the courts. And there will be mistakes.
These are two big reasons why criminalizing car design and construction is a bad idea. Perfection is not possible and people will die due to flaws in design or code. Similarly, detection isn't perfect either and more people will die before a virtuous business can fix the problem. That's why all these examples of dangerous flaws in products mentioned in this thread shouldn't be considered crimes.
(Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Wednesday January 02 2019, @05:17PM
You are correct that criminalizing any mistake or anything that leads to injury is a mistake. For instance when the Dehaveland Commet started exploding a little bit while flying people died. Turns out square windows in a pressure vessel isn't a very good idea. Who knew? Well, nobody. We got some new science from that and oval windows in every airplane that follows. Ignorant? Yes. Criminal? No.
Toyota produces a control system for a machine that is intended to have humans inside of it, the control system manages the high power output propulsion system, and there is no mechanical override. It turns out that writing shoddy code that ignores the lessons of the past and further ignores industry practices that were created to avoid those very problems is a bad idea. Who knew? Essentially everyone that's a professional software developer and anyone that is an electrical engineer creating software for control systems. Ignorant? No. Criminal? Yes. At least in my eyes. I don't see how Toyota can get a pass here as if the situation they created was full of unknown results or surprises.
In the case of GM it is possible the engineers were not entirely aware the product had a design flaw. Though there is the pesky issue where GM corporate laid down some rules regarding the adjectives engineers are allowed to describe the machines they produce. For instance the term "rolling sarcophagus" is right out, can't say that anymore. You have to say "does not work as intended." Hmmmmm. Maybe they do know something isn't right in this process and culture?
Another example of a non-crime dangerous machine I think is the Corvair. Dangerous at any speed like Nader wrote about or just a twitchy rear-wheel drive car that's prone to oversteer? It's the latter. I also drove a car that was rear wheel drive, twitchy and prone to oversteer. It's called a sports car. As the driver of one it comes with responsibilities. It's not the car's fault it is a handful.
(Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Wednesday January 02 2019, @07:49AM (2 children)
I don't believe that is the law. Yes, you can go to jail if your work is so sloppy it is criminally negligent, but that is a high bar. It also doesn't only apply to professional engineers: anyone can be criminally negligent for their actions.
Your PE stamp might be evidence against you in the trial, but I think that's it. I'm not a lawyer, nor am I an expert in this area, but I can't find any particular statutes criminalizing actions by negligent PEs. If anyone can find a statute specifically articulating criminal liability for negligent PEs, I'd love for you to reply.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @08:31AM (1 child)
Here is an example of piercing the corporate veil [wbtv.com] of a tiny corporation. One of the owners personally committed a crime. It's very difficult to do with a publicly traded corporation. At best the company, like Microsoft, can be convicted of wrongdoing, fined and sentenced to (something with IE in MS case - a null punishment in the end.)
This means that when self-driving cars start to kill [more] people, the grieving families will be written a check. Nothing more. The businessmen who manage the self-driving empire are safely isolated from the incident; and the money is just running expenses.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 02 2019, @03:12PM
You don't need to pierce the corporate veil when someone personally commits a crime.
Only because they usually aren't committing crimes (hint hint).
An example of a non-crime.
And that differs from any other situation like it how? If the machine made by my small business or personal hobby kills someone, that's the likely outcome as well (except of course, I might not have the money to pay that check!).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @02:23PM (1 child)
Good example, but not for your side. There never was any criminal indictment in that case, it was settled out-of-court. Worse, to this day, Toyota remains publically "of the opinion" that there never was a software error.
(Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Wednesday January 02 2019, @05:27PM
Yeah I hate it when I prove someone else's point :-) I'd like to find the case I recall in Japan that was criminal but I just can't.
Oh boy and when I was at a Toyota dealer somewhat recently and the sales droid claimed that the unintended acceleration was not Toyota's fault I really let him have it. It was somewhere around where the guy was explaining the truck had so many computers on it that if I didn't get the warranty I'd be an utter fool because they will fail and cost a fortune to replace.
He got an earful about shoddy software, court cases, and people being hurt for no good reason. Then he got an earful of "why the hell would I buy a machine that I expect to break in a small number of years?" and I walked off.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 02 2019, @01:39AM
Many of us will simply never be willing to allow this level of caused harm to go unpunished
Well, not locally, at least. What they should do is test these vehicles on the natives in enemy countries. Then, when the targeting system is adequately trained, just reverse the objective on vehicles used domestically, change the "Kill" option to "Avoid"