[sanex]

We need that lawsuit to happen already so we can establish precedent. The person in the driver's seat of the Tesla should be at fault. The engineer using the llm should be at fault. The person behind the gun not the manufacturer should be at fault.

[Iolaum]

We shouldn't need a lawsuit. The legislative branch should pass a law clarifying those things, that's their job.

[jon_richards]

Then you need a lawsuit to determine whether the law is “constitutional”.

[hvb2]

> The person in the driver's seat of the Tesla should be at fault.

I don't think this is a good analogy. For Tesla right now it might fly. However, when their software gets to waymo level of autonomy, I would expect liability to shift to the manufacturer.

If anything, I think that would be the true proof of a company trusting their software to allow for autonomous driving

[rokob]

> However, when their software gets to waymo level of autonomy

Luckily that won’t happen.

[kelvinjps10]

Also especially if they claim they're selling autonomous cars

[dotancohen]

I believe that Mercedes does offer manufacturer liability.

[missedthecue]

In the America, whoever has the most money is liable. It's not worth it for the legal industry otherwise. The lawyer earns his pay by convincing the court that whatever established precedent doesn't apply to his case.

[sanex]

Unfortunately.