Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

GummyBearz

(2,931 posts)

27. Everything you said is right

Reply to Humanist_Activist (Reply #19)

Thu Oct 29, 2015, 01:15 PM

Oct 2015

They would be at fault. Does that mean you kill them? Or "take one for team humanity"... What about something in between, such as hitting 2 is ok, 3 is ok, 4 is not ok... and what if you could choose the type of algorithm in the self driving car you bought to know you are fine with killing up to 5 people, but no more. Or up to 100 people...

Those are the questions I was trying to get a discussion on. Not "it would be their fault"... thats a no brainer.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

36 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Should A Self-Driving Car Kill Its Passengers In A �Greater Good� Scenario? [View all] GummyBearz Oct 2015 OP

Is this a self driving car without brakes? librechik Oct 2015 #1

If every car could always break in time there would never be an accident... GummyBearz Oct 2015 #2

it would stop and over to you, owner. They drive very slowly and have an override function. librechik Oct 2015 #4

I ryan_cats Oct 2015 #16

Bwahaha! valerief Oct 2015 #31

The computer would likely have a much faster reaction time in braking than a driver. ohnoyoudidnt Oct 2015 #25

Here's the problem with all the scenarios like these tkmorris Oct 2015 #3

I agree their scenario seems off GummyBearz Oct 2015 #5

It's almost physically impossible, really. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2015 #9

I hit a deer not long ago, managed to swerve enough I didn't hit it head on but crushed a headlight Fumesucker Oct 2015 #14

Reminds me of the time a tree jumped me. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2015 #15

Ok, here's the scenario Fumesucker Oct 2015 #22

First you would have to teach a calculator what "good" is. DetlefK Oct 2015 #6

You're going a bit off topic with the robot labor GummyBearz Oct 2015 #7

What's awesome is the ability to carjack people just by standing in the street jberryhill Oct 2015 #8

haha, that was good GummyBearz Oct 2015 #10

Still, being able to stop traffic with cardboard boxes is going to be fun jberryhill Oct 2015 #11

Especially ryan_cats Oct 2015 #18

Interesting for conversation, but car companies will not be wringing their hands over this kcr Oct 2015 #12

I don't see how this could ever be a scenario. Deadshot Oct 2015 #13

Ok, try this GummyBearz Oct 2015 #17

A couple of things, first, the accident would be the fault of the pedestrians.... Humanist_Activist Oct 2015 #19

Agreed. Deadshot Oct 2015 #24

Everything you said is right GummyBearz Oct 2015 #27

Not ryan_cats Oct 2015 #20

hehe :) GummyBearz Oct 2015 #29

I don't like "what ifs". Deadshot Oct 2015 #23

A valid position to have GummyBearz Oct 2015 #26

That eliminates the moral quality of life and reduces it to mere math Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2015 #21

Yes GummyBearz Oct 2015 #28

Ah, you've never driven in Philly during rush hour, have you jberryhill Oct 2015 #35

Yes, the sheer pleasure of driving... jberryhill Oct 2015 #34

Any car with that kind of judgement would refuse to take people anywhere. hunter Oct 2015 #30

Good point on the safety of driving in general GummyBearz Oct 2015 #32

Autonomous Cars of the Future will never have that kind of problem: kentauros Oct 2015 #33

The self-driving car that crashes you into a wall is the car no-one will buy. NutmegYankee Oct 2015 #36