@destructdisc @ajsadauskas But did the food get to the person who ordered?
@ajsadauskas But seriously I’ve lost count the number of stories I’ve read of these robots forcing people off sidewalks & ramps, including elderly and people in wheelchairs, because it demands the smoothest path.
Literally (as opposed to figuratively, not just as an emphasis word) barging in to peoples shins to get them to move and half knocking them over.
I’m glad we don’t have these in Australia, and I completely endorse any actions taken against these robots.
It’s funny how everyone is getting riled up about this story. You’re only hearing about it because it’s unusual. Over 100 people die on the road every day in America, die at the hands of human drivers, not bots.
Flip it around. Wouldn’t this seem an odd story if a pedestrian or driver caused this accident? No one would care.
How any cars are there one the road everyday? And how many of these “robots”? Put it in perspective.
As the spokesperson put it, the robot’s actions may legally constitute fleeing the scene of a traffic incident, meaning Starship Technologies could very well be on the hook for the incident.
Good. Nail them to the wall.
I think “fled” is the wrong word here. “Fled” means “running from” which implies some sort of conscious decision making usually reserved for living things. If you throw a rock and it bounces off Sam Altman’s head, you don’t say the rock fled from Sam. You just say “Nice shot”
If a driver hits someone without realizing it and drives off to continue their day, that’s still legally fleeing the scene
Maybe, but that’s still based on a human that should be aware of what they’re doing, even if they weren’t at the time.
To me it’s more like a rolling truck running someone over and continuing on down the street. Whoever was in charge of the truck should be liable for not securing it, but the truck at no point fled the scene… it has no awareness or capability to understand.
The issue with this argument is in order for us to allow these vehicles to operate on the road they NEED to have this awareness. If they can’t be aware then they shouldn’t be permitted to operate. We don’t allow people who’s awareness is impared to legally operate on the road, why should we let computers without awareness operarate in the same conditions?
By holding them to the same(or in my preference higher) standards is the only way we have if ensuring there is accountability for the companies operating these things. They cannot be allowed to pass off that liability.
Lmao
Right but if we say “fled” we can get everyone all riled up and increase our engagement metrics.
sometimes there are remote workers (…Another Indian) who drive these things.
That’s wild to think we’ve managed to outsource the very act of driving to another country. Nothing drives innovation quite like capitalism 🫠
It’s a mix. They’re like a Sim in The Sims, humans give them instructions and then they run path finding trying to implement it. The humans can take full control if the robots gets completely confused.
