Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| en:av:autonomy_and_autonomous_systems:autonomy:ethics [2020/12/20 16:33] – agrisnik | en:av:autonomy_and_autonomous_systems:autonomy:ethics [Unknown date] (current) – external edit (Unknown date) 127.0.0.1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ===== Ethics ===== | ===== Ethics ===== | ||
| - | As has been emphasized earlier, autonomous system developers are under high market pressure due to high potential benefits within the particular application area. Artificial intelligence (AI) and its advancements are one of the main driving forces of raising ethical challenges. Most of the potential concerns have been arisen because of the latest advancements of autonomous cars, drones, social robotics and other technologies that have made some bold demonstrations and start to enter the consumer markets. The IEEE Global Initiative on the Ethics of Autonomous Systems, the United Nations, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the White House, and the Future of Life Institute are among many responsible organizations that are now considering the ramifications of the real-world consequences of machine autonomy as we continue to stumble about trying to find a way forward ((https:// | + | As has been emphasized earlier, autonomous system developers are under high market pressure due to high potential benefits within the particular application area. Artificial intelligence (AI) and its advancements are one of the main driving forces of raising ethical challenges. Most of the potential concerns have been arisen because of the latest advancements of autonomous cars, drones, social robotics, and other technologies that have made some bold demonstrations and start to enter the consumer markets. The IEEE Global Initiative on the Ethics of Autonomous Systems, the United Nations, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the White House, and the Future of Life Institute are among many responsible organizations that are now considering the ramifications of the real-world consequences of machine autonomy as we continue to stumble about trying to find a way forward ((https:// |
| - | * understand implications of technology application in masses | + | * understand implications of technology application in masses; |
| - | * interpret implications according to the current social and moral frameworks | + | * interpret implications according to the current social and moral frameworks; |
| - | * develop and implement legislation and policies – global and national | + | * develop and implement legislation and policies – global and national. |
| - | The mentioned concerns are especially actual in the light of hyper-fast development of AI technologies and algorithms that are already deployed and not always its users are aware of this. | + | The mentioned concerns are especially actual in the light of the hyper-fast development of AI technologies and algorithms that are already deployed and not always its users are aware of this. |
| Referring to ((https:// | Referring to ((https:// | ||
| - | * **In the context of autonomous cars: Who lives and who dies?** This is the most illustrative and probably the most discussed case i.e. in a case of inevitable car accident what decision for the control system of the autonomous car is the right one. Should the drive be put to the maximum risk to decrease risks of pedestrians or other traffic subjects or should it protect the driver no matter what? Another discussion is on legal aspects – who is responsible for making that decision and to what extent – drivers (car owners), engineers or somebody else? This comes to some legal issues as well, however, as a consequence another question arises – would it be a right decision to ignore or to obey some of the traffic rules in order to save lives or to decrease potential risks of a car accident? According to (Should a self-driving car kill the baby or the grandma? Depends on where you’re from. | MIT Technology Review) researchers in MIT took an effort to study the question in more details through the experiment of a “Moral Machine”, which tested situation on real people to answer a set of questions: should an autonomous vehicle prioritize people over pets, pedestrian over passengers, more lives over fewer, women over men, young over old, fit over sickly, higher social status over lower, law-abiders over law-benders. It turned out that the answer depends on various factors and is very different in different countries. Therefore another question arises – should the behaviour | + | * **In the context of autonomous cars: Who lives and who dies?** This is the most illustrative and probably the most discussed case i.e. in a case of an inevitable car accident what decision for the control system of the autonomous car is the right one. Should the drive be put to the maximum risk to decrease risks of pedestrians or other traffic subjects or should it protect the driver no matter what? Another discussion is on legal aspects – who is responsible for making that decision and to what extent – drivers (car owners), engineers, or somebody else? This comes to some legal issues as well, however, as a consequence another question arises – would it be a right decision to ignore or to obey some of the traffic rules in order to save lives or to decrease potential risks of a car accident? According to (Should a self-driving car kill the baby or the grandma? Depends on where you’re from. | MIT Technology Review) researchers in MIT took an effort to study the question in more details through the experiment of a “Moral Machine”, which tested situation on real people to answer a set of questions: should an autonomous vehicle prioritize people over pets, pedestrian over passengers, more lives over fewer, women over men, young over old, fit over sickly, higher social status over lower, law-abiders over law-benders. It turned out that the answer depends on various factors and is very different in different countries. Therefore another question arises – should the behavior |
| - | * **Unordered List ItemIn the military context: Is saving the lives of civilians a moral imperative? | + | * **Unordered List ItemIn the military context: Is saving the lives of civilians a moral imperative? |
| - | * **In the context of people intimacy: how close is too close?** In this context, intimacy is the subject of people being attached emotionally to a device – robot. One can refer to the AIBO (https:// | + | * **In the context of people intimacy: how close is too close?** In this context, intimacy is the subject of people being attached emotionally to a device – robot. One can refer to the AIBO (https:// |
| According to the defined questions, some others raise concerns caused by uncontrolled development of AI ((https:// | According to the defined questions, some others raise concerns caused by uncontrolled development of AI ((https:// | ||
| - | * Unordered List ItemWill in general AI compete with humans, thus, compromising overall social constitutions and behaviour | + | * Unordered List ItemWill in general AI compete with humans, thus, compromising overall social constitutions and behavior |
| - | * As a consequence, | + | * As a consequence, |
| - | * Will AI through better | + | * Will AI through better |
| - | To address the defined challenges organizations like IEEE have started discussions and put a lot of efforts in defining standards of “ethical” AI solutions, which obviously will change the overall landscape of autonomous technologies. | + | To address the defined challenges organizations like IEEE have started discussions and put a lot of effort into defining standards of “ethical” AI solutions, which obviously will change the overall landscape of autonomous technologies. |
