• FishFace@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    9 hours ago

    That concept doesn’t exist in driver’s ed

    Well yeah, because there’s no-one else with a set of controls in a car.

    The concept absolutely exists in law but it’s just called… “the driver.”

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      Well nowadays there is “someone else” (for a given definition of “someone”) with a set of controls. Kids are being taught to drive in machines that literally drive themselves, and they need to learn that every decision that the self-driving computer makes ultimately falls on them as the driver. I think they were saying that this is a concept that needs to be taught, not a law that needs to be enacted.

      That’s not to say that a manufacturer is blameless when a FSD car careens into the side of a building at 80 mph. Just that immediate legal responsibility for the movement of a vehicle generally falls on a driver.

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      The concept is that anything that happens to that aircraft (or car) is the sole responsibility of the pilot. Flying into restricted airspace? If it’s necessary to avoid a collision, you do it. Putting the plane down in a field? Better than hoping you can make it to a runway when your engine is out and lives are on the line. Another driver signals that you are clear to make a left turn on a congested road? Nope, because when that traffic you couldn’t see hits you on the right, you’re responsible for your car, their car, and all the people inside both vehicles.

      • FishFace@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Well not quite. A manufacturing or maintenance defect will not be the responsibility of the pilot (unless they should have spotted it on their walkaround)

        I’m not sure what comparison you’re trying to make though; the grandparent said there needs to be a similar concept for cars, I said that there already was one. Are you agreeing or disagreeing that there already is one? Are you saying that, at present, the driver would not be responsible for moving into traffic if someone else had flashed their lights? Because that is certainly not true where I live.

        • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          The problem is that in that case, due to poor training or judgement, the person driving the turning car did not consider themselves solely responsible for the safe operation of the vehicle, they let the driver in the signaling car decide if it was safe.

          It’s subtle, but it happens all the time, because we don’t train drivers to think that way.

          • FishFace@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 hours ago

            In my country, we do train drivers to think that way, and then drivers stop thinking that way because they’re lazy.

            The difference here is not a conceptual one where drivers don’t understand rationally that they’re respondible for their actions, it’s one of standards and levels of training.