[masklinn]

> including the driver who was too busy looking at his phone to intervene

I've yet to get any information on one thing though, are safety drivers operating under the assumption that the car works at SAE2 or at SAE3? Because if it's the latter, the driver has no cause to keep looking at their phone. If it's the former, the car should have a deadman's switch to ensure the driver stay alert.

An other thing that is not clear is whether they were looking at their phone or at instrumentation (e.g. telemetry or the like).

[ghaff]

The safety drivers should theoretically be operating under the assumption that the self-driving system can fail randomly at any moment. Of course, humans are not wired as reliable backups to handle random split-second problems when the system, in fact, works correctly most of the time.

[masklinn]

> The safety drivers should theoretically be operating under the assumption that the self-driving system can fail randomly at any moment.

Then the car should be equipped with a dead man's switch / vigilance devices to ensure the driver pays attention, trains have been equipped with these equipments for decades.

> Of course, humans are not wired as reliable backups to handle random split-second problems when the system, in fact, works correctly most of the time.

Indeed, but again that is a long-known issue and we've had solutions for a long time.