Mahboobin 10:00
R12
THE ETHICS OF CREATING A CAR
Brian Maher (bkm28@pitt.edu)
THE CAR THAT CAN THINK FOR YOU
Engineering is a field that is inseparable from the code of
ethics. Whether it be putting a new product to market or
theorizing a new methodology extracting oil from the
ground, engineers are constantly faced with ethical
decisions. Ethics are an abstract definition of right and
wrong, good and bad instilled in everyone. Applying ethics
to engineering means being able to make a decision based on
not what is the best decision for the engineer, but what is the
best decision for everyone.
I am a lead mechanical engineer for General Motors
working on their new intelligent Cadillac cars. These cars
contain special vehicle-to-vehicle communication systems
that can help decrease the chances of a crashes on the road.
This technology allows cars to virtually talk to each other
and warn each other as well as the driver of any impending
dangers. These cars also have a sensory array that is able to
detect upcoming objects in the road or other cars without the
technology getting dangerously close to the drivers’ car.
This is a very sophisticated technology and even more
complicated to build. My team has been working on this
technology for three years, and our scheduled release of this
technology is in three months and rapidly approaching. My
team has tested this technology repeatedly, and there are still
a handful of bugs remaining in the codes that cause some
cars to shut down communications and sensory array for a
short period of time when speeds exceed 70 miles per hour.
Today, my supervisor came to me to tell me that it is my
decision on what to do with the technology in the next series
of Cadillac cars. I must decide first if the added cost of the
technology is even worth adding to the cars, or if we should
not add it until we can lower the overall cost and make it
more appealing to the consumer. I also must think about
releasing the technology into the cars with the knowledge
that it is not perfect. Although, we could release it and
continue to work on the coding until we perfected it and
eventually, when we complete the debugging of the codes in
the software we would release an update. However, that
means that all of the owners must get from their nearest
Cadillac dealership.
THE COST OF VEHICLE-TO-VEHICLE
COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY
The first decision I need to make is to implement the
technology or to hold it back because of the price increase
that it would cause in the new models. If I decided that the
price would not matter and to produce the new Cadillac cars
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 1
10/6/15
with the vehicle-to-vehicle communication technology, then
I could push away some potential costumers. These days
almost everyone in the market for a new car is looking for a
cheap car that can get the job that they need done. Not many
people are out looking for the newest model with the most
bells and whistles. For our targeted release date of 2016 This
technology would have “an initial cost of $2000 per vehicle”
[4]. Seeing as how the average car cost is already around
$33,000, there are not too many people who are going to be
happy about another $2,000 increase to that price. A benefit
to putting the vehicle-to-vehicle communication technology
on the road would be that even though it wouldn’t work
every time, it could act as a safety net to make the roads a
little safer. So, it would essentially be a $2,000 safety net
that you could add to your car. The question that faces me is:
is it ethical to charge our valued costumers an extra $2,000
for a technology that would only work most of the time?
However, if I were to hold the production back and wait
until we could lower the price then it would produce more of
an interest to potential buyers because it is closer to their
price range. Waiting would allow my crew and myself to
possible make “the on-board equipment necessary to support
the V2V safety applications would cost $329 per vehicle in
2020” [5]. This is a significant decrease in the price of the
technology. Along with the price decrease the more time we
are testing and working out the kinks of the software the
better and more useful the final product will be. Although it
would mean that we would have to delay our release date by
four years. This could potentially stain the General Motors
and Cadillac brands by having a certain technology be four
years late on its anticipated release date.
FINANCIAL SECURITY OR PUBLIC
SAFETY
If I were to allow the car to be produced with the new
vehicle-to-vehicle communication, the handful of bugs left
in the system have the potential to be very dangerous. With
this intelligent technology, that can practically think for the
driver, people will become too accustomed to the minimal
effort they must put forth to safely drive. However, if the
technology were to fail they would not have the safety net
that is the vehicle-to-vehicle communication to make driving
simple. For example, If someone were driving down the
highway at 75 miles per hour and that driver decides to
change lanes. If the vehicle-to-vehicle communication
system were to fail, then the driver could start a massive
chain reaction of car crashes on the highway. Any injuries or
deaths, and even repair costs attributed to this accident, are
due to the failure of the technology that I put on the road.
Brian Maher
“Holding the manufacturers responsible for any crash caused
by the vehicle would probably be the most obvious solution.
They are, after all ultimately responsible for the final
product” [2]. Having crashes and deaths on the hands of my
company and myself would definitely be a tough weight to
bear. The ethical part of this is how to program the software
to react in an imminent crash. The trolley problem is a
decision that must be made before the technology is
released, “the trolley problem questions whether sacrificing
one person’s life so that many others can live is justified”
[7]. This is an incredibly tough decision, my team and I must
decide that sacrificing one life to save others is an ethical
thing to do, or that we would program the vehicles to make
the best attempt at avoiding all deaths. This however may
not save any of the passengers involved in a crash.
my job and keeping the same income as more important than
my service to my company and the public.
FACTORS IN DECISION MAKING
Similar decisions like this have happened in the past, one
of the most know and important being the failure of airbags
in cars. Since the late 1980’s people have been dying from
failed airbags. Either from early or late deployment both
cases can cause deaths. The engineers continued to make
cars with the airbags even after learning of the defects;
however, it is very hard to know how an airbag would react.
There are infinite ways a car could crash and it would be
impossible to simulate all of them in a lab. They continued
to work on the defects and improving the triggering of the
airbags and also held a press conference where they
informed the public of the dangers of air bags. “By the year
2000, the number of deaths resulting from air bags had
dropped significantly, due in part to air bag redesign and
education efforts of engineering professionals” [6].
Similar to the airbag the vehicle-to-vehicle
communication technology is a work in progress. The
technology is not completely finished but it already has the
potential to save lives and the future potential for this to save
lives is very high. So accompanying the release with a press
conference of the benefits and dangers of this technology
could be very useful.
Also, in considering large ethical decisions I feel that
older people are more experienced and more knowledgeable.
That is why I contacted my parents. Both my Mother and
Father said the same thing, they both would release the
vehicle-to-vehicle technology in the cars. They said this
because even though it is not finished it could add some
degree of safety to cars. Any addition to safety could greatly
affect the public and save many lives.
On the other hand, if I were to cut this technology out of
the vehicle it could stain the image of the company. Holding
up the release of this technology for another year would
damage the image of General Motors and Cadillac. With
there being so many choices consumers have for cars a little
blemish on the record of a car company such as a failed
release could deter a consumer from buying a vehicle from
the Cadillac brand. Also, I could potentially lose my job.
With my wife and kids counting on my maintaining this job,
I can’t afford to lose it. It would be detrimental to my
family.
THE EITHICS OF CREATING A CAR WITH
VEHICLE-TO-VEHICLE
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS
One of the main engineering rules of ethics that I must
consider while I am making my decision is the first from the
National Society of Engineers (NSPE) stating that
“Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health, and
welfare of the public” [1]. This means that the most
important aspect of my decision should be if it is safe for the
public use. With my knowledge of the bugs in the system the
simple answer to this question should be that I do not allow
the release of the vehicle-to-vehicle communication to
continue. However, the decision is not that simple. When
thinking about calling this communications systems off for
the news cars I also have to think about the lives that even
the faulty technology could save. Although it may not work
100% of the time, every time that the technology does alert
the driver of a danger it has the potential to save lives and
thousands of dollars in repair costs.
Another rule of ethics that I will use in my decision
comes from the Engineers Creed by NSPE. It states “To
place service before profit, the honor and standing of the
profession before personal advantage, and the public welfare
above all other considerations” [4]. The most important part
that can be taken from this code is to place service before
profit. This means that I should not think about sustaining
WHAT IS MY DECISION?
My final decision would be to produce the new cars with
the new vehicle-to-vehicle technology. Although it may not
seem ethical at first glance, I believe that this is a smart and
educated choice for both the public and my own well being.
First and foremost, I would do this because it would increase
the safety for people on the roads. The additional cost would
maybe deter a fraction of potential customers away but the
additional safety could also be something that drives some
costumers to buy cars from us. Also, even though the
costumers wont be receiving the full technology that they are
paying for on the purchase date, as we continue to works out
the bugs they can receive the updates. This means that they
can have additional safety now, while investing in upgraded
safety for the future. This decision does in fact place the
safety, heath and welfare of the public paramount because it
is potentially adding more and more increments of safety to
2
Brian Maher
these cars and the roads with every software update that
Cadillac produces. The only downfall of this would be
making owners drive to their nearest Cadillac dealer to get
the software update. Releasing the communications systems
into cars also allows for a higher chance of my maintaining
of my current job position, thus keeping the major form of
income for my family intact. Finally, I would suggest that
General Motors hold a press release on the new vehicle-tovehicle technology. They must let the public know that the
technology is not perfect and that it can fail. I believe this
honesty may hurt the release of the car a little because it
does not meet expectations. However, it is much better than
trying to secretly release a car that has faults. That is why I
would choose to release the vehicle-to-vehicle
communications systems into Cadillac cars instead of
holding up the release date.
ADITIONAL SORCES
At least 3
REFRENCES
[1]http://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/BER%20Case%20
No%2013-11-FINAL.pdf
[2]
http://rt4rf9qn2y.search.serialssolutions.com/?genre=article
&title=Science%20%26%20Engineering%20Ethics&atitle=
Responsibility%20for%20Crashes%20of%20Autonomous%
20Vehicles%3A%20An%20Ethical%20Analysis.&author=H
evelke%2C%20Alexander&authors=Hevelke%2C%20Alexa
nder%3BNidaR%C3%BCmelin%2C%20Julian&date=20150601&volume
=21&issue=3&spage=619&issn=13533452
[3] http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/codeethics/engineers-creed
[4] http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/176093-v2v-whatare-vehicle-to-vehicle-communications-and-how-does-itwork/4
[5] (August 2014) “Vehicle-to-Vehicle Communications:
Readiness of V2V Technology for Application” U.S.
Department of Transportation (Online Article)
[6]
http://www.onlineethics.org/Resources/Cases/AirBag.aspx
[7] Newcomb D. Who Should Be the Self-Driving Car's
Moral Compass?. PC Magazine [serial online]. October
2014;:44-46. Available from: Academic Search Premier,
Ipswich, MA. Accessed November 2, 2015.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to say thank you to Writing Instructor Keely
Bowers for her writing support through the early stages of
my essay. I would also like to thank Ryan Rosenbaum for
the helpful peer editing and revising.
3
Brian Maher
4