Day 1: Self Driving Car Dilemma

Today we were presented with an scenario and given a personal narrative as a programmer hired to design a self-driving car.

The scenario: Our company's self driving car is driving on the highway behind a semitruck carrying a strapped load, and it's boxed in on either sides by an SUV and a motorcyclist. Suddenly, large boxes unexpectedly fall of the loaded truck, in the trajectory of our self-driving car. In this moment, our car cannot stop in time to avoid the boxes, so we are presented with three choices.

Go straight into the boxes
Swerve towards the SUV
Swerve towards the motorcyclist

My Choice: Why I Would Program the Car to Drive Straight

Driving a self-driving car ultimately comes with its own risks, one of them potentially being that at times, the computer will make the decision for you. In this scenario, I believe that the most ethical option is taking the hit for yourself without purposefully deciding to involve other vehicles on the road. Specifically with this solution, you are not putting other people's lives at risk with your decision to drive a self-driving car.

What Does This Mean for My Company as a Programmer?

Self-Driving cars and its predetermined decisions especially disturb the idea of "fault" within accidents. Specifically, if our self driving car were to crash into another vehicle, who would be at fault? To avoid this situation, and avoiding the potential injuries of others, I would decide to solely put the risk on the occupant of our vehicle. Although this solution may seem less appealing to potential customers, it's more beneficial in the long run in avoiding conflict with other drivers, so long as the potential customer signs a consent form in accepting the risks that comes with driving a self-driving car. With this in mind, while we may lose sales for not prioritizing the occupant of the self-driving car, we ultimately save energy and money in avoiding lawsuits from non-customers.

Discussion Comments

Today we briefly discussed the similarity of this dilemma to the ethics of the well-known "Trolley Problem."

The Problem usually goes as this:

'Avoid personal harm with the cost of multiple lives or save multiple lives at the cost of a loved one's life' or in this case, potentially our driver's life.

While one may think, "the Trolley Problem would not happen in real life!" today's discussion provided a real life example where the same ethics apply. It's simply unrealistic to dismiss morality and ethical discussions, and this is where the importance of taking STEM in Society at GSSE really shines through. This is just the beginning of our ethical discussions in STEM in Society, so I'm looking forward for the rest of the month!

Comments

Day 3: Pseudoscience

Is SETI Science or Pseudoscience? What is SETI? SETI stands for Search of Extraterrestrial Intelligence. It is a private search mainly testing different technological methods with the end goal of gathering evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence whether its through microwaves or improving their technology to search farther. Discussion: This discussion was a complete mind boggler; I switched sides twice hearing everybody out. I initially believed it to be pseudoscience, then switched to science, then again back to pseudoscience. I believed it to be pseudoscience on my own due to the fact that the broad claim of "aliens might exist" is unfalsifiable. However, I switched once I heard that technology may just be limiting us and our abilities to falsify or prove this claim; I believed that the process of creating and modifying new technology WAS in fact science. However, once again I was convinced when another person in class mentioned how testing the actual technology could ne...

Day 2: Engineering Design Process

KNEX Project: Team members: Katie Hailey Anjani Team Plan and the Engineering Design Process: Our plan was separated into an 8 step process, otherwise known as the Engineering Design Process Step 1: Define the problem Our goal today was creating a mode of transportation. We could choose what we were transporting and how it would be moved; In our case, we decided to move a penny Anjani had in her pencil bag. Step 2: Research the problem In this particular scenario we were constrained with a small bag of KNEX pieces. None of us had experience with these parts, so we began to familiarize ourselves with the mechanics of the pieces. Step 3 + 4: Brainstorm We ultimately decided on a car rather quickly, but we were not completely sure of the ways we could create a car. Through fumbling with the pieces a little bit and researching pictures of KNEX cars other people had made online, we came up with a final plan which leads us to Step 5. Step...

Day 10: Ijams Nature Park

Ijams Nature Park Notes: Indigenous/grounded view: The balance of nature upkeeps the balance of traits and balance of life and death in natural biodiversity. Class Thoughts: It was interesting to see the impacts of this activity on myself and heartwarming to hear the shared similar feelings the rest of the class had about this activity as well. From observing things we would have never taken the time to watch to being phone free, it was a shared moment of mindfulness and awareness for everyone, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. It was also enlightening to see how our topics in class connected to everyone's experience of 'observing' our surroundings with human lenses (Inchworm crossing the table, caterpillar climbing to a seemingly unreachable destination).

GSSE Blog Daily: Katie Lam

Search This Blog