It gets really interesting when you think about the clash of corporate greed in this area. It’s not hard to imagine car companies selling you a premium option (or worse, subscriptions) where the car will make decisions prioritizing your life and safety over people outside, even if it’s multiple people who would get maimed or killed to keep the driver safe.
At least I’d hope that they informed the driver/car owner about the AI system in their car and - if it so is - that The AI could decide against their life.
Then they “just” need to decide is it worth it to get such a car with such an AI system or not.
Not telling them that their car has such an AI would be unethical, to say the least.
Also, a question remains of whether the law should dictate the ethical standards that all autonomous vehicles must use, or whether individual autonomous car owners or drivers should determine their car's ethical values, such as favoring safety of the owner or the owner's family over the safety of others.[13] Although most people would not be willing to use an automated car that might sacrifice themselves in a life-or-death dilemma, some[who?] believe the somewhat counterintuitive claim that using mandatory ethics values would nevertheless be in their best interest. According to Gogoll and Müller, "the reason is, simply put, that [personalized ethics settings] would most likely result in a prisoner’s dilemma."[50]
Add comment