• 2 days PDVSA Booted From Caribbean Terminal Over Unpaid Bills
  • 2 days Russia Warns Ukraine Against Recovering Oil Off The Coast Of Crimea
  • 2 days Syrian Rebels Relinquish Control Of Major Gas Field
  • 2 days Schlumberger Warns Of Moderating Investment In North America
  • 2 days Oil Prices Set For Weekly Loss As Profit Taking Trumps Mideast Tensions
  • 2 days Energy Regulators Look To Guard Grid From Cyberattacks
  • 2 days Mexico Says OPEC Has Not Approached It For Deal Extension
  • 2 days New Video Game Targets Oil Infrastructure
  • 2 days Shell Restarts Bonny Light Exports
  • 2 days Russia’s Rosneft To Take Majority In Kurdish Oil Pipeline
  • 2 days Iraq Struggles To Replace Damaged Kirkuk Equipment As Output Falls
  • 3 days British Utility Companies Brace For Major Reforms
  • 3 days Montenegro A ‘Sweet Spot’ Of Untapped Oil, Gas In The Adriatic
  • 3 days Rosneft CEO: Rising U.S. Shale A Downside Risk To Oil Prices
  • 3 days Brazil Could Invite More Bids For Unsold Pre-Salt Oil Blocks
  • 3 days OPEC/Non-OPEC Seek Consensus On Deal Before Nov Summit
  • 3 days London Stock Exchange Boss Defends Push To Win Aramco IPO
  • 3 days Rosneft Signs $400M Deal With Kurdistan
  • 3 days Kinder Morgan Warns About Trans Mountain Delays
  • 3 days India, China, U.S., Complain Of Venezuelan Crude Oil Quality Issues
  • 4 days Kurdish Kirkuk-Ceyhan Crude Oil Flows Plunge To 225,000 Bpd
  • 4 days Russia, Saudis Team Up To Boost Fracking Tech
  • 4 days Conflicting News Spurs Doubt On Aramco IPO
  • 4 days Exxon Starts Production At New Refinery In Texas
  • 4 days Iraq Asks BP To Redevelop Kirkuk Oil Fields
  • 5 days Oil Prices Rise After U.S. API Reports Strong Crude Inventory Draw
  • 5 days Oil Gains Spur Growth In Canada’s Oil Cities
  • 5 days China To Take 5% Of Rosneft’s Output In New Deal
  • 5 days UAE Oil Giant Seeks Partnership For Possible IPO
  • 5 days Planting Trees Could Cut Emissions As Much As Quitting Oil
  • 5 days VW Fails To Secure Critical Commodity For EVs
  • 5 days Enbridge Pipeline Expansion Finally Approved
  • 5 days Iraqi Forces Seize Control Of North Oil Co Fields In Kirkuk
  • 5 days OPEC Oil Deal Compliance Falls To 86%
  • 6 days U.S. Oil Production To Increase in November As Rig Count Falls
  • 6 days Gazprom Neft Unhappy With OPEC-Russia Production Cut Deal
  • 6 days Disputed Venezuelan Vote Could Lead To More Sanctions, Clashes
  • 6 days EU Urges U.S. Congress To Protect Iran Nuclear Deal
  • 6 days Oil Rig Explosion In Louisiana Leaves 7 Injured, 1 Still Missing
  • 6 days Aramco Says No Plans To Shelve IPO
Alt Text

India’s Urban Explosion Boosts Oil Demand

As India sees incredible growth…

Alt Text

Are Combustion Engines Reaching Peak Demand?

As countries announce plans to…

New Safety Feature: A Smart Car Programmed To Let You Die?

New Safety Feature: A Smart Car Programmed To Let You Die?

The first auto safety device probably was the padded dashboard, unless you count such basics as roofs and windshields. Whatever the case, such features have proliferated to seat belts, air bags, rear cameras and the like.

Now researchers at the University of Alabama, Birmingham (UAB), are studying what may be the ultimate in safety features, one that's also counter-intuitive: The self-driving car that would allow its own occupants to die if its computer determines that their number would be fewer than the people whose lives are threatened in a looming auto accident. Related: Could $12 Trillion Trigger A Renewables Revolution?

“Ultimately this problem devolves into a choice between utilitarianism and deontology,” – the ethical principal that “some values are simply categorically always true,” UAB alumnus Ameen Barghi, a bioethicist, tells the school's news department.

Let's step back for a moment and look at a dilemma that highlights this ethical problem. Classically it's known as the Trolley Problem: An employee in charge of a switch on a trolley track knows a train is due to pass by soon, but suddenly notices that a school bus full of children is stalled on that track. A look at the alternate route shows the employee's young child has somehow crawled onto that track.
His choice is either to save his child, or save the many children on the bus. Which is right?

Now shift this dilemma to a highway of the not-too-distant future. It is crowded with cars, many of them self-driving vehicles. Google, which already has been experimenting with such autos, says its cars can ably handle the risks of the road, and boasts that any accidents involving its cars have been caused by human error, not programming glitches. Related: Why Buffett Bet A Billion On Solar

So here's another example of the dilemma involving not trolleys but cars: A tire suddenly blows out on a self-driving vehicle, and the auto's computer must now decide whether to allow the car to careen into oncoming traffic or deliberately steer the car into a retaining wall. Does it base its choice on the benefit of its occupants, or the benefit of others who may outnumber them?

Here's how Barghi breaks it down: “Utilitarianism tells us that we should always do what will produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people,” he told the UAB news department. In this scenario, then, the car should be programmed to ram into the retaining wall, endangering its occupants but sparing others on the highway.

But then there's deontology, which we might call ethical absolutism. “For example, [deontology dictates that] murder is always wrong, and we should never do it,” Barghi says. In the Trolley Problem, deontology says that “even if shifting the trolley will save five lives, we shouldn’t do it because we would be actively killing one.” Related: U.S. Oil Glut An EIA Invention?

As a result, he said, a company that follows deontology shouldn't program self-driving cars to save others while sacrificing the life of its occupants.

There's no word how Barghi stands on the dilemma of the self-driving car or the Trolley Problem. The UAB graduate, who will enroll in Britain's Oxford University in the autumn as a Rhodes Scholar, seems more interested in studying and debating such predicaments than in solving them. He served as a senior leader on UAB's team in the Bioethics Bowl in April at Florida State University. His team won this year's national championship.

But here's a hint: In last year's Bioethics Bowl, Barghi's team also competed, arguing a related case, whether governments would be justified in banning human driving altogether if self-driving cars proved to be significantly safer than cars with human drivers. Barghi's team argued in favor of self-driving cars.

By Andy Tully Of Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:




Back to homepage


Leave a comment
  • aed939 on June 28 2015 said:
    In order to gain the confidence of consumers in robots, self-driving cars must be completely loyal to its owners. It must make decisions that are consistent with the owners' own preferences, and that usually means that they value the lives of their children over stranger children.

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News