Should self driving cars make moral choices?

[Deleted]

Most people questioned in a study say self-driving cars should aim to save as many lives as possible in a crash, even if that means sacrificing the passenger. But they also said they wouldn’t choose to use a car set up in such a manner.

The study was conducted by three academics in the Department of Psychology and Social Behavior at the University of California, Irvine. They were exploring the implications of autonomous vehicles for the social dilemma of self-protection against the greater good.

Participants were asked to consider a hypothetical situation where a car was on course to collide with a group of pedestrians. They were three sets of choices:

A) Killing several pedestrians or deliberately swerving in a way that would kill one passer-by.

B) Killing one pedestrian or acting in a way that would kill the car’s passenger (the person who would be considered the driver in a normal car.)

C) Killing several pedestrians or killing the passenger.

What would you pick? Would you use a self driving car knowing it would kill you to save others? Seems an easy decision unless you are the one in danger.

original source

[Zoranon]

An interesting topic for ethicists to be sure, but I think market will settle this quite decisively.

Simply put, very few people would buy a car that would chose to kill them in order to save some strangers. As such I expect that the prime directive of self driving cars will be preserving their occupants.

[Deleted]

An interesting topic for ethicists to be sure, but I think market will settle this quite decisively.

Simply put, very few people would buy a car that would chose to kill them in order to save some strangers. As such I expect that the prime directive of self driving cars will be preserving their occupants.

Initially that might be true, but lawmakers might choose to enforce laws of this nature once self driving cars are the norm. On the other hand by that time accidents will be much lower anyways so probably less need.

[Dezerte]

I guess I'll be taking the public transit system in the future then, maximizing my survival by riding with as many people as possible.

[Khadgar]

isn't the "sticky hood" that Google patented supposed to solve this issue?



http://gizmodo.com/google-patented-a...ian-1777376162

[Zoranon]

Initially that might be true, but lawmakers might choose to enforce laws of this nature once self driving cars are the norm. On the other hand by that time accidents will be much lower anyways so probably less need.

I doubt that, after all the lawmakers would be passengers in those cars as well.

[Deleted]

This is a fun discussion to have at parties.

[Independent voter]

The car should always ask "what is best for the owner?"

[Khadgar]

I'd be content just having a Tesla S so I can take naps during traffic jam's.

[Gheld]

Or self driving should be grandfathered in to every car and we should aim to have automated highways, wherein every car connects to a "hive mind" which controls every single car in a fail-safe manner.

[Deleted]

The car should always ask "what is best for the owner?"

do you mean passenger/driver or actual owner?

what if the owner is uber / taxi company / company car / public transit / etc?

[xChurch]

Well when all cars are automated this wont be an issue but until then people will probably not like the idea of your car choosing to kill you.

[Deleted]

Well when all cars are automated this probably wont be an issue but until then people will probably not like the idea of your car choosing to kill you.

you will still have scenarios like a child suddenly running into the street in which this would apply. where a humans reaction time would not be enough to swerve out of the way, but a computers would be.

[Gheld]

People j-walking into the path of a self driving car should be allowed to die. It is their negligence that causes the accident. It's not safe for a vehicle travelling at high speeds to attempt a sudden change of course. The car should apply its brakes and attempt to make a lane change (if safe to do so) but nothing more.

[Deleted]

I think it should function as a normal car would in those situations, rather than deliberately sacrificing anyone.

since a computer has to choose, someone deliberately dies in each scenario regardless. the question is more, who and/or how many?

this is like that "im on a traintrack going to 1 or 5 people, do you switch tracks" but it's becoming real now.

[xChurch]

you will still have scenarios like a child suddenly running into the street in which this would apply. where a humans reaction time would not be enough to swerve out of the way, but a computers might.

Scenario's where that would result in a fatality would probably few and far between though, unless you just happened to swerve into a light pole or something but even then it'd be unlikely to end in a death perse, at least for the driver.

[Gheld]

since a computer has to choose, someone deliberately dies in each scenario regardless. the question is more, who and/or how many?

this is like that "im on a traintrack going to 1 or 5 people, do you switch tracks" but it's becoming real now.

These scenarios are all bad and the "Ethicicsts" who peddle them should feel bad.

Especially since you can't just switch tracks on the fly. this isn't fucking Hollywood. The tracks on the junction weigh in the tons. So operating the switch-track takes a considerable amount of time.

I feel like you should have to have real world experience to propose ethical scenarios. Because they all sound like they were written by a 5 year old.

[akris15]

If anything I would say self driving should only be allowed in designated areas (i.e. Highway and interstates here in America). These routes are already generally restricted in some way that would cause this issue in the first place. Right now interstate traffic prevents bikes, pedestrians and farm equipment.

[Deleted]

The car should always ask "what is best for the owner?"

This.. also Id change it to "whats best for the people in the car". And it would be the only way to make it commercially viable too.

Well when all cars are automated this wont be an issue but until then people will probably not like the idea of your car choosing to kill you.

Even then, Id probably not drive one or would try to change it for pirated bootleg AI that will always try to preserve people in the car or my property, assuming the person in the way is at fault and shouldn't be on the road.

[Deleted]

Scenario's where that would result in a fatality would probably few and far between though, unless you just happened to swerve into a light pole or something but even then it'd be unlikely to end in a death perse, at least for the driver.

i'm sure it will be rare, but i'm also sure it will happen regularly enough that it will eventually go to court. either carmakers solve this, lawmakers solve this, or courts solve this, but i'm sure it's gonna come up at some point.