Reply
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Like Tree30Likes

The Moral Machine - Pedestrians vs Passengers

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    薄扶林
    Posts
    24,581

    The Moral Machine - Pedestrians vs Passengers

    Who should the machine (an automated car in this example) save? The operator/passengers or the crowd/pedestrians?

    Welcome to the Moral Machine! A platform for gathering a human perspective on moral decisions made by machine intelligence, such as self-driving cars.

    We show you moral dilemmas, where a driverless car must choose the lesser of two evils, such as killing two passengers or five pedestrians. As an outside observer, you judge which outcome you think is more acceptable. You can then see how your responses compare with those of other people.
    Moral Machine
    Have a GeoExpat related problem - please create a support ticket.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    New Territories West
    Posts
    1,362

    Wow...

    I'm not sure I support self-driving cars anymore.

    I'm not sure I would drive a car that would readily sacrifice me and my passengers based on someone else's moral judgement.

    I basically never let the car make the decision to harm my people...


  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    薄扶林
    Posts
    24,581
    I'm not sure I would drive a car that would readily sacrifice me and my passengers based on someone else's moral judgement.
    How about if your car was designed with a cage frame and interior airbags which offered a higher level of protection to passengers v/s pedestrians?

    I don't think I've seen or heard of cars which offer exterior airbags which can deploy in advance of a crash involving pedestrians.
    Have a GeoExpat related problem - please create a support ticket.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    7,266
    Quote Originally Posted by SpeakCantonese
    Wow...

    I'm not sure I support self-driving cars anymore.

    I'm not sure I would drive a car that would readily sacrifice me and my passengers based on someone else's moral judgement.

    I basically never let the car make the decision to harm my people...
    Let me understand...
    you formerly supported self-driving cars, but had no idea that moral decisions and valuations would have to be programmed into it?

  5. #5

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    New Territories West
    Posts
    1,362
    Quote Originally Posted by TigerSun
    Let me understand...
    you formerly supported self-driving cars, but had no idea that moral decisions and valuations would have to be programmed into it?
    My sense of humour is too dry. Clearly.

    Shri's point about the airbags demonstrate that he understood.

    The moral dilemmas are an interesting distraction but have very little to do with real-world self-driving car scenarios.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    7,266
    Quote Originally Posted by SpeakCantonese

    The moral dilemmas are an interesting distraction but have very little to do with real-world self-driving car scenarios.
    Au contraire, they are the make and break issue.
    Technical issues are all solvable. Establishing a coded ‘barrier or crowd’ decision process is their biggest remaining issue. Similar problems yet to be resolved in Ai and robotics.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    薄扶林
    Posts
    24,581
    Shri's point about the airbags demonstrate that he understood.
    How about if you were at an intersection near where you lived, had a friend in the car with you and your family was on the footpath waiting for you to pick you up?

    Airbags are not the issue - there is a serious moral / ethical question and to be honest, I don't think ordinary human reflexes and thought processes are faster or better when it comes to instant decisions involving cars/pedestrians.
    Have a GeoExpat related problem - please create a support ticket.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,499

    Regardless of moral ethical decisions, self driving cars stand to save a lot of lives. There will always be far too many idiots driving vehicles and even in the case of trained professionals like pilot, much of it is now automated. I doubt I will but hope to see the day people are forbidden to drive on most roads. However imperfect machines are, they will be far better than most humans. These ethical debates may be interesting but humans are anything but ethical so why should machines be expected to be perfect.


  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    New Territories West
    Posts
    1,362
    Quote Originally Posted by shri
    I don't think ordinary human reflexes and thought processes are faster or better when it comes to instant decisions involving cars/pedestrians.
    As I've said before... I'm sure less people would die with automatic cars on the road.

    As for moral dilemmas, as soon as someone can present me with a realistic one I'll put my mind to it.

    There are way too many variables to decide whether or not swerving around (and crashing) or hitting pedestrians would save lives in any given situation.

    I would say that the best and safest approach in almost any scenario, especially in a computer controlled car, would be to sound the horn and slow the vehicle down as much as possible.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    17,543

    Piloting a plane is a lot easier than driving a car in our city centres. I'm not convinced truly self-driving cars will be a reality in our lifetimes. Having self-driving cars that interface with real traffic and real drivers is a major engineering feat, even without the Trolley problem.

    East_coast likes this.

Reply
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast