Thinkabit, the mind boggles!
I hope I am not around to see a world run by computers.

I can see some advantages to autonomous cars of course, but I remain a bit frightened of all the possible problems they will bring.
I think maybe the cost of making these sorts of cars will be a major factor in whether they will be popular or not.

Dear Suseonline,

If you were a passenger in an aircraft caught in fog and the safest way to land was the pilot switching to autopilot and letting the computer take control, would you insist on a hands on approach?

Most wouldn't. In many ways this is just an extension. As thinkabit says the autonomous cars may well continue to prove far safer than human driven ones. If you wanting to take a long trip with the kids or grandkids, the idea of having the the best driver at the controls would have to be a consideration, or does your pride take precedence of their safety? Perhaps you would enjoy watching a movie with them rather than dealing with rain and bright oncoming lights when driving through the night? Well Ford has already thought of that;
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2016-03/10/ford-patents-movie-window-for-driverless-cars

Remember this isn't a world run by computer but one serviced by them.

Dear foxy,

I have read similar arguments elsewhere and they seem to be a rehash from a single source. All are pretty soft in my opinion but let's look at their self proclaimed 'strongest argument'.

“d) The question is wrong.”

Why?

“As we know, the trolley problem has no ethically right solution- because in principle we can not weigh one life against another – , which makes it practically impossible for self-driving cars to solve the dilemma.”

This is to misstate the scenario. Most people who are posed the trolley problem would choose to pull the lever to sacrifice one life to save 5. If instead it were one to one they would not touch it. There is no dilemma.

The closest thing to the actual trolley dilemma would be to launch, ejector seat style, one of the car's passengers into the path of the car to slow it down enough to save the others. No one would think that was acceptable.

Were there any other arguments put forward in the article you linked to that you thought had any validity?

Ultimately the speed and processing power of onboard computers will force ethics in software programming.

SR,

While you have raised an interesting moot point, the reality is that in the foreseeable future AI is not going to be used to judge the value of human life, irrespective of whether it could or not, simply take the action that would most likely prevent or reduce the severity of an accident.

In 90% of cases this would involve maximum braking using ABS in a straight line, as anything else would tend to make the situation worse.

From what I've seen of testing here in SA, it will be many moons before these contraptions will be safe. I will never forget the look on the transport minister's face when the car he was a passenger in flattened a row of cardbard cut-outs it was supposed to brake for. Any money spent on the dangerously-increasing number of cars on the road should go toward making the cars we have safer, and convincing hoon drivers of the error of their ways.

then along comes a computer hacker with a warped sense of humour and CHAOS!!

Dear Shadow Minister,

We must have a different driving style. Most of my near misses involved not only braking but also taking evasive action and at least one memorable occasion involved speeding up when passing a Double B as a car had pulled into traffic ahead of me without looking. Could I have braked hard to avoid a collision? Possibly, but certainly the safest option was to accelerate.

As with anyone who had driven for any number of years there have been many close calls. The one that stands out though was pulling out at night to overtake a bus. In that first fraction of a second my brain registered something not being right and I pulled back in just in time to miss a speeding car without its headlight on coming from the other direction. It was very much a near death experience.

The thing is that I doubt very much I could have pulled off the same manoeuvre now. Eyesight and reactions are not what they once were.

It is interesting talking to younger people about autonomous cars. All seem to want to retain control when first asked but when it is put to them that it is not unforeseeable that after a night on the town they could go to their car and instruct it to take them home in autonomous mode without the risk of being caught for drink driving their attitude changes. The thought of not having to put up with cold and sometimes dangerous taxi ranks or shared rides is instantly appealing.

If available software enhancements would minimise harm is certain situations why wouldn't you want them to be more reactive than simply braking?

I should be noted that the software in these cars is capable of learning. A section of road that required 'hands on' control the first few times can be driven over autonomously after the software learns from the driver how to traverse it.

Also there are constant updates to the software, the one released this week allows for parking and retrieval via the car's remote.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3392647/Tesla-software-update-allows-self-parking-limits-speed.html

All very exciting stuff.