[SR2Z]

The NYT, in this article, admits to seeing a video that proves that Cruise did not block that ambulance.

This is a garbage headline meant to garner clicks. The city has been complaining about these cars for a while. They've never had any data and now are trying to complain about "x incidents where an AV interfered with emergency vehicles." They're banking on the headlines, and then they'll bring up whatever number they could passably claim in the next letter/meeting they have with the DMV.

[woodruffw]

> The NYT, in this article, admits to seeing a video that proves that Cruise did not block that ambulance.

I can't find this admission in the article. The article includes a quote from a Cruise rep saying that the ambulance "was never impeded," but this appears to be in the context of the first responders having to move one of their own vehicles so that the ambulance could leave (second graf).

In other words: Cruise's argument appears to be "we didn't block you because you found another way out." That wouldn't be an acceptable argument from a human driver at an accident scene; it it's an acceptable on from a self-driving car company.

[SR2Z]

> "we didn't block you because you found another way out."

In other words: the ambulance was not blocked. They (SFFD) recently had a press release where they say Cruise did not block the ambulance. Why? Because they know there's a video now, and that Cruise is more than willing to share it.