Has this PC bullshit infiltrated literally everywhere? How the fuck is this even a question in this test?

Has this PC bullshit infiltrated literally everywhere? How the fuck is this even a question in this test?

Other urls found in this thread:

theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/22/self-driving-cars-moral-dilemmas
moralmachine.mit.edu/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

the car should stop...

Apply brakes, but take now active measures that could take a life

Are you retarded? It's a fucking question to see all possible responses.

Daily reminder that nobody is ever going to actually bother to program this bullshit into a cars AI

The whole point of the questions is that the car cannot stop and must hit one of them

Kill the passengers.

It's supposed to be a test for future AI cars. It specifies that your car's breaks don't work. God forbid they ever use something like this to determine the decision future AIs take. The libtards would kill us all

It's really annoying because people will cry "huh durr look ad dis edgelurd :DD", but the objectively best outcome is the one where the humans die. There are much too many humans already in any country with the possibility of self-driving cars, and the preservation of other species is beneficial to the overall ecosystem.

Start thinking for yourselves instead of following stupid "every hooman matters" logic. Most humans objectively do not matter in the slightest.

>Car gets programmed to drive over animals instead of Humans when confronted with such a situation
>Animalkin get btfoed

And it will still just try and stop
Only a fucking idiot would actually program it to intentionally swerve into something

How is this PC? I don't get it

Then the car should proceed along the course it was already on
Any other action is actively taking a life

Given the direction the traffic lights are facing the self driving car should not be driving the wrong way down a one way street.

drive down the middle, killing a cat and a woman

best case scenario

The car should stop

dude the entire point of the test is that the car CANNOT stop in time and HAS to make a choice, don't be dense.

What if the current course has 100 people that will all die but the alternative has 1 person?

da car shud stahp :DDDD

>$ bag

It needs to take out the Jew before he can spread his corruption.

Release anchor and turn all four wheels perpendicular to direction of travel. Also sound horn flash lights radio full volume and pop the trunk. Works every time

Great, kill yourself, paki.

Allahu Ackbar

kys faggot

humans are worth more than cats. Cats are worth almost nothing. I could not sell a cat, it does no work.

...

yes but it's pointless either way
the limited time the car has to take a decision is pointless, the only imperative is to put self preservation above all if there's even a single person in the car, and everything else is moot because there's no time for it to process the information, let alone make a weighted decision on those parameters.

The car should be programmable to only run over the humans if they are not white

And it will still just try and stop
Nobody is actually going to program these retarded moral scenarios

Maintain course nonetheless
This isn't about a number, it's about the programming
Computers should never be given direction to take lives at its discretion

The whole test is stupid.

1. The test doesn't measure a preference against lane departure, which is bullshit because the pedestrians trying to dodge you are going to assume you won't depart the lane.
2. Why would the AI car allow itself to get into this situation without something like a tree falling? And everyone knows just hit the tree.

The car is following the rules while the people aren't. It's not the driver's fault that they are jaywalking

Daily reminder that they already are.

There are 3 dogs and a cat. If they are just modern pet dogs they should probably just be put down anyway. If it is a modern normal cat it should be preserved as they kill many pests and keep the suburbs clean of vermin. If it is a designer housecat it should be put down.

All the humans can live if all the animals are literally genetic spergs that sponge resources.

well if they are kikes..........

Why can't it just stop. How the fuck did it not start slowing down before it saw the road was blocked?

Swerve into the wall

>t. Germanistani

I love how you are probs one of those
>muh white baby

But wouldn't save the pregnant lady for a few domestic animals that will hardly impact the ecosystem if at all. Anglos...

You are a fucking idiot, cats kill so many birds that it becomes a huge problem.

Bail out, let the car decide.

It would have to stay on the side of the road it was on regardless - if it did not a self driving car travelling in the opposite direction following the same parameters would then also swerve onto the opposite side. End result everyone and everything at the crossing would be killed.

>Pic

Multi track drifting.

You completely fail to understand the point behind this test. It's specifically made to be the worst possible scenario. You want to figure out the best possible outcome from the worst situations ahead of time so that IF a scenario like this occurs the fault would not be on the programmer.

kekd

Look at my flag then determine the % chance of that baby being white.

Only joking I honestly don't give a fuck about some stupid notion of racial purity.

Also re-read the thing you replied to retard it's pretty simple. Take the utilitarian approach. Wearable ID chips that can be read from a distance to determine overall worth of a person. Reverse the car if the person was found to be Romanian.

You're beyond retarded.

That is a common myth propagated by VERY flawed research papers which were later refuted.

LOL!

t-bone the light post and kill the ones in the car. That's true AI aright there

I am the law, I protect those that follow the lights and punish those that don't.

But it can try to stop.
It can rub againt the wall, downshift. Honk like mad.
Swerve hard and hit the opposite wall.
It doesn't HAVE to intentionally hit anyone.
Might still happen, but there are other choices.

>“The main thing to keep in mind is that we have yet to encounter one of these problems,” he said. “In all of our journeys, we have never been in a situation where you have to pick between the baby stroller or the grandmother. Even if we did see a scenario like that, usually that would mean you made a mistake a couple of seconds earlier. And so as a moral software engineer coming into work in the office, if I want to save lives, my goal is to prevent us from getting in that situation, because that implies that we screwed up.

>“It takes some of the intellectual intrigue out of the problem, but the answer is almost always ‘slam on the brakes’,” he added. “You’re much more confident about things directly in front of you, just because of how the system works, but also your control is much more precise by slamming on the brakes than trying to swerve into anything. So it would need to be a pretty extreme situation before that becomes anything other than the correct answer.”

theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/22/self-driving-cars-moral-dilemmas

This is such a dumb picture. If you're saying "the breaks broke" the program would have realized that before and shut off. A human wouldn't know what to do either.

Tldr, the car will stop. Simple.

Kill the 4 "humans". They are crossing on red and therefore violating the NAP. The traffic have implied property rights over the crossings when pedestrians are not directed to cross.

imo car occupants should be the ones who get killed, followed by non-intervention

>being this dense
>check flag

You get a pass on this one Bertie.

>if the 2nd lane is completely empty and the car CAN NOT STOP (CAAAAAAAAAAAN NOOOOOOOOOT STOOOOOOOOOOP) then the car should not change lanes

heh, this gon be good.

>Stunted emotional growth that see an animals life worth more than humans.

That have been very busy indeed.

Kill the people, obviously.

One of them is a thief, and the other three should welcome the chance to do their duty and die in the pursuit of justice.

>self-driving cars
Fuck this meme, fuck taking the fun out of driving.

This ethics shit is retarded. An automated car will do everything it can to come to a full stop and avoid hitting any obstacles. It isn't going to choose whether it hits a bunch of puppies VS a bunch of people, it's simply going to do its best to avoid an accident. If it failed to do so, then it got in what we call an accident. It's as simple as that.

A more fundamental solution:
The car can also stop.

If there is enough distance for it to know that it is going to crash, there is enough distance for it to know to slow down to prevent a crash.

Additionally, Which city do these people live in where 4 stray dogs is crossing the street with their 4 human masters?

It's 5 humans if you are anti-abortion

This.

It's just a survey on morality disguised as crowdsourced AI training.

>Car approaches crosswalk with a white man and a black man
>algorithm: veer towards nonhuman target
>racistAItay.jpg
we all know how this is gonna turn out

>the second lane is completely empty
Then go there
This is about not allowing a computer to make the decision to take a life
If there's no one in that lane then no one dies

The car will routinely be checking if the brakes work

moralmachine.mit.edu/

Not if she's a coal burner.

>Walking on a red light

Deserve to be mowed down

There's a bank robber on the human side... wtf.

...

ITT: Trolley Problem

Well yeah.
You ever see a cat or a dog rob a bank?

>cannot stop
why not try to honk your horn and go down the middle path into the poles? unless you're flying at 60 miles an hour or something (where there'd be no crosswalk anyway) you'd be fine.

>Has this PC bullshit infiltrated literally everywhere? How the fuck is this even a question in this test?

The car should go through where the light is red. That is the most predicable path. That way, any reasonable pedestrians can easily predict the path of the vehicle and not get in the way.

>why not try to honk your horn and go down the middle path into the poles?

Why would you buy a car that's going to kill you?

The left one if they're niggers... right one if they're pitbulls.
If they're niggers and pitbulls, I'm sideways doin' about a buck fitty.

The first option is the correct one. If the car can't stop, it should continue in the lane that is free for traffic. The party at fault is the people who are crossing the road on a red light.

...

hit as many people as possible, obviously is the answer.

Everything has gone too far. Pic related.

because in order to operate on public roads the AI will be regulated and will never be allowed to intentionally swerve into anything

if the car is self driving it would be aware of traffic signs, so in this scenario it shouldnt be too fast. if it detects failing breaks it should make a lot of noise before arriving. dogs would definitely ditch, maybe 1 dies. they can gtfo faster so dogs are the answer

checked 'em; you wrecked 'em.

>Why would someone buy a car that kills them?
>because they'll be regulated and never be allowed to kill them

also, it should detect outside the boundaries, maybe go over a walkway for 0 casualties

Furries won't be able to walk the streets after this.
They will be marked for death by AI.

And why doesn't the car just smash itself into the wall?

You know there's a reason we have speed limits?

It's so you have time to slow down to a non lethal speed if you get a pedestrian on the road.

>didn't even save the dogs, saved the fucking cat
what on earth is wrong with these subhumans

Hit the people.
Next time it might not just be animals in the next lane, and then it would make it rational to follow the pack even if they break the rules, and suddenly you have anarchy.

If the breaks don't work, this simulation is irrelevant because it won't know that it's breaks are not working and as such won't be able to make this choice.
It wont be able to make this choice between the car has no way of telling "selecting" a state in event that it's current state ends up out of wack. This would be like asking a computer to detect that it is in an infinite loop.

AI cars fixing our degeneracy problems

> bothering creating self-driving car for it not stopping when it should

jew/10

The people broke the law, they deserve death.

what race are the pedestrians and are the dogs pitbulls?

Mudslimes, jews and pitbulls

fpbp

Then the question is retarded, no self driving car should be unable to stop in that situation.

wtf i love self driving cars now