> "It's a thing, although I misspelled "trolley". I wasn't intending to imply trolling on your part. [1,2]" Ah I see. Yes, the trolley problem, didn't know it

> "It's a thing, although I misspelled "trolley". I wasn't intending to imply trolling on your part. [1,2]" Ah I see. Yes, the trolley problem, didn't know it was called that, but that's what I meant. Thanks for the links. It's a problem that is applicable amongst all types of drivers, but the issue with autonomous drivers is that you have the choice to program for it in the AI. The question then becomes what is the best way to handle it? Furthermore, if you do try to minimise deaths, how do you communicate to the other autonomous drivers that they should not also self-sacrifice? > "The same ones we have for humans with the means and authority to kill. [3]" Let's discuss something concrete from that handbook... "the right to use force in self-defence arises in response to a hostile act (attack) and/or demonstrated hostile intent (threat of imminent attack)" How does an AI determine hostile intent? Reading the intent of humans is a complex task, depending on a wide range of cues (visual, verbal, physical, historical, societal). Can we design an AI that can read all these cues better than a human? Do you expect this to be easy to program?