[ececconi]

I think the liability shifts a little bit because when you're in cruise control you're literally behind the steering wheel. In this case you're outside the vehicle.

I think as more autonomous features get developed it's going to be complicated for some time regarding who is culpable for a given accident.

[justina1]

Even outside the vehicle you're still in control. By default, Summon can only be used with the mobile app and with a 'dead man switch': lift your finger off the button in the app and the car stops. The driver had to specifically disable that protection to use the feature the way he did, and now claims no responsibility. Also, pressing any button on the key stops the car. Seems like a whole host of bad decisions.

[CydeWeys]

> The driver had to specifically disable that protection to use the feature the way he did

It shouldn't be possible to disable safety features. I can't press a button to disable the brakes on my car, for instance.

[cynix]

> I can't press a button to disable the brakes on my car, for instance.

The brake is not a safety feature that you expect the car to activate automatically on your behalf. The driver has to explicitly step on the brake pedal to activate it.

With regards to Summon, disabling its safety limitations is like disabling traction control, stability control, automatic emergency braking, lane keeping/lane departure warning, etc., all of which can be disabled by pressing a button somewhere.

[kamaal]

>>It shouldn't be possible to disable safety features.

Here really it needs to be defined what qualifies as safety. The act of driving(in certain circumstances) in itself is unsafe by many a definition, by relinquishing control to the driver you open all the risks that likely to occur. Its hard to draw the boundary as to what is safe and what isn't. Please tell me should cars carry mandatory breath analyzers? and disable ignition in case the analyzer finds traces of alcohol in the breath? Should there be a detector to check if the driver at the wheel has been well rested a night before? A detector to check if the driver isn't in rage? These scenarios only increase exponentially, but remember when you relinquish control to the driver you now open door for all risks equally. Therefore you can't handle all the thousands of situations, instead what you do is remind the user of the responsibility, double check the user decision and then relinquish the control to the user.

Therefore in all seriousness, if you take control of the car regardless of the situation you are really responsible. Even if you control the car through your phone.

[CydeWeys]

There's a qualitative difference between allowing disabling of a safety feature (what I'm talking about) and adding additional ones (every example you just mentioned). In that light, do you have any response to my statement that it shouldn't be possible to disable safety features? Note that requiring the addition of other safety features is a separate issue.

[SmellyGeekBoy]

> It shouldn't be possible to disable safety features. I can't press a button to disable the brakes on my car, for instance.

Buy you can press a button to disable the traction control...

[mywittyname]

My personal opinion is that it's your property and you're responsible for it no matter what. To me, it's not really any different than a person's dog biting another person or a tree falling on his neighbor's house. It's likely the owner did not intent for these events to happen, but they did and the owner should be held liable for it.

[chc]

> My personal opinion is that it's your property and you're responsible for it no matter what.

I'm sure you don't mean that as absolutely as you're making it sound. For example, if I steal your car and run over somebody with it, surely that's my responsibility, not yours. Right?