Legal chalenges are this: the driverless EV ran over someone but what happens is that corporations (often) bribe the judicial parties not charging them with a hit & run even though the victims families want justice for their vehicles killing pedestrians. The only “prevention” is harm reduction (investing into technology that’s able to detect human presence & sensors that activate in pedestian heavy areas stopping the vehicle).
Usually, when it’s a EV (with no human driver behind the wheel): is it still considered a criminal offense if a driverless EV ran over somebody as it just continues driving? In that case it’s mainly rideshare companies (i.e. Uber, Lyft, DiDi, etc) face criminal liability. Regardless, the companies who dispatch EV’s are sued when their vehicles run over somebody and the EV didn’t stop whilst doing so.
Okay, but a quote like: “Usually, when it’s a EV (with no human driver behind the wheel)” makes it seem like the poster thinks that being an electric vehicle is a prerequisite to being driverless. Also, it seems like the poster thinks that “EV” almost implies “driverless”.
Not pointing it out perpetuates the conflations. I’ve had frustrating talks with someone who effectively thought EV, Smartcar, and digital gauges were, effectively, synonymous. I could see them including driverless, Tesla, and flush door handles as well, had they not owned an alternate EV without those
It’s like calling all gas vehicles SUVs.
Acronyms, at some point someone doesn’t care what each letter stands for and makes an assumption, then other people use them that way.