I keep looking but can’t find it. I keep just finding people saying the pedestrian was hit by a vehicle with a driver and thrown under a driverless car which spokepeople are saying tried to stop as fast as possible to minimize damages.
It’s the DMV claiming that the footage was withheld, the article was amended to include Cruise’s denial. The facts are in dispute. But what is beyond doubt is that it is the DMV making the claim, not a random journalist. The article includes the Order of Suspension from the DMV citing the reason:
On October 3, 2023. representatives ofthe Department of Motor Vehicles and the California Highway Patrol met with representatives from Cruise to discuss the accident. During the meeting. the department was shown video footage of the accident captured by the AV’s onboard cameras. The video footage presented to the department ended with the AV initial stop following the hard-braking ‘maneuver. Footage ofthe subsequent movement ofthe AV to perform a pullover maneuver was not shown to the department and Cruise did not disclose that any additional movement of the vehicle had occurred after the initial stop ofthe vehicle. The department only learnedof the AV’s subsequent movement via discussion with another government agency. The department requested Cruise provide a copy of the video with the additional footage, which was received by the department on October 13. 2023.
I know that boots are real tasty and all but you’re spending your free time lying to defend a corporation and that is just fucking weird behaviour.
I keep looking but can’t find it. I keep just finding people saying the pedestrian was hit by a vehicle with a driver and thrown under a driverless car which spokepeople are saying tried to stop as fast as possible to minimize damages.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/driverless-cruise-cars-cameras-recorded-moment-woman-was-struck/amp/
If the autonomous car reacted correctly then why wouldn’t they release the video which corroborates this?
They did, I’m sorry that isn’t what the article wanted to show. That is what we call propaganda.
If you find facts thay differ from that let me know.
It’s the DMV claiming that the footage was withheld, the article was amended to include Cruise’s denial. The facts are in dispute. But what is beyond doubt is that it is the DMV making the claim, not a random journalist. The article includes the Order of Suspension from the DMV citing the reason:
I know that boots are real tasty and all but you’re spending your free time lying to defend a corporation and that is just fucking weird behaviour.
Source or link? If you mean provided to the DMV, I wouldn’t call that released.
deleted by creator
yeah I can see that, but why not release the video to the public?
Something tells me they would get shit on for privacy reasons if they did something like that.
you’re right, didn’t think of that