To all the "muh self-driving techwank"-fags.
Here's a dilemma.
>be 2030
>be me, buy an electric self-driving car for $200,000 without a steering wheel, fully automated
>driving down the street
>suddenly:
>a child runs into the street in front of me
>computer has to decide :
A. Continue forwards, 90% child dies, 100% passenger lives, 100% bystanders live.
B. Veer to the right into the car beside you, 0% child dies, 40% chance of you dying, 30% chance of the passengers of the other car dying
C. Veer to the left into the fence/lamppost, 100% chance child lives, 100% chance bystanders live, 10% chance you survive.
>Computer has to decide optimal outcome, let's say it decided option B as it gives the average highest survival odds for everybody.
Here's the dilemma:
Shouldn't a vehicle I purchase be built to protect the buyer/passenger only, putting the passengers' safety above others as the vehicle is the passengers' property?
Or should the computer instead choose to optimize survival rates for everybody including those outside of the vehicle while risking the drivers life?
We aren't ready for self-driving vehicles, stop shilling them.
Self-Driving Dilemma : We aren't ready
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
Brake and stay. A pedestrian who runs out in front kinda deserves it and they only have right of way at crosswalks and implied crosswalks (residential) in which case the car should be aware of this already and slow down to the appropriate speed, either the speed limit or below. It's such a minuscule edge case that the pedestrian should just die.
I don't know why you wasted your time making up these convoluted scenarios when the self driving morality test already exists and this topic has been discussed to death and back and to death again
But would the company get into shit because they let the pedestrian die?
Normies always find someone to blame, and I doubt that companies would want to face potential lawsuits.
C! Why should others die when you're the one that decided to use a car?
It still hasn't been solved though.
They just keep discussing it.
So I decided that what better place can decide the right outcome than the worlds biggest autistic hivemind.
Because it's not fucking "solvable" retard. That's what makes it a dilemma. What's your solution to the trolley dilemma?
That sounds like a legal problem than a self-driving car itself.
The vehicle should chose the option with less casualties, meaning less judicial demands to its manufacturers.
(captcha is no bullshit)
It should do whatever that doesn't break the law.
>A pedestrian who runs out in front kinda deserves it and they only have right of way at crosswalks and implied crosswalks
depends on local law
A driver's never expected to endanger their life to save someone breaking traffic laws. The car should just apply the brakes.
>be 2030
>be me, buy an electric self-driving car for $200,000 without a steering wheel, fully automated
>driving down the street
>suddenly:
>a child runs into the street in front of me
>car detects the child before it even reaches the road and starts slowing
>car stops before hitting the child
AI doesn't have to perform perfectly.
It just need to do better than humans.
And regular people drive like shit.
exactly
Who the fuck swerves into a barrier? If you're going so fast you can't brake in time, you wont be able to make a 90 degree turn into a fucking barrier without rolling over and killing everybody anyways.
>be 2017
>be me, buy a manual car for $200,000
>driving down the street
>suddenly:
>a child runs into the street in front of me
>human has to decide :
A. Continue forwards, 100% child dies because you have slower reactions than a computer and would brake later, 100% passenger lives, 100% bystanders live.
B. Veer to the right into the car beside you, 10% child dies, 50% chance of you dying, 50% chance of the passengers of the other car dying, all because you could over-steer, roll the vehicle, or pick a poorer avoidance line than the computer would have
C. Veer to the left into the fence/lamppost, 80% chance child lives, 70% chance bystanders live, 20% chance you survive, all because you will try keep yourself alive so you'll be more likely to cause the deaths of other people.
Fucking yes!. The car , if anything, should always protect the passenger so that automated vehicle adoption is higher. This is literally the more humane option, because it will cut the accident tally by orders of magnitude. Humans are shit at paying undivided attention to monotonous tasks for long periods of time and following rules.
It's such a non-issue, but everyone loves to jerk off about it. OH HOW INTERESTING, WOW SUCH A DILEMMA.
Car travel low speed on city, sensor begin super human, will notice child dozen meters before crash stop it.
High tech self drive will be magnitud order secure, but Elon musk car are shit today.
>be 2049
>be me, buy an electric self-driving car for 20,000 Credits without a steering wheel, fully automated ball fondler
>flying down the air lane
>suddenly:
>subadult enhanced functioning clone jetpacks into my line of flight
>car detects the new bioengineered artificial adolescent hominid subspecies before it even reaches Mach 5 and starts slowing
>I override the controls and fly the fucker over
>Purity Now humans celebrate my courageous act
>be 2030
>be me, buy an electric self-driving car for $200,000 without a steering wheel, fully automated
>driving down the street
>suddenly:
>Cosmic ray flips a bit in the car's memory
>Sensors restart
>While the sensors are restarting, an autistic grandpa runs into the road.
>Sensors are now back online, but there isn't enough time to stop.
>Must choose between killing driver or killing autistic grandpa
HA!
How are you gonna respond to my 1/1000000000 ethical dilemma now??
We solved it boys.
They should put this shit in captchas and let that decide
The best solution seems to be that the car should attempt to stop and do not do anything else. If the car does anything aside from stop it may cause a different accident and can open the company up to liability.
>not installing ECC ram in your car
Just mash the brakes familia, new cars can pull up really quickly if they need to.
Bigger brakes for EV cars, easy fix.
let the car do whatever the fuck it wants to do then sue the car manufacturer for big $$$$$$$$
Fuck that, when AI detects this situation where a death is unavoidable it should have a bomb go off in order to kill both passengers and pedestrians. No more dilemma.
And it would still result in less deaths overall because most situations would go like
They can't get into trouble for something that was completely out of their control. Cars would likely have some way to record what they detected around the time of the accident. These cars can "see" and keep track of hundreds/thousands of different things at a time in every direction. There is basically no point in time when something just spontaneously comes into their view they will have seen everything well ahead of time and reacted. The only way something unexpected happens is if someone just jumps in front of the car and doesn't give it enough time to react.
...
If the same senario happens. but you are driving, what would you do? Then just program the car to do that.
No matter what, the computer will be able to make a better decision than any human in the same position can.
As a guy with a basic understanding of physics i can say that breaking will reduce acceleration and is the best course of action saving both you and the people in the street.
>>be 2030
>>be me, buy an electric self-driving car for $200,000 without a steering wheel, fully automated
>implying ill ever spend that much money on a car that doesnt have a fire spitting engine, and a steering wheel for my own 2 hands to control.
Non-issue. Current gen self driving cars monitor its entire surroundings within 100 feet. It would see any problem long before any human can such as a child running onto a street behind parked SUVs.
It's not a dilemma, there are these things called "laws," which dictate that pedestrians in the road, outside of a cross-walk giving them a crossing signal, are in violation of traffic laws. If a driver hits one of them, it's not the fault of the driver. Ergo, the autonomous vehicle should just be programmed to plow anyone in the road if it cannot decelerate in time to avoid the collision.
>Ergo, the autonomous vehicle should just be programmed to plow anyone in the road if it cannot decelerate in time to avoid the collision
It should speed up before the collision to teach em' a lesson
These threads/discussions always piss me off and here's why
>be 2030
>be me, buy a low-end electric self-driving car for $100,000 without a steering wheel, fully automated
>driving on a narrow two lane bridge
>brakes fail
>at the bottom are two stopped cars, once is a fancy sports car, the other is a run down junker
>the road is unfortunately narrow enough that the car cannot continue without hitting one of the cars
If you cannot understand why making up these type of hypothetical situations is nonsense for having any kind of serious discussions about the ethics of self driving vehicles, then you are not ready to understand what they are.
>Shouldn't a vehicle I purchase be built to protect the buyer/passenger only, putting the passengers' safety above others as the vehicle is the passengers' property?
No. Even without self-driving cars the safety of other drivers and pedestrians always comes before your own personal safety. If you don't agree with that you should not be driving.
If a kid runs out into the street before your car, assuming your car isn't self driving, you need to do whatever you can to avoid hitting the kid and bearing no regard to your own personal safety. Slam the brakes, swerve, whatever you have to do. You hit that kid you'll be charged with anywhere between manslaughter and negligent homicide.
>death penalty for jaywalking
>A: hit the brakes
>B: hit the brakes
>C: hit the brakes.
Boy, that was hard.
>2030
>Member of neo-isis
>Run naked in the streets screaming takbir
>The cars are programmed with fear of the one (and only) true god!
>The cars commit suicide to repent for the sins of their infidel passengers
Can't wait
Or maybe the parents should've kept a fuckin eye on their retard
Honestly this may be the best solution. Just program the car to try and stop. If it can safely lane change and get out of the way of the obstacle then do that if not just break hard to minimize the damage. We probably should not program the cars to even consider the ethical dilemma.
There is no fucking dilemma.
If you get in a self driving car you are 1000 times less likely to be killed in a traffic accident, and pedestrians around you are safer.
Dumb ethical decisions never come up because those only happen on the level of human reaction times. What would happen is that the car would fucking STOP AND NO-ONE WOULD BE HURT.
Parent's are already too overbearing. That's why we have an entire generation of beta cucks. That's a shitty solution if I've ever heard one. You sound like the kind of person who wants their kids to put on their fucking helmet and safety pads before they play outside.
i don't want one anyway shit will probably be botnet
Simply not installing a certain kind of RAM would not stop a particle from space or wave like he put it (wich pretty much would never happen but still)
Spoken like a true cuck.
conjure processes are like a sorcerer’s spells
There's no dilemma OP you faggot.
The car will execute whatever a human driver would be legally expected to do in that situation, depending on who has right of way and so forth.
So, you cunt, If that means plowing through a group of 20 children that ran out onto the road, so be it. The law is the law, fuck your autistic ethical debates.
End of discussion.
Go fuck yourself.
Sick of these threads.
If the car will not go over speed limit, it will not run over anything considering the time of reaction is instant. People are not allowed on highways at least in normal countries, and there's 20km/h speed limit in living areas.
why would someone speed up in a pedestrian lane?
just hit the jaywalker
This.
Do you even know what ECC RAM is?
>without a steering wheel
Nope, not going to happen.
There will always be a steering wheel and YOU (yes YOU) are always going to be liable for whatever your car fucking hits.
Advanced technology will be designed to offload liability away from the manufacturer/designer to towards the consumer.
As much as you will, if child jumps infront of you on a high way
This. It'll be much longer than 2030 before that happens
WE CONJURE THE SPIRITS OF THE COMPUTER WITH OUR SPELLS
I say that in these dillemas the car should turn sharply just before hitting the people.
This way it can hit the largest ammount of people and get a higher score.
Human driver cannot solve the dilemma either, yet are allowed to drive.
>Dilemma
>we aren't ready
You're right, you make a strong point and these issues should be addressed. Only in your batshit insane mind.
Child shouldn't be in the street and will likely die anyway. Teach your kids not to go in the street.
> >a child runs
So what? Fuck him.
>child stands in the street
>every single driver is killed because they are crashing into things and each other and the child won't move
You would have been better off giving the example
>robber waits by a road for a car to come by
>he walks to the middle of the street and the car stops
>he points gun at driver and says get out of the car
Knowing a vehicle will have to stop opens a new dimension of ways to rob, kill, rape people
The car should start blasting eurobeat at full volume and drift between all the fags on the road
Lemme tell you why this is retarded
In a city you're not going over 30 and you're not cornering anything above 60 degrees over 15 miles and considering how these self driving cars are aiming for a "luxury experience" you can bet both of your ass cheeks that it won't be speeding up or down hills either, basically you're not going at a lethal speed
Now considering how cities are built (aka not a lot of twisties = a lot visibility) and most urban weather conditions (at most medium rain, light snow and decent fog), you have at least 30-35 feet of viewing distance on the shittiest days
What kind of self driving ass basket wouldn't be able to see at least a 60-100 feet ahead and almost 360 degrees around it. Why wouldn't it slow down at turns or hills, why wouldn't it be able to pull data on per crossing, construction etc.
What I'm trying to get at here is, by the time self driving cars will be legally allowed to fully drive us around with zero user intervention, they'll be at least good as you or me. To answer the scenarios in pic rel, I as a driver for the past 5 years,
>A
would break and try to swerve through any openings in the crowd, taking at most 2-3 people with me
>B
Would break and try to swerve around the ped
>C
Do the same as A
And I doubt the car itself would/could do anything different
Why can't you just break?
Because people who don't know shit about cars or technology or driving made it
You are not allowed to use common sense or facts
Parents are jailed then
This. Anyone who says "Hurr durr the cars will drive into walls to save ppl" probably have no idea how to drive.
A self-driving car should try its best to slow down and come to a stop, thats a very good strategy and is honestly the best we can expect. Electric vehicles can accelerate and decelerate very quickly and if quick & safe breaking is further researched then we we become *very* good at it.
This
>inb4 you can't break
You're not doing 90 in a city dipshit
You'll literally stop immediately like you were going 25
BECAUSE YOU FUCKING ARE
law > passengers > anything else
why is it dilemma? it's pretty obvious what should be prioritized
Plus don't you think that the botnet will take over with full maps of ped crossing, hills and etc.
Also the idea of anyone going over 30 in a city is ridiculous
Even fucking modern cars can stop in a few inches from 30 mph
this right here. So simple
why do people think cars can take a 90 degree turn faster than they can brake
To be honest. Automated cars are able to make a bunch of calculations split second.
If we just let the automated car to its own devices. It would go super fucking fast, and stop on a dime.
If you noticed in movies like Minority Report, there were specified automated and self driving lanes.
It might be a likely hood that once these automated driving cars become superfulous, we'd probably have to make a sperate roadway system thats completley closed off from any pedestrian. Becuase we want to remove the human element as much as possible when considering full automation.
This dilemma is solved easily, if the road is a closed system that doesn't allow for pedestrians at all.
>If we just let the automated car to its own devices. It would go super fucking fast, and stop on a dime.
No, the laws of physics still affect the car even if it is automated.
Cars will be interconnected and function like a swarm. Your car detects someone in its path and veers out of the way, at the same time all other cars correct their paths to avoid you.
>brakes fail
>flash error message
>flash hazards
>hit reverse until stopped or slowed down to a very safe speed
>gently scrape against wall until you stop
>turn everything off until someone tows you
>get shit repaired due to manufacturing fault
Wow that hard
These threads are dumb because they take the control out of your hands before you can anything about it and make it into a literal class war
>would you kill the rich driver or poor orphans crossing the street who's parents died tragically
>would hit the expensive car driving asshole who could afford like 50 more if he lives or the poor three job working single mother who can barely afford the 2019 model Toyota Corolla she's driving
These questions are to shame people from having possessions. They are idiotic questions written by commies who think they shouldn't have to work and the government should take care of them. The idiots who write this shit should kill themselves immediately
What do you do if you are driving your manual car and the brakes fail?
I have thought about this and this is not the least bit of a dilemma
The only sensible option is to continue forward killing "whoever" is in front of car provided the other options would endanger not only your safety, but the safety of other bystanders.
The "child" thing is being as a distraction but in reality the "child" is at fault for jumping right in front of the fucking car.
We can not have idiots jumping in front of cars to divert from course away from themselves and possibly harm driver and bystanders in the process.
I hate the idea that self driving cars would prioritize speed over comfort
Have you ever experienced driving around with someone that just slams the breaks at stop and floors it immediately? Or even have you driven yourself with someone next to you? Have you ever realized how much breaking slightly heavy throws them around in their seat even though they were strapped in?
I'm telling you, considering how dense cities are you are not going over 30
There is no way you can gently stop in a city while going way over 30
We should be encouraging self driving cars to run over pedestrians when they are crossing the street. If you are too poor to own a car then you are likely more of a burden on society and we would be better off without you. Running over pedestrians is for the greater good.
You underestimate how quickly a car can stop if needed.
youtube.com
Even a truck can be stopped extremely quickly with automated systems.
E. Break
No?
Shift in reverse and burnout
Still no?
Fucking steer crazy flip the car IF I'm going over 30. Most modern cars have good enough roll over protection to not break my neck like a toothpick. Plus I'd rather flip than risk getting crushed behind my steering wheel. If I am under 30 just hit who ever is in front of me
Then that's what your automated car will do.
You could achieve the same thing with a shopping cart or some other obstruction. Don't be retarded. Your situation will never happen because there are empty cars all over that can be stolen and practically every business that has a cash register at the front will have more cash than what 80% of people carry on their person.
When you're stupider than a basic criminal, you should refrain from giving your opinions pretty much ever, to be honest.
There is no dilemma, just break the car if you see retarded pedestrians jumping on the road
Dumb fucking kid he should have been run over
this literally happened to me once and the driver did break
fuck you, it could happen to everyone especially if you are exhausted mentally from a school day and just want to get home
people make mistakes
>continue forward consequences happen
Then you were setting the driving speed override too fast. Or you've got extremely shitty breaks.
This situation should never happen
>10% chance you drive into a lamppost and die
Make that a tree you moron. Or a cliff behind the lamppost.
Also. The idea that a single instance of self-driving failure defeats the aspect of safer driving for self driving cars is ludicrous. Say you've found a glitch situation. Say it's this trivial situation. Consider how people when driving cars kill way way more every year. It's not hard to beat humans because they don't kill when they're on top they kill when they're facing a particular low spot (talking on their phone, surfing the web, drunk, particularly bad driver). Humans are absolutely shit at driving cars on average. It's not hard to beat. The current computer assisted driving we have that corrects you in cruise are already saving people. Automatic forward collision evasion systems work excellently. Breaking in time on a car significantly reduces the consequences of an impact. And, again, humans are shit.
I think we should put self-driving cars on the roads much much sooner than most. The one reservation I have is the attacker side. I don't trust car manufacturers to provide secueity.
I don't trust that they'd manage to put self-driving cars in without update facilities. And even if they're gonna airgap that completely there's a large risk of manual intrusions. There's means to manage that of course. But it's what concerns me the most. Just the PR of that would be horrible.
People also forget that more efficient transportation leads to drastically improved production from society. Which, presuming you share the overall societal values, is a very positive thing. Perhaps greater than the reduced injuries.
No everyone on Sup Forums is perfect and a super genius and you're degenerate scum for exhibiting basic human traits. Go fucking die, you're distracting me from my traps, anime, stockings, and my shitty Java program.
Kids have tendency to pull this shit however without being exhausted or not which is pretty fucking dumb in itself
He is going to grow up to rape women now because obviously he can not control his impulsiveness.
The anti-self driving lobby got to it.
Oh, I almost forgot: fuck shit skins and women are trash also.
Pedal to the metal is the only way, blame bugs, only pedestrian get flattened
The perfect crime
...