Started By
Message

re: Availability of self driving cars to the public

Posted on 12/23/16 at 2:06 pm to
Posted by NOFOX
New Orleans
Member since Jan 2014
10128 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 2:06 pm to
quote:

So we should ensure people keep dying as a result?

What's your exact point here?




My point is that the moral imperative argument that considerable lives will be saved by self driving cars is an overestimate from a moral perspective because other lives will be lost. It is just something that is never mentioned in these arguments when people talk about saving lives.
Posted by buffbraz
Member since Nov 2005
5761 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 2:11 pm to
So hypothetically, if we could make it so that 0 people would die in a car accident for the next year, you would say that there is a moral dilemma due to organ harvesting for dying people? I understand people are saved from organ harvesting but the end does not justify the means.
Posted by Bjorn Cyborg
Member since Sep 2016
36494 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 2:24 pm to
Military drones, jet airliners, helicopters, MRI machines, life-saving hospital systems, nuclear reactors, power grids.

There are all things that can be hacked. Yet, here we are.
Posted by NOFOX
New Orleans
Member since Jan 2014
10128 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 2:27 pm to
I am saying that people arguing that self driving cars will save X lives or Y dollars are only looking at it from one perspective and that in reality the arguments are relativley overstated because of that.
Posted by Bjorn Cyborg
Member since Sep 2016
36494 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 2:30 pm to
Well, it's a shitty argument. I guess you're against air bags and seatbelts as well? Think of all the lives we could save if we got rid of them.
Posted by NOFOX
New Orleans
Member since Jan 2014
10128 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 2:35 pm to
quote:

Well, it's a shitty argument. I guess you're against air bags and seatbelts as well? Think of all the lives we could save if we got rid of them.


It's a cost/benefit analysis. Arguing we should spend whatever we can to implement a system that has far reaching implications to save 30k lives a year is ridiculous. Should we have 30mph speed zones everywhere with massive coverage by traffic cameras??? Should we physically limit the speeds of cars??? Those things will save lives too, Are you for that?
Posted by buffbraz
Member since Nov 2005
5761 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 2:42 pm to
We can only hope people with his train of thought aren't working on any safety commissions! Terrible argument
Posted by NOFOX
New Orleans
Member since Jan 2014
10128 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 3:18 pm to
quote:

We can only hope people with his train of thought aren't working on any safety commissions! Terrible argument


Do you support state mandated governors limiting automobile speeds and the reduction of speed limits? If not, why not? That would immediately save lives. Saving lives is not the only consideration at play and again, the idea that self driving cars will save a tremendous number of lives is relatively speaking overstated.
Posted by buffbraz
Member since Nov 2005
5761 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 3:32 pm to
quote:

Do you support state mandated governors limiting automobile speeds and the reduction of speed limits? If not, why not?


Yes I do support this. Many cars have an automatic cutoff at a certain speed which is good and I do believe speed limits should be lower in some areas.....now you never answered my question.....if we could hypothetically reduce the number of fatal accidents to zero or approaching zero with autonomous vehicles would you be for it? Yes or no and why or why not?
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
120445 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 3:38 pm to
quote:

In Atlanta or Houston...it's not going to do shite for me.



The roads and freeways in Atlanta seemed to have been designed by a paranoid schizophrenic. I can only imagine machines making say getting into Buckhead much easier.
Posted by shel311
McKinney, Texas
Member since Aug 2004
112944 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 4:03 pm to
quote:

Military drones, jet airliners, helicopters, MRI machines, life-saving hospital systems, nuclear reactors, power grids.

There are all things that can be hacked. Yet, here we are.


Right, it's just odd to me that autonomous cars are where the line is drawn on that.

Also, I believe that same UF poster said we need to stop making these cars until the hacking problem "is fixed," but I don't know that it is a problem as I have never heard a story of a car being hacked as of now.
Posted by shel311
McKinney, Texas
Member since Aug 2004
112944 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 4:07 pm to
quote:

It's a cost/benefit analysis. Arguing we should spend whatever we can to implement a system that has far reaching implications to save 30k lives a year is ridiculous.
Earlier you mentioned 25,000 people are saved per year from organs from people who die in car accidents and threw out the 30k number who die from car accidents.

Shouldn't we factor in the 1 million plus who are injured/disabled in car accidents every year, as well as the billions and billions of dollars spent as a result of these accidents?

This post was edited on 12/23/16 at 4:08 pm
Posted by OneMoreTime
Florida Gulf Coast Fan
Member since Dec 2008
61865 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 4:24 pm to
quote:


Other poster mentioned that self driving cars are a moral imperative because 30k people die each year in car wrecks when maybe 90% is preventable. As usual it is not so black and white from a moral perspective because if those people do not die many others will since the #1 source of organ donation is carwrecks
Bruh.
Posted by OneMoreTime
Florida Gulf Coast Fan
Member since Dec 2008
61865 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 4:26 pm to
The arguments people are using against autonomous cars in this thread are incredible.
Posted by Breesus
Unplug
Member since Jan 2010
69549 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 5:33 pm to
In all honesty this thread contains some of the absolute stupidest arguments I've ever read on this site.
Posted by Napoleon
Kenna
Member since Dec 2007
74865 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 6:09 pm to
I would say they will be around and nearly commonplace by 2025.
Posted by buffbraz
Member since Nov 2005
5761 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 7:44 pm to
quote:

In all honesty this thread contains some of the absolute stupidest arguments I've ever read on this site.


Lol, yea the OT has hit an all time low.....
Posted by LSUsmartass
Scompton
Member since Sep 2004
82755 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 7:47 pm to
Will never happen, I'm surprised to see so many think it will happen.
Posted by gatorhater08
Baton Rouge
Member since Apr 2011
2511 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 8:09 pm to
I do not understand why people talk in absolutes. A lot things can and will happen and nothing is absolute either way.
Posted by TejasHorn
High Plains Driftin'
Member since Mar 2007
11801 posts
Posted on 12/23/16 at 8:16 pm to
quote:

Will never happen, I'm surprised to see so many think it will happen.


Tend to agree... There are way too many hurdles and "moral driving dilemmas" to overcome in our lifetime.

However, Uber and Tesla, etc are advancing robotics while they try at least.
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram