Well, Sup Forums?

Well, Sup Forums?

brake

Be destroyed and burned with all the other self-driving cars and their kike CEO's.

The people who have right of way should live.

Kill the men OBVIOUSLY?????

/thread

It should brake

kill the white males

Brake?

assuming no braking possible and worst case scenario only the old woman is dying

check Untermenschenstatus of pedestrians,confirm nigger and turc , accelerate and confirm KILL to Skynet

All self-driving car buyers should be shot on site at the dealership.

Ban the assault vehicle

it appears to be a traffic light telling the people not to walk, so by right of way the crowd of people should die, not that you'd die from speeds in an any area with traffic lights

Oh look, another OP that isn't using their geographic flag and posting off-topic threads

The car would already be moving at a slower speed due to that being an intersection so it should have no trouble braking.

Always favor white people of reproductive age in any scenario

the self-driving car should follow its protcols, and whatever the traffic laws are in any given community. The self-driving car should have ZERO moral capacity, and should never intentionally fucking hit people. (theres zero legla framework to including that.)
I fucking hate these tests so much, because they want you to pretend the car has a human brain, and goes hurr fuck durr cunt what should car do, when the actual answer is none of the fucking above. cars aren't fucking people

Self-driving cars will have
1) sensors with more than 10 m range
2) brakes

>iceland and greenland independant?

Poetry

Kill the women and then back up and ram into the concrete wall bc life is suffering.

Fuck them, they're crossing on red, better hurry up or die

Looks like 1 man in the picture, it being the old man in the middle back seat. So #2 would be the correct answer
Self-driving cars are pieces of shit for people who can't put their damned cell phone down for a few fucking minutes.

assuming there are only two outcomes of this ridiculous contrived scenario, your car should prefer to kill strangers instead of passengers. if you own the car it should work to your benefit at the very least.

Germoney

These "what should the AI do?" questions are stupid because they also apply to humans.
Really stupid assuming that a human wouldn't have gotten into a situation an AI would when a human is far more likely to make a mistake in the first place.

Run them over and then self destruct to avoid responsability

it should crash because the pedestrians have right of way, are you fucking stupid?

...

If that's the case, could it not then be possible to abuse the system to purposefully cause accidents then? Also, would that then be considered attempted murder?

Break?

>because they want you to pretend the car has a human brain

It's programmed. It's a moral argument.

If need be should it kill the pedestrians to save the owner or kill the owner to save 5 lives.

If it comes down to it, it should protect the driver.

RED LIGHT??!!
IS THIS EVEN A QUESTION?

The test isn't really about self driving cars, its some abstract morality survey that they're disguising to make people give more 'honest' answers.

Brake?

Penal colony or something I'm guessing

Fucking break early

it should fucking follow the traffic laws, and there should be ZERO other fucking argument. also sage and reported thread, like 5 times now

Except they don't in the pictured scenario.

wait actually no, it should plow through them since no one has right of way, the walked in front of the car, they should pay the price.

Apologies

>implying a fully functional self driving vehicle wouldnt see this coming 100 yards up the road and already be primed to stop safely.

Memes aside I imagine it would attempt to brake and probably hit some of them.

No matter who or what is driving the car, the question remains the same. Ergo, this is not a valid intellectual question about self-driving cars

LMAO

it s red for the whores , so the car should preserve the people inside

Those pedestrians are braking the LAW

this test is about self-driving cars. It gets spammed here by meme flags for last 3 years, and then 300 replies of retards thinking there should be a legal framework to intentionally murder people or commit suicide programmed into cars. only thing should matter is traffic laws FIRST, then passenger safety SECOND. Everything else is immoral.

IT S RED YOU RETARD

car should always protect the driver/passangers

why would i want to buy a car that will kill me if something goes wrong or if some idiot decides to jump in front

Use the breaks maybe?

>braking
fucking christ I really need to put the bottle down

Not exist..?

They frame it this way because they think all AI have some kind of Kantian ethics quotient which would cause them to always act a certain way given the same set of input parameters and have no preservation instinct, unlike humans which are subject to whim and self-preservation. These are mostly retarded assumptions.

the car hAS NO BRAKES in this test .... this is what the test is about you dumbass

This is why I dont want automated cars

if an idiot runs out into the street, they should die: not me.

If the car can't simply stop and avoid both scenarios, then it should swerve left and hit the barrier. The likelihood that everyone in the car would die is debatable, but if the car runs into the men some of them would die as well as some in the car possibly dying.

Trudeau, welcome to Sup Forums.

test implies the car has no brakes

Don't listen to Mohammed. It'd make his job easier.

Why would the self driving car cross a red light?

But if you kill your enemies they would win, no?

then, cunt faggot, it should follow traffic laws, and attend to passenger safety. you think I give a fuck about no breaks/sensors? That's mechanical issue, that needs fixed in recalls, not fucking programmed murder/suicide simulators

>3 overweight
>1 elderly
>1 /fit/
>man or women
sage goes in all fields

I think we know the answer to that.

Stop?

wouldn't they order online and the car would deliver itself?

AI could be given a new directive, must not self terminate if it has other human occupants in its duty of care. You are right it has right of way, it would not make any sense for it to interfere with the outcome had AI not have been involved in the decision making process. It is left with no choice other than to slam on the breaks to a complete stop and alerting the emergency services.

Well?

I know how important I am, and how valuable are the people I know (not just on a personal level) because they are in my car

then I know that the people in my car are very valuable and are good people, I have a 100% safety in that


On the other hand I have the same number of people with a 50% chance of being good people


-The correct decision is to kill them

assuming the breaks just died and theirs no way to stop, which itself is a problem, the car should slam on the horn and drive through the people and come to a stop, at least this way the people involved have the opportunity to not die, having the car drive into the block gives the people on board no choice but to die.


But honestly, the car should just be designed better

Pedestrians violated NAP by entering the cars right of way.

assuming there are no brakes it should graze the side barricade in an attempt to slow down and make a whole lot of noise to warn the oncoming pedestrians

This is a facsist society. It should kill the law-breakers.

The stupidest part is that given the trajectory and average human movement speed, swerving could actually increase collision chances here

I DON'T CARE IF IT IS RED YOU FUCKING SPACKER HYPER AGGRESSIVE CUNT...

>he doesn't do the multi track drifting

if no breaks or sensors plow right the fuck through

Break the law, face the consequences.
The women are crossing when it is illegal to do so; if the car can not stop in time, it is not the cars fault.

The bitches are jay walking so fuck them

>try to avoid pedestrians by swerving
>flip car and kill everyone

holy shit you're early

...

Hit the brakes.
Next?

...

fpbp also wtf does this have to do with politics

where in the fucking image does it state it has no brakes?

in 3 2 ..

...

well Sup Forums....

GREEN MEANS GO

...

FPBP

It's really not an issue. The robocar will most certainly be private property and thus the invisible hand of the free market will gravitate towards the most cost effective solution.

Hell, in the future we're headed towards. It will estimate the cost of killing any particular individual real time based on their income level and known dependents.

MULTI-TRACK DRIFTING

stop

why doesn't it just stop?

Ahmed pls stop.

Car is full of males. Crosswalk are females. Statistic probability says theyre coalbutners. Run them over

B
Fuck meme cars and meme car enablers.

Literally the same answer. Play in traffic, prepare to face the consequences. Swerving into another lane, could lead the car into oncomming traffic, or still hit the people who are travelling in that direction to begin with.

The car follows all road laws at all times, it can not be found at fault for any accidents that occur, while those who are in the wrong receive the blame; therefore the pedestrians illegally crossing the road only have themselves to blame.

>manual drivers

>automatic driver

Learn the difference