[ExI] [Bulk] Self-Driving Cars Must Make Ethical Decisions

[William Flynn Wallace]

I vote for:  the car won't start if you have an illegal alcohol content.
(Would have saved me a night in jail and a lot of money back in my
stupid(er?) days).  bill w

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:55 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On
> Behalf Of BillK
>
> >...Walker-Smith adds that, given the number of fatal traffic accidents
> that involve human error today, it could be considered unethical to
> introduce self-driving technology too slowly. “The biggest ethical question
> is how quickly we move. We have a technology that potentially could save a
> lot of people, but is going to be imperfect and is going to kill.”
> End quotes   -------------
>
> >>... There is also a chance that hackers will be able to change the
> ethics section of the car computer. All the way from 'Protect me at all
> costs' to weaponize it into 'Kill as many as possible'.  BillK
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Ja to all.  Regarding the swerve question, I can imagine a solution where
> the self-drivers just drive slower and react more quickly.  Then rather
> than swerve, they swerve only over to the centerline, and brake hard.  I
> can imagine if the self-drivers stay under the posted speed limits, they
> would be way safer than any human-operated vehicle, which routinely drives
> faster than that, particularly in residential areas.  Riding in one will
> require patience.
>
> Related to BillK's weaponized car scenario, a yahoo could rig one filled
> with fertilizer and Diesel oil, set it to drive over to the ex's house,
> blast him and his girlfriend into the next county.  If done with sufficient
> stealthiness, there would be no way to know who dunnit, or no way to prove
> it even if everyone suspected the ex.
>
> Agree with the article, introducing the technology too slowly poses
> ethical problems of its own for we know there are people with drivers
> licenses who shouldn't have them.  If you talk to any grave-shift cop, they
> will tell you a big part of their job is sweeping up body parts of yahoos
> who stayed at the bar until it closed at 0200, then attempted to drive
> home.  In some areas, the 0200 cleanup is worse than rush hour for accident
> rates.  Ethical dilemmas posed by children darting out doesn't apply at
> 0200.  But current technology is a waaaay better driver than some stupid
> drunk, and is better than plenty of elderly license holders.
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20150729/c901b636/attachment.html>