Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street

Re:Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street by rocqua on Monday March 19, 2018 @03:12PM (#16622037)

Uber has shown very often that they are willing to break the law. It seems within their modus-operandus to just ignore these rules.

Essentially, Uber engages in regulatory arbitrage but taking into account the cost-benefits of breaking the law. I.e. if it breaks the law but is profitable for them, they seem to do it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street by alextheparrot on Monday March 19, 2018 @04:07PM (#16622594)

Sure, so make the regulation expensive. For example, if a company is not in compliance then the executive team can be charged for any crime their self-driving toy committed under their guidance.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street by eric-hu on Wednesday March 21, 2018 @12:59AM (#16635607)

I don't believe this will be effective. Thinking back to the VW scandal, did any executive get punished for this? Same question for the Equifax breach and the insider trading issue.

My 'money' is on people with money figuring out loopholes, like plausible deniability.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street by aerotwelve on Monday March 19, 2018 @04:54PM (#16623052)

Yes, it means that we need to write new regulations with real teeth, and vote out the politicians on all sides of the aisle that continue to punt on this issue.

One of my biggest complaints about the self-driving car space is that real lives are at stake; light-touch "voluntary" rules suitable for companies that publish solitaire clones aren't going to cut it here.

[ Parent | on HN ]