They have no reason to release it to the public. They don’t want to set a precedent. They will show the video to the regulators (CA DMV) and if they’re not happy, they will take action. It’s regulation working as intended.
The public is allowing them to borrow govt-built roads to test their products and potentially endanger the public. That's more than enough reason for Waymo to be transparent here.
I'd like them to release the video, but just be clear what you want, and best not to act like it is required of them.
Waymo reports to the DMV, they do not report to you or me.
Anyway, I'm talking about a moral or PR obligation, not a legal one. Waymo is using roads that taxpayers pay for, and that raises the bar for transparency for them.
States and the Federal government are managed by an Elected government and their appointees, and are empowered to levy taxes.
Taxpayers foot the bill, and some taxpayers are even citizens with the right to vote in elections.
The whole “X belongs to the taxpayer” is crap rhetoric you and many many many Americans were raised on, but which does not accurately convey anything about your relationship with the roads and highways you use. We pay for them, we elect the people who are charged with managing the entity that does own them and employs people to build and maintain them, but we do not own them.
I'm saying that we pay for the roads, and the entities that legally own/maintain/control the roads are supposed to be under the control of our elected representatives. We own the roads in the sense that they are public spaces that we pay for.
There is a moral obligation to transparency when benefitting from public resources, whether or not there's a legal one.
Setting a precedent for releasing footage means fault is automatically assumed when they don’t voluntarily release it.
It’s a problem if they’re not even releasing it to the regulators, but that’s not happening here.
The regulators don't want the footage released to the general public any more than Waymo does—the last thing they need is a bunch of armchair traffic accident investigators telling them how to do their jobs.
If you’re not an expert, it’s best to let the regulators and insurance adjusters do their job.
Public trust requires building it first. As one of the first instances of a waymo crash, yes the public needs to see it. If after reading the footage in the first 99 crashes and in each time waymo’s assessment was valid, that’s when Waymo has public trust and can credibly not release every single video but only do it on a case by case basis.
Waymo is regulated by independent agencies (CA DMV and NHTSA). They are watching the videos and assessing if Waymo is telling the truth. Their permit is pulled if they get caught lying (like Cruise). How are you and thousands of SF residents more qualified than them? Why should I take your assessment more seriously than that of the regulators?
I mean, if it reflects positively on them, they have huge reason; they want to put as much distance between their response and Cruise's as possible, and show that they're acting in good faith.
A large part of what killed Cruise was, well, either the cover-up or its employees' amazingly persistent internet connectivity problems, depending on how cynical you want to be.
If they want to put as much distance between themselves and Cruise, they just need to be transparent with the regulators and not play games with them.