175
submitted 11 months ago by Voyager@psychedelia.ink to c/technology@lemmy.ml

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"Tragically, as he drove cautiously in the darkness and rain, he unsuspectingly followed Google's outdated directions to what his family later learned for nearly a decade was called the 'Bridge to Nowhere,' crashing into Snow Creek, where he drowned."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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] nakal@kbin.social 31 points 11 months ago

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 11 months ago

Tragically, as he drove cautiously in the darkness and rain, he unsuspectingly followed Google's outdated directions to what his family later learned for nearly a decade was called the 'Bridge to Nowhere,' crashing into Snow Creek, where he drowned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

[-] jonne@infosec.pub -4 points 11 months ago

Presumably the road to the bridge would've been blocked off with signs and stuf? Is there any information about whether the signage was inadequate? Doesn't excuse Google for but updating the map in almost a decade, but it seems either council or the driver have more responsibility here.

[-] Deceptichum@kbin.social 19 points 11 months ago

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

[-] Maalus@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

So how the hell do they blame google instead of the local government for failing to keep up the signs and blockades?

It's such an idiotic case, "the guy drove blindly off a bridge because his navigation told him to". So in the old days, he would've had a paper map and would have driven off the bridge the same way.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 22 points 11 months ago

Multiple entities can hold responsibility, including:

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

This was a long running problem that Google was contacted to fix and didn't. They don't bear sole responsibility, but that is negligence that contributed to his death.

[-] Nindelofocho@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

the fault is shared. google was mentioned moreso because its big company and that makes a headline

[-] owf@feddit.de -1 points 10 months ago

I don't know whether you didn't read the article or are just one of these simpletons incapable of holding an opinion more nuanced that "good or evil", but they are suing the owners.

So in the old days, he would've had a paper map and would have driven off the bridge the same way.

Paper maps don't talk to you and tell you which way to go, do they?

I seriously can't decide whether you're some Google shill or you've just given your brain the day off.

[-] Maalus@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Nice b8 m8 not going to respond to a weak troll :)

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 5 points 11 months ago

Yeah, that's definitely more the council's responsibility then (or those vandals, if they find them).

[-] shalafi@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

How in hell were vandals able to remove anything?! There should have been dragon's teeth or something similar blocking the road.

[-] nyan@lemmy.cafe 3 points 11 months ago

It sounds like their "barrier" was probably traffic cones or sawhorses—easily knocked over, stolen, or destroyed. What should have been there, but apparently wasn't, was a double or triple row of concrete jersey barriers. Or something else that was too heavy or awkward to be easily stolen, or destroyed without leaving serious residue. Nothing like hitting concrete chunks all over the road to make someone slow waaaaaay down and take a look around.

Yeah, I'd say that whoever was responsible for keeping that road blocked off was the major culprit in this. Google is just a "they have deep pockets, and we might be lucky and get a judge who doesn't know squat about how nav systems work" add-on.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 10 months ago

Knowing about how nav systems work would make them more likely to find against Google, because an online nav system is trivially updatable. Even if they wanted to be extra cautious a simple call to the local police or a peek at a satellite image in the preceding 9 years would give confirmation.

[-] ZzyzxRoad@lemm.ee 7 points 11 months 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 11 months 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 11 months 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.

this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
175 points (88.5% liked)

Technology

34110 readers
215 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