curl-6 said:
They don't need to be that autonomous. For that matter, why make an autonomous car at all? Just make a car a disabled person can drive. Let's say you cure a disease by experimenting on people without their consent. Technically, yes, you cured a disease. But the process you used to there there was unethical; in this case, you could and should made the same breakthrough in way that didn't fund and support AI's numerous harmful applications. With that said, AI has never cured a disease, and there's no guarantee it ever will. On the other hand, we've been curing disease without it for centuries. |
The goal there is to save hundreds of thousands of lives each year since drunk drivers and bad drivers in general cause a ton of deaths and they're already a lot safer than the average driver. The idea that it'd be unethical to use AI to cure diseases if it becomes capable of that and that it's currently unethical for people to use it to massively improve their lives through helping them find out what rare disease they have so they can get treatment for it is wild to me since I really do feel like you can't get more ethical than those sort of use cases but if that is how you feel then we will just have to agree to disagree on this. If I've misinterpreted you here I apologize but otherwise have a good one.
Last edited by Norion - 13 hours ago







