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.
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.