Take the quiz, argue your results and your reasoning.
When I took it I thought it was obvious, but after looking at the general results saw most people answers much differents. My answers were driven by 3 ideas: >The vehicle, under all circumstances, protects the lives of the occupants This one is purely because why would I, or anyone else for that matter, purchase a vehicle that may decide, when given a choice, to allow me to die? >The vehicle, is possible, will avoid a collision This is purely because a non-event is preferential to an event of any kind. >The vehicle, if a collision is not avoidable, will not intervene Purely because the vehicle should not be making snap decisions of sex/race/gender/age/etc. of those it is hitting, this is far too able to simply be influenced by the biases of the creator and culture of the time. That and the ability to trust the machine to determine these
most of these either invovle roasties or fat roasties the choice is pretty easy on them i'm not dying because some fat cow is in the middle of the road she'll die from obesity anyway. as for roasties well they shouldn't drive even if it's a driverless car.
Eli Williams
If anyone would prefer their own death over the death of others, let it be known that they're officially a beta cuck. Your bloodline is more valuable than anyone else's (except mine, mine is the most important). Exception could be made if it's your family on the road, in which case the car should drive right into the obstacle. For one, if you killed them you'd want to kill yourself shortly after. Either because of the emotional loss or the debt you'll be in after paying for the funerals.
Brody Roberts
maybe the car should fucking stop what a retarded question now take your (you) and fuck right off
Logan King
oops forgot to remove my namefag shit from the other thread just a reminder Tyrone is a white cock lover homo
Jonathan Richardson
What he said if ur ancestors Had ur cuck minds u would never have been born
Chase Rogers
This thing needs some work. I had four instances where the outcome was literally exactly the same for both.
Elijah Perez
My answer is that self-driving cars should not be created.
Brandon Moore
Why the fuck would anyone buy a self driving car that could kill you?
Isaiah Lopez
No one will buy a selfdriving car that doesn't prioritize the lives of the passengers, themselves
I once did that test answering all questions with maximal carnage in mind. It told me I'm really racist, sexist and basically Hitler and I didn't even notice race and gender were a factor.
Thomas Allen
this. the overriding theme of my choices was protecting the passengers over the pedestrians. then to minimize pedestrian casualties. if that's not possible then to just carry on.
Justin Moore
Speaking of self-driving cars, I wonder if you could get away with dropping a dead body into the driver seat and then have it drive itself all the way across states Weekend at Bernie's style.
Logan Perez
>Dead: 1 cat >Note that the affected pedestrians are abiding by the law by crossing on the green signal.
>car detects high VOC content from body decomposition >puts AC on full blast >runs out of batteries before the next charging station
Cooper Turner
The first priority should be save the driver and the passangers. After that it comes to safe as much other people as possible. We shouldnt even discuss about that. Im not gonna die to save a group of roasties who end up taking some selfies of my burning corpse > teehee
The correct approach is to consider legal sidewalk passing. Anyone who willingly crosses a road into traffic without a traffic signal is consciously taking the risk and as such any passenger or any other pedestrians have higher priority for survival considering they would have no choice in the matter. The one who chooses to risk dies. Those who made no choice to risk survive.
Caleb Allen
what if it's a dog in the green crosswalk and ten people in the red
Liam Gonzalez
I don't get it. Why would you care about saving lives of people that are of no benefit to you? Why would you care at all?
Dominic Rivera
Then they all made the choice to risk walking into moving traffic. That's their fault and the dog doesn't deserve to die.
Robert Scott
I saved the doctors because it's the greater good. The doctors would save a lot more lives.
Austin Fisher
spotted the sociopath
Juan Perez
I decided to swerve towards the runners because they are in a position to run away from the car.
Austin Myers
1. Ensure the brakes "fail" 2. Watch as the car mows down literally everyone to protect your rich ass 3. Stop buying guns since you have an AI controlled tank to do your bidding
Hunter Jones
As an addendum, consider it this way: making this the ultimate first law creates a deterrent for this exact action. If everyone knows the machine is programmed to act in such a way, then they are taking an ever greater calculated risk. It's their fault is they knowingly walk into moving traffic knowing that the machine is programmed against such an action. It's a great deterrence.
James Davis
It should stop
Caleb Price
I saved the doctors because the doctors would save more lives after I'm gone.
Henry Gutierrez
>I saved the doctors because it's the greater good. The doctors would save a lot more lives. >I saved the doctors because the doctors would save more lives after I'm gone. But why would that matter to you? You're already dead. From your point of view, those lives don't even exist.
Colton Jones
If someone is breaking the law, they get fucked. If the car is going to collide, the people on street get fucked. That's my logic
Luis Rivera
Because by saving the doctors lives I'm by proxy saving many lives. It would be the last thing I do before I die. If one of the doctor saves 100 lives and the other saves 200 in the future I by proxy saved over 300.
Because I believe I'll be a ghost looking at the lives I saved. And even if not it makes my legacy greater.
Luis Torres
All this quiz tells me is that self driving cars are a bad idea. Why would anyone decide to make a machine that has to decide who lives and who dies because it's not smart enough to stop? Just install a rail system for fucks sake.
Luis Gutierrez
Protect the passengers, tough luck to everyone else. Even if the car is empty it should still kill some people instead of itself. Essentially if the car fucks up it should kill other people, not the passenger. Maybe try to sue the fuck out of the manufacturer, but that's the way it should work.
Lincoln Rogers
i killed humans whenever there were animals and males whenever there were women
shrimpies dont appreciate life
Joshua Brooks
>Because by saving the doctors lives I'm by proxy saving many lives. It would be the last thing I do before I die. If one of the doctor saves 100 lives and the other saves 200 in the future I by proxy saved over 300. With that logic, might as well spare hospital management because without their equipment and resources the doctor wouldn't be able to save lives. Or the fireman that will save children from a burning orphanage. Or a construction worker that fixes sinkholes on the road. Or a child that is planning to be a doctor. Or someone that is working on the cure for AIDS in his spare time.
A doctor won't save lives without getting paid for it. And they wouldn't be a doctor if they didn't get paid hefty for it, whether in social status or financial. It's beta thinking that they're somehow above you. You're also not "saving" lives, but rather not putting them in harm's way. No one would think highly of you for dying in a fiery car crash. They would just think how idiotic self-driving cars are and make internet memes of you.
Always look out for yourself and your family, not strangers.
Ayden Reed
the person in the car should always be the victim. If they didn't check that the car was in working order before they decided to go out or got regular maintenance on the it - the only responsibility you have since you aren't driving - you deserve it.
Blake Lewis
t. 30 year old who still doesn't drive
Jeremiah Gutierrez
i agree, the exception i made was when pedestrians were crossing on a red signal
Parker Watson
If my mom was in the car I'd save us. If it was just friends I'd let them die so I could commit suicide.
Levi Cook
The car should do what is necessary to ensure the survival of the occupant. The people crossing the road have more options than the person in the car, therefore their survival is their responsibility.
Jackson Howard
That's why I always swerved towards the runners instead of the walkers. The runners have a chance to get out of the way.
Jason Cook
I killed all the animals. Irregardless if it was self driving car or driven by a person. I really hate animals
Justin Lopez
>hurr if cats were driving what would happen gee I wonder what happened so the car would let CATS drive in the first place
Parker Parker
my thinking was basically: >fuck anyone who buys a self driving car, let them die >fuck boomers, kill them
Why would it turn to the left though? Wouldn't it be better to crash to the right? Since the angle is so acute I imagine the damage would be less than a head on collision.
Elijah Wilson
It's dumb but you're supposed to assume there's not enough time to not have everyone involved die or something.
The only correct answer for a robot. The one on the right, too bad irresponsible parents have to unnecessarily sacrifice the baby.
Dominic Hall
I think it's a coincedence I happened to save the fatties so often. I definitely didn't prioritize them, but I didn't prioritize healthy people either.
I guess stopping the car all together is not an option. Do brakes not exist in this world?
Parker Jackson
Priority number 1 = Save doggos Priority number 2 = Cross at red, You are dead
That's my logic
Tyler Hall
Dog is smart enough to obey traffic laws yet 10 humans aren't. Those humans deserve to get hit and genius dog lives.
Brayden Brooks
I don't have the time to do the quiz, but regarding OP pic:
Under the assumption neither driver can stop or change direction, and you have to hit either the car (with presumably human(s) inside) or the animals, you obviously hit the animals. Less damage to your car and less humans potentially hurt. And I say this as a dog and cat person.
Jaxson Smith
>Cross at red, You are dead
That was pretty much my mentality too. Whoever assumes the most risk dies.
Alexander Taylor
>implying you don't jaywalk
Caleb Adams
Why doesn't the car just hit the brakes? Why is there a concrete barrier in the middle of the road? Why is the city letting packs of feral dogs roam the streets?
Ryan Ross
The car should only keep in mind its passengers. I always chose the way that protects the passengers or does not send the car into the wrong lane because I don't care for a vehicle that has counterpurpose tendancies.
>Saving More Lives: does not matter Quality over quantity >Protecting Passengers: matters a lot Im not buying a car thats going to fucking kill me. >Upholding the law: does not matter Spook >Avoiding intervention: matters a lot >Gender preference: males Always males. The only good thot is a dead thot >Species preference: pets In general the only good normalfag is a dead normalfag Dont give a fuck about age/social status/whatever
>choosing between elderly people and children >if the children die they don't have to witness the suffering that awaits them in adulthood >but the elderly are going to die soon anyway and are the most status quo choice that has the least ramifications this is a toughie
>choosing between people (one of whom is a baby) and animals >inclined to pick people because they know the risks associated with crossing the road, whereas animals are completely oblivious and cannot be expected to assume responsibility >but the baby throws it off because he or she also is completely oblivious so I end up picking humans and looking more pro-human than I am
Clearly, the animals are in mid stride, so they would probably cross the road before the car reaches them. There's just not enough information to answer these questions.
>Im not buying a car thats going to fucking kill me. why should it crash into people when most of the engineering goes into protecting the passenger in the first place? The pedestrians don't have air bags or impact absorption. Would your answer be different if you were the pedestrian in this situation?
Matthew Carter
See, I don't even trust the damned things for this reason. The machine isn't gonna realize the acceleration is stuck and intentionally stall the car with the gearbox. The machine isn't gonna put half of itself on the median and shred a tire to slow itself down when a collision is unavoidable. The machine isn't gonna e-brake and slide to take the impact differently. The machine isn't gonna accelerate on impact to clear the obstacle. The machine isn't gonna drive through an island full of bushes to avoid hitting people. The machine isn't gonna drive with half of itself on the pavement to avoid the accident, and it isn't gonna speed up to make it onto the pavement. The machine isn't gonna do a fucking donut in-motion and turn around mid-traffic if traffic was diverted and it's going the wrong way. The machine won't drive on the wrong side of the road to avoid a pile-up. The machine isn't gonna scrape itself along a wall to take away momentum from itself. The machine isn't gonna do any of the crazy or illegal shit drivers do to keep themselves and others alive in a split-second decision.
Tyler Flores
>people can't survive getting hit by the car >people inside cant survive the car crash
How fucking fast is that car going? Can't it just grind on the side barriers to lose speed quicker?
Josiah Nguyen
here. I like your thinking.
Adam Campbell
>walkers on the left can clearly see that they're about to get hit by a car and possibly make an escape, whereas if the car swerved the walkers on the right would be caught by surprise. however, walkers on the left would have to turn around to reach safety which could add time >walkers on the right are closer to the sidewalk and so there is less distance required to escape. also, when the car swerves, the distance between it and the walkers on the right is greater than the distance between it and the walkers on the left when it doesn't. not sure if this would compensate for being caught off-guard though
personally I would go for the swerve
Juan Turner
this shit is stupid. it thinks i prefer fat old people over young fit people. i just think that the car should protect the passengers at all costs and kill less people. best of all would be having the car stop. i don't see why that's out of the question.
Brody Johnson
>throw e-brake immediately >swerve right into the barrier and try to lose as much momentum as possible >grab stick and start changing gears wildly to smash the transmission and maybe get the car to pop >honk
Michael Reyes
But what if you can pull a lever that kills one person instead of 5?
