Google Street View Car In Wrong-Way Crash

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
I'll bet this is why Google is working so hard on self-driving cars.

Case told TSG that the Google worker “blew a red light” and slammed into his car, a 2008 Mazda owned by his girlfriend. Case, a 22-year-old construction worker, said he was headed home from work when the Google car “came out of nowhere and hits me in the side.”
 
Oh I am sure this guy's "injuries" are going to take a LONG TIME to properly heal and cost lots of money in doctor's fees as well as for pain & suffering!!

rudy4.jpg
 
How would the story be different if it was a self driven car that was in the accident?
 
I bet this guy's phone hasn't stopped ringing since this was reported. Every lawyer in the country is probably lining up for this one.
 
Victim: "Ow....i think I hurt my finger".
Lawyer: "This is Google...an almost half-billion dollar company"
Victim: "Ow....my......everything"
Lawyer: <insert Mr Burns> "excellent"
 
Victim: "Ow....i think I hurt my finger".
Lawyer: "This is Google...an almost half-billion dollar company"
Victim: "Ow....my......everything"
Lawyer: <insert Mr Burns> "excellent"

half-trillion. no edit.
 
Out of nowhere?

I doubt that, it has a big assed camera on the roof. Still goggle drivers fault, but you know wrecks happen every day.
 
Story would have been better if the other car was this.

bing-street-view-car-1394110684.jpg
 
Victim: "Ow....i think I hurt my finger".
Lawyer: "This is Google...an almost half-billion dollar company"
Victim: "Ow....my......everything"
Lawyer: <insert Mr Burns> "excellent"

Yep, pretty much. Quote from article:
"After the crash, Case sought treatment at a hospital emergency room, where he received a CAT scan and X-rays. Case said that he suffered bruised ribs and whiplash in the crash and was outfitted with a neck brace at the hospital.

Case said that he expects to miss upwards of three weeks of work and is planning legal action over the accident"
 
Unfortunately, the driver is to be blamed and the driver is not a property of Google. Thus, Google is not responsible. Spurr on the other hand may be rich, if he can prove that the accident was the result of a distraction from the car, which is a property of Google, or the task that was assigned to him by Google. Those street view car drivers probably never thought that their true purposes are being crash dummies.
 
seems to me with as much money and testing as they put into a single car... there has to be some form of on-board 360 degree camera that logs EVERYTHING.

So basically the guy goes to court expecting a huge payday, and google plays their ace in the hole showing this piece of shit is just trying to extort money from them.

I'd trust a self driving car over any other asshole on the road these days. Homeboy is just looking for a quick payday. If by some stroke of luck the guy plays the sympathy card and wins... google could make his life a complete hell VERY easily just for fun.
 
Yep, pretty much. Quote from article:
"After the crash, Case sought treatment at a hospital emergency room, where he received a CAT scan and X-rays. Case said that he suffered bruised ribs and whiplash in the crash and was outfitted with a neck brace at the hospital.

Case said that he expects to miss upwards of three weeks of work and is planning legal action over the accident"

Glad I wasn't the first to have the thought of "Scumbag". Case sounds like another waste of space looking for a payday.

I'm betting the google car wasn't the cause of this, and the cameras that are streaming constantly on the top of the car will clearly show what happened... If Google doesn't release that video, then their driver is at fault - if they do, he isn't..
 
Unfortunately, the driver is to be blamed and the driver is not a property of Google. Thus, Google is not responsible. Spurr on the other hand may be rich, if he can prove that the accident was the result of a distraction from the car, which is a property of Google, or the task that was assigned to him by Google. Those street view car drivers probably never thought that their true purposes are being crash dummies.

Unless the car was modified in a way that prevented the driver from reacting properly. Hypothetically a Google made/modified fly by wire brake system that stopped working or obstructed view, etc.
 
Nevermind, only a streetview car, not one with autonomous technology.
 
Google driver wasn't paying attention to road signs and drove the wrong way on a one way street, panicked and attempted an illegal U-turn then hit someone who had the right of way. I don't see the controversy. Dude will get a settlement from Google because their employee was a jackass.
 
The article says one car has $2,000 worth of damage and the other is about $1,500. I don't even see how either driver could be injured as $2,000 damage couldn't be more than the slightest of bent metal and scratched plastic.
 
The article says one car has $2,000 worth of damage and the other is about $1,500. I don't even see how either driver could be injured as $2,000 damage couldn't be more than the slightest of bent metal and scratched plastic.

America, that's why. We have too many lawyers and people looking for a payday. I was in a rear end collision years ago. We exchanged numbers and talked, said he was fine. The only damage to his car is the bumper came off the clips.

Three weeks later my insurance company let's me know that the guy was claiming $8,000 (it was a Cobalt) damage to car and $20,000 in medical bills. I showed my insurance company my flawless car and said "how could this do $8k damage all while not deploying airbags?". We also showed them his background report, in which he had numerous " rear-end accidents" claiming the same injury. He wisely settled for considerably less.
 
America, that's why. We have too many lawyers and people looking for a payday. I was in a rear end collision years ago. We exchanged numbers and talked, said he was fine. The only damage to his car is the bumper came off the clips.

Three weeks later my insurance company let's me know that the guy was claiming $8,000 (it was a Cobalt) damage to car and $20,000 in medical bills. I showed my insurance company my flawless car and said "how could this do $8k damage all while not deploying airbags?". We also showed them his background report, in which he had numerous " rear-end accidents" claiming the same injury. He wisely settled for considerably less.

Sounds like the time I was sued by a bunch of illegal immigrants after THEY HIT ME head on at 45+ while I was sitting completely stopped in the turn lane. I wish I were kidding. I counter-sued and never heard from them again.
 
When individuals try to rip off people they are called criminals. When corporations do it, it's called capitalism.

It's the American Way! =D
 
The article says one car has $2,000 worth of damage and the other is about $1,500. I don't even see how either driver could be injured as $2,000 damage couldn't be more than the slightest of bent metal and scratched plastic.

Not arguing in either persons defense, but the cars today do nothing but crumple when hit at nearly any speed. depending how fast they were going, most of the damage is going to be under the plastic which is more labor than parts.
 
Yep, pretty much. Quote from article:
"After the crash, Case sought treatment at a hospital emergency room, where he received a CAT scan and X-rays. Case said that he suffered bruised ribs and whiplash in the crash and was outfitted with a neck brace at the hospital.

Case said that he expects to miss upwards of three weeks of work and is planning legal action over the accident"
Getting side swiped is about the most traumatic accident you can have, especially if it hit the driver's side.

Bruised ribs and whiplash are very real, and I'd absolutely sue for pain and suffering and lost work wages too. Why wouldn't you?

You're not even dealing with Google anyway, I'm sure they carry insurance like everyone else, so you're dealing with their insurance company.
 
Back
Top