My bet is that the car followed the traffic laws and this woman was jay walking or walking against the light.
Irrelevant.
A driverless car, with superhuman reaction time, should be able to deal with unexpected situations.
My bet is that wouldn’t stop liability if there was a human driver and in this instance there was a backup human operator who allowed this woman to die....
Since humans don't always do what they are told, its time to ban them from the roads !
So, not following the letter of the law is license for the driverless car to kill? I notice the police says walking outside of a crosswalk, not jay walking. What exactly was she doing? And again, is that justifiable defense for a driverless car to kill a human?
Yeah. You should probably get killed for that.
Well not really...the number one rule is that pedestrians have the right of way...if the car is not programmed to avoid people, even when they are not supposed to be there, the car and its operator are liable.
Doesn’t matter. Pedestrians still have the right of way. You are not granted permission to legally mow them down outside of crosswalks.
Then it's obvious it wasn't the car's fault. She should have gotten out of the way and deserved what she got for not following traffic laws. Why should driverless cars wait for little old ladies to finish crossing the street after the don't walk sign comes on or little kids and dogs run out into the street while chasing a ball or exiting a school bus. /s