The problem is they are not suing over the mistake made by the clinic, but that the child has the wrong genes.
The kid having the wrong genes is the direct fruit of the clinic's malpractice. It's no different than a baby being dropped on its head by the doctor. You don't sue ONLY for the mistake, you sue for the consequences of the mistake. Two parents decide to merge their DNA and make a baby. They do so knowing their, and their families' histories. The clinic chooses to negligently upend that planning with an unknown set of consequences - and robbing the parents of having allowed the father to contribute his traits to the child they've chosen to make. The ramifications are numerous, both emotionally and quite possibly medically, intellectually, etc., for the child. You can't separate the negligence from the life-long consequences.
Thank you for your detailed and loquacious rebuttal. I bow before your eloquence.
Hydrogen as an energy storage method is extremely inefficient. It is a distraction. Battery power with grid recharging is far more efficient and convenient.
Only if the insurance company chooses to pass on the savings.
No, only if they are allowed to actually compete with each other for your business.
With automobile pilots we tolerate faulty humans whose decision-making processes we absolutely don't understand such that car crashes don't even make the news, but every car AI pilot fender bender will "raise deep questions about the suitability of robots to drive cars."
If AI is better than humans, then fewer people will die in cars. Period.
It is all about past experience. If some humans drive well then we predict they will continue to drive well and give them an insurance discount. If they drive poorly, we charge them a lot for insurance, under the prediction that they will continue to have more crashes. If a particular AI has a better driving record than humans, then it would be logical to give it a lower insurance rate, based on past experience. We don't have to know the details of how the human brain works to predict these things, and we shouldn't need the exact details about how the AI works to predict its behaviour. Better is better.
adding that after Massachusetts passed a similar lar
Ermehgerd they persed a similar lar!
panic: kernel trap (ignored)