Comment by JumpCrisscross 3 days ago
> They have to be, as a machine can not be held accountable for a decision
This logic applies equally to all cars, which are machines. Waymo has its decision makers one more step removed than human drivers. But it’s not a good axiom to base any theory of liability on.
> now it's driver vs injured party. Self-driving makes it trillion dollar company vs injured party
It’s historically been my insurance company versus your insurance company or an uninsured driver. (Or I’m Apple Paying you $5k so my fender bender doesn’t show up on insurance.)
Now it’s my insurance company versus the insurance company of a client who can pay damages. The number of cases where drivers are individually litigating is relatively rare and preserved against e.g. Waymo.
yes, so now it's me and my consumer insurance vs an entire department of people at an incredibly well funded company and their corporate insurance company — it's an entirely different scenario that starts looking a lot more like individual litigation for the consumer, even for otherwise run-of-the-mill insurance claims
not to mention that "driver error" becomes an argument with a black box
In traditional vehicles, liability is structurally centered on the human driver, and product liability exists but is difficult to assert absent clear or systemic defects.
Autonomous driving systems disrupt this by directly assuming the driving function, forcing liability upstream (where it's significantly more difficult to navigate).
So now it's driver vs injured party. Self-driving makes it trillion dollar company vs injured party. Night and day difference.