Off-Topic :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Self-driving cars may one day face decision of who to save, kill
Posted by:
Fox News
()
Date: June 24, 2016 04:47PM
http://wtop.com/national/2016/06/self-driving-cars-may-one-day-face-decision-of-who-to-save-kill/
4:40 pm, June 24, 2016
84°
Would you get into an automated self-driving vehicle, knowing that in the event of an accident, it might sacrifice your life if it meant saving the lives of 10 other people?
Autonomous vehicles (AVs), also known as self-driving vehicles, are already a reality. Initial guidelines from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration regarding this technology are expected by this summer, and road tests are currently in progress across the country.
But one barrier to the widespread use of autonomous vehicles is deciding how to program these vehicles’ safety rules in the most socially acceptable and ethical way.
After a six-month survey, an international team of researchers published their findings Thursday in the journal Science and found the public has a conflicted view about the future of self-driving technology.
Scientists used Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform, an online marketplace where people are asked to conduct human intelligence tasks computers aren’t yet able to do.
Over the course of six months, researchers conducted six online surveys, with 1,928 participants total, asking people to evaluate the morality of several different situations a self-driving vehicle may one day encounter.
Saving the Most Lives Is a Priority
One survey found that 76 percent of participants felt it would be more moral to sacrifice the life of one passenger than to kill 10 pedestrians. People still upheld the utilitarian view, which is to maximize the number of lives saved, even when asked to consider that their family members were present in the car.
But There’s a Roadblock
While most were in favor of an outcome saving the most lives, survey results also indicated that participants would be less likely to purchase a car that followed this principle, with people instead preferring a car that would be more protective of themselves and their families. They also expressed reluctance to accept governmental regulation of self-driving vehicles.
The researchers call this situation, in which conditions could be made less safe for everyone by individuals acting in their own self-interest, a “social dilemma.”
“You can recognize the feeling; the feeling that I want other people to do something but it would be great not to do it myself,” Jean-Francois Bonnefon, co-author of the study, said during a teleconference with reporters.
The authors of this study note that the benefits of autonomous vehicles are numerous and include significantly eliminating the number of traffic accidents that occur each year, reducing pollution, increasing traffic efficiency, and enabling the elderly and disabled to move around more easily.
“Autonomous cars have the potential to revolutionize transportation, eliminate the majority of deaths on the road,” Iyad Rahwan, another author of the study, said during the teleconference. “That is over one million global deaths annually. But as we work on making the technology safer, we need to recognize the psychological and social challenges.”
Curious to further explore some of the potential situations that may arise with an AV? The Scalable Cooperation group at the MIT Media Lab has created a game which allows users to interactively explore the types of decisions these cars will be programmed to make.
4:40 pm, June 24, 2016
84°
Would you get into an automated self-driving vehicle, knowing that in the event of an accident, it might sacrifice your life if it meant saving the lives of 10 other people?
Autonomous vehicles (AVs), also known as self-driving vehicles, are already a reality. Initial guidelines from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration regarding this technology are expected by this summer, and road tests are currently in progress across the country.
But one barrier to the widespread use of autonomous vehicles is deciding how to program these vehicles’ safety rules in the most socially acceptable and ethical way.
After a six-month survey, an international team of researchers published their findings Thursday in the journal Science and found the public has a conflicted view about the future of self-driving technology.
Scientists used Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform, an online marketplace where people are asked to conduct human intelligence tasks computers aren’t yet able to do.
Over the course of six months, researchers conducted six online surveys, with 1,928 participants total, asking people to evaluate the morality of several different situations a self-driving vehicle may one day encounter.
Saving the Most Lives Is a Priority
One survey found that 76 percent of participants felt it would be more moral to sacrifice the life of one passenger than to kill 10 pedestrians. People still upheld the utilitarian view, which is to maximize the number of lives saved, even when asked to consider that their family members were present in the car.
But There’s a Roadblock
While most were in favor of an outcome saving the most lives, survey results also indicated that participants would be less likely to purchase a car that followed this principle, with people instead preferring a car that would be more protective of themselves and their families. They also expressed reluctance to accept governmental regulation of self-driving vehicles.
The researchers call this situation, in which conditions could be made less safe for everyone by individuals acting in their own self-interest, a “social dilemma.”
“You can recognize the feeling; the feeling that I want other people to do something but it would be great not to do it myself,” Jean-Francois Bonnefon, co-author of the study, said during a teleconference with reporters.
The authors of this study note that the benefits of autonomous vehicles are numerous and include significantly eliminating the number of traffic accidents that occur each year, reducing pollution, increasing traffic efficiency, and enabling the elderly and disabled to move around more easily.
“Autonomous cars have the potential to revolutionize transportation, eliminate the majority of deaths on the road,” Iyad Rahwan, another author of the study, said during the teleconference. “That is over one million global deaths annually. But as we work on making the technology safer, we need to recognize the psychological and social challenges.”
Curious to further explore some of the potential situations that may arise with an AV? The Scalable Cooperation group at the MIT Media Lab has created a game which allows users to interactively explore the types of decisions these cars will be programmed to make.
Re: Self-driving cars may one day face decision of who to save, kill
Posted by:
You kidding?
()
Date: June 24, 2016 06:21PM
You kidding? Guy killed 9 cyclists last week because he was in a bad mood. You think anyone wants to be in a vehicle where they cannot choose life by killing a doezen others? That will never happen.
Re: Self-driving cars may one day face decision of who to save, kill
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: June 24, 2016 06:35PM
Not an issue. Vehicles will always be programmed to protect the occupants first. If they are not, first of all, they won't sell and people won't accept it but second people can harm others by jumping out in front of autonomous vehicles on groups knowing the vehicles will drive themselves off the road or a cliff. Therefore it will always be programed to protect the lives of the occupants as the first priority.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/24/2016 06:35PM by Gerrymanderer2.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/24/2016 06:35PM by Gerrymanderer2.
Re: Self-driving cars may one day face decision of who to save, kill
Posted by:
uWmyG
()
Date: June 24, 2016 07:00PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not an issue. Vehicles will always be programmed
> to protect the occupants first. If they are not,
> first of all, they won't sell and people won't
> accept it but second people can harm others by
> jumping out in front of autonomous vehicles on
> groups knowing the vehicles will drive themselves
> off the road or a cliff. Therefore it will always
> be programed to protect the lives of the occupants
> as the first priority.
Wrong.
If the formula is number of lives, then having more than one person in the vehicle will mean certain death the the saboteur.
If there is only one passenger and one person jumping in front of the vehicle and driving off a cliff or off the road would result in the death of that passenger, then the AI could be parameterized to favor the passenger.
If we ever get to the point where the AI could count people in the car and people in front of the car and calculate the odds of killing/saving any/all of these, then the AI would be sophisticated enough to apply the laws governing right-of-way.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not an issue. Vehicles will always be programmed
> to protect the occupants first. If they are not,
> first of all, they won't sell and people won't
> accept it but second people can harm others by
> jumping out in front of autonomous vehicles on
> groups knowing the vehicles will drive themselves
> off the road or a cliff. Therefore it will always
> be programed to protect the lives of the occupants
> as the first priority.
Wrong.
If the formula is number of lives, then having more than one person in the vehicle will mean certain death the the saboteur.
If there is only one passenger and one person jumping in front of the vehicle and driving off a cliff or off the road would result in the death of that passenger, then the AI could be parameterized to favor the passenger.
If we ever get to the point where the AI could count people in the car and people in front of the car and calculate the odds of killing/saving any/all of these, then the AI would be sophisticated enough to apply the laws governing right-of-way.
Re: Self-driving cars may one day face decision of who to save, kill
Posted by:
MdWcm
()
Date: June 24, 2016 09:55PM
Aren't the members of the inner party more valuable than the proliteriat?
Re: Self-driving cars may one day face decision of who to save, kill
Posted by:
gerry2 nailed it
()
Date: June 24, 2016 09:58PM
uWmyG Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Not an issue. Vehicles will always be
> programmed
> > to protect the occupants first. If they are
> not,
> > first of all, they won't sell and people won't
> > accept it but second people can harm others by
> > jumping out in front of autonomous vehicles on
> > groups knowing the vehicles will drive
> themselves
> > off the road or a cliff. Therefore it will
> always
> > be programed to protect the lives of the
> occupants
> > as the first priority.
>
> Wrong.
>
> If the formula is number of lives, then having
> more than one person in the vehicle will mean
> certain death the the saboteur.
>
> If there is only one passenger and one person
> jumping in front of the vehicle and driving off a
> cliff or off the road would result in the death of
> that passenger, then the AI could be parameterized
> to favor the passenger.
>
> If we ever get to the point where the AI could
> count people in the car and people in front of the
> car and calculate the odds of killing/saving
> any/all of these, then the AI would be
> sophisticated enough to apply the laws governing
> right-of-way.
Gerry2 is way more realistic.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Not an issue. Vehicles will always be
> programmed
> > to protect the occupants first. If they are
> not,
> > first of all, they won't sell and people won't
> > accept it but second people can harm others by
> > jumping out in front of autonomous vehicles on
> > groups knowing the vehicles will drive
> themselves
> > off the road or a cliff. Therefore it will
> always
> > be programed to protect the lives of the
> occupants
> > as the first priority.
>
> Wrong.
>
> If the formula is number of lives, then having
> more than one person in the vehicle will mean
> certain death the the saboteur.
>
> If there is only one passenger and one person
> jumping in front of the vehicle and driving off a
> cliff or off the road would result in the death of
> that passenger, then the AI could be parameterized
> to favor the passenger.
>
> If we ever get to the point where the AI could
> count people in the car and people in front of the
> car and calculate the odds of killing/saving
> any/all of these, then the AI would be
> sophisticated enough to apply the laws governing
> right-of-way.
Gerry2 is way more realistic.
Re: Self-driving cars may one day face decision of who to save, kill
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: June 24, 2016 09:59PM
What if a visual effect could be created to make it seem like there were multiple people in front of the vehicle which would seem quite easy. It might take nothing more than cardboard cut outs. Are the cars going to be programmed to drive off a cliff in such an event?
Articles assertion is not going to happen unless at the very least the vehicle can verify with absolute certainty that there are humans ahead.
Articles assertion is not going to happen unless at the very least the vehicle can verify with absolute certainty that there are humans ahead.
Re: Self-driving cars may one day face decision of who to save, kill
Posted by:
1--93pjr
()
Date: June 24, 2016 10:53PM
It will supercede drones as the easiest means of getting rid of the4 state's "enemies"--no more messy executions, much less fed funds have top be spent on surveillance--just program the bloke's car to do it, and it was an accident that never happened...
Re: Self-driving cars may one day face decision of who to save, kill
Posted by:
SDV Programmer
()
Date: June 25, 2016 09:52AM
Niggers are programmed as 3/5 of a person in all the software, so they will be the first to go. There is a move to reduce them to 1/5 based on their behavior of the last 30 years, but that's still being reviewed.
Re: Self-driving cars may one day face decision of who to save, kill
Posted by:
such a dolt bore
()
Date: June 25, 2016 10:09AM
SDV Programmer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Niggers are programmed as 3/5 of a person in all
> the software, so they will be the first to go.
> There is a move to reduce them to 1/5 based on
> their behavior of the last 30 years, but that's
> still being reviewed.
Your storm front bullshit is so fucking tiring. How much of a god damn loser in real life do you have to be to make every single fucking thing about the supposed barrage that the nigger has imposed on your ignorant ass.
Go fucking fix your own god damn loser life, stop blaming others you stupid teenage shit cunt.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Niggers are programmed as 3/5 of a person in all
> the software, so they will be the first to go.
> There is a move to reduce them to 1/5 based on
> their behavior of the last 30 years, but that's
> still being reviewed.
Your storm front bullshit is so fucking tiring. How much of a god damn loser in real life do you have to be to make every single fucking thing about the supposed barrage that the nigger has imposed on your ignorant ass.
Go fucking fix your own god damn loser life, stop blaming others you stupid teenage shit cunt.
Re: Self-driving cars may one day face decision of who to save, kill
Posted by:
nog ventilator
()
Date: June 25, 2016 01:22PM
^^^^^^^^^^^
Wow. Who loves the coloreds?
Wow. Who loves the coloreds?
Re: Self-driving cars may one day face decision of who to save, kill
Posted by:
cXEYn
()
Date: June 25, 2016 10:09PM
So let's say 10 kids are playing in the street. The car decides to save 10 lives breaking the law instead of yours? Why?
Re: Self-driving cars may one day face decision of who to save, kill
Posted by:
Herbert Kornfeld
()
Date: June 26, 2016 08:05AM
This whole discussion is bullshit. You guys have obviously never read much or been exposed to self driving cars.
They move like old people fuck. Real slow.
They also can see around corners, through shit and never fuck around and text or beat the kids or fish for a nickel under the seat while driving - like so many of these self absorbed NOVA snowflake bitches. All of this means that the car knows there are things that MIGHT be in the road...even if it's a deer beside the road...up ahead and the car slows the fuck down to a speed that is capable of stopping should the object suddenly move into the roadway.
They move like old people fuck. Real slow.
They also can see around corners, through shit and never fuck around and text or beat the kids or fish for a nickel under the seat while driving - like so many of these self absorbed NOVA snowflake bitches. All of this means that the car knows there are things that MIGHT be in the road...even if it's a deer beside the road...up ahead and the car slows the fuck down to a speed that is capable of stopping should the object suddenly move into the roadway.