Australia's EV tax discount is being wound back. Here's what it actually means
Australia's EV FBT exemption is being phased out from 2027. Here's what's changing, who it affects, and whether it should influence your next car decision.
The truly weird ethics around driverless cars
We’ve seen self-driving cars on screen for years, from Batman to Knight Rider, and now they’re a thrilling reality. Self-driving cars are already roaming the roads in several US cities, and are expected to produce $300-400 billion in revenue by 2035. But along with the excitement and awe about this brilliant technology, comes some truly weird dilemmas that haven’t been resolved yet.
Here are some of the biggest quandaries.
Who should the car prioritise in a split decision?
In theory, driverless cars should be safer than most because they can reduce or even eliminate human error. After all, robots can’t drive drunk or sneeze. And in a critical moment, driverless cars can act rapidly to avoid hitting a pedestrian. But what if there’s an urgent choice to be made between saving one pedestrian or another?
Is it right to prioritise saving three lives, rather than one?
Should the car prioritise an 8-year-old’s life over that of an 80-year-old?
What if the choice is between saving someone who’s pregnant, and someone who isn’t?
For the first time, cars have the processing ability and programming to make such impossible decisions. As it turns out, the trolley problem and self-driving cars are essentially one and the same — which makes self-driving car design a deeply philosophical process.
Is a driver worth more than a pedestrian?
The nature of driverless cars also presents a choice between who’s inside and outside the vehicle. When surveyed, most people say a driverless car should prioritise pedestrians over the car’s occupants if a crash is unavoidable. Yet, people prefer to ride in a driverless car that will protect its occupants at all costs. After all - who wants to buy a car that might sacrifice you?
If this decision is left up to manufacturers, it’s conceivable that the car’s occupants might be prioritised for the simple sake of profits. This throws up all kinds of curly questions to do with class and privilege. For example: could car drivers have a better life expectancy because they’re better protected? And could life insurance premiums cost more if a person walks or rides a bike to work?
