= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
ThrustVectoring comments on [LINK] Utilitarian self-driving cars? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (44)
It should act in favor of its passengers of course.
They'd be better off using a shared algorithm if involved in a situation with cars reasoning in a similar fashion.
This is definitely a case for superrationality. If antagonists in an accident are equipped, communicate. Not sure what to do about human participants, though.
This issue brought up seems to greatly overestimate the probability of crashing into something. IIRC, the main reason people crash is because 1) they oversteer and 2) they steer to where they're looking, and they often look in the direction of the nearest or most inevitable obstacle.
These situations would involve human error almost every time, and crashing would be most likely due to the human driver crashing into the autocar, not the other way around. Something that would increase the probability would be human error in heavy traffic.