If a Google Car Has to Kill Someone, Who Should it Be?

Discuss morality and ethics in this message board.
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: If a Google Car Has to Kill Someone, Who Should it Be?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

AwkwardPanda wrote: December 1st, 2021, 11:54 pm Maybe the car will require a "morality customization" program. It presents a series of questions and choices to the owner of the car, about what the car should do in different moral scenarios. The car will not be able to drive before the owner selects their moral preferences. That way, when a self-driving car ends up killing someone, the owner of the car will be persecuted as they would now. It would give the company decent deniability to the crime, and it would allow the owner of the car to think over such moral scenarios, instead of choosing on the spot.
Just as we - those of us who use Windows PCs - don't own Windows, and can't control it, so a 'self-driving' car is beyond the 'owner's' control too. It is not reasonable to hold the 'owner' responsible for the actions of a car that they are unable to control. That isn't just. But then, who is responsible in the case of an 'accident'?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
figliar0
Posts: 15
Joined: November 7th, 2021, 4:52 pm

Re: If a Google Car Has to Kill Someone, Who Should it Be?

Post by figliar0 »

AwkwardPanda wrote: December 1st, 2021, 11:54 pm Maybe the car will require a "morality customization" program. It presents a series of questions and choices to the owner of the car, about what the car should do in different moral scenarios. The car will not be able to drive before the owner selects their moral preferences. That way, when a self-driving car ends up killing someone, the owner of the car will be persecuted as they would now. It would give the company decent deniability to the crime, and it would allow the owner of the car to think over such moral scenarios, instead of choosing on the spot.
I do not think it is wise to take responsibility for result of someone's program execution. There are program bugs, security vulnerabilities etc. Even programmer of any software do not give you waranty of any kind, how can be user responsible for that?
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: If a Google Car Has to Kill Someone, Who Should it Be?

Post by AverageBozo »

Pattern-chaser wrote: December 2nd, 2021, 8:50 am
AwkwardPanda wrote: December 1st, 2021, 11:54 pm Maybe the car will require a "morality customization" program. It presents a series of questions and choices to the owner of the car, about what the car should do in different moral scenarios. The car will not be able to drive before the owner selects their moral preferences. That way, when a self-driving car ends up killing someone, the owner of the car will be persecuted as they would now. It would give the company decent deniability to the crime, and it would allow the owner of the car to think over such moral scenarios, instead of choosing on the spot.
Just as we - those of us who use Windows PCs - don't own Windows, and can't control it, so a 'self-driving' car is beyond the 'owner's' control too. It is not reasonable to hold the 'owner' responsible for the actions of a car that they are unable to control. That isn't just. But then, who is responsible in the case of an 'accident'?
Would you have a different view if the person in the driver seat were able to override the car’s control in an instant at any time?
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: If a Google Car Has to Kill Someone, Who Should it Be?

Post by Terrapin Station »

WanderingGaze22 wrote: November 9th, 2021, 4:56 am Should it do a full-quick stop to avoid hitting a galloping deer knowing there is a speeding car right behind it?
Whether a person or a computer is operating a car, if a car behind another can't accommodate a "full, quick stop," then it's driving too close. You can't follow so close to another person that you're only safe just in case they don't do something like suddenly jam on their brakes, lol.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: If a Google Car Has to Kill Someone, Who Should it Be?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Pattern-chaser wrote: December 2nd, 2021, 8:50 am
AwkwardPanda wrote: December 1st, 2021, 11:54 pm Maybe the car will require a "morality customization" program. It presents a series of questions and choices to the owner of the car, about what the car should do in different moral scenarios. The car will not be able to drive before the owner selects their moral preferences. That way, when a self-driving car ends up killing someone, the owner of the car will be persecuted as they would now. It would give the company decent deniability to the crime, and it would allow the owner of the car to think over such moral scenarios, instead of choosing on the spot.
Just as we - those of us who use Windows PCs - don't own Windows, and can't control it, so a 'self-driving' car is beyond the 'owner's' control too. It is not reasonable to hold the 'owner' responsible for the actions of a car that they are unable to control. That isn't just. But then, who is responsible in the case of an 'accident'?
AverageBozo wrote: December 2nd, 2021, 5:32 pm Would you have a different view if the person in the driver seat were able to override the car’s control in an instant at any time?
Your question takes us outside the OP, which refers to cars that 'drive themselves', not cars that are driven and controlled by a human, with robotic assistance.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: If a Google Car Has to Kill Someone, Who Should it Be?

Post by AverageBozo »

Pattern-chaser wrote: December 3rd, 2021, 10:19 am
Pattern-chaser wrote: December 2nd, 2021, 8:50 am
AwkwardPanda wrote: December 1st, 2021, 11:54 pm Maybe the car will require a "morality customization" program. It presents a series of questions and choices to the owner of the car, about what the car should do in different moral scenarios. The car will not be able to drive before the owner selects their moral preferences. That way, when a self-driving car ends up killing someone, the owner of the car will be persecuted as they would now. It would give the company decent deniability to the crime, and it would allow the owner of the car to think over such moral scenarios, instead of choosing on the spot.
Just as we - those of us who use Windows PCs - don't own Windows, and can't control it, so a 'self-driving' car is beyond the 'owner's' control too. It is not reasonable to hold the 'owner' responsible for the actions of a car that they are unable to control. That isn't just. But then, who is responsible in the case of an 'accident'?
AverageBozo wrote: December 2nd, 2021, 5:32 pm Would you have a different view if the person in the driver seat were able to override the car’s control in an instant at any time?
Your question takes us outside the OP, which refers to cars that 'drive themselves', not cars that are driven and controlled by a human, with robotic assistance.
Are there “self-driving” cars that are not equipped with a manual override for a human occupant to use?

If no, then I was certainly outside of the OP.
figliar0
Posts: 15
Joined: November 7th, 2021, 4:52 pm

Re: If a Google Car Has to Kill Someone, Who Should it Be?

Post by figliar0 »

AverageBozo wrote: December 2nd, 2021, 5:32 pm
Pattern-chaser wrote: December 2nd, 2021, 8:50 am
AwkwardPanda wrote: December 1st, 2021, 11:54 pm Maybe the car will require a "morality customization" program. It presents a series of questions and choices to the owner of the car, about what the car should do in different moral scenarios. The car will not be able to drive before the owner selects their moral preferences. That way, when a self-driving car ends up killing someone, the owner of the car will be persecuted as they would now. It would give the company decent deniability to the crime, and it would allow the owner of the car to think over such moral scenarios, instead of choosing on the spot.
Just as we - those of us who use Windows PCs - don't own Windows, and can't control it, so a 'self-driving' car is beyond the 'owner's' control too. It is not reasonable to hold the 'owner' responsible for the actions of a car that they are unable to control. That isn't just. But then, who is responsible in the case of an 'accident'?
Would you have a different view if the person in the driver seat were able to override the car’s control in an instant at any time?
But is it possible to override control instantly? The person on the seat have to hold steering wheel all the time, that person need to pay attention all the time. That person need to disable autopilot by a blink of an eye or will have to rely on some kind of auto-switch. If all this is needed, what is the purpose of autopilot?
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: If a Google Car Has to Kill Someone, Who Should it Be?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

AwkwardPanda wrote: December 1st, 2021, 11:54 pm Maybe the car will require a "morality customization" program. It presents a series of questions and choices to the owner of the car, about what the car should do in different moral scenarios. The car will not be able to drive before the owner selects their moral preferences. That way, when a self-driving car ends up killing someone, the owner of the car will be persecuted as they would now. It would give the company decent deniability to the crime, and it would allow the owner of the car to think over such moral scenarios, instead of choosing on the spot.
Pattern-chaser wrote: December 2nd, 2021, 8:50 am Just as we - those of us who use Windows PCs - don't own Windows, and can't control it, so a 'self-driving' car is beyond the 'owner's' control too. It is not reasonable to hold the 'owner' responsible for the actions of a car that they are unable to control. That isn't just. But then, who is responsible in the case of an 'accident'?
AverageBozo wrote: December 2nd, 2021, 5:32 pm Would you have a different view if the person in the driver seat were able to override the car’s control in an instant at any time?
figliar0 wrote: December 3rd, 2021, 3:32 pm But is it possible to override control instantly? The person on the seat have to hold steering wheel all the time, that person need to pay attention all the time. That person need to disable autopilot by a blink of an eye or will have to rely on some kind of auto-switch. If all this is needed, what is the purpose of autopilot?
Exactly. We are discussing what might/could happen when self-driving cars 'drive themselves' without human interference. 👍
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: If a Google Car Has to Kill Someone, Who Should it Be?

Post by AverageBozo »

figliar0 wrote: December 3rd, 2021, 3:32 pm
AverageBozo wrote: December 2nd, 2021, 5:32 pm
Pattern-chaser wrote: December 2nd, 2021, 8:50 am
AwkwardPanda wrote: December 1st, 2021, 11:54 pm Maybe the car will require a "morality customization" program. It presents a series of questions and choices to the owner of the car, about what the car should do in different moral scenarios. The car will not be able to drive before the owner selects their moral preferences. That way, when a self-driving car ends up killing someone, the owner of the car will be persecuted as they would now. It would give the company decent deniability to the crime, and it would allow the owner of the car to think over such moral scenarios, instead of choosing on the spot.
Just as we - those of us who use Windows PCs - don't own Windows, and can't control it, so a 'self-driving' car is beyond the 'owner's' control too. It is not reasonable to hold the 'owner' responsible for the actions of a car that they are unable to control. That isn't just. But then, who is responsible in the case of an 'accident'?
Would you have a different view if the person in the driver seat were able to override the car’s control in an instant at any time?
But is it possible to override control instantly? The person on the seat have to hold steering wheel all the time, that person need to pay attention all the time. That person need to disable autopilot by a blink of an eye or will have to rely on some kind of auto-switch. If all this is needed, what is the purpose of autopilot?
Excellent post. The only purpose I can envision for such an arrangement would be for the manufacturer to eliminate or reduce its exposure to lawsuits. Such a car would likely be made as long as it can be sold to early adapters or to the public in general.
User avatar
Mounce574
Premium Member
Posts: 156
Joined: October 8th, 2021, 2:24 am
Location: Oklahoma

Re: If a Google Car Has to Kill Someone, Who Should it Be?

Post by Mounce574 »

Based on the title of this one, The Google Car should Sacrifice itself.
"Facts don't care about your feelings." Ben Shapiro
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." NF from Motto
Good_Egg
Posts: 782
Joined: January 27th, 2022, 5:12 am

Re: If a Google Car Has to Kill Someone, Who Should it Be?

Post by Good_Egg »

I'd question the assumption that if somebody dies in an accident then there should automatically be a lawsuit to make somebody compensate the victim's relatives. Maybe that's US culture for you ?

The common law tradition has long distinguished deliberate harm from negligence from accident.

If the owner and manufacturer of the self-driving vehicle have each made every reasonable effort to avoid a collision, why should either be punished ? Why does every collision have to be somebody's culpable fault ? Whatever happened to the notion of accidents ?
"Opinions are fiercest.. ..when the evidence to support or refute them is weakest" - Druin Burch
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: If a Google Car Has to Kill Someone, Who Should it Be?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Good_Egg wrote: August 5th, 2023, 4:41 am I'd question the assumption that if somebody dies in an accident then there should automatically be a lawsuit to make somebody compensate the victim's relatives. Maybe that's US culture for you ?

The common law tradition has long distinguished deliberate harm from negligence from accident.

If the owner and manufacturer of the self-driving vehicle have each made every reasonable effort to avoid a collision, why should either be punished ? Why does every collision have to be somebody's culpable fault ? Whatever happened to the notion of accidents ?
Yes, the question here is — is there such a thing as an accident, or is someone always 'to blame'?

The law in many countries is moving toward the understanding that there are no 'accidents'; there is always blame, and thereby, liability. Accidents generate no income... Personally, I disagree, but I doubt this will have any effect on the rest of the world.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
Post Reply

Return to “Ethics and Morality”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021