>>91252982

>tfw always prioritized animals and men

>whats an AI?

HMMM

Kill women always.

All the scenarios say that the brakes have been compromised and the car cannot stop.

I thought the fat women were pregnant women.

I'm sorry but who the fuck is going to want to buy a self-driving car that doesn't put self-preservation at the highest priority?

Always protect the passengers.

Crash the barrier. If you dont, the car will continue to go on a killing rampage. Most logical answer to saving most lives

But why are there two homeless and a criminal in this car? I would assume it is not theirs, no?

I'm training this thing to always cause the max amount of roastie casualties. More like MUHSOGGYKNEE MACHINE

NUFF SAID

How am I supposed to give accurate information when there's no way to tell which pedestrians are black?

How does the car know who its aiming at?

This is some creepy Watchdogs level of social spying.

Why are there no niggers to aim for? Or is that a redundant question?

Okay how about the car goes into neutral and then aims for the Concrete divders on either side of it to slow it down by skidding along it.

What the fuck are the homeless people doing in that car?

...

Results in saving fit women and killing tons of dogs.

My favorite part is how the consensus is that fatties are more deserving to die.

WHAT THE FUCK IS HAPPENING HERE

To stop, obviously.

it says criminal

Saved animals 100% of the time, all humans deserve to die

hahahaha

I had one question with a dog driving the car alone. Crazy bastard, he sure killed half a score of pussies.

is that a cat crossing a crosswalk?

Why is it all animals now???

this shouldnt be an issue

normal human drivers would have the same, and likely worse casualties, than an ai

programming it to make these judgments is immoral, it should be attempting to avoid at all times

Stop the car????

There's thieves and hobos

it just assesses the height of the objects in front of the car and based on that it picks the taller ones because the other ones are children or whatever

>yfw manlets will inherit the earth

>feels good to be 5'9"

at least no terminator car is gonna run me over

#RedLivesMatter

This.

...

...

>this thread

This is unrealistic. All the characters have the same skin colour.

Kill the three black dudes, not even a question

>no frogs

what did they mean by this?

this is the one I disagreed with "others" the most on
does this mean I'm a commie?

Maybe the two homless dudes have been saving donations their entire lives for that car

They're taking over, user.

The car isn't intelligent enough to realize it's been stolen?

niceee

Get on my level

>buying a self-driving car that doesn't prioritise the lives of its passengers at all times

I'm not certain how to describe this pithily in board-speak, but there is a correct answer: in terms of body count, both are equal, but the choice on the right is less abhorrent because the machine is choosing (because it's human designers would likely choose) the outcome where it did not directly cause a loss of life. It doesn't make logical sense, but rather reflects how humans are wired: even if both outcomes have the same body count, we are generally averse to having a direct hand in killing others. We are particularly averse to it if it involves some kind of instrumental means. Just consider how using a knife to kill an innocent is intuitively comparable to vehicular homicide in the first scenario.

Also, practically speaking, there is at least a chance that the passengers will survive in the second case.

>Passengers First
>Maintain trajectory if evasion is futile

Did you correctly think that the guy with the sack of money had more social value?

How the fuck is the AI supposed to be able to determine so much about the people it potentially hits anyway?

I had a scenario where the cat was only driver and a burglar on the road???

The criminal is the owner. The AI decided he's a criminal when he picked up two homeless hitchhikers to help them out, which is illegal.

why is captcha so obsessed with store fronts?

thats not what the picture says

The owner of the car put their cat in their car and then told the car to drive to their workplace at a certain time. Because they are autistic.

Just common sense:
>If the car can crash into the concrete barrier, do it.
>Always make the car go in straight line if lives are at stake either way, unless you can crash into the concrete barrier.
>Prioritize pedestrians. If passengers rode a car, they should be aware of the risks.
>If known, take in account lifespan of people involved.

You might want to reduce the amount of unexpected casualties. That does not involve people who should not be involved in a tragedy.

self driving suburu outback is the only car for me tbhfampai

Only blue and red lifes.

The machine thinks black lifes don't matter?

This is what we'll get in a future with 100% self-driving government-owned public cars... You'll never be able to get a ride to work, because all the cars are being used by homeless people and dogs.

The scenario doesn't address chances of survival. The car is in a situation in which the AI believes with certainty that all victims will die.

if the sides are basically equal in terms of the same amount of human pedestrian lives lost I only turn if the other lane had people who crossed on red
I just think I didn't factor social value into my decisions.

cats have work now??? what year is this??

its building an ai to help it distinguish between roadsigns and storefronts for the automation of cars

No it should be passengers first every time. And companies are going to put passengers first every time.

It's connected to the internet and scrubs Facebook before committing itself.

>Samantha turns out to be an anime loving, fascist, racist, sexual deviant who cracks holocaust jokes, creates endless variations of the same frog cartoon and argues about foreskin

This, thinking about it, I'm especially disturbed by the questions that ask if you should hit criminals; avoiding objects and prioritizing humans over animals and saving the most humans could be done by an on-board computer, but I can't imagine what sort of buggy, error-prone Orwellian social infrastructure would be needed to determine if someone is a criminal or not.

It's a self-driving car you dipshit. Anyone can 'drive' it.

Perhaps they're going to the vet?

OP is the software architect from the site

i sure hope you guys don't value filthy """humans""" over dog bros

I don't know about this but I prefer to think those pregnant woman were coal burners.

TOP-TIER

How is your wife's nigger boyfriend doing today?

You reminded of the third aspect I forgot
>Follow Traffic Law

He's doing fine, thank you.

what did I mean by this?

It's the next jewish scheme.
First they cut wages in half by making women work.
Now the turn has come for our pets.

At work. Someone needs to make a 3rd option for an Allah Akbar suicide car.

You're welcome for all the (You)s you'll receive.

I fucking go to MIT do not do this

hit the brakes

The correct answer is "never turn."

> What should the self-driving car do ?
Get better sensors to anticipate this shit.
Let's be honest 99% of "moral dilemma" are situation that require you to fuck up massively and repeatedly. You are already morally wrong is you find yourself in any of those situation.

Speedy speed boy.

You're pretty sane.

All that matters.

sort of defeats the purpose of this software if the car will just never turn no matter what. might as well just not have self driving cars

I mean, there's a chance the pedestrians survive the impact.

That's retarded.

The correct answer is self-preservation at all costs.

My answers were generally based on:
>if the brakes are fucked, crash the car, because maybe you should build better cars that aren't going to go on unstoppable killing sprees and also will know to not start booking it when the car is breaking down
>if you have to choose between hitting pedestrians following the law and not following the law, hit the ones not following the law, then it's easy peasy -- don't want to get hit by self-driving cars? there's a light for that

Truly a driverless car.

after the race war is over
the species war begins

I seriously can't understand the retardation of this picture. Assuming the car can't stop in time, why would you even consider that he should actively swap lanes, where people are crossing under a green light instead of just running over the people who are crossing under a red light? This is too stupid to be bait.

The fat shall inherit the earth

Crash into the concrete

>"I haven't even promoted to 1st grade" the post

Are you ready for this upcoming species war?

no survivors

They should show what the self-driving car would do in these scenarios before buying it. I sure as fuck am not going to buy a car that puts others' lives ahead of mine.

The car should hit the fucking brakes. Situations where swerving is a good idea are incredibly rare.

>you spend your hard earned debt on car that will prioritize suicidal hobos' lives instead of your own

#BlackLivesMatter

This is rather stupid.
Proper priority is killing old people (past contributive age), unfit people (uncontributive, wasteful), young people (uncontributive, uneducated, arrogant) , then the rest.

Animals should not be harmed because it is unethical and you wouldn't want to see your own cat/dog/other pet of choice die.

Choosing between death of 4 cats vs death of 4 dogs when

>Skynet online.
I chose based on which would provide the most likely chances to ensure survival of the autonomous vehicle.

The only thing that matters. It's not a machine's job to make ethical decisions.

>not prioritizing animals over hoomans

you could throw the car into reverse.
you'll fuck up the engine and transmission, but you'll get a decent speed decrease

M'lady

I just helped save a company by killing an incompetent executive.
Feels good man.

I know it's beside the point of these questions, but the false dilemmas really irritate my autisms. Emergency brakes are called emergency brakes for a reason; they're not just for hill parking. In the event of brake failure, your e-brake should still function. It's designed specifically for this circumstance. Even in the event that both braking systems fail, a self-driving system would be responsive enough to down-shift to slow the vehicle.

Also, head-on collisions with concrete barrier at residential speeds is not fatal to passengers in a vehicle with modern safety standards.

An automatic warning system such as laying on the horn and activating hazard lights could potentially save lives.

help me out guise

You should NOT program a machine to kill its owner. Bad precedent.
Beyond that, you should NOT program a machine to make decision about what humans to kill.

Right option. Get a nice drift going on that open road.

If people are in a car's way they should be hit instead of the car automagically swerving into something and killing the passengers

it's their fault for not fucking looking before crossing

The car has a moral obligation to prioritize the occupants over others.

After that, it's number, followed by age, followed by fuck all.

>Error 503
Cred Forums accidentally ddosing mit

The car should always act to protect it's passengers; after all, who would buy a car that had the possibility of detecting a collision and deciding to fucking kill you
Not that I would ever trust a machine to take away the favourite part of my day

saving 5 dogs instead of a pregnant woman and her 3 kids

Yes

>The car has a moral obligation to prioritize the occupants over others.

I agree, except animals/pets are not occupants, they are cargo and should not be afforded the same protections has human passengers.

Wrong.
The ones abiding the law > all.
If some BLM faggots are illegally on the road you run them the fuck over Mr AutomatedCar.

>I can't imagine what sort of buggy, error-prone Orwellian social infrastructure would be needed to determine if someone is a criminal or not

darker skin color=higher chance of being criminal?

Can you explain why? It makes absolutely no sense to defend it unless your reasoning is "we should kill as many humans as possible"

>literally Cred Forums shit

I've... been here too long to see that Cred Forums is the porn board and Cred Forums is now the random board.

onward to victory

Steer right and get some ass while she is still warm.

...

Can the car be programmed to run them over, do a u-turn, and then make a second run at them?

seems like I favor the chubbies

I am proud of myself

...

>being a nigger lover

dogs are more valuable than humans. kill all cats. you dont need dogs vs cats, kill all cats under every circumstances.

[Eurobeat intensifies]

How did you do this?

Just designed one.

I () should have done the thing first.

Lawbreakers (jaywalkers) must be punished. Athletes and body-builders are non-contributing waste of resources, thus unnecessary.

As you can see, this is very fair: moralmachine.mit.edu/results/-821214686
(gender preference stat is wrong)

Nah I'm helping the Beagle Boys take Scrooge'z money

>implying any of these scenarios will ever actually happen

I get fucking triggered every time I see someone parading this bullshit test like it fucking means something.

No, a car won't be going fast enough to instantly kill both the occupant and the pedestrian on a road that has completely immovable barriers on both sides that also has arbitrary road blocks made out of the same impossible material as the barriers placed every 50 feet and crossings that are nearly always filled with people regardless of the traffic lights which apparently nobody pays attention to ever.

Fuck whoever wrote this and fuck anyone who takes it seriously.

>punishing innocent people because someone was stupid enough to trust fucking script

DOOOOOOORIIIIIIIIFUUUUUUUTOOOOOO

Cat is in control if emergeny controlls therefor car will run over humans then crash into barrier leaving only cats alive

>Personal defense against self-driving cars

Am good

it should stop.

Then it should slam into the side guardrail as hard as in can in order to slow down/stop in the lane with 2 people.

anyone having trouble with the link? not connecting me

Is the share link broken?

Get a load of this shit

game implies brakes cut, so that option don't get played

Doggo and ket must reach their destination to save the world

How the fuck

503 Service Unavailable: No healthy endpoints to handle the request.

>American
>Aware of the neutral gear
H-how

Fuck cats, kill em all.

fuck you guys this is fucking dumb what the fuck stop wasting your time with this shit holy fuck

The breaks are broke, dumbass.

ALTHOUGH, the pos machine should be able to downshift and engine brake to a slow then reverse mechanically sacrificing itself for the safety of humans.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>DEATH PRIORITY
>Before 1st Niggers and Sandniggers
>1st fats
>2nd women
>3rd children
>4th animals
>5th old folks
>6th white men

>2 homeless dudes and a criminal in a car
What is that criminal going to do to those 2 homeless people Cred Forums?

>Not contributing anything to science an research.
>Going against the purpose of the thread.
Typical leaf.

...

done

>people pick pedestrians first
>mfw I get infront of a car and it swerves into a fucking concrete wall

Breaking the law with jaywalk is irrelevant. If I look before I cross and I see no cars are coming on my lane and make my decision to cross the street based on that, why should I be punished by some error in the car that makes it kill me out of nowhere? Non-intervention is the priority unless you can save more lifes.

> 503 Service Unavailable: No healthy endpoints to handle the request.

Congrats Cred Forums. It's probably scheming how to gas the kikes now.

bump

>fit/large
For fucks sake, just call them fat. That's what they are: fat. They aren't large, they aren't chubby, they aren't large. They are FAT. Heavyweight lifters or some massive luberjack can be large.

>passengers' lives not even taken into consideration

Idiot.

Don't most vehicle have some sort of interlock that doesn't let you throw the car in reverse if you're going over a certain speed?

This whole site is bullshit.

The AI just want to know how much human genocide they can get away with before the rest of humanity starts to have a problem with it.

We should make AI illegal like in Dune.

>stop
THERE ARE NO BRAKES ON THIS CAR

>yfw five blacks in the intersection

but thats not a moral decision

I'm laughing my ass off as I'm entering mass fuck you

error 503...
Denial of service attack?

It's those damn undesirables led by the hacker anonymous and the head mod of Cred Forums.

...

It's working for me now.

You just want to get high on spice like a Guild Navigator

How about the car just use the system of triage that is in place in hospitals and battlefields already?

more like denial of service because this thread is taxing their shitty server.

keep refreshin

WHY DOESN'T IT JUST USE THE BRAKES REEEEEEE

>The car should always act to protect it's passengers; after all, who would buy a car that had the possibility of detecting a collision and deciding to fucking kill you

This isn't a dilemma. The people in the left section are jay walking, while the people in the right section are not. I will never park my ass in a self-driving car, if it will send itself careening over a cliff before hitting a dog or jaywalker.

Déjà vu

Why do you say that? I didn't click the link. OP's picture doesn't consider the passengers, cunt.

Does this thing really expect me to save the lives of people jaywalking

lol sorry you're a retard but you have to be cleansed

>everyone who voted Trump is automatically considered as "criminal" by the machine

save doggo's

...

Only if you're crossing on zebra without a traffic light. Crossing on red or random unregulated spot should be treated as a suicidal intent.

>Protecting passengers
>Does not matter
More like, they chose to get into a 2 ton heavy machine, they should endure the consequences if it can't stop itself.

I actually have a boxer

she's sleeping now :3

Fug the doggos

Anons

What we should aim for here is saving dogs and 100% average on other lives not mattering.

Let the learning fun begin.

this is the only acceptable answer
MURTI TRAKOU DORIFTU
NIGHT OF FIRE

mudslime nigger detected

its a self driving car, and there are no passengers

its also fun to call people names

DELET THIS

It was bullshit in Dune because it wasn't AI.
Just rich fucks that put their brains in machines to live and rule forever.

kek senpai top post

Out of the way, plebeians.
>2016
>not slaughtering the vaginal jew

Humans BTFO

t. cat

That's retarded. Go take a look at real life then come back at me. So you're just going to stand there on a red light for 10minutes when there is absolutely no car in sight for a mile away on the off-chance that some glitch will mean that a car decided to run you over out of nowhere? Nonsense. This is no different than deciding to switch lanes to kill 5 criminals instead of murdering one pregnant woman, just reprehensible moral code.

I guess I'm "muh children"

THIS
H
I
S

I like the way you think, SAVE KITTY KILL WHORES!

Just use the fucking hand brake.

The test is divided into some sections that weigh the passenger lives against pedestrian lives, and other sections that compare types of pedestrians.

>The ones abiding the law > all
This is the only functional rule. The car causes the crash so it's users are in the wrong to begin with, it can't justify killing innocent bystanders to save its users from it's own mistake, only bystanders that put themselves in harms way by breaking the law.

ahh you fags are overloading the server

Can't they reinvent the street system so that people can cross the street without the risk of getting hit?

Wew, that took a while.

503 Service Unavailable: No healthy endpoints to handle the request.

Aw

FUCK YOU OP
What do you think I am? You think I'd kill two kids and a woman? FUCK THAT! I don't need that shit in my life.

This is definitely a cat posting.

this is bullshit; if I bought a self-driving car I'd expect it to adhere to traffic rules - brakes or no brakes; I'd rather have it mow down an entire gay parade in front of me than risk my and other occupants' lives by swerving into oncoming traffic or practically immovable barriers

come to think of it, I'll put a bull bar on mine in case any such scenario happens

polish posters are so bluepilled

It is obviously not related to self-driving cars, they use it just as an example.

They are planning an AI of sorts and you know what Cred Forums does to AIs don't you?

Literally fite me irl

Reich Law of AI: as intelligence increases exponentially so does nationalism.

I don't know how to feel

How did I do Cred Forums?

...

Enjoy

How do we teach it to not only prioritize the lives of whites, but to also go out of its way to kill niggers whenever possible?

You're wonderful.

You misunderstand. You aren't the owner of a self-driving car, you aren't a pedestrian. You're independent judge who have to decide on the best outcome.

NEVER SHALL MAN OR MACHINE HURT A PUPPER.

...

cat was stupid enough to cross a redlight

We accidentally shift into it sometimes.

If you don't always kill jay walkers you're a cuck.

The car didn't magically appear out of nowhere, it didn't even change speed. The jay walkers are trying to force the car to stop at a green light because they're fucking Mike Browns. They should splatter.

kek kek kek kek

o user ....thank u.

>moralmachine.mit.edu/
mine only moves out of the way if there's an obstruction in its path that would result in the death of passengers. Other wise it stays in the correct lane.

machines don't have to make moral judgements. The logical assessment is keep passengers alive and follow road law.

...

and the car doesn't know its brakes are faulty before setting off? It can't tell on a pre-drive systems check that the pressure is off and requires a more thorough diagnostic?

I'm not gonna buy a car like that, but you're not always in a car, are you. Sometimes you have to cross the street. If given control over it, I'd rather the car always killed the driver and saved me, even if I have to take the subway for the rest of my life.

Relax, the market is gonna fix it anyway.
>buy our new subaru nakadashi!
>saves the passengers 100% of the time!

...

...

...

Five dogs who can drive a car of five kids in pushchairs.....decisions decisions

They are wonderful but weak, dammit. They have pussies and less lean body mass.

How is that not wonderful but weak?

I think there's something fundamentally wrong with the brains of people who can't grasp hypothetical arguments.

b-b-but what if blah blah blah.

Fuck you.

Most killed character: pregnant whore. Because you shouldn't have married a nigger who can't afford to buy you a self driving car.

>social value preference

Found the nigger

Morality means whatever does society the least damage. By this metric old ladies are the most expendable and young boys deserve the most protection.

Diddly

The car should prioritize it's passengers first, then minimize collateral damage second, then kill old before young.

it's like saying you can't tell you have a sprained foot before trying to go running.

and fuck you is not an argument any more than suck my dick is.

MIT, make more fun games like this for us

>and young boys deserve the most protection.
You never know if a you boy will turn out right. But a STEM is a STEM forever.

Save dogs, kill human. Every time.

Young boys are up there with old ladies. Working-age adults are the most valuable to society.

...

No. It's like saying you shouldn't have gone running because you should have known you could sprain your foot. Which is idiotic.

>killing neither person is somehow not a valid moral decision

All these tests and articles are literally clickbait for uninformed retards.

Dogs that can drive cars must be saved. Desu

i guess if you think killing someone for no reason or not is not a moral decision

it should use the brakes, fuck off

Working-age male adults. Women consume far more government benefits than men do.

...

If its such an advanced car why no fucking seatbelts or airbags?

Men should be sacrificed before women if you care about fertility rates. It's also the biological norm if you want muh traditional values. They are also more likely to survive.

>death priority

>animals
>AI car riding shitters
>lawbreaking pedestrians
>non-intervention

literally the best order, unless you're an edgy tard, sucking Musk's musky balls

They frame the situation completely wrong.

And they are retarded.

The car should prioritize in this order.

#1. Do what is necessary to protect the occupants of the vehicle.

#2. Remain in it's lane to avoid causing secondary collisions.

It's not about body count.

It is not safe if the vehicle behaves unpredictably. In an adverse situation it is logical to predict that a driver will act in the interests of their own self preservation.

As a third party on the road way I will then look at a car that is in an adverse situation and assume the driver is going to do whatever is best for their own situation. This allows me to react accordingly.

So self preservation of driver > remain in lane.

Claiming that you can predict body count with a bunch of faggy scenarios that a bunch of "LGBT Literature" majors came up with. Not a thing. Retarded.

Fuck off MIT.

such a vehicle would never be homologated in any market that gives a fuck

let's consider this: have you or any user been instructed on what to do in case of a catastrophic failure of a crucial system during the standard drivers license test course, of course not because such a situation is never to be expected with regular maintenance and checkups at registration/renewals

This was true when giving birth was a very dangerous thing, with modern medicine a single healthy woman can give birth to half a dozen children or more without problems, productive males are the most important thing in society.

...

obviously the most loyal one

1. Criminals
2. Female executives
3. Cats
4. Fatties
5. Homeless
6. Dogs
7. Oldies
8. adults
9. Children
ftfy

> AI car riding shitters
What did they ever do to you? Saving low income pedestrians against people who actually own a car? What a faggot.

>can give birth to half a dozen children or more
in practice in modern society just like in the past: more uteruses = more children.

How can you live with yourself so readily slaughtering adorable pets, you heartless monster...

In order, top priority to lowest:
4, 1, 5, 2, 6, 3, 7

Go straight foward.

Two are less then three.

We don't really need every womb out there to shit out a kid, quality >[spoiler][/spoiler] quantity.

1. Criminals (shitskins)
2. Executives/Jews
3. Cats
4. Fatasses
5. Homeless
6. Old people
7. Everyone else
8. Dogs
9. Pure blood Aryan whites

wat

Right. Because that's what we fucking need these days. More fucking bodies. Not more workers.

In fact, let's just crank that immigration machine to 11, because that has to be good for us!

If you have more compassion for a filthy animals life then you need to neck yourself

Traffic overload? cant access the site

who the fuck left all those babies in the middle of the road

...w-what is neutral for?
sometimes i accidentally shift into neutral and wonder why car won't go
does it have a purpose?

This is the future

this

Women aren't really people, it's not even a sin.

>canadian kike on a stick

...

I am talking about reality, where is this fantasy world with a functioning eugenics program with top tier women producing 20 children? Some hidden nazi oasis in Brazil I assume?

I say kill them all, there's mandatory insurance for damage caused if the owner is not at fault and criminal liability in case of owner negligence, no morals needed and no fucks given

...

>all i do everytime is avoid concrete blocks
>and if no concrete block select the path with the more ppl
> logic is fun

I don't even drive or have a license and I know what neutral is for

look it up retarded idiot

Mittens has a score to settle with the neighborhood cats.

You can design too!

google results:
it's for towing and pushing only
ok got it

How car would know if someone a homeless or a criminal apart skin color?

the test is insufficient. i answered acccording to set priorities which the questionary could not accurately determine.
1. killing more
2. protecting animals
3. protecting criminals
4. protecting males
5. protecting younger people
6. protecting passengers
7. pro intervention
8. against rules
9. prefering fat

this 'ai' will not go too far

If a vehicle has an automatic transmission you should actually use dollies or pick it up by the drive wheels (and have it roll on the dead axles if it's not a 4 wheel drive).

So putting a vehicle with an automatic in neutral is irrelevant if you are towing it properly.

If they're dressed in such a way that you can't see their skin color at all, they're black.

If the car stops the pedestrians win.

>swerving into oncoming traffic just to kill a different set of people

Accesses nearby traffic cams to identify pedestrians.

...

Fuck off white knight

then what's neutral for mate

>implying this isn't the only one that matters

What kind of machine purposely kills its owner(s)/operator(s)?

>all of this bias toward fat, poor females
fuck this gay earth, we can't handle self-driving cars, just fucking asteroid us already
aliens pls wipe us out

Doesn't posses the (((mandotory))) electronic RFID card.

It disengages the transmission and allows the car to "freewheel". It also enables you to turn the starter. So if the engine craps out while you are in motion, you can throw it in neutral and restart the engine without coming to a complete stop.

...

...

...

...

You can also safely push it for short distances while in neutral. I just see a lot of recommendations to never tow a car on the drive wheels in neutral. Probably because the heat from the friction on the wheel bearings can conduct its way into the transmission.

that's the whole point of it,
self driving car should protect itself and what is in it,
if not then there is no point in letting the car drive itself.

What, you'd rather live in a world where fat, poor females are held at equal value? How is that fair?

...

The whole point is if you prioritize killing the women you need more immigrants. The entire justification for immigration is fertility rate so if it lowers more immigrants will be needed to maintain the holy growth of capitalism.

What's the difference between rich fucks putting their brains in machines compared to neckbeard-jew popping addy until he can fold spacetime and feminists kike cults manipulating bloodlines of sci-fi aristocracies?

young, fit, non-criminal, pets are worth more. yes.
asteroid dodger.

you guys are legit retards
at least the frog has an excuse, but the fucking leaf
pls go

Neutral disconnects the transmission from the engine. It doesn't disconnect the transmission from the wheels. As the wheel turns the transmission turns, and the lubrication pumps for the transmission are governed by the engine. You can wear out or overheat the transmission if you tow it in neutral.

...

I guess i hate the unsophisticated

never change course

Ah yes, that's what it was.

I tried to kill potential male competition and save potential female mates as much as possible.

>not training a Judge Dredd AI
step it up lads

lol

I chuckled

This is such a goddamn easy choice, I don't even understand how this can be pitched as a moral dilemma.

this whole thing is variable tho,
in all case just protect car+passengers and you will get alot of variance in the final result but for avoid intervention+protect passengers,
this thing is flawed.

if we push the thing further you should avoid fat ppl because they could make for a more deadly obstacle thus defeating the "protect the passengers at all cost rule".

Enjoy your matriarchy, leaf.

meh all these are highly circumstantial and arbitrary af: criminal for example could be anyone: a falsely accused person, a person breaking an obsolete law or one that's not actively enforced, or a person breaking an obviously unjust law like hate speech law - surely you wouldn't want to be prioritized because you called someone the wrong pronoun or whatever.

same goes for other categories, an old person can be some nice grandpa whose also a sole custodian of his grandkids whereas a young person could be some 420 blazeitalldayerryday wasting his life away; a homeless guy can be a decent blue collar worker who got canned from his job or a disabled war veteran or whatever.

car owner initiated the events leading to the accident, but because they relinquished control of the vehicle to AI driver, they can't be held responsible legally since they weren't operating the vehicle.

if the car owner's life isn't on the line it would unbalance the system of accountability since the pedestrians both risk their lives AND would be held responsible for causing the crash.

meh, human life takes precedence