re: Regarding AI and Driverless Cars...

quote:

---

Those are not original scenarios. Those two examples have been talked about a ton in other contexts.

---

I wasn't trying to pass them off as original scenarios.

In any case, in regards to the thread topic, I'm not a fan of AI in pretty much any way.

I remember listening to the podcast that I referenced and they went into the fact that AI and driverless cars will most likely put all the truck drivers, cab drivers, pizza delivery drivers, and pretty much any business that has to do with drivers out of business. I'm not for that.

Somebody mentioned the fact that robots will one day be performing surgery and other doctoral duties, I'm not for that either.

I can't see in any way how AI expanding is a good for the human race. I don't think we should be dishelving ourselves willingly as top dogs on this planet. I think with AI, we are playing a very dangerous and as far as I'm concerned, a no sum game when it comes to the human race.

AI will ruin society in my mind.

quote:

---

In any case, in regards to the thread topic, I'm not a fan of AI in pretty much any way.

I remember listening to the podcast that I referenced and they went into the fact that AI and driverless cars will most likely put all the truck drivers out of business. I'm not for that.

Somebody mentioned the fact that robots will one day be performing surgery and other doctoral duties, I'm not for that either.

I can't see in any way how AI expanding is a good for the human race. I don't think we should be dishelving ourselves willingly as top dogs on this planet. I think with AI, we are playing a very dangerous and as far as I'm concerned, a no sum game when it comes to the human race.

AI will ruin society in my mind.

---

I get the Terminator concern and though still science fiction it deserves and gets much contemplation.

Truck driver jobs as we know them will be gone in a matter of time, just like buggy whip makers. While it is a good paying job (albeit a tough life if OTR) that doesn't require a lot of education it is one that if we don't move away from will put more burdens on our ability to compete with other countries for manufacturing. As a bonus it will reduce traffic fatalities/injuries and reduce the cost of bringing goods to market.

As for robot surgeons that is well on its way to fruition now but needs a lot of refinement to be totally autonomous. I get that you are not for it but say 30 years from now you need a life saving surgery and have the option of a human or robotic surgeon. If the robot's morbidity/mortality outcomes are 1/10th of the human surgeon which will you pick? There will come a time where computer generated differential diagnoses are far more accurate than a human physician.

While I certainly agree it will change society I don't really buy that it WILL ruin society (though it has that possibility) but also accept ruin can be very subjective and my idea of ruined may be very different from yours.

It is absolutely a dangerous path but it is a path that someone will take, better for the US to be a trailblazer. While not a perfect analogy but consider if North Korea was the first to go down the nuclear bomb path...

quote:

---

1) Lets say there's a train coming wildly down the track and there's five guys who are standing directly in the train's path, but you can pull a lever and the train will veer away to another set of tracks and on the other set of tracks, there's only one person. Do you pull the lever or not?

---

Simple decision. You pull the lever. Better to kill one than 5.

quote:

---

Now, let's say the same scenario is occurring. Except, instead of the lever and separate set of tracks, there's a fat man on a bridge with you. You can push the man off the bridge to stop the train from hitting the five people. Do you push the fat man?

---

You absolutely push fat man. You only have 2 options. Neither are good but you always take the less risky approach.

quote:

---

2) Like the last episode of MASH, you and a group of people are hiding out from an enemy who is certain to kill you if they find you. You have a baby who is sick and you know if anybody makes a sound, the enemy will certainly find you and kill you. Do you kill your sick child in order to save the lives of the people around you by smothering the child?

---

See this is where it gets difficult. I wouldnt want to live without my child. My decision ultimately affects everyone involved. But it would never come to that. We all die because everyone in the bunker knows my child has to die. They would attack and I would defend. We all die because of the ruckus.

quote:

---

I ask this because they paralleled these two scenarios with driverless cars and AI and let's say you were riding in your car and a wreck was about to happen in which either you or the people you wreck into will die, how is the AI in the driverless car supposed to decide for you who gets to die and who doesn't?

---

How can the AI determine who will die in a car wreck? I have yet to see any argument made on preventing death that is inevitable. Like the LV shooting. There is no AI in the world could have predicted which person lives and which dies in split seconds. The car will never know and neither will the passengers.

quote:

---

How can the AI determine who will die in a car wreck? I have yet to see any argument made on preventing death that is inevitable. Like the LV shooting. There is no AI in the world could have predicted which person lives and which dies in split seconds. The car will never know and neither will the passengers.

---

In fairness, the LV example has far more variables than your average car accident. The physics are car accidents are fairly well understood. While not perfect, especially given some humans are more fragile than others, an algorithm could be written that would allow the car to preserve the most lives based on a statistical model. Even if not perfect it could easily do a better job than most humans in preserving the most life in an accident.

There are two keys here. One, with all autonomous cars the number of accidents, should drop significantly and the severity of the ones that do occur could be often be mitigated but a much quicker thinking computer with much more data available to it than a human. There are long functioning examples of this sort of process in industrial settings all over the world.

quote:

---

Obtuse1

---

You seem like you've done a whole lot of research on the AI subject. And while I can't agree with you on the morality of having essentially a computer make the decisions on who lives and who dies, I can agree with you on the fact that we do need to be trailblazers in this regard. Because whether or not I like it, I do know it's coming and it's better to be first with something that will inevitably change the world as we know it.

The answer to this question is obvious.

The cars should be programmed to take out the uglier of the two groups. Ugly people don't matter in the long run.