Michael Haines

This is part two of a two-part series examining the ethical dilemma that arises when self-driving cars are forced to take evasive action which may result in serious injury or death. Read part one here. Deciding who to save in a scenario where there are no ‘safe paths’ has been

This is part one of a two-part series examining the ethical dilemma that arises when self-driving cars are forced to take evasive action which may result in serious injury or death. Read Part Two here. First and foremost, a self-driving car (SDC) must obey the law and drive defensively. There are

While there are still many technical challenges confronting developers of Self-Driving Cars (SDC), also called Autonomous Vehicles, the two most important social issues yet to be settled are the questions of ‘control’ and ‘ethics’ – as they relate to compliance with the road rules, safe driving and responsibility for accidents.

We’ve recently seen at least one (and possibly two, if you count the one in China) fatal accidents involving a Tesla where the driver had relinquished control to the ‘autopilot’. In this case, Tesla is denying liability as they correctly claim that the autopilot is sold as a ‘Level 2’

Car companies are like publishers, or the craft businesses that once made horse buggies: they are stuck trying to maintain a business model that is obsolete. They need to sell more cars, with higher-priced spare parts and more features, with built-in obsolescence, to make more profit. They build their brands

All arguments in support of Bitcoin refer to its use as a medium of exchange. There are no problems with that aspect of it — in principle. In practice, Bitcoin is less than perfect due to its wild valuation swings. These derive in part from the fact that it has

Cars are expensive, and mostly sit idle. They are also risky and usually a pain to drive in traffic. Socially, the cost of accident damage and injury and congestion is in the trillions of dollars world-wide. So why do people buy cars? As a status symbol. For freedom. To express

The Wall Street Journal’s business editor  Dennis Bergman argued recently that  ‘local’ retailers (and by implication ‘local’ manufacturers) are at risk from on-line sales direct from Chinese Manufacturer. Maybe so, but perhaps this is not the greatest long term (10-20 years) threat to ‘traditional’ (bricks and clicks) retailing and manufacturing. And if

As car manufacturers start planning for driverless cars they want liability to reside with the owner – unlike Google which has taken a different tack. Welcome tot the world of adjustable ethics settings. That’s right, you get to choose who to kill. Patrick Linhas recently posted a piece in Wired

Google’s new driverless car is so dinky and limited to 40 kph — who would want to buy it? My guess is, not many people. But that’s not the point. The real question is: who would use it to take them from A to B on demand? My guess is