RESUMO
How would people distribute risks of autonomous vehicles (AVs) in everyday road traffic? The rich literature on the ethics of autonomous vehicles (AVs) revolves around moral judgments in unavoidable collision scenarios. We argue for extending the debate to driving behaviors in everyday road traffic where ubiquitous ethical questions arise due to the permanent redistribution of risk among road users. This distribution of risks raises ethically relevant questions that cannot be evaded by simple heuristics such as "hitting the brakes." Using an interactive, graphical representation of different traffic situations, we measured participants' preferences on driving maneuvers of AVs in a representative survey in Germany. Our participants' preferences deviated significantly from mere collision avoidance. Interestingly, our participants were willing to take risks themselves for the benefit of other road users, suggesting that the social dilemma of AVs may be mitigated in risky environments. Our research might build a bridge between engineers and philosophers to discuss the ethics of AVs more constructively.
RESUMO
ChatGPT is not only fun to chat with, but it also searches information, answers questions, and gives advice. With consistent moral advice, it can improve the moral judgment and decisions of users. Unfortunately, ChatGPT's advice is not consistent. Nonetheless, it does influence users' moral judgment, we find in an experiment, even if they know they are advised by a chatting bot, and they underestimate how much they are influenced. Thus, ChatGPT corrupts rather than improves its users' moral judgment. While these findings call for better design of ChatGPT and similar bots, we also propose training to improve users' digital literacy as a remedy. Transparency, however, is not sufficient to enable the responsible use of AI.