4 ms·
What if the rate of deaths for a given company is not zero, but below the rate for human drivers? Is it ok to have additional, unnecessary pedestrian deaths by
by drcode 7y ago
What if the rate of deaths for a given company is not zero, but below the rate for human drivers? Is it ok to have additional, unnecessary pedestrian deaths by NOT allowing that company to deploy their technology?
(That said, the negligence in the Uber case makes it pretty clear they are likely far from reaching that level of competency)
- puranjay 7y agoSo you mean being okay with a multibillion dollar corporation harming people so it can make even more profits, all the while telling you that it's "good for society" Gee, where have I heard that script before?
- nulld3v 7y agoSo is reducing the accident rate on roads "harming people"?
- puranjay 7y agoGood for the people once the system is perfected. Not so much for the ones who get run while the system is being perfected. The "greater good" utilitarian argument has been the basis of some of the worst policies and politics in the world. I'm not saying that self driving cars fall into the same category, but how many deaths are you okay with until Uber/Waymo perfect their algorithms (and later, charge you for it)? 1? 10? 100?