[UncleEntity]

Yep, if you make a left turn in front of oncoming traffic it's pretty much always your fault even if the robot was driving the other car.

Though, in this case, it's probably cheaper for Uber to fix the other car than pay all the lawyer fees because you know there's going to be lawyers involved.

[adrianmonk]

There will be legal fees, but if Uber is confident they can win it, it might be a good investment just to defend the reputation of self-driving cars.

If they settle out of court, it leaves room for people to wonder if they settled because they had to. If they proceed to court and win, then they can say, "Our algorithm didn't cause this crash, and an impartial jury confirmed that."

[trendia]

The damage was on the front-right bumper of the left-turning car. The only way I can see the left-turning car being at fault is if the left-turning car was in the leftmost lane, and the right-turning car tried to merge into the leftmost lane as well (rather than the closest lane as required)

[pcthrowaway]

There was no right-turning car. The uber car was going straight. The woman in the other car (making the left turn) argued they had their right signal on, but it's not apparent if there's any evidence to corroborate that. Uber has stated that the car's left turn signal was on to indicate an upcoming lane change

[UncleEntity]

> "As I was making my left, he continued to drive straight and slammed directly into the side of my vehicle," she said.

Ignoring the misgendering of the robot car of course...