In which case I would ask to borrow your computer so I could look at Google Maps, and a pen and paper so I could write down the directions.
Whereas keeping your eye on the GPS instead of on the road is always perfectly safe?
Have you ever actually used a GPS? Because that’s not how they work.
That is, however, how paper directions work. You typically need to check them once in a while, and at night, they need to be illuminated, which besides being dangerously distracting, also ruins your night vision.
I think you’ve got the whole paradigm exactly backwards.
A few years back I lived near a road that was dead ended, but Google maps showed it as going straight through. I reported the problem at least once a month for over a year. Every time I re-routed around it I would hit the button and mark it as a dead end.
I dearly hope that Google is held accountable. The article says they have proof that the problem was reported to them. Git’em!!
That’s really damning. The street view shows it broken down. Which means a Google employee saw it and didn’t update the map. It has obviously been updated now, so we can’t go down that road. But clearly wasn’t done at the time, which is sketchy.
No it doesn’t mean that. Google employees don’t look at each and every image captured by the camera car - the process is largely automated.
Also bear in mind you’re seeing Google Streetview images that were captured after the tragic event being discussed in this thread.
This raises another good point; not everyone has perfect vision. It would be easy just to say “well, if your vision is imperfect, you shouldn’t be driving”, but the world simply would not function if only people with the top 1% of visual acuity were the ones allowed to drive, so there is a range of vision capability for driving. Nobody experiences zero risk, but the people at the lower end of the acceptable eyesight range probably experience greater risk than the others, even if everyone is driving to the best of their ability.
The streetview car would have been directed to drive down that road. The road isn’t available now because it has finally been fixed. But yes, the driver certainly noticed in time to NOT drive over the bridge.
And there are views of the bridge in various states of blockage, from fences to barricades, meaning this has happened multiple times. (I think they were marked 2019 and 2022?) It would have been marked as available to drive through and wasn’t updated. What is the point of sending a driver down every singe road if not to update such things?
If a jury sees that, I predict they will find it important.
Especially at night in the rain. And looking at that first photo, the bright silver guard rail still appears to go across in a straight line. So any strangeness in the roadway would just be attributed to puddles or shadows. If he’d been coming the other direction, he’d have been more likely to realize the road dipped down strangely. (Still, perhaps too late.)
IMO that’s the most dangerous thing that happened here. Leaving that guardrail intact across the broken roadway instead of pulling it back and welding it to block the entry. In poor driving conditions, we follow the bright lines on the road or our headlights reflecting off of the guardrails. It looks like a straight line.
The streetview car may not have been directed to drive down that road, if the road had already been reported as closed and unusable, and had been deleted from the actual map.
And if, when the streetview car did pass by, the closed road had a barrier on it, I don’t think it would have been particularly negligent just to shrug and conclude it was closed and move on.
What we seem to be doing in this thread is predicting the past. A bad thing happened, and we want to blame someone. It should have been obvious to the people in the past that a bad thing was about to happen, because we, in the future, know that it did.
Consider these two (both hypothetical) timelines:
- The bridge collapsed
- Someone informed Google via the ‘suggest an edit’ feature
- Someone at Google saw it and ignored it
- Someone else, later, driving the streetview car, tried to drive the route and found the unprotected broken bridge and didn’t think anything of it
- The map was not updated, even though it should have been.
- Someone tried to drive over the bridge and died
vs
- The bridge collapsed
- Someone informed Google via the ‘suggest an edit’ feature
- The suggestion went into the pipeline for updates to the map
- Before the map was updated, someone tried to drive over the bridge and died
- The map was updated
- The streetview car was never directed to drive down the road, because the map was already updated
I don’t know what’s a reasonable timeline for Google to react to reports that a road is defunct. I am sure it cannot be instantaneous. If they just changed the map immediately because someone submitted a web form, this would be vulnerable to interference from vandals or (for example) unscrupulous businesses anonymously reporting as closed all of the with their competitor’s stores on them.
And in any case, Google is just one data set; reporting a road as closed to Google won’t update Bing Maps, or the map sources that standalone satnav devices use, etc.
I feel the people who are most to blame here is the people who had the power to make it safe, by physically blocking it off - the landowners.
So ar no one seems to be picking up on my suggestion that whatever public agency maintains the streest on either end of the private bridge bore some responsibility. How come? How much would a “Bridge Out” sign cost, compared to a lost life?
Putting up warning signs where you are not responsible for safety opens you up to range of liability concerns.
Exactly. Who expects a drop when there is a continuous guardrail going across the creek there? As I said before, I’d likely be following that guardrail in those conditions, thinking I’m being safe and prudent, when WHAM! down we go.
From the standpoint of a GPS service, a bridge being out is a matter of convenience and effective route planning, not a matter of safety.
It’s reasonable for a route planning service to expect that individual drivers will be fully responsible for the safe operation of their vehicle, and for municipalities to be responsible for roadway safety and signage.
I think if it were a straightforward case of a private road across a bridge, joining two public roads, there would be a case for the public agency to close off the two ends, for example by erecting a barrier or fence on the edge of the public property.
The complication in this case is that the private road is really someone’s private driveway that just happened to include a bridge extending their driveway so that it opened onto two different roads. I think the local authority would be overstepping their domain of control if they put up signage about something that is happening entirely within a piece of private property.
One could speculate the land owners might have allowed the bridge to fall into disrepair, or maybe demolished it, because they didn’t like people using their driveway as a shortcut road.
Nope, that’s not how it works. Governments are responsible for their own & nobody else’s.
We have four types of roads were I live, town, county, state, & private. I have witnessed the town snowplow truck plow to the end of a residential street & lift the plow blade up to drive down the unplowed state road to get to the next town street because if they were to plow it they would now be taking on responsibility/liability that isn’t theirs.
Yep, and as i said above, that happens. So, you cant really expect for them to change within minutes for a single edit report. And again, I have yet to see how Google was “informed”. Was it? How? Where is the evidence? One person saying “Yeah, I told Google about that?” So, maybe Google was not informed before the accident.
Right.
Because it was iirc a private road and thus no public agency?
Right.
Via the commonly known and easy to use mechanism for reporting errors. Like the one that I used to fix where it thought the front of my house is.
That doesnt answer my other questions. And do you have any evidence for that?
The evidence will come out during discovery.
Is there a reason you doubt that users reported it through the app mechanism? It’s the standard way of reporting issues.
I don’t think the streets at either end of that bridge are maintained by a public agency. I suspect every street in that subdivision is privately owned and privately maintained, just like the bridge. That may sound strange to some of you, but that’s not an uncommon arrangement in North Carolina, unless things have changed since I lived there.
When I rode the school bus to school, the the bus was not allowed to drive on any privately maintained roads for some sort of liability reason. That meant there were entire subdivisions the bus was not allowed to enter.
Actually, Google Street View seems to confirm that these are private streets. In NC every street sign on a publicly maintained streets will have something like “SR1234” in smaller letters before the name of the street, for “State Road 1234”. The street signs on all the streets on either side of the bridge lack those markings, which tells me those are private streets. In fact that was how the school bus driver could tell which streets he wasn’t allowed to drive on.
ETA: Hmm, I may be wrong. Google Maps shows a state road number for most of those streets on their map, even though the number isn’t posted on the street signs.