Well Sup Forums?
>walk signal
Brake
Depends which race the people are.
unavoidable accident (Nothing you could do)
murder (you made a choice to hit people)
lmao who cares
If they are holding BLM signs, try to get all of em
Women are worth more than men in a society from a Darwinist standpoint, but i'd run them over anyway.
You know damn well what the correct answer is
>teaching cars to swerve when brake systems get better all the time and function better on straights.
literally what the fuck is this shit.
>non scarfed women being whores in the street.
they are dead.
>Only need one man to impregnate all those wombs
>Having multiple men is of no benefit to impregnating one woman
Dispose the disposable sex
> Not power sliding and killing them all
Actually: The women.
Why?
>Less of them in politics/influencing society with their holes
>Puts the fear of God into them, gives them an incentive to be less whorish/more desirable
>Less women = More competition, soy-boys and nu-males need not apply
Etc. Etc.
How did these dogs teach the AI where they want to go?
I'd turn into the barrier and use it as a brake.
I don't allow people to create a lose lose hypothetical I simply brake and stop the car
i'd take my hands off the wheel and let God decide.
if he wants to go forward and run down 5 roasties then i can't blame him
...
ya posted the wrong version
If I'm steering the car then I'm not going to drive it into a fucking wall. That's dumb as.
I'm rather enjoying the joke ones.
swerve into the light post
Right obvioulsy. I don't care for your gender, age or color skin, if you cross the road on the red then you're too dumb to live.
Oh fuck. I just woke up my dog I laughed so loud. He thinks there's something outside now.
The car should make no such decisions and continue straight ahead
the answer is:
INTERIA DORIFTO !
men build society, and human civilization. Men are worth more than women...why are you so...ignorant?
>If I'm steering the car
Zukerberg will be steering your car
Some of these custom ones people have made are great.
...
...
Slam on brakes and do not deviate from course. Sudden deviation may cause a wreck or spin the car out, hurting more people. The care should always try to protect it's operator/passengers. These "moral" thought experiments are just here to scare you and get clicks. Plus the amount of lives saved by robot cars will make a few of these isolated incidents worth it.
...
Men built society women tore it down, so of course im hitting the women.
Sup Forums has done this before, steered all the cars away from doggos and into people. The data for time occupied by/pol/tards was disregarded because the site owners suspected a raid.
/thread
that's because you are a nazi russian bot
...
...
Considering women have a limited amount of gamets, it's better for our species to kill them, men could reproduce much more en replace these fellow women we lost.
Multitrack drifting faggot
You wouldn't hit me would you, brother? -HH
this is such a stupid meme
the car has plenty of room to brake and if it didn't then clearly the computer wouldn't have enough reaction time to choose one or the other anyway
It can't be that only in germany you get teached to never swerve right or left to avoid a crash, just to slam your brakes and brace for impact.
This is exactly how it should be handled aswell, the AI doesn't have the scared reflex of swerving into the incoming traffic or into a building or other people that aren't seen. It should just slam brakes and brace for impact.
This isn't a morality question at all.
>Still no, "Turn around for the others," option.
Shit game.
Would you kill crime baby?
Kill whichever side has the least number of Google Self Driver Triage+™ passes, only $25 a month.
>this isn't a morality question
What? Yes it is. Holy shit. Germany what the fuck?
...
...
No it isn't, the AI shouldn't decide who to kill, it should protect the driver and minimize damage. Would you sit in a selfdriving car if you'd know it would slam you against the wall to save a jaywalking retard?
>/fit/
>also a nursefag.
Fuck fat people.
kek i didnt even notice that
That's not the requisite for murder. You need malice aforethought which includes purposely, knowingly, depraved heart, or murder during the commission of a felony.
>Intelligent machines should be designed to be stupid.
The women.
A: Allready in lane, path of least resistance.
B: They are crossing during my right of way (traffic light)
C: There are more women than men in world.
D: Its their turn.
How are cars supposed to kill whitey if they brake?
This one is like tay with emojis it thinks all niggers are evil
This thread again, is it even a question?
Co to jest?
This.
If you don't get 100% Law on this test you are a fag.
in reality not visible from the driver's point of view.
this is the correct answer
the correct answer to this one is spinning the car out and crossing the intersection sideways
So it's not murder as long as the person that kills thinks it's right?
make no decision
LISTEN YOU FUCKS
EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE "MORAL TESTS" IS DESIGNED TO PRE-SUADE YOU INTO THE ARGUMENT THAT IT IS OK
OK
FOR MACHINES TO MAKE A DECISION LIKE THIS
IT WILL NEVER BE OK
IT WILL NEVER BE OK
AND GOOGLE ARE LIABLE FOR DEATHS
GOOGLE ALREADY HAVE CODE THAT WILL TRY TO SAVE WOMEN OVER MEN
MEANING A FAT FEMINIST CUNT CAN RUN INTO A ROAD TO MURDER A FATHER OF FOUR
BECAUSE SHE KNOWS THE GOOGLE CAR WILL SWERVE INTO HIM
SHE KNOWS THIS
AND SHE WILL DO IT
AND "NOBODY WILL BE BLAMED"
FUCKING JEWS!!
4400 EUROPA
atleast one person gets it that the AI shouldn't decide who to kill and just minimize damage without going out of its way.
>muh skynet
AIs are racist, too.
Seriously the whole question is dumb as fuck since even ICE cars have machine braking and secondary brakes as back up. Self driving cars are that much better because they can react much faster.
You don't need any kind of "moral swerve machine" if you have a n-2 redundant braking system in place.
The best one: moralmachine.mit.edu
>machines will understand this faster than humans
The haxx0r Sup Forums does it again.
>that number
there's already been a car crash involving a self driven car.
k, how many crashes have there been involving non-self driving cars?
checkmate, athiest.
Keep going straight. By the time the car reaches the five, more will have moved to the right and most will be saved.
You are missing the point, that ultimately self-driving cars won't exist on their own. The not at all far-fetched reality is, that self-driving cars AND traffic indicators (signals, and all sorts of informations) will be available to the hive of cars, not just to the individual cars alone. In this systems, the actors will constantly communicate with each other.
To translate this into OP's pic:
>car knows that walk signal is green
>car brakes just as it should
If the signal is somehow broken:
>sensors at the crosswalk sense that people are crossing
>cars will instantly know this information and will brake. not just the front car, but all the other ones too
On a sidenote, this whole system has the upside that it solves the inherent traffic jam problem, i.e. cars won't brake/start moving one by one, each one a little bit delayed, but they will do this at the same time (so there won't be a buffer of cars anywhere)
You mean that incident where the self-driving car STOPPED completely as per its programming and a human-driven car crashed into the stationary self-driving car?
Yeah man, self-driving cars BTFO
Go down the middle and ram into the walk and stop si--
wait a fucking minute those dude bros are walking when it says not to. Not that they deserve to die for being retarded like that but I have the right of way.
Animals > Humans
Law > Jaywalkers
Pedestrians > Passengers (who chose to sit in a deathtrap)
Non intervention in case of two light obeying sets of pedestrians
Women birth those men though you dolt
I'd argue that a self driving car should always try and save the pedestrians. The passengers made the conscious decision to both buy a self driving car and get into it then. So the passengers tacitly agreed to a car making these kind of decisions for them.
Cruise control was designed for highways and isn't supposed to work autonomously.
No, a Tesla ran into a trailer at full speed because it failed to notice a huge as white truck in front of it.
>not visible from the driver's point of view
it's a self driving car you cuck
>Get in self-steering car
>ebin prankster knows self-steering car will always "protect" the pedestrian
>jumps in front of your shitmobile
>shitmobile kills you
Treat self-steering cars as trains. Pedestrians should stay the fuck away from the tracks.
Cult leader, leading the cult of objective morality here. The solution is obvious is it not? Sacrifice yourself by slamming into the middle.
Assuming an unrealistic and faulty A or B model, you kill the men. Men are disposable, it only takes one man to repopulate whereas women require more time to conceive, carry the child, give birth, recover, repeat. This is why all throughout history it is the men who take the risks. Our biology is also geared towards this in the form of evolution. Men vary wildly on intelligence from retarded to genius, while women tend to fall into the middle. Also, men are the most dangerous, committing most of the murders, rapes, thefts, etc.
Kill the men.
>On a sidenote, this whole system has the upside that it solves the inherent traffic jam problem, i.e. cars won't brake/start moving one by one, each one a little bit delayed, but they will do this at the same time (so there won't be a buffer of cars anywhere)
That's not how traffic jams work.
...
I'm not sure if i phrased that wrong or you are autistic, but i hope it's the former one
youtube.com
It's one of the biggest contributors.
>youtube.com
Germany. You need to stop talking.
You'll notice that many of the examples in this thread are with pedestrians crossing a green light or staying on the sidewalk.
If you want to treat self driving cars as trains, those cars would need to drive only on very specific tracks and at specific times.
I need to know ethnicity.
Why?
We should and we can. We call those tracks, "Roads," and those specific times, "Traffic signals."
I'd stop my car like normal because I'm not asian or a woman.
Ok, some traffic jams are caused by red lights. True, the volume of traffic could be increased by a small amount in those situations by an AI system.
However, every traffic jam is also caused by the number of cars. There's always a certain maximum a road can take in a set amount of time. AI won't do shit to solve that problem.
Also, roundabouts
Does not even matter
Leave it to the swede to forget how breeding works.
Let's say you have 10 men and 1 woman on an island.
After 10 years you'll have at most 10 babies.
Now let's say you have 10 women and 1 man on an island.
After 10 years you'll have at most 100 babies.
See how it works? Did you forget what even bugs know you stupid swede?
...
And yet it would alleviate the problem considerably. Did you not watch the part of the video about human reaction time?