160

Tech company faces negligence lawsuit after Philip Paxson died from driving off a North Carolina bridge destroyed years ago

Discuss!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] stopthatgirl7@kbin.social 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Did you read the article?

neither the destroyed bridge nor the road leading to it had any barriers or warning signs to alert drivers of the hazard.

It was also raining and at night, so he likely had no way to know the bridge was gone until it would have been too late to stop.

[-] riodoro1@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Doesn’t sound like google’s fault, does it?

The article even mentions that other entities are sued but oh that sweet headline.

[-] ExLisper@linux.community 21 points 1 year ago

Yeah, suing google makes as much sense as suing the car maker for not making the car fly.

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works -4 points 1 year ago

No??? It's perfectly reasonable to sue Google here, considering locals had been asking the company to update the map for nigh on ten years. It's negligence on their part at that point. When it's dark and raining, you can and should expect that your GPS won't lead you across a bridge that collapsed last decade.

[-] ExLisper@linux.community 14 points 1 year ago

I would agree if the purpose of GPS navigation was to allow you to drive with all your windows covered. It's not. When you're driving and can't see what's in front of you (because you're blinded by something, because there's fog, because it raining hard or because Batman is throwing smoke bombs) you have to slow down appropriately or stop entirely if necessary. I can understand following GPS indications and getting stuck in some mud but not falling of a bridge. If you don't see the rode in front of you: stop.

[-] lustrum@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

There can be some culpability in Google's direction, it doesn't have to be all the blame.

It's absolutely negligent of Google to suggest that route after been informed multiple times over 10 years the bridge is collapsed.

[-] Neve8028@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

The expectation of safety should be on the local authorities. Clearly marking that the bridge is unsafe to drive over with signs and blocking off the area. While google should have marked it as an inaccessible route, it's the local authorities that should be looking out for the safety of drivers in that situation.

[-] stopthatgirl7@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The bridge was broken years though, so Google should not have been using it for routes. The country is definitely at fault for not having signs up, but Google isn’t blameless in this.

[-] theKalash@feddit.ch 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So sue the county or who ever is in charge of erecting the barriers. Still not the map's fault.

[-] Eufalconimorph@discuss.tchncs.de 19 points 1 year ago

If you can't stop within the range of visibility, you're driving faster than road conditions allow. That part is on the driver. The lack of barriers or warnings is on the municipality.

I always like to point this out.

In every single driver's manual, it states having a 4 second window of visibility, minimum. On rainy days/fog/bad weather, more if possible.

That buffer is to help avoid unknown surprises.

[-] Hogger85b@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes so this is the on the authority that owns the road if people have been telling Google about it surely the municipal or state or whoever maintains the road was informed and should have made effort to block it off or mark the road as private or whatever. If it is a private road you are still liable if it appears to be access to your property (say for delivery drivers to your mailbox)

this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
160 points (93.0% liked)

World News

32314 readers
556 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS