Posted on 06/24/2016 8:20:32 AM PDT by BenLurkin
Ejection seats.
I don’t think your self-driving car will enter a ghetto. It’ll be on some no-go list that you note in the system as you purchase the car. It’ll be like driving south through Birmingham, Alabama....it’ll ask you if you want to refuel 40 miles before or 40 miles after....but it’ll tell you that getting off the interstate in Birmingham is not possible.
“Dave.....what are you doing, Dave?
You’ve entered us in a demolition derby, Dave.
Perhaps you should get out and make sure the hood is latched, Dave.
Daisy, Daisy......”
All this proves is Karen Kaplan is an idiot and the article is not really about self-driving cars.
[ “The easiest question was whether a self-driving car with a single passenger should crash itself into a wall to avoid hitting a group of 10 pedestrians.”
Are the ‘pedestrians’ holding ball bats, tire irons, machetes, concrete blocks, bicycle chains, etc.? ]
What will it do if it runs into a “Murder of Muslims” in the road....
I think “Murder of Muslims” is a like a group of crows, What do you call a group of Muslims, I think “Murder of Muslims” is the most accurate descriptor...
But liberal logic would tell you that since everyone
is going 30 mph. it wouldn’t make any difference since
there would be no velocity inequality.
Technology this advanced could map out any trip with preferences and advisory. People might want to go to a dangerous neighborhood for any number of reasons. If an emergency suggested a dangerous neighborhood stop, the car could ask the rider for permission, warning about the trade-offs. Maybe a little hatch would open, a la James Bond, to give the passenger a gun.
What are the pedestrians doing in the roadway in the first place?
I’m supposed to sacrifice my life because some idiots decided to jaywalk? Don’t think so...
Susan Calvin: What happened to you?
Detective Del Spooner: Headed back to the station. Normal day, normal life. The driver of a semi fell asleep at the wheel. Average guy, wife and kids, working a double. *Not* the devil. The car he hit, the driver’s name was Harold Lloyd. Like the film star, but no relation. He was killed instantly. But his twelve-year-old was sitting in the passenger’s seat. Never really met her. Can’t forget her face, though. Sarah.
[fingering the necklace]
Detective Del Spooner: This was hers. She wanted to be a dentist. What the hell kind of twelve-year-old wants to be a dentist? Yeah, um... the truck smashed our cars together and pushed us into the river. You know, metal gets pretty pliable at those speeds. She’s pinned, I’m pinned, the water’s coming in. I’m a cop, so I know everybody’s dead. Just a few minutes until we figure that out. NS4 was passing by and jumped in the river.
NS4 Robots: [from flashback] You are in danger!
Detective Del Spooner: [from flashback] Save her!
NS4 Robots: [from flashback] You are in danger!
Detective Del Spooner: [from flashback] Save her! Save the girl!
Detective Del Spooner: But it didn’t. Saved me.
Susan Calvin: The robot’s brain is a difference engine. It’s reading vital signs. It must have done...
Detective Del Spooner: It did. I was the logical choice. It calculated that I had a 45% chance of survival. Sarah only had an 11% chance. That was somebody’s baby. 11% is more than enough. A human being would’ve known that. Robots,
[indicating his heart]
Detective Del Spooner: nothing here, just lights and clockwork. Go ahead, you trust ‘em if you want to.
Give me a break. If they decided to flout the rules of the road and step into traffic, then they made that choice, not me.
In real life, we can drive competently enough that jaywalkers are almost never a serious issue. Being mobbed in the street is a different story, but you’re talking jaywalkers here.
What do you want to use that break to do? Show more callousness?
Excellent.
And just what is going to mean for all those podunk towns who set up their speed traps to fund their coffers?
I say no.
I don’t think that we write an ethical algorithm that can make snap decisions in a fraction of a second deciding life or death.
I certainly don’t think it would be ethical to do so.
That was one of the Isaac Asimov robots, wasn’t it. It wouldn’t LET you sacrifice.
Well, the way the question is posed you only have the option of driving through them or killing yourself. Obviously that is not a situation that describes some avoidable jaywalkers, but sounds more like people who decided to jump into the roadway in front of traffic on purpose.
If they want to suicide like that, it’s on them, not me.
Well we do have a lot of computer aided whatever whose function is important to safety.
Ultimately, though, these are just machines carrying out someone’s will. And always will be — this is why I scoff at the idea of a singularity of machine takeover, though I might not scoff at much at the idea of people choosing to WORSHIP machines. It’s wrong, but always possible.
It’s callous to say I wouldn’t kill myself to save a suicidal idiot? I’d say it’s common sense.
Someone who popped out on purpose would pose a different thing to react to than someone who blindly wandered out, but the question you should still ask is, what would you do if YOU drove the car.
If this is your attitude, that you aren’t at least going to slam the brakes hard to try to lessen the damage to the kamikaze pedestrian, then that speaks for itself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.