Should driverless cars kill their own passengers to save a pedestrian?

[bennyboy]

So....that's my response as well.  I have to listen to the man constantly on topics like this, and the truth is....I agree.  Not just because he's my hubby (although he may be my hubby because we tend to agree on stuff like this, if you see what I mean).

I do not necessarily disagree with you or hubby, however, this is a new field.  A software game; It is not like immoral/errant programming is going to let loose the bad guy into our world to reek havoc.  Electric plants; it is not like immoral/errant programming is going to allow the power lines to slither around and attack people.  Brownouts need to consider hospitals and public safety, but that is pretty much cut and dried.

The one point I disagree on is that there is a moral consideration due to the fact that the programmer does have to consider life and death situations that can be directly attributed to the device and software rather than an indirect result.  The program itself will have no concept of that or anything for that matter, it will be all up to the programmer that is far removed from any situation that may arise. Granted that after the fact the programmers will be intimately involved along with the company, lawyers, family and anyone else that has suffered a loss or has something to gain.

In the first trial of 'death by driverless vehicle', any bets on how many times "moral" will be said?

All this is relatively trivial, because the fact is that in almost 100% of cases, cars will be driving at a speed which will allow them to stop safely if a pedestrian steps onto the road.  Cars will be able to accurately calculate the stopping distances in different weather, based on measurements of wheel friction over x minutes.  They will not talk on their cell phones, do their makeup, or have a bad day at the office and drive faster than normal.