6 ms·
I think such a value system is fine in as much as it preserves the safety of the driver. I'd like my car to make value judgements about what's safer - braking
by esteth 10y ago
I think such a value system is fine in as much as it preserves the safety of the driver.
I'd like my car to make value judgements about what's safer - braking and colliding with an object or swerving to avoid it. I'd rather it brakes and collides with a child than swerve into oncoming traffic, but I'd rather it swerved into oncoming traffic to avoid a truck that would otherwise T-bone me.
As long as the system only acts in the best interest of it's passengers, not the general public, it's fine by me.
- Twisell 10y agohttp://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/self-driving-car-ethics http://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/self-driving-car-ethics
- kozak 10y agoIt's fine for you until you step outside the car.
- vacri 10y agoThe moral choice is the opposite direction: the car should prefer to kill the occupant than a bystander. The occupant is the reason why the car is in use; if it fails, the penalty for that failure should be on the occupant, not bystanders.
- pc86 10y agoThis is a great argument if your goal is no autonomous cars. Nobody buys a car that will choose to kill them.
- jessaustin 10y agoSociety will not tolerate a robocar that cheerfully kills our children to avoid some inconvenience to its occupants. One might think that we're not talking about inconvenience, but we are, because after all any car may be driven slowly enough to avoid killing children in the road. A particular robocar that is not driven that slowly (which, frankly, would be all useful robocars), must avoid killing children in the road above all other priorities, including the lives of passengers. A VW-like situation in which this were discovered not to be the case, would involve far more dire consequences for the company (and, realistically, the young children and grandchildren of its executives) than VW faces for its pollution shenanigans.
- vacri 10y agoWhy would I want to be in a society where every other driver has a car that would act in the interests of it's occupants and not the general public?
- eertami 10y agoBut in this case it isn't a bystander, it's out in the middle of the road in front of a moving vehicle. If a child runs in front of my car then it is most definitely at fault and I'd honestly much rather it be dead than me, if those are the options.
- JoeAltmaier 10y agoYou are not alone in that, but perhaps in a minority. A child cannot truly be 'at fault'.
- pc86 10y agoLegally speaking children are found to be at fault all the time, and under certain circumstances even treated as adults. So no, they're not incapable of being at fault.
- jessaustin 10y agoHypothetical question: would you send the bill for bumper dent-repair to the parents of the child who died making that dent?
- pc86 10y agoWould I? Of course not. Would my insurance company? Probably.
- jessaustin 10y agoLet me guess, you haven't done much work in public relations? Much worse for a company than doing some evil reprehensible shit, is doing such shit in a fashion that's an easy, emotional "narrative hook" for the media. A grieving mother clutching a tear-stained auto repair bill itemized with "child's-head-sized dent, one" is the easiest hook imaginable.
- 10y ago
- jessaustin 10y agoI'd rather it brakes and collides with a child... Humanity: you're doing it wrong. That some humans have this attitude is another reason why humans shouldn't drive automobiles.
- pc86 10y agoThe first priority of an autonomous vehicle should be to cause no loss of life whatsoever. The second priority should be to preserve the life of the occupants. Nobody buys an autonomous car that will make the decision to kill them.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- Spooky23 10y agoThis is where the current AI hype cycle will die. You cannot codify some of the "dark" choices that are typically made today in split second, fight or flight situations. If we go down this road, it opens to door to all sorts of other end justifies the means behaviors. There's a threshold number of dead hypothetical children that's going to trigger a massive revolt against tone deaf Silicon Valley industry.
- Reason077 10y agoI'd rather it brakes and collides with a child than swerve into oncoming traffic Wait, what? You'd rather hit and kill a child than hit another vehicle - a crash which at urban/suburban speeds would most likely be survivable, without serious injury, for all involved?
- brokenmachine 10y agoAt the moment our autonomous cars can't manage to avoid a stationary guard rail on the side of the road, so it's a bit premature to be worrying about our cars making moral decisions.