3 ms·

When autonomous vehicles encounter an obstacle, they brake. Moreover, why in this problem, that appears in absolutely every thread about self-driving cars, is t

When autonomous vehicles encounter an obstacle, they brake. Moreover, why in this problem, that appears in absolutely every thread about self-driving cars, is there a family in a crosswalk with no awareness whatsoever of a speeding vehicle? Are they deaf and blind without assistance? This is not a joke. The car will be aware of the presence of the crosswalk. It will slow long before arriving at it. So the deaf and blind family will likely be safe.

ghaff 11y ago
I'll concede that there are some scenarios where choices may be required: e.g. Child darts in front of car. Slam on brakes and hope for best or swerve off road (which probably isn't a cliff) or into traffic? And perhaps there is a different calculus if the car isn't carrying a passenger. But, for the most part, these trolley arguments are pretty uninteresting from a technical, as opposed to a philosophical, perspective. It's going to be very rare that an autopilot would even in principle be able able to reliably forecast a significantly better outcome than hitting the brakes and/or otherwise protecting itself/its occupant as much as possible.
- true_religion 11y ago
  > e.g. Child darts in front of car. Slam on brakes and hope for best or swerve off road (which probably isn't a cliff) or into traffic? And perhaps there is a different calculus if the car isn't carrying a passenger. I think its fair to say that the car might have an engine that decides to preserve human life at the cost of human injury. To avoid killing the child, it may serve into traffic if and only if doing so has a high likelihood of survival for all passengers. If it can't determine that; it'll take the conservative approach and break to mitigate the damage of the impact to the child. Regardless the decision engine of the car isn't perfect. I'd have a hard time seeing it predict serving left to cause a 4 car pile up, instead of right to cause a 5 car pile up. How could it know? At some point, it'll just short-circuit its decisions because time is passing, and its critical to do something rather than simply slow down and maintain course.
Qworg 11y ago
They sometimes break [sic]. I think your position requires a fully autonomous world. Instead, imagine that the car behind you continues to barrel forward instead of slowing itself. Your autonomous vehicle then has a decision to make.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- intopieces 11y ago
  What is the decision? The car will follow exactly the rules of the road. If the car behind it continues to barrel forward, that driver did not allow for adequate stopping distance. In this scenario, that driver is at fault. Of course that doesn't say anything for the safety of the child, but just as we don't expect humans to be able to account for every single scenario, neither can we require a computer to do so. For every one of these supposed ethical dilemmas, replace the computer with the most pedantic driver imaginable: this person has literally memorized the driver's manual. Ask that person how they would respond in that situation. That is how the computer would respond. There are no choices to be made: the choices have already been made by the legislators who enacted the driving laws. I imagine the first set of self-driving cars will require a huge bumper sticker (like the ones they put on learner cars: "STUDENT DRIVER") that indicates this car will not exceed the speed limit and will not deviate from the rules. Everyone else can adapt accordingly.
  - Qworg 11y ago
    There's an implicit decision there - choosing between you (the passenger in the autonomous vehicle) and the people on the street. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Fault isn't what's at stake here. You actually DO require the computer to account for every single scenario - since we DO require humans to do so. Nobody says "Oh, it's okay that they <<insert some negative driving consequence>> - nobody expected that they'd be able to handle it!" Legislators with driving laws aren't how people interact with roadways, except in a basic sense of a framework. I do agree with the self identification of autonomous vehicles, especially if they replace LIDAR. However, there are already highway capable autonomous systems that are driving around right now (Teslas are an example). There's just no test case yet.

ghaff 11y ago

I'll concede that there are some scenarios where choices may be required: e.g. Child darts in front of car. Slam on brakes and hope for best or swerve off road (which probably isn't a cliff) or into traffic? And perhaps there is a different calculus if the car isn't carrying a passenger. But, for the most part, these trolley arguments are pretty uninteresting from a technical, as opposed to a philosophical, perspective. It's going to be very rare that an autopilot would even in principle be able able to reliably forecast a significantly better outcome than hitting the brakes and/or otherwise protecting itself/its occupant as much as possible.

true_religion 11y ago
> e.g. Child darts in front of car. Slam on brakes and hope for best or swerve off road (which probably isn't a cliff) or into traffic? And perhaps there is a different calculus if the car isn't carrying a passenger. I think its fair to say that the car might have an engine that decides to preserve human life at the cost of human injury. To avoid killing the child, it may serve into traffic if and only if doing so has a high likelihood of survival for all passengers. If it can't determine that; it'll take the conservative approach and break to mitigate the damage of the impact to the child. Regardless the decision engine of the car isn't perfect. I'd have a hard time seeing it predict serving left to cause a 4 car pile up, instead of right to cause a 5 car pile up. How could it know? At some point, it'll just short-circuit its decisions because time is passing, and its critical to do something rather than simply slow down and maintain course.

Qworg 11y ago

They sometimes break [sic]. I think your position requires a fully autonomous world. Instead, imagine that the car behind you continues to barrel forward instead of slowing itself. Your autonomous vehicle then has a decision to make.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
intopieces 11y ago
What is the decision? The car will follow exactly the rules of the road. If the car behind it continues to barrel forward, that driver did not allow for adequate stopping distance. In this scenario, that driver is at fault. Of course that doesn't say anything for the safety of the child, but just as we don't expect humans to be able to account for every single scenario, neither can we require a computer to do so. For every one of these supposed ethical dilemmas, replace the computer with the most pedantic driver imaginable: this person has literally memorized the driver's manual. Ask that person how they would respond in that situation. That is how the computer would respond. There are no choices to be made: the choices have already been made by the legislators who enacted the driving laws. I imagine the first set of self-driving cars will require a huge bumper sticker (like the ones they put on learner cars: "STUDENT DRIVER") that indicates this car will not exceed the speed limit and will not deviate from the rules. Everyone else can adapt accordingly.
- Qworg 11y ago
  There's an implicit decision there - choosing between you (the passenger in the autonomous vehicle) and the people on the street. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Fault isn't what's at stake here. You actually DO require the computer to account for every single scenario - since we DO require humans to do so. Nobody says "Oh, it's okay that they <<insert some negative driving consequence>> - nobody expected that they'd be able to handle it!" Legislators with driving laws aren't how people interact with roadways, except in a basic sense of a framework. I do agree with the self identification of autonomous vehicles, especially if they replace LIDAR. However, there are already highway capable autonomous systems that are driving around right now (Teslas are an example). There's just no test case yet.