[sharken]

That makes a lot of sense, on a highway with three lanes, I'm always making sure to not merge to the middle lane, if there is a car on the opposite lane, to name another situation.

The hard question which really has nothing to do with the tech, is what we do if a self driving car kills a person. Made worse if the accident could be avoided by the majority of human drivers.

[trhway]

>The hard question which really has nothing to do with the tech, is what we do if a self driving car kills a person. Made worse if the accident could be avoided by the majority of human drivers.

we have already had exactly such a case - Uber. Even though Uber was totally negligent, nothing happened to them, beside probably some settlement behind the scene. In part they were able to wiggle it by showing a bad dynamic range video (which is completely different from how human eyes see in such situation) there the victim appears as if out of nowhere.

I think that case just sets the pattern that the autonomous vehicles will not be judged according to human driver standard.

[UncleEntity]

Nah, they just threw the safety driver under the bus…apparently being charged with (negligent?) homicide.

Buying a governor really payed off for them it turned out.

[sharken]

Quite right, the Uber case is here:

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-54175359

So what happens with the human driver (you) if the same accident happens ?

If the Uber case sets the standard, then negligent homicide is a likely charge. The sentence for that in the US is "A minimum of 4 years in prison and up to a maximum of 8 years in prison" according to this link:

https://www.feldmanroyle.com/homicide/negligent-homicide/

You better hope you can explain it was a bug in the software in this situation.