Autonomous vehicles are rapidly becoming a reality on our roads, bringing with them a host of ethical considerations. This article examines crucial aspects of self-driving car ethics, including public oversight, liability issues, and the need for transparency. Drawing on insights from experts in the field, we explore the pressing need for clear guidelines in this evolving technological landscape.
- Autonomous Vehicles Demand Public Oversight
- Liability and Due Process in AV Decisions
- Transparency Key in Self-Driving Car Ethics
- Clear Guidelines Needed for Autonomous Vehicles
Autonomous Vehicles Demand Public Oversight
This is a challenging yet crucial question. We observe autonomous vehicles daily near our office in Century City.
Consider a scenario where a self-driving car is traveling down a city street when a child suddenly darts out between two parked cars. The vehicle has a split second to make a decision: swerve into a wall, likely causing fatal injury to the sole passenger inside, or maintain its course and strike the child. This decision isn’t being made by a human in the moment. It’s predetermined by programmers based on algorithms and risk matrices.
Now, ask yourself, whom does the car protect? The passenger who placed their trust in the technology? Or the pedestrian who had no say in any of it? This isn’t merely a question of coding—it’s a matter of values, ethics, and justice.
These decisions cannot be left to tech companies alone. We require public oversight. We need robust laws with real consequences to hold companies accountable. We cannot wait for accidents to occur before we start questioning the logic that may lead to one. Every line of code has human consequences, and someone always bears the cost.
If you’re ever involved in a collision with an autonomous vehicle, regardless of whether you’re a passenger, pedestrian, or another driver, there are some critical steps you need to take. First, prioritize your well-being. Your primary duty is to ensure your health. Everything else can wait. If possible, document the scene—take photos, record videos, anything that captures what transpired. And refrain from speaking to insurance companies or representatives from the AV company before seeking legal counsel.
Yosi Yahoudai
Co-Founder & Managing Partner, J&Y Law
Liability and Due Process in AV Decisions
Behind every choice is a person who designed it.
The ethical conundrum autonomous vehicles (AVs) face revolves around liability, foreseeability, and due process. An AV confronted with an inevitable crash—for example, when it has to choose between colliding with a pedestrian or veering and endangering its passengers—is presented with a moral decision. In US tort law, intent and duty of care are significant components in determining negligence. Machines, of course, can’t have intent, so we would probably need to look at the design choices of the company or developer.
Consider this scenario: An AV sees a child sprinting into the street and is given just milliseconds to respond. A sudden maneuver may cause fatal injury to the car’s occupant, and braking won’t stop the vehicle in time to save the life of the child. This raises questions of liability under product liability law: Did the AV program the AV to prioritize passenger safety over pedestrian safety, or on some algorithmic “value judgment?” There is no explicit clause in the Constitution that addresses AVs, but the due process clause under the 14th Amendment applies, perhaps, if the logic of a vehicle deprives someone of life without clear standards.
My view on this is straightforward: If AVs are taking action with life-and-death legal consequences, then regulatory oversight is in order, similar to how you would regulate medical protocols or critical safety systems. There needs to be accountability and transparency in the code—because behind every “choice” is a person who designed it.
Seann Malloy
Founder & Managing Partner, Malloy Law Offices
Transparency Key in Self-Driving Car Ethics
Here’s the tough truth: no algorithm should play god—but someone has to write the code. Picture a scenario where a self-driving car has to choose between swerving into a tree (likely killing the passenger) or hitting a pedestrian. Who lives? If the car protects its passenger at all costs, it’s a rolling ego machine. If it sacrifices them, who’s buying that car? The real ethical failure is pretending this can be solved with a clean formula. My stance? Transparency is non-negotiable. Manufacturers must disclose how their systems make these calls, and consumers should have a say in those settings. Otherwise, we’re handing life-or-death ethics to a black box.
Justin Belmont
Founder & CEO, Prose
Clear Guidelines Needed for Autonomous Vehicles
The ethics of autonomous vehicles present a complex issue, particularly when considering split-second, life-or-death scenarios. Imagine a situation where a self-driving car must choose between swerving into a barrier, potentially harming the passengers, or hitting a pedestrian who has suddenly stepped into the road. The question arises: how does a machine weigh one life against another?
Based on observations and considerations, programming a car to make these moral decisions is fraught with complicated ethical dilemmas. Some argue that the primary goal should be minimizing overall harm, while others believe the passengers should always be the car’s top priority since they have entrusted their safety to the vehicle. Personally, I believe it comes down to having a clear, transparent set of guidelines that govern this technology—a sort of universal rulebook that everyone understands. This way, at least everyone knows the parameters, even if the rules are difficult to grapple with. It’s something to consider carefully before we allow these cars to take control.
Alex Cornici
Marketing & PR Coordinator, Magic Hour AI
