Will your car decide to kill you?

Meanwhile a beat-up people-mover with mum and six kids onboard blows a tyre, loses control and careers over the median strip into the path of said autonomous car.

The autonomous car has two options, and microseconds to decide.

The first option is for the computer-controlled car to avoid the minivan with an evasive manoeuvre but potentially kill its Candy Crush-obsessed occupant, as the only possible escape route could result in a deadly impact with a field of pine trees.

The second option is for the autonomous car to brake but hit the people-mover head-on, safe in the knowledge that the German car's active and passive safety systems will ensure its occupant's survival in the event of a frontal collision, and the potential rear-end impacts of following cars.

However, several of the minivan's occupants will certainly die as a result.

How will a computer, a robotised car, make this decision? Can it be programmed to understand the moral and ethical implications of this decision?

No, it cannot… At least not yet.

The legal — let alone emotional — ramifications for those involved in this scenario will be colossal and flow on to the greater community.

Blame will inevitably be laid, but who will be legally liable? The car-maker? The owner of the vehicle? Or perhaps lawyers and governments for passing blanket autonomous vehicle laws without any heed for unpredictable situations?

Meaningful and transparent dialogue needs to occur -- not only between governments and car-makers but also the general public.

What is a car's default programming in an emergency situation? If a tragic death does occur at the hands of a computer program driving a car, it wouldn't be unforseen for a knee-jerk reaction from a government to ban autonomous cars in the face of public outrage.

Global news agency Reuters recently reported on a near-collision between two autonomous cars in Silicon Valley last month – the first near-miss on record.

Both Google and Delphi Automotive have since denied the close call but as more car-makers jump on the autonomous bandwagon (Audi has committed to deploying its first self-driving car in 2017), the number of 'close calls' is likely to escalate.

As my good mate and motoring.com.au managing editor Marton Pettendy recently said during a chin-wag about self-driving cars: "AI [artificial intelligence] is the reason autonomous cars and military robots are controversial".

Drones now deliver DVDs and carry out military operations and the mining sector uses autonomous trucks, so driverless cars on public roads are inevitable.

Car-makers are investing hundreds of millions of dollars to be the first to market. The claim is that they'll improve safety and reduce CO2 and traffic congestion. Some industry heavy-hitters even say they'll make our roads so safe that governments will have no option but to ban all drivers to remove 'human error' from the equation.

Elon Musk, Tesla’s outspoken CEO, says: "In the distant future… people may outlaw driving cars because it's too dangerous. You can't have a person driving a two-tonne death machine."

Musk made the comments during his keynote speech at the 2015 GPU Technology Conference in March and posited that autonomous cars were indeed only a handful of years away.

"We'll take autonomous cars for granted in quite a short time," he stated.

"I almost view it as a solved problem. We know what to do, and we'll be there in a few years."

That's all well and good – and truly exciting for anyone sick of sitting in peak-hour traffic – but let's bring it back to this question: Will your car decide to kill you?

Of course it won't, not intentionally, but there will be freak accidents that are unavoidable.

Perhaps a set of rules to govern AI and help us navigate such uncharted waters is required?

American science-fiction novelist, Issac Asimov, is well known for creating his three Laws of Robotics, which are supposed to ensure that artificial intelligence will always limit the amount of harm done to humans.

Asimov's rules are:
>> A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
>> A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
>> A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

Tell that to SkyNet…

In all seriousness, computers equipped with AI — which is required even for the most basic of routines that will guide cars and buses around our streets via visual and satellite data — will at some stage need to make decisions that may have fatal consequences.

As science fiction becomes reality, as robotics and AI software take control of our personal transport, society will need a paradigm shift in the way it interacts with technology.

Moral of the story? Don't play Candy Crush in the car.