News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Uber Self-Driving Car That Struck Pedestrian Wasn’t Set t... by jacquesm on Thursday May 24, 2018 @04:16PM (#17147939)
Are you seriously suggesting that the better software strategy is to aim for the kill because it is cheaper than possibly causing 'only' injury?

That should be criminal.

I'm all for chalking this one up to criminal negligence and incompetence, outright malice is - for now - off the table, unless someone leaks meeting notes from Uber where they discussed that exact scenario.

Re:Uber Self-Driving Car That Struck Pedestrian Wasn’t Set t... by beenBoutIT on Friday May 25, 2018 @01:19AM (#17150816)
My point is that it's a black box and nobody outside of Uber knows what its priorities are. It could have just as easily mistaken the pedestrian leaned over pushing the bike for a large dog and then proceeded to run her over because it's programmed to always run dogs over at full speed on the highway. Outside of Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics" there is nothing that dictates how self-driving cars should behave, so my unpopular idea above isn't technically breaking any rules.
Re:Uber Self-Driving Car That Struck Pedestrian Wasn’t Set t... by jacquesm on Friday May 25, 2018 @02:59AM (#17151267)
You should check out what happened to Volkwagen for a similar trick.
Re:Uber Self-Driving Car That Struck Pedestrian Wasn’t Set t... by beenBoutIT on Friday June 01, 2018 @01:21PM (#17207670)
Fines.