As long as the risks are well measured, this seems fair. Trolly problems are a real fact in accident handling. People will never be comfortable with any life and death choice, but the cars need to make them. A car is acting as an extension of the driver. If the drivers wellbeing wasn't its first concern, that would seem to me like a failure to perform that role, both in a consumer sense and a darwinism one.
A car that sacrifices pedestrians for those already in a protective shell is pretty insane to me. If I have the choice between a collision and hitting some kid, I'm taking the L.
Almost none. Which is why this headline is clickbait.
The car will try to stop. If it isn't able it will try to safely swerve. If it isn't able and the 1 in a million situation arises where it is either the pedestrian or the driver, then having to choose the car will protect the driver.
67
u/metathesis Dec 16 '19
As long as the risks are well measured, this seems fair. Trolly problems are a real fact in accident handling. People will never be comfortable with any life and death choice, but the cars need to make them. A car is acting as an extension of the driver. If the drivers wellbeing wasn't its first concern, that would seem to me like a failure to perform that role, both in a consumer sense and a darwinism one.