Thread

Uber arbitration award over Emily Normandin-Parker’s death

159 points · 192 comments · dataflow

calibas · 1790002537 · focus · HN ↗
> Stone rejected Uber's argument that it is "merely a technology company" connecting riders with drivers, finding that Uber provides transportation services to the public through its app, sets prices and controls key aspects of the rider experience.
> The arbitrator also rejected Uber's argument that Proposition 22 -- a California ballot measure approved by voters in 2020 that allows companies to classify app-based drivers as independent contractors instead of employees -- prevented the company from being held liable for Tran's conduct.
The dream of every major tech company, making ridiculous profits while taking zero legal responsibility for what you create...
1. xhkkffbf · 1790004516 · focus · HN ↗
  The bad guy here is the driver. Could Uber have done more? That's what the arbitrators concluded.
  But the reality is that this is a victory for the driverless cars (Waymo, Tesla, etc.). If you want to force Uber to take responsibility for the driver, the simplest thing is to get rid of the driver.
  1. c22 · 1790005870 · focus · HN ↗
    This sounds about right. When Uber's driverless car killed someone they got off pretty easy:
    *"In March 2019, Arizona prosecutors ruled that Uber was not criminally responsible for the crash. The back-up driver of the vehicle was charged with negligent homicide, pled guilty to endangerment, and was sentenced to three years' probation." [0]
    0:<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Elaine_Herzberg" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Elaine_Herzberg
    nextaccountic · 1790008147 · focus · HN ↗
    So.. there's a driver in driverless cars. A fall guy that will take all the blame should the company needs to produce someone to be arrested, but don't otherwise have leverage to earn a decent living
    gruez · 1790008306 · focus · HN ↗
    >So.. there's a driver in driverless cars. A fall guy that will take all the blame should the company needs to produce someone to be arrested
    Are you seriously pretending the driver doesn't have agency here? This accident was easily preventable by the safety driver, which makes the "fall guy" characterization misleading. Sure, maybe there was some risk of complacency, but what's the alternative? Should uber have gone full workplace surveillance and have a camera trained on the safety driver's face, to make sure she was paying attention?
    stefan_ · 1790009484 · focus · HN ↗
    But.. they did have that? What a bizarre argument.
    And yes, if you make software that drives the car, release it into public traffic, and then your software runs someone over that would be plainly visible to a reasonable human driver (the misleading dashcam footage you release to make it seem way too dark [to a shitty dashcam sensor] notwithstanding) - you should absolutely bear responsibility! How is that even a question? You did that! Not whoever you put there as a "safety driver". We can adjudicate their responsibility separately, but it's certainly not 100%.
    gruez · 1790022524 · focus · HN ↗
    >you should absolutely bear responsibility!
    You're conveniently omitting the fact it's a self driving car prototype and that the safety driver is supposed to catch failures.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.