Core Viewpoint - The rapid development of artificial intelligence, particularly in autonomous driving, raises legal questions about the division of responsibility between humans and intelligent systems. The recent court ruling clarifies that the driver remains responsible for safety even when using autonomous driving features [1][4]. Group 1: Case Summary - The case involved a defendant, Yan, who drove under the influence with a blood alcohol content exceeding 200 mg/100 ml after activating the autonomous driving feature of his vehicle [2][5]. - The court found that the current stage of autonomous driving technology is still considered as driver assistance, and the ultimate responsibility for vehicle safety lies with the driver [4][6]. - The court ruled that activating the autonomous driving function does not mitigate the criminal responsibility of a driver under the influence, emphasizing that the driver must maintain control and oversight of the vehicle [10][11]. Group 2: Legal Implications - The ruling reinforces the principle that human drivers cannot evade legal responsibility by relying on technology, as the law still holds individuals accountable for their actions [8][12]. - The court's decision reflects a broader legal framework that categorizes drunk driving as an abstract danger, meaning that the act itself is deemed dangerous regardless of the presence of other vehicles or conditions [11][12]. - The case highlights the need for future legal frameworks to address the implications of advanced autonomous driving technologies and their integration into existing laws [12].