...the moral dilemma of programming autonomous vehicles

[uumode]

Interesting, programme to sacrifice the driver to save the pedestrians?

https://www.theguardian.com/science...ve-the-lives-of-others?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

[Dave.tam]

Hmm, not sure there's anyone out there that would consciously drive into pedestrians, rather than try to avoid them. The same would work for AVs surely?

I guess the question gets more complicated when you consider that you're driving on a single track road with a sheer drop on either side. Then it's always a question of who do I save, but in every other situation, there is much less likelyhood that the passengers would be killed, than pedestrians, so in my mind, AVs should always try to avoid them.

Does that make sense?

In my mind it does lol not sure if I've communicated my opinion well though.

 

[markjay]

I think the issue will be in actually making a car that will be clever enough to make such a complex judgment.

- How many pedestrians will get hit, and what will be the severity of the injuries?

- How many alternatives are there to hitting the pedestrians? What evasive action options are available?

- How many occupants are there in the car, how many of them will be injures, and what will be the severity of their injuries - for each of the available alternatives?

The next step would be the easy one - provide scoring for each injury then choose the optimal option with the lowest score - which might not be one or the other - e.g. the car might decide that the optimal result (lowest overall injury score) will be achieved by swerving slightly and hitting the pedestrians at the fringe of the group etc.

In this case we need to consider that this is not a moral dilemma for the driver - but for us all. How would you feel if a car decided to swerve right into you because this way it will cause less damage overall than by hitting the people standing right in front of it?

But - the first part is a very very complex equation for any computer.... and that's even before adding qualitative values for the people involved - e.g. a young pregnant woman or a child will score higher than an OAP....

So an interesting morel issue, yes, but it will not be a practical issue any time soon - computers just cant do that (yet).

 

[grober]

To be honest its total ********. Lets get real- what about the autonomous family car complete with 2 kiddies in the back and the wife in the front passenger seat. 2 young guys in their twenties out on the raz [ high on drink or drugs] lurch out in front of the car. What's the "moral decision" now? preserve the lives of 2 people who put themselves in harms way against 4 innocent parties? And that's the problem virtually every situation will require a unique nuanced decision - almost impossible to programme for. Reductio ad absurdum seems apposite.

 

[Dave.tam]

I still think that with regard to the 'decent family' in the car, and the two degenerate peds, the likelihood of passengers being injured in 99% of circs would be minimal, if not non existent, so the car would always avoid the peds.

Obviously this is always hypothetical.

 

[markjay]

I can see an Agatha Christie plot.... car swerves to avoid pedestrian, and kills the male driver... it then turned out that the 'pedestrian' was in fact the daughter of a woman who killed herself 20 years ago after being deceived by the man (car's driver), and it was in fact a carefully planned murder. She works for Google and knew how the car will behave in such circumstances. Curtains.

 

[Dave.tam]

It must be fun in that head of yours!

 

[grober]

Here's a scenario autonomous cars are compulsory programmed to avoid colliding with pedestrians. Cut to a main road close to a sink estate full of young teenagers with "issues" Wot we goin to do tonight bruv there's f*** all on tele. I know we is going down the high street to see how many cars we can crash init! then we is going to post the video on ar*e book wicked!

 

[markjay]

I can see an Agatha Christie plot.... car swerves to avoid pedestrian, and kills the male driver... it then turned out that the 'pedestrian' was in fact the daughter of a woman who killed herself 20 years ago after being deceived by the man (car's driver), and it was in fact a carefully planned murder. She works for Google and knew how the car will behave in such circumstances. Curtains.

It must be fun in that head of yours!

There's more

....she stuffed a pillow under the front of her blouse to make the car think she was pregnant...

etc....

 

[markjay]

Here's a scenario autonomous cars are compulsory programmed to avoid colliding with pedestrians. Cut to a main road close to a sink estate full of young teenagers with "issues" Wot we goin to do tonight bruv there's f*** all on tele. I know we is going down the high street to see how many cars we can crash init! then we is going to post the video on ar*e book wicked!

Or... Buy on eBay an ECU flash with illegal mod.... kill the pedestrian instead of swerving...

 

[Dave.tam]

There's more

....she stuffed a pillow under the front of her blouse to make the car think she was pregnant...

etc....

You don't give said car enough credit! It uses IR technology, decides that the female is in fact trying to deceive it, and purposefully targets her, then hunts down her close family and friends

iRobot all over again lol

 

[grober]

this possibly give rise to a scenario quite close to the emissions regulations where its left to each manufacturer to implement such regulations on the vehicles they manufacture. Couple that to post purchase "reprogramming/reprioritising" and the scope for a wide variety of pedestrain v car occupants prioritising is vast. The survey in that article which indicated owners wanted cars that protected them as a priority is in fact pretty much in line with current buying patterns where buyers take account of crash safety ratings and indeed buy bigger heavier vehicles such as SUV's because they perceive they offer better crash protection for their families when they can afford it.

 

[markjay]

You don't give said car enough credit! It uses IR technology, decides that the female is in fact trying to deceive it, and purposefully targets her, then hunts down her close family and friends

iRobot all over again lol

OK... so... the murderer pushes a (real) pregnant woman who just happens to be standing nearby into the path of the speeding car...

 

[Bellow]

Couple that to post purchase "reprogramming/reprioritising" and the scope for a wide variety of pedestrain v car occupants prioritising is vast..

I'm having mine remapped to only hit immigrants. Stuart is having his done to target the unemployed.

 

[Stratman]

Who is going to buy a car knowing it will sacrifice its owner to save a stranger?

 

[oldguy57]

I'm having mine remapped to only hit immigrants. Stuart is having his done to target the unemployed.

I'm an immigrant (from Yorkshire) and unemployed - so do I get hit twice?

 

[markjay]

I'm having mine remapped to only hit immigrants. Stuart is having his done to target the unemployed.

Beware - your cars might collide on target.

 

[Bellow]

I'm an immigrant (from Yorkshire) and unemployed - so do I get hit twice?

Absolutely! They'l be like busses. Along comes one. Then another.

 

[camerafodder]

I'm buying one of these: