3 ms·

I was comparing swerve instead of braking to the trolley problem as usually contrived, i.e. you can direct the trolley to one of two tracks. The person I was r

I was comparing swerve instead of braking to the trolley problem as usually contrived, i.e. you can direct the trolley to one of two tracks. The person I was replying to said this is nonsense, as in a car you can just brake and nobody gets killed. I explained that there is a real-world situation where braking is not an escape, it is—as you say—equivalent to directing the trolley to the line where there is one victim. We agree that the trolley problem in the abstract is about making a choice as to who is harmed. I was just pointing out that car brakes do not invalidate the concern.

JoeAltmaier 7y ago
Of course, sorry. I've predicted for years now that the first day of automated driving will have to solve the trolley car problem. I can only see one way out: we make a rule e.g. automated cars cannot leave the roadway.
- gricardo99 7y ago
  I think you’re specifying the solution you prefer to the trolley car problem, rather than finding a way out of the problem. I think that’s the point. Decisions need to be made about how to deal with these ethical dilemmas. It shouldn’t be left up to individual companies or software implementations.
  - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
    Nobody's solved the trolley car problem to everyone's satisfaction in a century. Not gonna happen tomorrow. Agreed it shouldn't be left to the companies - that's why the 'make a rule' idea. Else the companies are in an escalating war of ad-hoc behaviors to preserve their customer vs all others.