- 注册
- 2003-06-21
- 消息
- 32,650
- 荣誉分数
- 4,558
- 声望点数
- 373
这文章有意思
http://gizmodo.com/your-self-driving-car-will-be-programmed-to-kill-you-de-1782499265
Situation A:
选择撞死一堆人还是选择撞死一个人？
Situation B:
选择撞死行人，还是撞死车里的人？
Situation C:
选择撞死车里的人，还是很多行人？
“Most people want to live in in a world where cars will minimize casualties. But everybody wants their own car to protect them at all costs.”
A new study published in Science shows there’s a big disconnect between the kinds of ethical programming we want these vehicles to have, and the kinds of cars we actually want to ride in. Surveys done last year demonstrate that people tend to take a utilitarian approach to safety ethics. That is, they generally agree that a car with one rider should swerve off the road and crash to avoid a crowd of 10 pedestrians. But when the survey’s respondents were asked if they’d actually ride in a vehicle programmed in this way, they said no thanks.
http://gizmodo.com/your-self-driving-car-will-be-programmed-to-kill-you-de-1782499265
Situation A:
选择撞死一堆人还是选择撞死一个人？
Situation B:
选择撞死行人，还是撞死车里的人？
Situation C:
选择撞死车里的人，还是很多行人？
“Most people want to live in in a world where cars will minimize casualties. But everybody wants their own car to protect them at all costs.”
A new study published in Science shows there’s a big disconnect between the kinds of ethical programming we want these vehicles to have, and the kinds of cars we actually want to ride in. Surveys done last year demonstrate that people tend to take a utilitarian approach to safety ethics. That is, they generally agree that a car with one rider should swerve off the road and crash to avoid a crowd of 10 pedestrians. But when the survey’s respondents were asked if they’d actually ride in a vehicle programmed in this way, they said no thanks.
