Philosophical cars

>>1376701
Solipsism.

Util.
the car must run the man over.

File: 1467350397936.jpg (637KB, 4500x4334px) Image search: [Google]

637KB, 4500x4334px

>>1376905

>>1376701
>implying you will ever drive a self driving car that is vulnerable to there flaws
Bruh, a quantum computer could control every single car on the road at any given time perfectly and there will be no accidents assuming there are no outside influences which could be extremley small outside of natural phenoemna which could still be tracked and forseen by other quantum computers (weather events, wet roads hell even fucking meteors).

Simply put, you are an idiot if you get into a self driving car when they still crash into each other.

One that favours operator preservation at all costs.

>>1376931
This. No one would drive a self driving car that would sacrifice their life to save others.

>>1376701
Protect the driver is highest priority

why the deontological car is on a one way.

>>1377274
Because utilitarian car is a dick.

Philosophy is useless