this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
164 points (88.0% liked)

Technology

34982 readers
90 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Philip Paxson's family are suing the company over his death, alleging that Google negligently failed to show the bridge had fallen nine years earlier.

Mr Paxson died in September 2022 after attempting to drive over the damaged bridge in Hickory, North Carolina.

A spokesperson for Google said the company was reviewing the allegations.

The case was filed in civil court in Wake County on Tuesday.

Mr Paxson, a father of two, was driving home from his daughter's ninth birthday party at a friend's house and was in an unfamiliar neighbourhood at the time of his death, according to the family's lawsuit.

His wife had driven his two daughters home earlier, and he stayed behind to help clean up.

"Unfamiliar with local roads, he relied on Google Maps, expecting it would safely direct him home to his wife and daughters," lawyers for the family said in a statement announcing the lawsuit.

"Tragically, as he drove cautiously in the darkness and rain, he unsuspectingly followed Google's outdated directions to what his family later learned for nearly a decade was called the 'Bridge to Nowhere,' crashing into Snow Creek, where he drowned."

Local residents had repeatedly contacted Google to have them change their online maps after the bridge collapsed in 2013, the suit claims.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Fester@lemm.ee 117 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Local residents had repeatedly contacted Google to have them change their online maps after the bridge collapsed in 2013, the suit claims.

Barriers that were normally placed across the bridge entrance were missing due to vandalism, according to the Charlotte Observer.

The lawsuit is also suing three local companies, arguing they had a duty to maintain the bridge.

That’s a lot of fucking negligence.

[–] MooseBoys@lemmy.world 54 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Barriers that were normally placed across the bridge entrance were missing due to vandalism

vandalism? What were these “barriers”, a handful of orange cones? At minimum they should have put some concrete jersey barriers there.

[–] owf@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago

Really. It's a collapsed death bridge, FFS.

These "vandals" should have needed industrial machinery to remove the barriers that should have been there.

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 48 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I came here thinking it recently collapsed and Google Maps just never updated.

It collapsed a decade ago, and both Google Maps and local ~~maintainers~~ organizations (whoever maintains the roads) dropped the ball. You'd think someone would have built a wall blocking that road off by now

[–] skullgiver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Ah sorry, I meant people locally that maintain the roads/signs/barriers. I'll fix it to be more clear

I agree with your comment though

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 30p87@feddit.de 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Google is not at fault here, not at all. If at all, Google is just responsible for a not fully up to date product, which could enrage consumers at worst. If that guy literally couldn't see the road he also was unable to stop for an animal or even human.
It's not Google's responsibility to drive responsible for their users; drivers need to do so safely with or without help from maps of any kind.
If the false information had caused an emergency vehicle to be misguided which led to the death of the patient I would agree that Google is at some fault.

Other than that, the companies responsible for caring about the bridge should be at fault here somewhat too, even though it's not their responsibility to - again - ensure a driver can stop in time at their current speed and the given weather conditions. Yet they should mark a road as dead end and block the road as done at eg. natural cliffs where roads are ending, with proper material, so blocks of concrete stopping even tanks.

[–] Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It is not uncommon to go over 20 at night, even in the rain.

This accident could have easily happened without a GPS, because it is a very bad location and has no warnings, however without a GPS it is also unlikely he would have found himself in this area, and it did lead him directly to a road that it had been told was not passable. They do not have a large part of the liability, but they should have a responsibility to warn their users when people have told them about an extreme safety hazard for ten years.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sadbehr 65 points 1 year ago (5 children)

After looking at the picture of the bridge in the article, it looks like it should have either been fixed or blocked by a large only moveable by heavy machinery barrier of some description.

What if someone was using a 15 year old paper map? Would they get to sue the cartographer?
What if the bridge had collapsed yesterday? Last week? As much as I don't like Google, I don't think they're at fault here.

[–] Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org 17 points 1 year ago

A 15 year old paper map doesn’t have the ability to immediately update itself. I don’t think anybody things Google is primarily at fault, that doesn’t mean it should be ignored that they were informed of the dangerous issue numerous times, have the ability to correct it and routinely do so, and ignored the issue in this location which contributed to this death.

[–] curiousaur@reddthat.com 9 points 1 year ago

I completely agree, they should sue the local municipality, whoever is responsible for that bridge.

[–] Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It says that the residents had repeatedly requested that google update their maps to reflect that the bridge is gone. Not googles fault but they have ignored/missed multiple requests to update their maps so they hold some blame here when you consider that people rely on these types of navigation and google explicitly make google maps to provide help in navigation. I dont think theres nothing there.

It also says the lawsuit includes the suing of three local companies that should have been in charge of maintaining the bridge. So its not even just about google.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sugarfree@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago (5 children)

You'd think after nine years the city would do something about the bridge.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] authed@lemmy.ml 34 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Probably should sue the city?

[–] Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s a private bridge. And they are also suing the owners.

[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I wonder if the bridge owners aren't also preventing Google from updating the map.

[–] owf@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

I'd love to hear how you think that would work.

[–] nakal@kbin.social 31 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I am not a guy who blindly trusts technology. Why go forward when you cannot see what's in front of you? How can that happen?

AFAIK Google makes a disclaimer about it. A bridge can also be destroyed on the same day, so...

[–] Deceptichum@kbin.social 28 points 1 year ago (16 children)

Tragically, as he drove cautiously in the darkness and rain, he unsuspectingly followed Google's outdated directions to what his family later learned for nearly a decade was called the 'Bridge to Nowhere,' crashing into Snow Creek, where he drowned

From the picture I could easily imagine myself falling into the hole if it was dark and rainy.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] ZzyzxRoad@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

I think more than one party can be at fault at the same time, but it also depends on the situation.

For example. Google maps kept taking rideshare drivers to the wrong entrance of my apartment complex. When I say "wrong," I mean "nonexistent." So multiple uber drivers were literally pulling over on the side of a busy street near a freeway on ramp with no bike lane or shoulder. They'd hit their flashers and stop in the middle of the road, blocking the on ramp lane. I'm in the actual parking lot, not tracking them in the app, so I don't know they're around the corner. I had two drivers just leave. Did they let me know they were going to cancel and drive away? Fuck no. The actual parking lot and driveway is only a few yards away. If they don't pass right by it, they can at least see the driveway. I mean, come on. Use your brain.

After the first time this happened, I tried to move the pin in the app, but it just kept sending drivers to the same place. I started texting them after they accepted the ride, but not all would see it. I contacted google and the pickup spot did change - to a back entrance on the opposite side of the complex that has no parking lot or place to stop unless you have a gate opener. For fuck's sake.

Anyway, it's both of their faults.

[–] Nindelofocho@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

driving in the dark and rain is mad sketch. This is more than googles fault. Its also the city for not properly blocking it off. “Vandalism” is just a sorry excuse

[–] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

During my time visiting NC I didn't trust gmaps at all. It would give you 1m shortcuts over dirt roads then back onto the same highway, send you in circles and give you wild routes that somehow made it. It was really interesting after growing up in a newer city with a grid layout.

[–] 3ntranced@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

It reminds me of the Office episode where Michaels GPS is like "take the next left" so he starts driving into a lake.

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is tragic. Is the bridge also marked on Open Street Maps?

[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

On OSM all it takes is one person to delete that bridge if it isn't there anymore. That is what is so great about wikis.

[–] minorninth@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Doesn’t that also mean that ONE malicious person can get traffic off their local street or hurt a competitor’s business?

Just like moderating Lemmy, effectively policing user-generated content is a huge challenge.

[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 year ago

It does, but if someone makes changes that actively degrade the map, they can be reverted and blocked from editing. There are monitoring tools available and in general things like that don't tend to happen, at least not in areas with an active good faith community.

[–] JWBananas@startrek.website 9 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Google Maps literally directs me to drive off a bridge all the time. How do I get that fixed?

[–] newIdentity@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago

Local residents had repeatedly contacted Google to have them change their online maps after the bridge collapsed in 2013

You don't

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] mojo@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (9 children)

This literally has nothing to do with Google. As shitty as Google is, it's entirely the city and the driver's fault.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] cestvrai@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Google is terrible and could have updated sooner, but not their responsibility.

I don’t see why residents did not construct a makeshift barricade themselves after years of inaction.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kekzkrieger@feddit.de 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Based on the picture in the article, maybe just look at where you're driving for once. If you can't see far enough slow down.

Tho it's definitely the street maintainers responsibility to put up enough warnings/barriers

[–] betwixthewires@lemmy.basedcount.com 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So apparently the barriers were missing "due to vandalism" and it was raining heavily the night this happened.

I am a bit terrified of this. Sometimes when I'm driving at night I realize, to assume the road doesn't end right over the next hill is to put full faith in the state. You have to trust your government to am extreme to go 70 mph over a hill you can't see past. Some people in some places don't have that luxury, and it won't be like that forever anywhere.

[–] MaxHardwood@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Some people in some places don't have that luxury, and it won't be like that forever anywhere

You're driving a several thousand kilogram death machine. The luxury you're referring to is irresponsibility.

[–] betwixthewires@lemmy.basedcount.com 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The ability to drive on a road and know it will be in front of you is called irresponsibility?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The family of a US man who drowned after driving off a collapsed bridge are claiming that he died because Google failed to update its maps.

Philip Paxson's family are suing the company over his death, alleging that Google negligently failed to show the bridge had fallen nine years earlier.

Mr Paxson, a father of two, was driving home from his daughter's ninth birthday party at a friend's house and was in an unfamiliar neighbourhood at the time of his death, according to the family's lawsuit.

"Unfamiliar with local roads, he relied on Google Maps, expecting it would safely direct him home to his wife and daughters," lawyers for the family said in a statement announcing the lawsuit.

"Tragically, as he drove cautiously in the darkness and rain, he unsuspectingly followed Google's outdated directions to what his family later learned for nearly a decade was called the 'Bridge to Nowhere,' crashing into Snow Creek, where he drowned."

Local residents had repeatedly contacted Google to have them change their online maps after the bridge collapsed in 2013, the suit claims.


The original article contains 373 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 52%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next ›