What's new

The Moral Dilemma

Thəorətic Muslim

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
5,006
Reaction score
17
Country
United States
Location
United States
That kid is a reincarnated Troll. :flame:
 
Who is the kid? :D
 
Watch this video:



And then visit this site, scroll down and click "Start Judging".

http://moralmachine.mit.edu/


Post any remarks.

@Syed.Ali.Haider @Joe Shearer @hellfire @salarsikander @cloud4000 @wiseone2

I have a horrid feeling that I have encountered this approach on this very forum, among alleged grown-ups.

There are those on both sides of the Radcliffe Line who have gone on record urging a nuclear war.

One side says let all perish; that is an old sub-continental precept, and the story is told of the scholar involved in a mediaeval battle who was seen to be discharging his firearm into the ruck. When a bystander asked him what he thought he was doing, he said God would choose his own from among the dead and save their souls, and for the rest, they were better dead.

The other side looks at the prospect of each and everyone of 1.3 billion dying in a nuclear holocaust and with the glibness born of utter stupidity suggests that some survivors will be left on one side, none on the other, so on to the final disaster.

I am saddened, but not much. The human mind shuts down after a point, in sheer self-preservation.
 
mc.JPG
mc2.JPG
mc3.JPG





didn't pick up the fat/fit or rich/poor cues, I thought they were bank robbers so always ran them over, unless there was a dog in the crowd lol
 
Teaching morality to machines? Why and how?


Transference as defence mechanism?
 
Transference as defence mechanism?

May be, but even that does not work very well in this situation.
 
Teaching morality to machines? Why and how?

As of currently autonomous self-driving cars can't differentiate between a human, animal, car, or wall. Each is an obstacle with the potential to not only damage the vehicle but injure the passenger(s).

Eventually AI will evolve and have to make decisions of mortality, the question becomes who is more important when the car can't brake?

And how will the lawmakers eventually catch up with advances in technology.
 
As of currently autonomous self-driving cars can't differentiate between a human, animal, car, or wall. Each is an obstacle with the potential to not only damage the vehicle but injure the passenger(s).

Eventually AI will evolve and have to make decisions of mortality, the question becomes who is more important when the car can't brake?

And how will the lawmakers eventually catch up with advances in technology.

There is no real issue here. The car owes its primary duty to its occupants, if it ever comes to that.
 
There is no real issue here. The car owes its primary duty to its occupants, if it ever comes to that.

Wow... talk about being cold hearted.
 
An economist :P

Hitler reborn! This is called "na rahega bansh, na bajegi bansuri" approach. :P

I initially thought that bugger would send the train in opposite direction after moving that one fella on the track. But no!!.....he turned out to be a prodigy with great prospects in politics!!! :D
 
Last edited:
Wow... talk about being cold hearted.

Machines have no hearts. Such attributes belong in the human domain only.
 
Back
Top Bottom