> The driver was hired to perform a task that was almost guaranteed to result in a deadly injury while some driver was behind the wheels. She didn't have any way to know that, but the engineers did.
I think the culpability lies a bit more on her than you imply... she was watching a video on her phone instead of surveying the road/instruments for dangers
By virtue of being a HN reader, you are almost certainly much better educated and much more highly skilled than the person Uber hired to baby sit their vehicles during testing. Set the alarm on your watch to go off in two hours. Start looking at your monitor to see if any pixels fail in the next two hours. Ask yourself how far into that 2 hour task you were able to maintain vigilance. Now try to do it day after day. Was she at fault, yes. Were the Uber engineers who designed this testing system at fault too? Absolutely.
> Was she at fault, yes. Were the Uber engineers who designed this testing system at fault too?
Those two tasks are quite different. One is driving and observing new stimuli and the other is looking at paint dry. I don't think anyone could do that without adequate breaks.
I never implied that the guilt was solely on her... she's culpable to an extent as is uber for not having two backup drivers and/or more breaks to stay fresh. I don't know if they had a written policy about it but I can't imagine being on the phone watching a movie is allowed.
I think the culpability lies a bit more on her than you imply... she was watching a video on her phone instead of surveying the road/instruments for dangers