Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13
3202 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 560

Trusted

  Reply # 1420529 4-Nov-2015 10:50
One person supports this post
Send private message

Paul1977:
reven:
ubergeeknz: Of course the cop-out option is that in this hypothetical extreme situation, the vehicle hands control to the human driver.


the human would have less time to make a decision and probably end up just crashing causing more harm.

only situations I can really think of that the car couldnt avoid are 
- things falling off the back of trucks etc
- rockslides etc

pedestrians, other cars etc the automated cars should have enough sensors (well the google one's definitely appear to) to be fully aware of these and safely avoid any issue.


I'm not sure I agree. I think the biggest hazard the self-driving car needs to deal with are all the unpredictable human-driven cars.




them seem to be able to handle that pretty well.  sure if someone just decides to smash into your side, theres not a lot you can do, but the SDC would see this before a human would, so could
- slow down
- speed up
- change lanes to avoid
- prepare to be hit

3202 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 560

Trusted

  Reply # 1420531 4-Nov-2015 10:54
Send private message

ubergeeknz: Here's my prediction:

Self-drive cars will become main-stream.  First semi-auto (supervised) and then full auto, or maybe both at once for different circumstances.  It will take a good while as old vehicle stock is replaced by capable vehicles.

Nothing will happen for a while.  Once a critical mass is reached, vehicle safety will improve overall as self drive vehicles will generally drive within safe parameters, be more aware, not distracted, not in a hurry, etc, all the things which usually cause humans to have vehicle accidents.  Traffic should be better too since they won't be lane jumping, will better predict traffic flows, etc.

Then maybe there will be one of these weird and wonderful situations we are hypothesising, maybe a couple.  Swerve to avoid a person on the road, go over a blind cliff, or mow down some children due to unexpected road conditions (eg black ice) causing an inability to stop or steer. Bound to sooner or later, right?

It will be news for a week or two, maybe it will be considered a "scandal".  But everyone will move on when they realise it's an unsolvable problem, that a human would not have done better in all likelihood, and the benefits outweigh the downsides 100 to 1 or more.

Really, I think some are making a big deal out of nothing.  IMO if a vehicle is programmed and capable of avoiding 99% of accidents it will far outperform human drivers, even if in that 1% it manages to s**t the bed completely.


completely agree, but as a programmer you have to handle that situation. thats the what the discussion is about, you have to program instructions/logic for what the car should do but first you have to decide what that logic should be.

can't just leave

public void UnavoidableCrashScenario() {
throw new NotImplementedException();
}

 
 
 
 


Onward
11346 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5059

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1420535 4-Nov-2015 10:59
Send private message

I honestly believe that autonomous vehicles on public roads is going to go horribly wrong. I hope I am wrong but my gut tells me different.

One fear I have is there will be some out there who believe they know better than the developers and will hack their vehicles with disastrous results.




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


2816 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1463

Subscriber

  Reply # 1420549 4-Nov-2015 11:06
3 people support this post
Send private message

I would expect a self driving car's primary goal to be to protect its occupants.
I certainly would not own or ride in a car that was programmed to kill my family for "the greater good".








Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

 

Thinking about signing up to BigPipe? Get $20 credit with my referral link.


1852 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 513


  Reply # 1420550 4-Nov-2015 11:08
Send private message

reven:
Paul1977:
reven:
ubergeeknz: Of course the cop-out option is that in this hypothetical extreme situation, the vehicle hands control to the human driver.


the human would have less time to make a decision and probably end up just crashing causing more harm.

only situations I can really think of that the car couldnt avoid are 
- things falling off the back of trucks etc
- rockslides etc

pedestrians, other cars etc the automated cars should have enough sensors (well the google one's definitely appear to) to be fully aware of these and safely avoid any issue.


I'm not sure I agree. I think the biggest hazard the self-driving car needs to deal with are all the unpredictable human-driven cars.




them seem to be able to handle that pretty well.  sure if someone just decides to smash into your side, theres not a lot you can do, but the SDC would see this before a human would, so could
- slow down
- speed up
- change lanes to avoid
- prepare to be hit


I agree that they are (or will be) better that humans at avoiding accidents, but I still think that most situations of unavoidable accidents will be the result of other human-driven vehicles (as opposed to things like rockslides etc).

5845 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2677

Subscriber

  Reply # 1420562 4-Nov-2015 11:27
Send private message

An autonomous machine should be designed to do what a person would, only better. This introduces an element of randomness into any ethical decision-making. One time the occupants might get it, another time the pedestrian children. Still better than the human average overall and the random ('human') aspect would make its occasional mistakes more acceptable. 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


458 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 95

Subscriber

  Reply # 1420599 4-Nov-2015 11:58
2 people support this post
Send private message

MikeB4: I honestly believe that autonomous vehicles on public roads is going to go horribly wrong. I hope I am wrong but my gut tells me different.

One fear I have is there will be some out there who believe they know better than the developers and will hack their vehicles with disastrous results.


How could it be any more disastrous than what we currently have?

People drive drunk or drugged.
People drive tired.
People get angry.
People drive without a licence.
People make bad decisions.

I could go on but this would be a rather long list.






Geoff E

1218 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 511


  Reply # 1420600 4-Nov-2015 11:58
One person supports this post
Send private message

SaltyNZ:
andrew027: But surely these "ethical" decisions are contrary to the first two laws of robotics and a self-driving car having to make a choice between harming its occupants or harming other road users would irreparably damage its positronic brain?

Tsk. You never read the later books, then? The Zeroth Law?

I'm not sure a car choosing between injuring me by crashing into a power pole or injuring a pedestrian by driving up on the footpath would result in harm to humanity either way, unless the pedestrian was on the verge of creating a 100% effective cancer drug, or was a tyrannical world leader, etc. and these are things it would difficult for the car to know.

The first thing to work on shouldn't be "algorithmic morality" but reducing the number of accidents, which is surely the whole point of self-driving cars anyway. In the case of an accident that is truly "unavoidable", I'd expect the vehicle to protect the occupants. Laws will also need to be set for "driver" behaviour, e.g. must they still be paying attention to what's going on around them or can they read a book, or even fall asleep, while the car takes them from A to B? My cynical side says it will probably take a US lawsuit by a pedestrian or cyclist injured by a self-driving car to iron the laws out - is the "driver" or the manufacturer of the vehicle responsible?

Fully Operational
3343 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1088

Trusted
Vocus
Subscriber

  Reply # 1420607 4-Nov-2015 12:04
Send private message

andrew027: In the case of an accident that is truly "unavoidable", I'd expect the vehicle to protect the occupants.


See this makes sense, it is realistically the decision most humans would make in the split second leading up to the situation.  

Or how about a slider option from "prefer occupant safety" to "prefer safety of others", giving the "morality" choice to the operator of the vehicle?

3576 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 389

Trusted

  Reply # 1420613 4-Nov-2015 12:10
4 people support this post
Send private message

Or the vehicle manufacturers can choose where in the scale. But in the case of VW. They'll advertise as will protect you the most, but actually do the opposite. And in test conditions use a morality defeat device.




Previously known as psycik

NextPVR/OpenHAB: 
Gigabyte AMD A8 Brix --> Samsung LA46A650D via HDMI, NextPVR,OpenHAB with Aeotech ZWave Controller
Media:Chromecast v2, ATV4, Roku3, Raspberry PI temperature Sensors and Bluetooth LE Sensors,HDHomeRun Dual
Windows 2012 
Host (Plex Server/Crashplan): 2x2TB, 2x3TB, 1x4TB using DriveBender, Samsung 850 evo 512 GB SSD, Hyper-V Server with 1xW10, 1xW2k8, 2xUbuntu 16.04 LTS, Crashplan, NextPVR channel for Plex,NextPVR Metadata Agent and Scanner for Plex


Fully Operational
3343 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1088

Trusted
Vocus
Subscriber

  Reply # 1420619 4-Nov-2015 12:17
Send private message

davidcole: Or the vehicle manufacturers can choose where in the scale. But in the case of VW. They'll advertise as will protect you the most, but actually do the opposite. And in test conditions use a morality defeat device.


"The "premium" package includes a 10 speaker Bose sound system and the Morality algorithm is less likely to kill you in a life-or-death situation"

1445 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 481

Subscriber

  Reply # 1420620 4-Nov-2015 12:19
3 people support this post
Send private message

Self drive cars don't have to be perfect.
Current minimally accepted skill are low.

After all we are quite happy to allow 17 year olds with mates to cruise round.

A.

SJB

1042 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 222

Trusted

  Reply # 1420710 4-Nov-2015 12:47
One person supports this post
Send private message

As a software developer I am NEVER, EVER getting in a self drive car, taxi or bus.

And anyone who does or decides to buy one should be sectioned as soon as possible.

458 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 95

Subscriber

  Reply # 1420713 4-Nov-2015 12:50
6 people support this post
Send private message

SJB: As a software developer I am NEVER, EVER getting in a self drive car, taxi or bus.

And anyone who does or decides to buy one should be sectioned as soon as possible.


Well you should never get on an aircraft as well then.




Geoff E

3202 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 560

Trusted

  Reply # 1420729 4-Nov-2015 13:10
5 people support this post
Send private message

SJB: As a software developer I am NEVER, EVER getting in a self drive car, taxi or bus.

And anyone who does or decides to buy one should be sectioned as soon as possible.


remind me never to hire you :P

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Phone prices rising as users move upmarket
Posted 24-Nov-2017 17:16


Talking net neutrality on RNZ Nine-to-Noon
Posted 24-Nov-2017 12:11


Air New Zealand experiments with blockchain technology
Posted 23-Nov-2017 15:39


Symantec selects Amazon Web Services to deliver cloud security
Posted 23-Nov-2017 10:40


New Zealand Ministry of Education chooses Unisys for cloud-based education resourcing management system
Posted 22-Nov-2017 22:00


Business analytics software powers profits for NZ wine producers
Posted 22-Nov-2017 21:52


Pyrios strikes up alliance with Microsoft integrator UC Logiq
Posted 22-Nov-2017 21:51


The New Zealand IT services ecosystem - it's all digital down here
Posted 22-Nov-2017 21:49


Volvo to supply tens of thousands of autonomous drive compatible cars to Uber
Posted 22-Nov-2017 21:46


From small to medium and beyond: Navigating the ERP battlefield
Posted 21-Nov-2017 21:12


Business owners: ERP software selection starts (and finishes) with you
Posted 21-Nov-2017 21:11


Why I'm not an early adopter
Posted 21-Nov-2017 10:39


Netatmo launches smart home products in New Zealand
Posted 20-Nov-2017 20:06


Huawei Mate 10: Punchy, long battery life, artificial intelligence
Posted 20-Nov-2017 16:30


Propel launch Disney Star Wars Laser Battle Drones
Posted 19-Nov-2017 21:26



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.