Mercedes is making multiple levels of self-driving cars, they range from self-parking to cars that will take you step by step to your location. These more advanced levels of cars will be programmed to sacrifice pedestrians and other drivers to save the passenger of the Merc. This is a huge question of ethics in technology, whose life is worth more? Is it worth it to save the driver over five other people? Christoph von Hugo the manager of Mercedes driverless car division said, “If you know you can save at least one person, at least save that one. Save the one in the car,” von Hugo told during an interview. von Hugo also goes on to say if we know we can save the driver we are going to do it, there is no guarantee that anyone else wouldn't get hurt, so why put them in the algorithm. In a situation straight out of iRobot, the driverless car would completely be oblivious to other people.
This may take years to perfect but it has already proved necessary, a Tesla took a life in 2016, it ran its driver under a semi, killing him. In a car accident, nothing is certain, but if the life of the driver can be saved then why not make that a certain outcome. That is Mercedes's defense against putting its driver over all else, and while there are certain limitations to the technology so we may be safe from loose Mercedes for years to come.
Hi Conner, interesting post! I really like the topic you have chosen as I am a big fan of companies that make self-driving cars such as Tesla or Mercedes and am excited what the future has in store for them. The issue that you bring up is definitely a hard one to tackle, from both a logical and ethical standpoint. Your blog post is quite brief though. I would recommend adding a source about specifically which cars are actually programmed to sacrifice pedestrians over the lives of the passengers as well as fixing some grammatical errors. Also, adding some images would make the post more engaging.
ReplyDeleteHi Conner,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading about the topic and thought you had an attention grabbing headline. I feel the post is a little brief and adding context such as, for example, what your opinions are about what Christoph von Hugo said in your given quote, could provide some more substance to the post. Perhaps include the sources you used as well as a news story or article about any particular cases you brought up as examples, such as the Tesla death. This is a very difficult issue with driverless cars and I don't believe there really is a correct answer.
Hi Conner, your topic is really interesting and thought invoking. I think it's a valid question of eithcs, however, I would take into account the side of Mercedes when considering ethics. It's more of a two way street, in my opinion, from the perspective of Mercedes, it's reasonable to value their client first and foremost. Your question itself is very reasonable, in the future I would try to present from both sides when discussing these types of topics.
ReplyDeleteHi Conner! Your topic is definitely unique and current given the advancement of driverless cars. Your article is concise and to the point, and your headline is certainly attention grabbing. I feel your article would benefit from some more depth as you could expand on certain points like the implications of Hugo's statement. Furthermore, bringing in some of the class readings into your article could help support some of your ethics arguments. Overall, I believe your topic is strong and very relevant in today's day and age!
ReplyDeleteHi Connor,
ReplyDeleteThat is a pretty interesting ethics issue you have brought up. It's kind of similar to the Trolley problem: do you sacrifice one to save five, or vice versa? I think it's interesting to see philosophy intersect with technology, so good topic! I think the article would benefit from more details and expanding on the points of both sides.
Hello Connor! First off, great job. I enjoyed the topic of your post thoroughly, and feel it is very relevant to our current time, making this blog a useful read. To make this post even better, I would suggest a couple lines of who you are and why this topic was of interest to you- maybe even add a personal and relevant anecdote? This will help you develop a unique and personable voice. Regarding your cited quote, you did a beautiful job of introducing the author and explaining why he is credible, however I believe there is room in this post to not only mention what he says, but what YOU think about it. Great job, and I'm looking forward to seeing your edits!
ReplyDeleteHey Connor! Great blog post, the subject of self driving cars and the safety of the driver is a very interesting topic. I think I would have liked to read more about Mercedes thought process on when saving the driver causes more deaths in the outside world. I also would've liked some images to break up the text and make it a little more readable. Nonetheless, it was a very interesting blog post!
ReplyDeleteHi Connor! I love the topic since the ethic has always been a big problem in the technology industry. Every big tech companies has a committee on that but that wasn't enough and when it comes to deciding life, programs can never have a say on that, right? To make your post more convincing, more connections to the reading might be great. The quotations and statements from the known can make your opinion and summary more supportive and give readers a think. Overall, amazing post!
ReplyDeleteHi Conner, nice piece. This post is definitely controversial because so many people are caught up in optimization and "making the world a better place" with their AI cars and other cutting edge technologies but it's definitely important that the issues aren't swept under the rug. This post reminds me of the trolley problem that is presented in probably every philosophy class ever taught at this university. Again, very insightful piece, thanks for the read.
ReplyDelete