CDIO ACADEMY 2017#3 – Ethical

When an autonomous vehicle crashes or has an accident of some sort – who is responsible, and to what degree? Consider the following story:

Alice buys an autonomous vehicle from Bob, who sells them. The autonomous vehicle has different settings, some more aggressive (where the autonomous vehicle drives faster and brakes harder), and some less. Alice sets the autonomous vehicle to its most aggressive setting. One night on a dark and wet road, Alice hits a pedestrian, Carlos, who was jaywalking. Carlos is badly hurt.

How should we divide up the responsibility for Carlos’ injury? Here are some immediate suspects: Alice, since she was the owner of the autonomous vehicle, and was using it at the time of the accident; Carlos, who was in the road when he shouldn’t have been; Bob, who sold Alice a car that had the aggressive setting(s).

Perhaps there are some other possible responsible parties as well. For example, we might consider the state (the government) that allows the autonomous vehicle on the roads, to be partly responsible. Or we might think that the autonomous vehicle manufacturers are partly responsible, in that they made the autonomous vehicle with the aggressive settings. Or we might think that the autonomous vehicle itself is partly responsible, since it is somewhat autonomous. Or we might think that the accident was a freak occurrence that no-one is responsible for.

In a blog post of 300-400 words, consider who the parties responsible for Carlos’ injuries are, and why they are so responsible. Given your assessment, what advice might you give to the manufacturers, owners or regulators of AVs to help address these types of issues?

1.Carol should take most of the responsibility(80 percent). The reason is that he jagwalked on the wet road on dark night which was easier to cause car accidents.He did not obey the law so when he was hit, he should take most of the responsibility. On the other hand, Alice should take part of the responsibility(20 percent). The reason is that she chose the most aggressive setting, which put the vehicle into higher risky conditions. If she chose the less aggressive setting, the vehicle may have more time to react, and accidents might not happen.

2.My advices:

(1)For regulations of AVs:
AVs regulation must rule the responsibility between the vehicle manufacturers and the car owners. Manufacturers should design settings for car owners to choose and they should tell owners what will happen in different setting cases. Owners need to know what settings they choose and take 80 percent of the responsibility they decided. (20 percent is for manufacturers.) Besides, the regulation should be practiced strictly to make sure people truly obey.

(2)For manufacturers:
Vehicles should be tested more carefully.Vehicles need to test on road at least for three year in order to collect sufficient data of accidents. In addition, solutions need to be well-prepared when the vehicles come to the similar conditions. For ethical problems, settings should designed  as selections for the car owners to make decision by themselves in order to make sure the drivers know what will happen when accidents occur.Last but not least, setting instructions should be told to the vehicle owners to make sure they know what responsibility to take care of.

(3)For owners:
Bear in mind the responsibility to take between different settings. Do notice what occurence will happen at the settings as car drivers choose in order not to know nothing when accidents occur.

CDIO ACADEMY 2017#3 – Ethical 有 “ 1 則迴響 ”

  1. Thank you for your work on this assignment. An interesting thing to think about would be why there needs to be an aggressive setting on the car at all. – The CDIO Academy Team

    Liked by 1 person


在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入: 標誌

您的留言將使用 帳號。 登出 /  變更 )

Google photo

您的留言將使用 Google 帳號。 登出 /  變更 )

Twitter picture

您的留言將使用 Twitter 帳號。 登出 /  變更 )


您的留言將使用 Facebook 帳號。 登出 /  變更 )

連結到 %s