When AI Self-Driving Cars Sue Due To Dangerous Roadway Conditions

You walk on the highway and enjoy the open road.

Forward, the curve is coming. You are currently drinking at high speed allowed speed (well, and tad very fast, though you will not allow that). The curve does not look extremely annoying, at first glance.

So, you move fast.

It turns out that as you start taking the curve, you suddenly and shockingly find that you are very fast on the curve. The car’s wheels began to lose momentum. You hear the car pull hard and you fight hard with the steering wheel to stay on the road. It’s too late to try to slow down because you’re already deep in the curve.

Yikes!

Sweat floods your forehead as you, the car, and the highway fights. If you look at the edge of the highway and see that you can end up in a ditch. Not what you want to do. Not what you had in mind. Pure fear and fear begin to pass through your mind as you struggle to save yourself and the car from possible destruction.

Luckily, somehow you pull the curve and head straight out. All good. Face the evil harvester and live to tell the story. The whole story took a few seconds to play, but it looked like a lifetime. This is a turning point you will never forget.

Gradually restore your composure. Another thought that begins to creep into your mind is whether there was a warning about curve and the dangers of too fast. Should there be no sign posted? Often, road signs warn you of curves and offer a reduced speed.
Sure, no doubt, you tend to ignore those signs, but at least you look at them. Your feeling is that you can drive your car and there is no need for some stupid sign to give you advice. In this case, you think that perhaps those posted posts could be helpful. It is thought that you may have slowed down naturally by seeing a posted sign, even if you were just passing by and not giving your full attention.

Later that day, he returns home in the same manner.

When you get to the point where the sign that was sent should have been there, you realize that it has been put down. No one could see it unless they were looking for it and even then it was almost impossible to see it (hidden slightly in a crowd of weeds and large grass). The sign appeared to be damaged and may have been struck, perhaps by a driver who had previously rebelled. That is unfortunate.

In fact, that is a life-threatening factor, which means that this important and degraded sign must be restored to its proper place so that those approaching the curve are adequately and discreetly informed of their toes.

You decide to call a government agency responsible for that road and inform them of the reduced sign. Why is that? Because you feel strongly that it is your job as a trustworthy person and you want to help ensure that no one else puts you in serious danger. It’s your best practice for the day, maybe for the week.

Two months later, he read in the news about a car that took the same turn and flew uncontrollably into a ditch. The driver and two passengers were seriously injured. No one was killed, thank you.

You wonder if that warning sign was restored. On your next drive from time to time in that direction, you choose to move around the curve and see if the signal is high.

Darn, the sign is lying on the floor.

Apart from this posted sign, those innocent people in that erased car seem to have no problem with the curve and the type of speed that should go safely. They probably walked on the main roads and simply took a curve without special speed adjustments. Perhaps, if the government agency had returned the signal, those people would not have been harmed and would have taken the curve without problems.

One has to file a lawsuit.

What do you think?

Should people in a car accident choose to follow a government agency that has the responsibility of putting up a warning sign? The action of suing that agency can help recoup some of the cost of their entire car and their huge medical bills. In addition, the agency may share its performance and file such registrations, as well as general diligence regarding these signs.

One question that may arise is whether the agency knows about it or should be aware of the downgrade. In this case, a phone call two months ago seemed sufficient. Two months ago it would be too late for the agency to register or submit a new token.

All in all, it seems that the government agency threw the ball away and the driver unexpectedly and some passengers paid the wrong amount in the right way.

The government may argue that the driver of the car is at fault.

Whether marked or not, the driver has a responsibility to drive safely. The buck stands with the driver, as it were.

In addition, the government may question the driver’s ability. Could it be that the driver was drunk? Was the driver born? Maybe the driver was watching cat videos and allowed himself to be distracted on the road.

On the contrary, the driver claims that their driving is perfectly legal and that the speed limit on that highway is fully followed. Unless the signal posted is visible and visible, no one is unaware that it needs to slow down. In short, the government cannot escape its duty to ensure that there are appropriate signs of a public road that the government is known to be naturally dangerous to. Indeed, there was a sign there, proving that the government was aware of the danger, and that the agency was failing to fulfill its mission by ensuring that the sign was sent sufficiently.

In the meantime, a government agency is deciding to seek independence. This is a legal way of saying that this agency is not protected in civil courts and cannot be properly prosecuted. No such cases can be legally sought against the agency.

In response, the driver’s attorney argues that there is a difference in the immune system and that the model is different. Through a lawyer, the agency has failed miserably to repair roads. And depending on the laws that apply in this case, the lack of proper and timely remediation provides an opportunity to push for normal self-defense and bring the agency to court.

The building is strengthened when it is discovered that the highway construction company was hired by the agency to do the work in the area. They saw the sign. They did nothing about it. The decision was made by the driver for the lawyer to continue to sue the construction company.

It’s all immoral.

I sincerely hope that none of you have ever faced such a difficult situation.

Let’s slightly change gears.

The future of automotive consists of AI-based self-driving cars.

No human driver is involved in a real self-driving car. Remember that real self-driving cars are driven by the AI ​​driving system. There is no need for a human driver on the wheel, and also no provision for a person to drive a car. For my more and more ongoing discovery of private cars (AVs) and especially self-driving cars, see the link here.

Here is an intriguing question to consider: Is it possible that autonomous AI vehicles could be court-martialed, and if so, what might that be?

I would like to first clarify what it means when referring to authentic self-driving cars.

Understanding the Rate of Automotive Vehicles

As specified, authentic autonomous vehicles are the only AI that drives the car itself and there is no human assistance during driving.

These non-driving vehicles are considered Level 4 and Level 5 (see my description in this link here), while a vehicle that requires a human driver to participate in a driving attempt is considered Level 2 or Level 3. automation called ADAS (Advanced Driver-Assistance Systems).

There is no real car to drive in Level 5, and we don’t even know if this will be able to achieve it, and how long it will take to get there.

At the moment, Level 4 efforts are slowly trying to catch a breath by doing the smallest and preferred public road tests, however there is controversy over whether these tests should be allowed privately (we are all guinea pigs of deaths that occur on our highways and roads, some argue, see my cover in this link here).

Since private cars themselves require a human driver, the acceptance of those types of vehicles will not be significantly different from that of conventional vehicles, so there is nothing new about each new cover (however, as you will see in a moment, the following points apply generally).

In private cars themselves, it is important that the public needs to be warned in advance of the disturbing situation that has occurred recently, which means that apart from those human drivers who keep posting their videos lying on the wheel of a Level 2 or 3 car, we all need to avoid being deceived into believing that the driver could distract them. while driving while driving a private car.

You are a team responsible for car driving activities, whether automatic machines can be thrown at level 2 or level 3.

Self-driving cars and collisions with road conditions

In Levels 4 and 5 of self-driving cars, there will be no human driver involved in the driving activity.

All passengers will be passengers.

AI makes driving.

One aspect to discuss quickly includes the fact that the AI ​​involved in modern AI driving systems has no emotions. In other words, AI as a whole is a combination of computer programs and algorithms, and it certainly cannot think in the same way as humans.

Why is this additional emphasis on AI lack of emotion?

Because I want to emphasize that when discussing the role of the AI ​​driving system, I am not giving personality traits to AI. Please note that there is an ongoing and dangerous trend these days for anthropomorphize AI. In short, people are sharing a human-like feeling in modern AI, apart from the undeniable and undeniable fact that there is no such AI yet.

With that definition, you can see that the AI ​​driving system will not naturally somehow “know” about driving features. Driving and everything involved will need to be configured as part of the hardware and software of the self-driving car.

Let’s get into a lot of features that come into play with this theme.

There are several ways AI self-driving cars can get into the picture with this theme. We can look at each of these methods and get into some of their details.

First, one factor that can arise in a case like this is whether there is any kind of evidence or documentation about the state of the road that existed at the time of the incident.

The driver may need to provide visual clues that can show up by pointing to the issue at hand. For example, is there any evidence that the sign was not written on the day or at the time of the incident? Can the driver provide concrete proof that they were driving at the official speed limit? Was the road dry or was it wet because of the rain?

All of this can be important in committing a crime against a government agency.

This is where self-driving cars come in.

Self-driving cars have a lot of sensors. This includes video cameras, radar, LIDAR, ultrasonic units, and the like (not all self-driving cars have the same set of sensors). These sensors are used to locate the drive. Throughout the driving journey, sensors actively collect data and feed data into the AI ​​driving system. The AI ​​driver program then translates the data evenly to find out where to drive and how to perform the driving task.

Sometimes, data is stored in an internal computer memory. This can be used in the long run when it can be loaded into ship operator clouds via OTA (Over-the-Air) electronic communications. I have strongly emphasized that this is going to be a huge amount of information that is likely to make money by the pilot. In addition, in the mitigation of material, this may also indicate greater concern for personal privacy issues.

I listed this skill as a moving eye, see my discussion on the link here.

Therefore, you may wonder.

Once we have a large number of self-driving cars on our highways and highways, they are likely to record all kinds of everyday things. If any self-driving vehicles were near the scene of a driver’s collision, there could be a record of the incident.

They may have been uploaded to the ship’s operator cloud, both sides of the case may need access to data. The recorded video can clearly show that no sign was sent during the incident. It can indicate the speed of a car that has failed to make a turn. Road conditions can be seen as whether the road was dry or wet. Similarly, radar, LIDAR, and other sensory information may be helpful in the case.

There are a number of complex issues in this regard.

You can expect that there will be many different automakers and automotive technology firms that will produce and install self-driving cars. Each of them may have its own clouds that store the obtained information of his private car. No doubt they will have their own data-related formats. They will have different backup policies about how long they keep their data.