-
I don't think the ethical questions are that difficult really.
This 90% isn't an end game position. This is a trolley problem in a scenario where the track continues and an endless sequence of trolley problems with multiple switching positions that, if managed well, will get us to as close to zero road deaths as we can ever possibly get.
The question isn't "is it good enough?" when the alternative that we currently have is to leave those 90% to still die. In the balance of "good enough" questions, "is it good enough to sacrifice 9 people because we couldn't save the 10th?" should be the absolute loser every single time. I can't imagine why you're arguing the case against that.
Where do we set the limit for robots? It's hard to answer that question without first establishing the parameters of regulatory control, liabilities and responsibility, standardised safety protocols, information sharing protocols and so on. But if 90% doesn't fit into that limit against our current piss poor performance, we have definitely fucked up. Honestly, I might balk at 5% or 10% improvement. Largely on the grounds that much of it may be very difficult to accurately attribute. At around 15%, I personally start feeling comfortable pushing the yes button.
In my mind, the question should be; is this good enough for now? That's because, as stated, this isn't an end position. Achieving that 90% more doesn't mean you stop, it means you can have more resources to work on eliminating that other 10%. You can't actually work on that remaining 10% if you haven't dealt with the that starting 90% in the first place.
The_Seldom_Killer-
I can't imagine why you're arguing the case against that.
I think it’s the belief that tech interventions should be perfect on launch
That said, getting accidently killed by an autonomous robot in public sucks balls in a way that the same outcome by human error probably doesn’t.
-
Also, full AV is the end state. This tech has lots of trickle down effects. Look at the existing collision mitigation systems in use on current cars. Lane keeping systems for motorway driving which reduce fatigue and presumably crashes. All saving lives right now, every day. Let’s not shut this shit down but have strict controls on how they experiment on public roads.
Howard
Ramsaye
It again raises the ethical questions about AVs. If they cut the number of deaths by say 90% but people are still dying on the roads is that good enough? Society 'accepts' a pretty high price in death toll for the benefits of vehicle transport controlled by humans - where do we set that limit for robots?