Learning objective: exposure to some of the real-world complexities involved
when technical approaches to safety meet regulation, litigation, criminal law,
and politics.
Formatting reminders:
- Be sure to list citations for references you use as a source for answers.
If multiple references say the same thing, you need to only give 1 of them as a
source.
- Include a brief summary of the question you are answering on the slide
title or major bullet (the phrase in italics at the start of the question).
This will help everyone keep on track with any classroom discussion. The exact
wording is flexible.
10-1: The Audi 5000 (sometimes called the Audi 100) is a notorious
case in which driver error due to pedal misapplication is commonly blamed for
unintended acceleration. (Note that it is OK to use the Wikipedia page as a
source for questions specifically about it. Part of the assignment is comparing
what Wikipedia says to primary sources.) Answer the following questions:
- 10-1a: (Audi 5000 Wikipedia reason) What is the main reason given
for Audi 100 (Audi 5000) UA in the Wikipedia page? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_100)
- 10-1b: (Wikipedia fix)According to that same Audi 100 Wikipedia
page, what was the eventual recall fix for the problem?
- 10-1c: (Pollard reason)What is the main reason given for Audi 5000
UA in the Pollard & Sussman NHTSA report? (Links:
https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/8617
or
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.730.5953&rep=rep1&type=pdf
just read the Executive Summary -- the front part through page xi.)
- 10-1d: (Reasoning Flaws) The Pollard & Sussman report is often
used as a source for blaming drivers for pedal misapplication when there is no
reproducible UA behavior. List two flaws in reasoning in using this argument
(Two different reasons
10-2: Short responses.
- 10-2a: (Big picture) What was the one thing that Toyota did in the
UA cases that struck you as being the worst offense in terms of things you care
about (not necessarily legal issues), if any. This can be technical or
non-technical. If you think that Toyota did nothing wrong, that's OK, but
explain why.
- 10-2b. (Driver age?) UA litigation often emphasizes the age of an
older driver as a contributing factor, blaming old drivers for being bad
drivers. Who is more dangerous: a 70 year old driver or an 18 year old driver?
Define the metric you used for "dangerous" and cite your source.
- 10-2c. (UA Class Action) Read
this
article about another unintended acceleration class action lawsuit. What do
you think about the car manufacturer's statement that the incident peak in 2005
is due to driver error?
- 10-2d. (Police Officer Trial) Read
this
article about a police officer involved in a fatal crash involving a
vehicle that was apparentlycovered by the class action lawsuit in the previous
paragraph. Why do you think the police officer changed his story from
"sudden acceleration" to another explanation?
- 10-2e: (What if it's you?) Hypothesize that you are driving a
vehicle and hit a pedestrian. You claim it was UA. The vehicle data recorder
says your foot was on the accelerator. The local government prosecutes you for
the death because the police report says the only possible reason is pedal
misapplication due to incompetent driving. What do you do?
- 10-2f: (Should this man be in jail?) Read
this
article about a father in jail for the death of his daughter. He claims it
was UA. Do you think the sentence passed was just? (If the video doesn't load,
don't worry -- the text article suffices.)
- 10-2g: (Should SW designers be liable?) Should the software
designers of vehicle engine controls be held personally responsible for defects
that result in fatalities?
- 10-2h: (Shoddy software vs. Death rate) Is it acceptable for
self-driving cars to have shoddy software quality and actually kill people due
to the types of software practices seen in the Toyota UA presentation so long
as the total number of deaths is reduced compared to manually driving
vehicles?
- 10-2i: (Liability) If a self-driving car kills someone due to an
obvious design defect, who should go to jail, if anyone?
- 10-2j: (Human supervision) If a Tesla hits another vehicle and
causes a death due to driver inattention when the vehicle was on so-called
"auto-pilot" should the driver be blamed?
- 10-2k. (Should Govt Regulate?) The US government does NOT regulate
software safety in cars other than, in principle, via recalls after a
statistically compelling number of mishaps have occurred. Should the US
Government regulate software safety (e.g., by requiring compliance to the ISO
26262 safety standard?) Why or why not?
RUBRIC:
- First slide: short answers for 10-1. Answer all parts
- Second slide: short answers for 10-2. Answer all parts. If you're not sure
it is OK to give two possibilities or otherwise explain why you're unsure. OK
to spill onto additional slides if needed, but please keep answers relatively
short.
Supplemental materials. (This material is entirely optional, and put
here so you can dig deeper if you find this material particularly interesting.)