Alphabet's Self-Driving Cars to Get Their First Real Riders

Re:Alphabet's Self-Driving Cars to Get Their First Real Riders by foolfoolz on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @11:40AM (#14194499)

I think you slept through an ethics class

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Alphabet's Self-Driving Cars to Get Their First Real Riders by kinghajj on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @12:09PM (#14194866)

Maybe they just subscribe to an extreme utilitarian ethical philosophy?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Alphabet's Self-Driving Cars to Get Their First Real Riders by maxerickson on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @12:16PM (#14194949)

If that is the context their analysis is bad.

There's little evidence that anything Tesla has deployed is an important step towards viable self driving vehicles.

They are apparently mapping the locations of odd situations, but that is pretty meh (and doesn't require the mapping system to be in control of the vehicle).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Alphabet's Self-Driving Cars to Get Their First Real Riders by brilliantcode on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @12:56PM (#14195515)

Well, if Tesla was a Japanese company and people died, ritual suicide would be the one of two possible options. The other is dishonor.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Alphabet's Self-Driving Cars to Get Their First Real Riders by adrianN on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @12:42PM (#14195305)

There are different kinds of ethics.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Alphabet's Self-Driving Cars to Get Their First Real Riders by brilliantcode on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @12:53PM (#14195467)

The one where you build and market something but then it turns out to be something less than expectations.

Ethic issues arise when the expectation is that the occupants will live and then your product falling short on those critical constraint.

Because when you design something for the masses, you are directly responsible for the deaths caused by your product.

This is not a matter of philosophy, from one engineer to another, it's our duty.

[ Parent | on HN ]