Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Amorality of Self-Driving Cars

nplusonemag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 72 posts

Re: The Amorality of Self-Driving Cars

#41

Post by lifeformed »

I don't get the controversy about this at all. Prioritize the passengers lives every time.

If someone is walking around on the road, then they are putting themselves in an extremely dangerous position. Whether or not they deserve or intend it, they are the ones with the responsibility to not be there. It's unfortunate if they die, but it's their "fault", at least more than the passenger's fault. If a bunch of kid runs down a highway into incoming traffic, are all the cars supposed to kill themselves?

Sure, people will accidentally be stuck in the middle of a road. If you're unlucky enough to be in that situation, that sucks, but you can't ask someone else to die for it. Accidents are a part of reality, we should minimize unfairness rather than minimize loss of utility.

One person getting unlucky and dying is bad, but one person dying because someone else got unlucky is worse, in my opinion. That's twice the unfairness.

Re: The Amorality of Self-Driving Cars

#42

Post by hawkice »

mcbits wrote: post #31
venomsnake wrote: post #14

double getMaxSpeed(clear_road_ahead){ return speedAtWhichStoppingDistanceIs (clear_road_ahead/3); } enforceTopSpeed(getMaxSpeed(clear_road_ahead)); Engineering solved morality once again.

try { enforceTopSpeed(getMaxSpeed(clear_road_ahead)); } catch (CatastrophicBrakeFailureException ex) { // ??? }

This is probably the perfect example of why I find these discussions massive wastes of time.

If there is a catastrophic brake failure currently, with human drivers, it isn't seen as a deep philosophical issue. I have absolutely no clue why this changes because the car is operated differently.

Re: The Amorality of Self-Driving Cars

#43

Post by rimantas »

caseysoftware wrote: post #24
ChuckMcM wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually got a rather deep insight from the article, which was "How would an autonomous car get itself into such a situation?" Such a car would not drive so close to a truck that it could not simply stop should the truck lose its cargo. It would not approach a tunnel at a rate of speed where it could not brake to avoid an obstruction. People do that because they ignore risk in favor of some perceived time advantage…

I think there's a positive feedback loop in there too... As cars go autonomous, they'll communicate faster, drive more predictably, and generally be safer. At some point - 1%, 5%, 20%? - the network as a whole will benefit with less accidents and less of the resulting delays which means human drivers will be less likely to be late which takes away anxiety and potential distractions, making it even safer. Therefore, I…

What prevents to deploy these systems (e.g. start braking if on collision course) whith human still under the wheel?

Re: The Amorality of Self-Driving Cars

#44

Post by TillE »

mcbits wrote: post #31
venomsnake wrote: post #14

double getMaxSpeed(clear_road_ahead){ return speedAtWhichStoppingDistanceIs (clear_road_ahead/3); } enforceTopSpeed(getMaxSpeed(clear_road_ahead)); Engineering solved morality once again.

try { enforceTopSpeed(getMaxSpeed(clear_road_ahead)); } catch (CatastrophicBrakeFailureException ex) { // ??? }

Sudden brake failure on a properly maintained car is vanishingly unlikely. Having it occur the instant you need to slam the brakes for a life-or-death intervention will basically never happen.

For the vast, vast majority of catastrophic failures, the basic procedure of pulling over and stopping the car will be absolutely fine.

Re: The Amorality of Self-Driving Cars

#45

Post by lisivka »

Tiktaalik wrote: post #32
ChuckMcM wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually got a rather deep insight from the article, which was "How would an autonomous car get itself into such a situation?" Such a car would not drive so close to a truck that it could not simply stop should the truck lose its cargo. It would not approach a tunnel at a rate of speed where it could not brake to avoid an obstruction. People do that because they ignore risk in favor of some perceived time advantage…

Supposing autonomous cars actually drive extremely safely and this results in them going 20 km/h under the speed limit. Are drivers going to be happy about the length of their commute increasing while regular car drivers (due to human recklessness) wiz by in the left lane at 130 km/h? I think you'd see a lot of human drivers get frustrated and turn off the AI.

We are already have fully automatic transportation machines: lifts. Are you happy with them? Do you want to use faster lifts at exchange of higher risk of injure or death? Do you want such faster lifts for others or for your family?

IMHO, safety will win. Human life is much more valuable than wasted time. 50km/h is consider as safe speed for human driver in city. Computers are faster, so 60-70km/h will be safe for them.

Re: The Amorality of Self-Driving Cars

#46

Post by tim333 »

>At some point, my car is going to have a choice between hitting a semi and hitting a minivan full of kids.

No it's not. I doubt that has ever come up with a human driver and probably won't with autonomous drivers either. If it does both humans or robots will probably think oh shit, hit the brakes and hope for the best.

Re: The Amorality of Self-Driving Cars

#47

Post by gengkev »

Self-driving cars that have even the slightest hope of considering such questions in split-second situations will, undoubtedly, already be better than any human driver. So when we get to the point where we have to actually ask questions like these, they'll still be an improvement over jerking the wheel in a random direction and praying. By then, perhaps, we will be able to investigate car crashes with the same rigor with which we investigate airplane crashes.

Re: The Amorality of Self-Driving Cars

#48

Post by Tiktaalik »

lisivka wrote: post #45
Tiktaalik wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supposing autonomous cars actually drive extremely safely and this results in them going 20 km/h under the speed limit. Are drivers going to be happy about the length of their commute increasing while regular car drivers (due to human recklessness) wiz by in the left lane at 130 km/h? I think you'd see a lot of human drivers get frustrated and turn off the AI.

We are already have fully automatic transportation machines: lifts. Are you happy with them? Do you want to use faster lifts at exchange of higher risk of injure or death? Do you want such faster lifts for others or for your family? IMHO, safety will win. Human life is much more valuable than wasted time. 50km/h is consider as safe speed for human driver in city. Computers are faster, so 60-70km/h will be safe for th…

If our society was actually that concerned with safety we would have backtracked from automobile infrastructure a long time ago, but we've allowed them to dominate our public space despite the dangers they pose.

Re: The Amorality of Self-Driving Cars

#49

Post by mc32 »

Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #40
mc32 wrote: post #2

However it works out, on the whole, there will be fewer deaths and injuries with autonomous cars. So, we can try to weight the different scenarios to give one a handicap over another --but this pales in comparison to all the lives saved by having autonomous cars.

Yet even autonomous cars will kill more people than bicycles, trains, and walking infrastructure. Yes, I know, I know, suburban sprawl, rural communities, etc. But rather than perpetuating car-centric design and the inevitable, though fewer, deaths, maybe we should concentrate on designing walkable, bikeable, liveable cities instead.

I love walking as much as anyone. And I love efficient and convenient mass transit, but I realize that there still is a place for cars. Tokyo, Paris, etc. Very good transit and very walkable, yet cars are still necessary. With autonomous vehicles we can utilize capacity better reducing the number of vehicles necessary to transport a given number of people.

Re: The Amorality of Self-Driving Cars

#50

Post by ommunist »

Technology is immoral. Business is immoral. These things cannot be put into the moral dimension. Only humans are moral beings (fortunately that can be fixed). Essentially, modern planes are 100% self-driving, and look, there are much less human lives spared in plane accidents than in car accidents every year.
Post reply on HN