Why Self-Driving Cars Must Be Programmed to Kill
 

I had not given this any thought but damn, yeah, what do you do.

"How should the car be programmed to act in the event of an unavoidable accident? Should it minimize the loss of life, even if it means sacrificing the occupants, or should it protect the occupants at all costs? Should it choose between these extremes at random?"

Why Self-Driving Cars Must Be Programmed to Kill | MIT Technology Review

I find the very idea of self-driving cars deplorable, but I think they will be here shortly.

Pretty interesting to think about.

Implement the 3 Laws.

Read the threads about seniors who refuse to stop driving...

I believe he has undermined his basic argument by using a flawed premise. A self-driving car would not allow itself to get into a situation where it would be suddenly forced to make such a choice.
Unless you suddenly have people jumping off bridges, the vehicle would slow down where a person would just press on while trying to avoid.

Best
Les

When's the last time you drove through an Elementary School zone?

We average a kid a year tagged crossing the street.

That's with crossing guards and strict 20 mph speed limits.

Had one just this past Friday.

"When's the last time you drove through an Elementary School zone?"

Good point.
I had to think about this for a while. I suspect it was a rhetorical question, but it has certainly been over a year.
I know kids can be forgetful of their surroundings. A friend of mine had an elementary school student run headlong into the side of his car. What can you do, aside from drilling it into their heads to look both ways, etc.

OK, substitute a kid diving in front of the car instead of a person dropping out of the sky. If its sensors have not picked out the rapidly approaching threat, all the car can do is try to stop as quickly as possible. If there is a car in the opposing lane it won't go there. A person might though and that is the point of the article.

Best
Les

I predict that self-driving cars will be given their own strip of the road to separate them from 'driven' cars and trucks.

So this will sort of turn one lane of the roadway into a version of a scaled down railway track (&/or tramway track). Driven cars will not be allowed to use this reserved lane.

In effect, this means that this novel technology will be stealing space on the road that you have already paid for.
We already have this in our city for bicycles which have commandeered roadspace on busy throughways. The bike lanes have a lower level of utilization but cause major traffic jams in peak times.

The point of the article is we have to consider there will be situations that are simply not possible for the vehicle to avoid.

We can't assume those worst case scenarios will never happen.

If i've learned one thing in life it's there are always times when your choices are limited to bad or worse.

Yep I have posted in those threads. Losing car keys was a major blow for my father. Anything beyond a block or two is too far to walk when you're 80 and have issues. I am seriously hoping that self driving cars are mainstream in the next 25-30 years. That's probably about the time folks will be looking to lift my keys too.

OPEN THE POD BAY Door, HAL

I am looking forward to my self driving car. I can ride to and from the party, NP! :D

Hopefully the cars communicate and therefore collisions are going to be very few and far between. If they do collide, the rule should be minimize the loss of life but with a correction factor for occupant's age. I.e. a 90 year old vs. a 20 year old occupant - the 90 year old should become crumple zone for the 20 year old. ;)

G

That's an interesting perspective. How should we rate the value of age? I'd say 40-60 year olds should have the greatest value. They survived youth, they have education and experience behind them, and many good years to apply it ahead of them. 0-30 year olds should be of low value as they know next to nothing and have a high accident mortality. (you might sacrifice someone else to save them, only to have them do something stupid and get themselves killed anyway.) Over 60 you don't have a lot of productive years ahead, and over 70 you're just useless.
Please don't miss the sarcasm in my reply.

How will a self driving car differentiate between a shopping cart running into it's path ("OK to hit") and a pram running into it's path ("Not OK to hit")?
If a soccer ball suddenly appears on the road, will the car know it's OK to continue (good field of view, soccer players not nearby) or slam on it's brakes? (poor field of view, kid may be chasing the ball).
Will a car sacrifice itself? (Hit the kid, or miss the kid by swerving into the path of the truck?)
Can the car differentiate between animates? (Hit the dog, miss the truck vs miss the kid, hit the truck).

Self driving cars will need to make moral decisions.
We have enough trouble deciding which crisis human decisions are morally justified.

What about the necessary breaking of road rules?
Driving through a red light to make way for the ambulance to get through the intersection?

Selfdriving cars will only have a future on large roads/freeways/Autobahn.
In the cities and where people are walking around selfdriving cars will not/never work and there the driver will be assisted, as today.

Eventually they'll be ubiquitous, even in cities and residential areas. But I can't see their use in those more stressful cases happening in my lifetime.

KITT v KARR???

For myself, as someone who rides a motorcycle every day, I rather look forward to the predictability of said self-driven cars. It would beat wondering what maneuver the yo-yo next to me is going to do next.
Jim

I think they will be less predictable. Because a human does not think like a machine.
I think you will be surprised what maneuver those machines will be doing! Maybe it will not be allowed to mix self driving vehicles with human driven.