If you brake, that which was traveling forward wants to keep traveling forward. If anything, I'd expect the outer edges of the door to fly forward, i.e., more open.

Even if you were right, it probably would work only if the door is very open, but not ajar.

Yet traditional cab drivers don't monitor their passengers to make sure they are awake and alert and not reporting any distress the entire trip

Of course not. That's not the scenario. The scenario is waking the driver upon reaching the destination. A taxi driver could physically shake the person.

I can't currently imagine what that would be to get me to go along with the idea you have any claim against them.

Somebody, somewhere can.

The point you're missing is that they don't have to get to an emergency room since an ambulance, unlike an autonomous vehicle, has trained medical personnel on board that can start administering procedures immediately upon arrival.

Also, FYI, despite what you may think, ambulances DO have to follow the speed limit.

It varies by jurisdiction, but no, they don't. At least in California, they can legally exceed the speed limit:

(b) Speed Restriction. In no event shall an ambulance driver exceed a speed of 15 miles per hour while disobeying any official traffic control stop sign or stop signal.

So that means that while going through, say, a red light, not only can they legally go through it, but then can, at most, exceed the speed limit by 15 MPH while doing it.

While NOT "disobeying any official traffic control stop sign or stop signal," they can generally exceed the speed limit even more (but, again, it varies by jurisdiction).

Here is the relevant law for Hollywood, FL:

No ambulance shall exceed the speed of 40 miles per hour except in cases of extreme emergency.

Which means they can exceed the speed limit by 39 MPH for "non-extreme" emergencies.

In New York State:

1104 Authorized Emergency Vehicles - (b) The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle may: 3. Exceed the maximum speed limits so long as he does not endanger life or property;

No specific maximum speed is mentioned.

The autonomous car would have to drive the speed limit and stop for all lights on the way to the hospital adding minutes to the trip.. minutes a passenger who is actually having a medical emergency might not have. The passenger will likely get life saving medical attention faster if the ambulance (that can legally exceed the speed limit and run red lights) travels to the car.

Because if they're actually having a medical emergency and are unconscious and die, the family will sue for negligence, wrongful death, or who knows what.

Gig workers close the doors, not emergency personnel. But yes, there should be a way to close the doors without human assistance.

Arrested on what charge? If they are someone previously caught shoplifting then presumably they have already paid their fine or served their sentence for that crime.

If the shop banned them, then the charge would be trespassing. Shops are private property and can ban people for life even if they've otherwise paid their debt to society.

Apple's iMessages are E2E encrypted. Only the sender and recipient have they keys to decrypt the messages on device; Apple does not. The new Siri search is run on device also.

It doesn't matter. What matters is the politicians "did something" and the companies followed the law, so everyone is blameless.

FYI: Apple discontinued their Time Capsule in 2018 without replacement.

Yes because no CEO would want to add new features or fix more bugs per unit time with the same number of programmers; they and their customers are happy with the same rate of progress with fewer programmers.

AI is being used as a convenient scapegoat. If a few big tech companies do layoffs, more do because it's a case of monkey see, monkey do.

Even if training is legal (and I don't concede it is), you still have to have a legally authorized copy to train from to begin with. Unless Meta paid for every book they trained their AI from, they're already guilty of copyright infringement.

Acting - as part of "the arts" - is more play than work for the people who do it. That merits not automating it because without enjoyable things to do, we become nothing but consumption machines.

Why should the movie studio executives, board of directors, or shareholders care? To them, it's a business to maximize profit. You can do that if using AI costs less than paying actors.

Woz, despite his technical chops, had no influence after the Apple ][ days, so while he was initially influential, he hasn't been influential over most of Apple's history.

What if nobody implemented it?

Then Microsoft and Apple among others would be fined per day until they implemented it; or perhaps even being held in contempt of court if the government sued them and won up to and including jail time for executives; or given the current regime, being designated a supply chain risk.

Even if the companies eventually prevail in court, most wouldn't want the hassle or being on the bad side of Orange Man.