Self-driving cars - Ethical dilemma

CruelCoin · 06-04-2015 09:56AM #1

Morning all,

Has there been any serious debate on the ethics of self-driving cars?

Just say that you were bumbling along, heavy traffic on your right (turn that way you die and so do others), 4 pedestrians on your left (turn that way you live but they die), and there is a truck barrelling towards you on the wrong side of the road.

What does the car do?

Will it sacrifice you to save the 4 pedestrians, or will it try save itself and its owner by moving them down?

What does it do? What should it do?

If the car decides to sacrifice you in the face of greater numbers of pedestrians, how does it judge the numbers?

Personally, i'd want the car to save me, but with certain caveats. i'm 29. I'd want the car to save me rather than 4 pensioners at age 80. I'm not so sure i'd want the car to save me if there were 2 mothers with babies.

I'd want the car to save me if it were a bunch of knackers on their way to a good 'ol riotin'. Not so if there was a group of young professionals. Again, how does a car judge the worth of a person? Should it?

Your thoughts?

One eyed Jack · 06-04-2015 09:58AM

Turbo-boost over the lorry.

Problem, solved.

Señor Fancy Pants · 06-04-2015 10:01AM

My thoughts are Id rather drive it myself. No Total Recall or Demolition Man cars for this pig!

Plus, if the car becomes racist it might have select targeting, which would be baaaad mkay.

CruelCoin · 06-04-2015 10:04AM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Turbo-boost over the lorry.

Problem, solved.

My borther did mention ejector seats to me.

I can picture it now, yanked out of the car while trying to drink my martini...:mad:

Sarn · 06-04-2015 10:09AM

You have to consider the fact that your car will have various safety features in place that will reduce the risk of fatality to the driver versus the near certainty of killing the pedestrians.

Personally I would have invested in the flight feature and thus would fly over the impending carnage.

who the fug · 06-04-2015 10:15AM

We will end up with very intelligent cars who realise that roads be dangerous, so will refuse to leave the driveway.

wendell borton · 06-04-2015 10:17AM

They should obey Asimov's laws.

A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

One eyed Jack · 06-04-2015 10:19AM

CruelCoin wrote: »

My borther did mention ejector seats to me.

I can picture it now, yanked out of the car while trying to drink my martini...:mad:

And with ejector seats, you wanna make sure the sun roof is open first!

s15r330 · 06-04-2015 10:19AM

When self driving technology becomes readily available some of the first users will be hauliers (no more driver wages, restricted driving due to tiredness). So the lorry will be on the right side.
At some stage in the future all cars will have it, so these situations shouldn't arise. Sorted.

The Backwards Man · 06-04-2015 10:23AM

It won't know they are pedestrians, it's a car not Metal Mickey.

They also don't work in the rain, can't avoid potholes and can't navigate when google maps aren't 100% accurate, so I don't think this is an ethical dilemma that will come up in Ireland any time soon.

CruelCoin · 06-04-2015 10:46AM

s15r330 wrote: »

When self driving technology becomes readily available some of the first users will be hauliers (no more driver wages, restricted driving due to tiredness). So the lorry will be on the right side.
At some stage in the future all cars will have it, so these situations shouldn't arise. Sorted.

It's all well and good forcing everyone to go from analog to digital (tv's) but i can imagine the outcry when people are forced en-mass to switch from self-drive to driverless.

People balk at 150 for water. Can you imagine 20k?

Spunge · 06-04-2015 10:54AM

who the fug wrote: »

We will end up with very intelligent cars who realise that roads be dangerous, so will refuse to leave the driveway.

didnt this happen in an unreal tournament server? the bots on the server learnt over several years of playing the safest thing to do was to not move at all, so they were all just standing still. thats what i heard anyway

CruelCoin · 06-04-2015 11:27AM

Spunge wrote: »

didnt this happen in an unreal tournament server? the bots on the server learnt over several years of playing the safest thing to do was to not move at all, so they were all just standing still. thats what i heard anyway

The story gained ground for a bit, was was shown to be a hoax in the end.

Interesting idea all the same.

Banjo String · 06-04-2015 11:35AM

I have a self driving car, though I didn't even know it was a self driving car when I bought it.

I only realised it was a self driving motor yesterday morning when I woke up to see it parked out the back of my house.

We were in the pub all day Saturday, and late into Saturday night, I must have had 10 beer, and a fair few whisky chasers, and was definitely in no fit shape to be driving.

Anyway, woke up yesterday, and realised that not only did the car manage to get itself back from the pub in one piece, but also seems to have had chips from Borzas, and it even managed to put the keys in the kitchen press where they belong.

There's a bit of a tree hanging off one side mirror, and she's parked at a fairly awkward angle, but other than that, solid enough effort.

Definitely 8/10 from me.

kneemos · 06-04-2015 11:48AM

The Backwards Man wrote: »

It won't know they are pedestrians, it's a car not Metal Mickey.

They also don't work in the rain, can't avoid potholes and can't navigate when google maps aren't 100% accurate, so I don't think this is an ethical dilemma that will come up in Ireland any time soon.

Totally useless then.

Panda_Turtle · 06-04-2015 11:56AM

I doubt the reflexes and instincts of a human can be replicated in all scenarios but overall it would probably be beneficial.

shruikan2553 · 06-04-2015 11:56AM

It is currently an area of research, when should the car hit an animal or when should it stop is another one. Then if the car chooses an action that harms someone can the makers be sued or is the driver responsible?

Another thing would be all the cars are aware of their surroundings and the surroundings of nearby cars so they can all plan with each other in what to do.

kneemos · 06-04-2015 12:03PM

Who's responsible then if it avoids the truck and wipes out three pensioners?
Or if it goes berserk and slams itself and it's over trusting driver into a wall?

GaryTLynch · 06-04-2015 12:21PM

Maybe there'll be an override option where manual control can be returned to the driver/passenger in 'does not compute' situations?

IsaacWunder · 06-04-2015 12:31PM

They bought their tickets. They knew what they were getting in for. I say let them crash.

shruikan2553 · 06-04-2015 12:36PM

GaryTLynch wrote: »

Maybe there'll be an override option where manual control can be returned to the driver/passenger in 'does not compute' situations?

There is but you need to make sure that the person "driving" is paying attention. Dont want to be going down the motorway reading a book as the car decides "**** this ****, its your problem now"

pablo128 · 06-04-2015 12:41PM

Banjo String wrote: »

I have a self driving car, though I didn't even know it was a self driving car when I bought it.

I only realised it was a self driving motor yesterday morning when I woke up to see it parked out the back of my house.

We were in the pub all day Saturday, and late into Saturday night, I must have had 10 beer, and a fair few whisky chasers, and was definitely in no fit shape to be driving.

Anyway, woke up yesterday, and realised that not only did the car manage to get itself back from the pub in one piece, but also seems to have had chips from Borzas, and it even managed to put the keys in the kitchen press where they belong.

There's a bit of a tree hanging off one side mirror, and she's parked at a fairly awkward angle, but other than that, solid enough effort.

Definitely 8/10 from me.

I had a Fiat 127 like that years ago. Mine had a knock on the rear bumper the next day. 7/10 unfortunately.:pac:

GaryTLynch · 06-04-2015 12:51PM

shruikan2553 wrote: »

There is but you need to make sure that the person "driving" is paying attention. Dont want to be going down the motorway reading a book as the car decides "**** this ****, its your problem now"

Ha ha, good point.

kneemos · 06-04-2015 12:58PM

I'd imagine it would be similar to today if a part failed on your car and killed a pedestrian,it's down to plain bad luck.

Don't think there's an ethical question,the car is just mechanical after all.

CruelCoin · 06-04-2015 01:27PM

shruikan2553 wrote: »

It is currently an area of research, when should the car hit an animal or when should it stop is another one. Then if the car chooses an action that harms someone can the makers be sued or is the driver responsible?

Another thing would be all the cars are aware of their surroundings and the surroundings of nearby cars so they can all plan with each other in what to do.

Anything rabbit sized and down is fair game in my mind.

After that, wipe out the pensioners.

(I realise how horrible that sounded the moment i typed it....)

CruelCoin · 06-04-2015 01:29PM

kneemos wrote: »

I'd imagine it would be similar to today if a part failed on your car and killed a pedestrian,it's down to plain bad luck.

Don't think there's an ethical question,the car is just mechanical after all.

But nothing is failing.

There is a truck coming. There are three options that i laid out. Go left, straight, right. Two of these options kill you. Two of themk kill others.

There's nothing mechanical about it. A decision needs to be made in the programming phase.

martinedwards · 07-04-2015 06:57AM

Whattaya know, he OP watches top gear.

Clarkson had this exact question on one of the last episodes.......

Desolation Of Smug · 07-04-2015 07:08AM

martinedwards wrote: »

Whattaya know, he OP watches top gear.

Clarkson had this exact question on one of the last episodes.......

He'd deffo vote for hitting the producer, sorry, pensioners. He could apologize afterwards and divide public opinion.

DoYouEvenLift · 07-04-2015 07:41AM

If all vehicles involved were automated I'm sure they'd all be able to communicate with one another and all take part in the best option for the situation. Stuff like this is interesting though because as automated cars phase into our daily lives, like anything, the early adapters will probably have to go through some trial and error before all issues are sorted and we can drive around completely accident free. Chances are the roads would also need some kind of technology built into them as well to help the cars be as safe and effective as possible.

the groutch · 07-04-2015 08:01AM

s15r330 wrote: »

When self driving technology becomes readily available some of the first users will be hauliers (no more driver wages, restricted driving due to tiredness).

Looks like we got us a 10-38, outsider blabbing about the Navitron auto-drive system.

cros13 · 07-04-2015 08:22AM

CruelCoin wrote: »

Personally, i'd want the car to save me, but with certain caveats. i'm 29. I'd want the car to save me rather than 4 pensioners at age 80. I'm not so sure i'd want the car to save me if there were 2 mothers with babies.

You are overcomplicating it. The correct response from the car in this situation is to stay where it is and prep the airbags. Which is exactly what the current autonomous test cars do.

It's such an edge case that coding for that situation would result in:

1. lawsuits
2. possible criminal charges
3. unwanted behaviour in other situations

The Backwards Man wrote: »

It won't know they are pedestrians, it's a car not Metal Mickey.

I'm afraid you are behind the times. Google's test cars from 2 years ago can even identify pedestrians and cyclists hand signals and probable intentions (based on past movements, location, position of other traffic and probable sight lines).

The Backwards Man wrote: »

They also don't work in the rain, can't avoid potholes and can't navigate when google maps aren't 100% accurate, so I don't think this is an ethical dilemma that will come up in Ireland any time soon.

Yes they do work in the rain. While google's cars currently don't scan ahead for road imperfections, Audi's autonomous vehicles do. And maps are not necessarily required, The DARPA grand challenge featured vehicles figuring their way from point A to point B 150km away ten years ago.

It's 2015, My car drives the M50 regularly without me steering or controlling speed.
The rental car I had last weekend does 160km/h on the autobahn steering itself.

Nissan is due to have a commercial autonomous vehicle FOR SALE in Ireland in the next four years.
The UN Road Traffic treaties are being amended this year to account for autonomous vehicles.
Tesla's Model S (of which there are five already in Ireland) is getting Autopilot in a software update later this year,
including automatic lane changes on the motorway and a meet-me function where the car will bring itself out of the garage and meet you at the front door.

The test fully autonomous vehicles on the road are already far safer than the average human driver. Google's cars are now up to almost three million km on the public road, no accidents (except when humans took control).

Self-driving cars - Ethical dilemma

Comments