如果说有任何收获的话,那就是这个实验证明,要在无人驾驶汽车的道德上达成共识是极其困难的。
Similar surveys show that the utilitarian ideal of saving the greatest number of lives works pretty well for most people as long as they are not the roadkill.
类似调查显示,对大多数人而言,救下最多条命这个功利主义观念合情合理——只要他们自己不在车轮下丧生。
I am pessimistic that we can simply pool our morality and subscribe to a norm — because, at least for me, the norm is not normal
我对于只是把大家的道德集合到一起、然后遵守一个规范感到很悲观,因为,至少在我看来,这个规范不是正常的。
This is the hurdle faced by makers of self-driving cars, which promise safer roads overall by reducing human error: who will buy a vehicle run on murderous algorithms they do not agree with, let alone a car programmed to sacrifice its occupants?
这是自动驾驶汽车厂商面临的障碍。他们承诺通过减少人类过错来提高整体道路安全,但是谁会购买一辆由他本人并不认可的杀戮算法操控的汽车呢?更别提程序设定牺牲车上乘客的汽车了。
It is the idea of premeditated killing that is most troubling.
最令人不安的正是这种预谋杀戮的构想。
That sensibility renders the death penalty widely unpalatable, and ensures abortion and euthanasia remain contentious areas of regulation.
【无人驾驶汽车如何处置险情】相关文章:
最新
2019-01-07
2019-01-07
2019-01-07
2019-01-07
2019-01-07
2019-01-05