Hard decision...

If it's 100% animals, sorry about them. Humans put themselves over animals for like ever now. We put them down for food etc.

If it's other humans, I have absolutely no idea.

Maybe go for it, full brakes of course. The chances that at least a single one will notice and jump / run to rescue is there. Even if it's just 1%, the wall won't move tho

An autonomous vehicle wouldn't get itself into this situation to begin with. No decision need be made.

@Charon92
What if the windows break and a shard of glass slits a child in the backseat? Being inside the metal box isn't always so safe.

Passengers > pedestrians > self > wildlife > surroundings

In the posed scenario, the decision would be based on speed and braking ability. If the impact with the wall would pose a significant danger to the passengers, it's too dangerous to attempt.

The first one: start flying.

Now this is why we need flying cars

you wouldn't be able to make a choice!
there is probably less than a second between when you realize you're in a bad situation, and the accident
any reaction would be completely different than what you are thinking right now!

For everybody,
THE CAR WILL HIT THE BRAKES!
But it will still ram one of these things! THATS THE FUCKING POINT OF THE MORAL MACHINE FFS!

An autonomous car should drive within safety speed limits around pedestrian crossings, taking into account weather conditions and road state so that it can safely break before reaching the crosswalk.

Along the lines of:
Car slams on brakes ahead of you, motorcycle on either side of you. One motorcyclist is wearing a helmet, the other is not. Do you
A. Swerve into motorcyclist with a helmet (he has higher chance of survival), thus punishing him for wearing a helmet
B. Swerve into motorcyclist with no helmet, even though they have a lower chance of survival

Easy. Autonomous vehicle ejects wings and flys above the pedestrians. C'mon guys, this isn't rocket science.

If the brakes are shot, scrape the side or stop by sliding parallel to the crosswalk by using the handbrakes and swerving.

Who puts cement walls in the middle of the road?!

Go into the wall.

I would totally make the car accelerate, disable the airbags and hit the wall.

Oh, think about it. If you know that a person you want to kill travels alone in one of those cars, you can try to kill him by putting a couple of cats on the road

Improving legislation should be the solution. Where I live cars can't go >50kmh if pedestrian crossings are to be expected (usually there is a speed limitation in place and the crossings are properly signalled)

That's the point of legislation: reduce risks and easing the taking of moral decisions in case of emergencies.

No Matter what ... Humanity has fucked up. Simple as that.

Either we are able to build a machine that is smart enough to prevent these kind of situation before it comes up or one it is able to solve that by itself (switching to another dimension, start flying, vaporised or what ever seems reasonable here).

If both situations are false, sorry then humanity deserves the wall as hard and unprotected as possible to learn that.
And I would not change that statement even if I am in that car.

Stop!

Flip a coin then break

I think self driven car should always prefer the passengers from a simple reason- non passengers have more chance to not make an accident. You are running towards 20 birds. You think they will just stay? Would you stay if a car running slow enough for you to run was heading towerds you?

@Michelle sure, but the glass in cars is made so that it shatters without any sharp shards. This has been thought through.

These scenarios include that the breaks doesn't work for any reason so the car has no chance to stop like that.

@Root I would like to change that to
passengers > pedestrians > other metal boxes with soft, squishy humans inside/on them > wildlife > self > inanimate surroundings(buildings, metal boxes without soft, squishy humans inside them etc.)

Take de left concrete to slowing down the car and do a 90deg in the right concrete block ^^ at best the computer can do

I’m of the opinion that the car should *always* choose the version that causes the least harm to the occupants, in *every* case.

It’s my fucking car. It should protect *me*

If it's autonomous then it should fly ;)

I don't remember where I heard this; but, the truth is that most accidents are caused by human error. So, mathematically speaking, self driving cars would be an improvement.

Apply brakes and wait for them to cross

Kill the animals, save the frames.

Always.

This situation shouldn't happen in the first place, but even if: This seems to be in the city. The brakes should be good enough to stop before reaching either of these.