• Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    During Mr Paxson’s journey, the GPS put him on the unfamiliar path of the bridge, which had collapsed almost a decade earlier and was never repaired, the lawsuit said.

    He drove off the unguarded edge and crashed about 20 feet below, the lawsuit said.

    I don’t understand this at all. Were there no signs telling people that the bridge did not exist, or is the news report omitting some critical detail? If the bridge was like that for a decade, was he the only one to drive off it?

    Also, when using navigation, you’re still supposed to be looking at the road and paying attention to what’s happening.

    I don’t get how stuff like this happens.

    EDIT: Looks like there were no signs that the bridge was out. This really isn’t a “Google problem”, but the municipality should be to blame (unless they did put up a sign that was removed by some lowlife).

    EDIT 2: Looking at the accident photo, it appears that the driver would have had to drive through overgrowth to even access this collapsed bridge. This is looking more like inattentiveness than poor navigation. Still trying to find the actual location of the bridge, so I can see what images Google Street View can provide going back since the time of the collapse.

    • dingleberry@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      This would be a non-story if they had just sued the city for negligence. But everything is big tech’s fault nowadays.

      • Retrograde@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It was private land, the story is a bit more nuanced than you may think. Someone posted a link to a local article that sheds a lot of light on the matter

      • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I thought so! You can actually see that the most recent Street view (May, 2023) has barriers, but how can someone miss the gaping hole, even without signs? The driver would have still needed to drive through the overgrowth :/

        This is what they would have seen as they approached the bridge:

        Yes, barriers should have been put there, but being a low-speed residential area, the driver shouldn’t have missed it. Really strange story, especially putting blame on Google.

        EDIT: Barriers were put there, but vandals destroyed them, and they had to be removed ahead of this accident. SOURCE

        • Pxtl@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          1 year ago

          If he was driving at night in the rain I could imagine that looking like a big dark reflective puddle and not realizing it’s a gaping hole until you’re too close to stop.

          • SwampYankee@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            1 year ago

            September 30, 2022 in Hickory, NC it rained 5 inches. That is a shit load of rain. It doesn’t say when he was driving home, but from 5 PM to 7 PM, it rained 1.7 inches, the peak of the storm. Driving through a wooded, unlit area in a torrential downpour… I’d wager you’re right.

            Article also says he drowned. In this little creek:

            Yeah, it was raining hard.

            • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              This is the actual scene.

              The overgrowth would have been visible ahead of the bridge, even in rain. I wonder if any dashcam was on board and if speed was also a factor.

              • SwampYankee@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                He wasn’t found until the next morning, so that’s not a great indicator of what it would have looked like as he was driving. A few comments up is a picture showing the approach he came from is not nearly as overgrown, also.

                • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  A few comments up is a picture showing the approach he came from is not nearly as overgrown, also.

                  The photo showing the actual vehicle in the water clearly shows overgrowth from the day the accident happened. He would have to have driven through it.

                  It’s odd that he was found so late, TBH.

          • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            No doubt there were other factors at play, but you can’t blame Google for bad weather and poor road visibility, though.

            The story here is that the city of Hickory had a responsibility to put barriers and signs up, which they did not. The family is likely going after Google because $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$, but they have no case.

            • Pxtl@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              But shifting the blame wholly onto the driver is also not reasonable. People thinking “lol, Darwin” damned well know that driving at night in a dark, rural area, you’re still going to be driving a decent speed and you might not see something coming. There are classes of problems you have to expect, like wildlife or other vehicles… but there are also classes of things you should not have to worry about, like the map not being updated about a destroyed bridge after 10 years despite having been notified repeatedly.

              The city of Hickory bears most of the blame, of course. But the fact that Google does not pay attention when users notify them about dangerous road conditions in their maps is a serious problem, and deserves some responsibility. They can’t say “we didn’t know” when they actively, aggressively choose not to listen.

              • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                But shifting the blame wholly onto the driver is also not reasonable.

                Of course, safety measures should have been put in place. The problem is that the family seems to be putting blame on everyone else, and that’s also not reasonable.

                The city of Hickory bears most of the blame, of course.

                Yes, but…

                “The barricades were removed after being vandalized and were missing at the time of Paxson’s wreck.” (source)

                Really awful circumstances. If the vandals were caught, I’d have them face an involuntary manslaughter charge.

                EDIT: Also, this particular bridge was on a private road that had no “ownership”. It actually was NOT the city’s responsibility and the developer of that road apparently dissolved… this just keeps getting worse and worse for the family.

                But the fact that Google does not pay attention when users notify them about dangerous road conditions in their maps is a serious problem, and deserves some responsibility. They can’t say “we didn’t know” when they actively, aggressively choose not to listen.

                Having mapped for Google for years, that’s just how it is. Missing roads, incorrect routes, addresses that don’t exist, closures that aren’t reflected on the map… all normal stuff for every digital mapping service.

                The reality is, Google does not bear any responsibility for what happens during the use of the product. No navigation app/company does. It’s always in their TOS.

                The very nature of maps is that they are ever-changing, and never 100% accurate.

                • Count042@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes, McDonalds coffee is kept at far hotter temperatures then other resteraunts to extend the life of the coffee. Yes, they did know that it had already caused serious burns from spills.

                  Still, that woman should have known that coffee is hot and not asked for the cost of her medical bills to be paid by McDonalds when she required multiple skin graft surgeries to heal the third degree burns to her genial area. I mean, come on, how could McDonalds by liable for that?

                  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    That’s not comparable at all. McDonald’s basically sold an unsafe food, so they were liable. Food companies, restaurants, etc. are held to a certain standard for what they service.

                    Other than being inaccurate (every map ever made is inaccurate), can you explain how Google is responsible for a driver’s skill or ability to pay attention to where they are going?

                    There have been some wild cases of people using in-car navigation and driving off dead ends, into water, etc. We laugh and call them idiots. What else can you do?

              • EssentialCoffee@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’m probably just old, but there’s more than one case of an Internet map telling folks to turn somewhere that there was no where to go because the maps aren’t updated. I also used to used the old fashioned paper maps before MapQuest and while those were usually fine, they also don’t help in cases of road closures or construction changes.

                Whoever’s responsibile for the road itself (local municipality or state) should have had it blocked off.

                the fact that Google does not pay attention when users notify them about dangerous road conditions in their maps is a serious problem,

                Again, as someone who grew up using paper maps, this is such a bizarre statement. It’s cool that map companies offer things like speed trap warnings, but I frequently get warnings about stuff and there’s nothing there. You still can’t fully trust what the system is telling you. It’s just a tool.

      • Madison_rogue@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Image capture 2012” This is why it shows still intact. The bridge washed out after this street view was taken.