Should your car kill you to save others?

[SMOGZINN]

In the same way if the mothers of the country are fed some BS framing that "SDCs are child murdering machines because they will always put the driver's interests before your little angel making an innocent mistake" then the whole product category is cooked.

Politically we will probably end up with some sort of system where children are given some sort of beacon that tells objects like SDCs they are children and the SDCs will optimize the safety of the beacons over anything else. I just don't see any other way around this question.

I don't know. I think SDC side will just retort with 'when was the last time you let your child play outside?!?' and everyone will just shut up.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I don't know. I think SDC side will just retort with 'when was the last time you let your child play outside?!?' and everyone will just shut up.

 

[SlitheryDee]

You just go for the highest odds of everyone coming out alive I guess. There's a bigger chance of the pedestrians dying if you hit them than you dying due to swerving off the road. They're naked and unprotected from your fast moving metal carriage, while you're inside said carriage protected by a number of safety features honed over a century of automobile manufacturing knowledge.

 

[Linux23]

Politically we will probably end up with some sort of system where children are given some sort of beacon that tells objects like SDCs they are children and the SDCs will optimize the safety of the beacons over anything else. I just don't see any other way around this question.

everyone should be tagged with some sort of chip so the system knows where everyone is located and in order to buy anything, you must have this chip.

 

[poofyhairguy]

everyone should be tagged with some sort of chip so the system knows where everyone is located and in order to buy anything, you must have this chip.

We call such chips NFC chips.

 

[Linux23]

We call such chips NFC chips.

need longer range than nfc.

 

[Slacker]

People are over thinking this, full autonomy won't happen tomorrow, by the time that happens pedestrians and cars will have zero interaction, in the mean time there will be zones for computer controlled driving where pedestrians have no access.
Eventually either the pedestrian zone or vehicle zone will be elevated, computer controlled vehicles will never be operated anywhere near the threshold of needing to make a life or death choice.
We are not aiming for computer controlled cars going 90 mph, the biggest impact on traffic flow will be eliminating the reverberating inch worm effect that even a minor accident currently has on traffic, a minor traffic incident on a major highway the way things are now can impact traffic flow for DAYS after the incident.

The real concern in all this should be system dependability/uptime, a system glitch after full autonomy will be a nightmare.

 

[BUTCH1]

I'd have mine programmed to head for the nearest car-wash to remove any DNA traces, even if the car was driving itself you insurance rate will take a hit, fuck that.

 

[Yakk]

If a choice had to be made, the car was going too fast.

Lower the speed limit until the car can stop with less than 24" or 12" breaking distance.

Bicycles will be faster than cars, but everyone will be safe. (Well... the bicycle rider might have the accident)

 

[SMOGZINN]

People are over thinking this, full autonomy won't happen tomorrow, by the time that happens pedestrians and cars will have zero interaction, in the mean time there will be zones for computer controlled driving where pedestrians have no access.

You apparently have not been paying attention. Full autonomy is what every SDC project is already working on and they have made impressive progress. Millions of miles have already been driven autonomously in real world traffic conditions. There is still some obstacles to overcome, like snow, but those are already being tackled, and realistically we should be there in the next 5 years. It will then take a few more years for them to get on the roads in any significant number. While our road structures are not going to substantially change in the next 5, or 10, years.

 

[Red Squirrel]

I see self driving cars can go two ways law wise.

1: Manufacturers will be held liable for everything. In a way this is good for the driver, but bad for the tech, since it's just impossible to make it 100% perfect and due to liability reasons a lot of self driving features simply won't make it to market. Kinda the same reason why there arn't a lot of theme parks or other fun things, because people like to sue.

2: The driver will still be 100% responsible, and the law will still require the driver to be alert and ready to take over at any moment. You will basically be treated the same way as right now. Using a device while driving, or sleeping, or otherwise not paying attention will be illegal, etc.

I think what will probably happen is #2 and maybe a bit of #1 as people are still going to sue the manufacturer when the system malfunctions.

 

[pete6032]

If pedestrians know with 100% certainty that a self driving car will always brake and stop for them because of its safety features then will pedestrians become even bigger jerks about crossing the street and jaywalking?

 

[Chiropteran]

If pedestrians know with 100% certainty that a self driving car will always brake and stop for them because of its safety features then will pedestrians become even bigger jerks about crossing the street and jaywalking?

I see this potentially being monetized.

You buy pedestrian insurance, which adds your identity to the car AI databases. With sufficient insurance, cars will break for you. With even greater insurance levels, cars will avoid you even if it means hitting someone else or endangering the occupants. Basically the rich can pay extra for safety and convinience at the expense of the rest of us.

Sounds like a dystopian sci-fi movie, but I could totally see this happen as mega corporations merge until they are all interlinked. Google car owned in part by the corporation providing $500 billion in life insurance will give google car a huge incentive to make sure the insured guy isn't killed under any circumstance, even if it means killing some other pedestrian and paying out a few million in settlements.

 

[DrPizza]

If the cars swerve to avoid running into a pedestrian, if you jumped in front of one on a winding mountain road, alongside a cliff, and knew the car would swerve and go over the cliff - would that be murder?

 

[Red Squirrel]

If the cars swerve to avoid running into a pedestrian, if you jumped in front of one on a winding mountain road, alongside a cliff, and knew the car would swerve and go over the cliff - would that be murder?

I think that would be an assist, you only get 1 point.

 

[rh71]

Autonomous cars won't take a majority foothold on our streets for at least 2 decades. People won't actually shell out for it as quickly as you believe. Compare it with all the tech-averse people who don't even have rain-sensing wipers, auto-headlights, or adaptive cruise control that have been around for years already... they don't even exist in the majority yet. I don't blame them either... because I drive an over-engineered car and shit does break. Electronic parking brake actuator - $1400 please.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Autonomous cars won't take a majority foothold on our streets for at least 2 decades. People won't actually shell out for it as quickly as you believe. Compare it with all the tech-averse people who don't even have rain-sensing wipers, auto-headlights, or adaptive cruise control that have been around for years already... they don't even exist in the majority yet. I don't blame them either... because I drive an over-engineered car and shit does break. Electronic parking brake actuator - $1400 please.

Yeah I think we will see "auto" features like those Ford cars that can park themselves, or the Teslas that can follow the car in front, or the collision detect stuff etc, before we see true self driving. That, and people like me refuse to spend money on a new car when a used car is 1/10th the price, so it will take a very long time before they become mainstream.

One thing I'm excited about is the new Teslas that are at a fairly affordable price point (35k I think?). Still more money than I personally would want to spend on a car, but that price point is fairly on par with a new gas car. This will hopefully spark more electric cars to come out and be bought by mainsteam people wanting to buy a new car. It will also spark more research into better battery tech. ... that and my lithium penny stocks will probably go up.

 

[DrPizza]

Autonomous cars won't take a majority foothold on our streets for at least 2 decades. People won't actually shell out for it as quickly as you believe. Compare it with all the tech-averse people who don't even have rain-sensing wipers, auto-headlights, or adaptive cruise control that have been around for years already... they don't even exist in the majority yet. I don't blame them either... because I drive an over-engineered car and shit does break. Electronic parking brake actuator - $1400 please.

Why the hell would someone want to pay extra for rain sensing wipers?

 

[rh71]

^ I'm not sure why you're asking. Rain-sensing wipers' benefit is variation of speed so you don't have to keep adjusting it. But the point is none of that stuff is mainstream because they are add-ons or not even offered by some manufacturers, rather than standard. If few people have simple, optional, tech upgrades like that, imagine how long it will take for people to purposely buy an entirely autonomous vehicle. Self-parking is another good example of something that's been around but hasn't even come close to mainstream.

People are also keeping their cars much longer and the used car market is indeed still huge.

 

[disappoint]

I'm just waiting for teleportation

Designed, built and maintained by your average clueless human? Are you mad man? Do you want to end up materializing in an actual shark tank? Because this is how you end up materializing in an actual shark tank.

Or the sun, quicksand, a wall... Feel free to post your own "fun" places to materialize.

Although it should be fun for philanderers. Honey I can explain! It's not what it looks like! I materialized in my girlfriend's apartment by accident and my clothes must have materialized elsewhere! Damn machine! It's all it's fault! I mean some random girl's apartment I don't have a girlfriend. You're the only one for me honey! I swear! Uh oh...

 

[SMOGZINN]

Autonomous cars won't take a majority foothold on our streets for at least 2 decades. People won't actually shell out for it as quickly as you believe. Compare it with all the tech-averse people who don't even have rain-sensing wipers, auto-headlights, or adaptive cruise control that have been around for years already... they don't even exist in the majority yet. I don't blame them either... because I drive an over-engineered car and shit does break. Electronic parking brake actuator - $1400 please.

What you are missing is that things like rain-sensing wipers and auto-headlights are minor conveniences at major price points while self driving cars will be literally life changing for a lot of people. They will give autonomy to groups of people that have to rely on others for transportation. People unable to drive for a variety of reasons. Amputees and the seizure prone, the blind and the old and infirm. It will matter a lot on how the laws end up being written on these cars, as to who can take advantage, but hopefully they will allow for such cases and if so we will see self driving cars adopted faster than you can imagine.

 

[poofyhairguy]

You apparently have not been paying attention. Full autonomy is what every SDC project is already working on and they have made impressive progress. Millions of miles have already been driven autonomously in real world traffic conditions. There is still some obstacles to overcome, like snow, but those are already being tackled, and realistically we should be there in the next 5 years. It will then take a few more years for them to get on the roads in any significant number. While our road structures are not going to substantially change in the next 5, or 10, years.

Eh, I think sooner than later some cities will be willing to create "self driving only lanes" or the like to encourage people to buy those cars. So many places now have traffic that is beyond what they can build to fix and so embracing SDCs might be their only hope.

It will be a patchwork. Some places won't allow any SDCs eventually I bet.

 

[momeNt]

This is something that is best left to the government to decide.

The important thing that the government would need to consider when setting the standard for AI driving would be the value of the outcome. One obvious example of this would be whether or not the driver is registered as an organ donor. There is higher value if an organ donor dies in an accident compared to one who is not.

With positioning data on cell phones, it may be possible to target the pedestrian as well though and what the expected outcome of their survival or death is as well.

Positioning data on the cell phone would let us know who potentially could be hit, their tax bracket, the organ donor status, their age, etc. All of this would already be known for the driver because the vehicle is registered. But some sort of network that the AI vehicle is tied into would be able to make case by case decisions on whether or not to avert and cause driver death vs pedestrian death.

Society is a team game and being able to weigh the greater good on a scale like this is really a big step forward. I know for a fact a lot of selfish drivers would never avert an accident and cause their own death because they aren't considering the greater good in the situation. It's a decision best left out of their hands.

 

[TheGardener]

This is something that is best left to the government to decide.

The important thing that the government would need to consider when setting the standard for AI driving would be the value of the outcome. One obvious example of this would be whether or not the driver is registered as an organ donor. There is higher value if an organ donor dies in an accident compared to one who is not.

With positioning data on cell phones, it may be possible to target the pedestrian as well though and what the expected outcome of their survival or death is as well.

Positioning data on the cell phone would let us know who potentially could be hit, their tax bracket, the organ donor status, their age, etc. All of this would already be known for the driver because the vehicle is registered. But some sort of network that the AI vehicle is tied into would be able to make case by case decisions on whether or not to avert and cause driver death vs pedestrian death.

Society is a team game and being able to weigh the greater good on a scale like this is really a big step forward. I know for a fact a lot of selfish drivers would never avert an accident and cause their own death because they aren't considering the greater good in the situation. It's a decision best left out of their hands.

You touched upon some good points. One has to believe that the manufacturers and local law enforcement will be required to keep racial, gender and other demographic statistics. So if a civil rights organization deems a car manufacturer is programming their cars with a racial or gender bias, then besides massive lawsuits, car software programs will need to be modified to meet some perceived level of equality in who is hit and who is not.