<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>sologoub</author><text>Looking at the actual facts, there appear to be little justification for this violence, especially since it affects the human safety drivers the most and they are definitely not any kind of aggressor here.&lt;p&gt;Some recent quotes from the USA Today article covering the Waymo self-driving car hailing service:&lt;p&gt;“&amp;quot;But mostly it just makes me feel safe. One time, the Waymo (vehicle) paused before turning, and I wondered why. Then a car ran the red light and crashed into the median. It saw that car way before I did.&amp;quot;”&lt;p&gt;“But the fact remains that after millions of miles of city driving, another 7 billion miles of virtual testing and countless more tests undertaken at a private faux-city facility in California, Waymo vehicles have yet to cause a major accident. When fender-benders do happen, often it&amp;#x27;s because human drivers bump into the robot cars.”&lt;p&gt;Source: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.usatoday.com&amp;#x2F;story&amp;#x2F;money&amp;#x2F;2018&amp;#x2F;10&amp;#x2F;10&amp;#x2F;waymo-self-driving-cars-hit-10-million-road-miles-they-aim-public-debut&amp;#x2F;1536441002&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.usatoday.com&amp;#x2F;story&amp;#x2F;money&amp;#x2F;2018&amp;#x2F;10&amp;#x2F;10&amp;#x2F;waymo-self-d...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;The real issue is that we need more miles driven to really be certain that this safety record will hold. Thwarting this testing will probably endanger more people because the tech will become mainstream whether anyone likes it or not. It would be a lot better if the tech is over-tested than under-tested.</text><parent_chain><item><author>Retric</author><text>Context suggests people are justifiably upset, not that these specific actions  where justified.  Google is putting their community at risk without any form of compensation.  Much like dumping toxic waste into public streams it’s public harm for private gain.&lt;p&gt;PS: Never trust a quote that’s that short, it’s been stripped of all meaning.</text></item><item><author>emmelaich</author><text>He should not use the word &amp;quot;justifiably&amp;quot; if he&amp;#x27;s merely explaining.</text></item><item><author>munchbunny</author><text>There&amp;#x27;s an important difference between blaming the victim and trying to explain why the attackers are doing what they are doing.&lt;p&gt;Rushkoff is doing the latter, not the former, and pretending he&amp;#x27;s doing the former certainly makes it easier to ignore his point.</text></item><item><author>KKKKkkkk1</author><text>I love this quote:&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;“People are lashing out justifiably,&amp;quot; said Douglas Rushkoff, a media theorist at City University of New York and author of the book “Throwing Rocks at the Google Bus.” He likened driverless cars to robotic incarnations of scabs — workers who refuse to join strikes or who take the place of those on strike.&lt;p&gt;“There&amp;#x27;s a growing sense that the giant corporations honing driverless technologies do not have our best interests at heart,” Mr. Rushkoff said. “Just think about the humans inside these vehicles, who are essentially training the artificial intelligence that will replace them.”&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Why is it that for every act of random vandalism or hooliganism, there&amp;#x27;s always an academic who will find a way to blame the victim?</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Wielding Rocks and Knives, Arizonans Attack Self-Driving Cars</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/31/us/waymo-self-driving-cars-arizona-attacks.html</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>yellowapple</author><text>The wording plainly states the lashing out itself is justifiable.  That&amp;#x27;s very different from saying that being upset is justifiable.</text><parent_chain><item><author>Retric</author><text>Context suggests people are justifiably upset, not that these specific actions  where justified.  Google is putting their community at risk without any form of compensation.  Much like dumping toxic waste into public streams it’s public harm for private gain.&lt;p&gt;PS: Never trust a quote that’s that short, it’s been stripped of all meaning.</text></item><item><author>emmelaich</author><text>He should not use the word &amp;quot;justifiably&amp;quot; if he&amp;#x27;s merely explaining.</text></item><item><author>munchbunny</author><text>There&amp;#x27;s an important difference between blaming the victim and trying to explain why the attackers are doing what they are doing.&lt;p&gt;Rushkoff is doing the latter, not the former, and pretending he&amp;#x27;s doing the former certainly makes it easier to ignore his point.</text></item><item><author>KKKKkkkk1</author><text>I love this quote:&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;“People are lashing out justifiably,&amp;quot; said Douglas Rushkoff, a media theorist at City University of New York and author of the book “Throwing Rocks at the Google Bus.” He likened driverless cars to robotic incarnations of scabs — workers who refuse to join strikes or who take the place of those on strike.&lt;p&gt;“There&amp;#x27;s a growing sense that the giant corporations honing driverless technologies do not have our best interests at heart,” Mr. Rushkoff said. “Just think about the humans inside these vehicles, who are essentially training the artificial intelligence that will replace them.”&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Why is it that for every act of random vandalism or hooliganism, there&amp;#x27;s always an academic who will find a way to blame the victim?</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Wielding Rocks and Knives, Arizonans Attack Self-Driving Cars</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/31/us/waymo-self-driving-cars-arizona-attacks.html</url></story>