• intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    If the weight of the car stopped her from breathing she’d be dead.

    The facts of the matter are:

    • The car is programmed to stop and turn on its hazard lights when it detects an obstruction underneath it.
    • That is good policy, overall, for when a person is trapped under a vehicle
    • As exemplified by this situation, where moving off her leg could endanger her life

    A larger narrative was attempted to be extrapolated from the smaller narrative here of a car endangering someone’s life.

    However as has been described already, this car did not endanger anyone’s life any more than a human-driven car would have. In fact, given then scenario of a pedestrian literally flying into its path, it behaved optimally for that scenario. Something a human driver may not have done.

    • upstream@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I like how you just keep on talking about what we all agree on.

      Would you like to imagine how you would argue if the first sentence you wrote was true?

      That’s when the interesting scenarios start showing up, including how humans are ready to grab the pitchforks when an automated system kills someone, but when humans do it 10x more it’s perfectly fine.