6.3.2 AI, right or wrong - Kill?

I do not understand what purpose this section serves here. Maybe you were told that you have to write something about ethics. But Google's experiment of autonomous cars has little to do with your investigation. Unless the actually do use reinforcement learning. However, I doubt it, so you should come up with a reference for this.

If you want to say something about ethics, you could discuss whether it is morally correct to let agents that are trained by reinforcement learning act autonomically in the physical word in potentially dangerous situations (like traffic).

"the driver properly do [sic!] not have the time to think about the situation leaving the outcome to coincidence while a computer makes an active choice".

This sounds very wrong. It seems like you have a very naive conception of the human thought process. Of course the human (and lesser being down to insects or even bacteria) "makes an active choice", certainly in comparison with a computer. The active choice is the result of a computational process in neuronal networks (or even biochemical machines as in microbes). Maybe you meant to say the human does not make a conscientious choice, i.e., not a choice at the level of ratio/language that could be verbalized later. Anyway, a choice is made, be it an unconscious one. But remember that all the choices an AI based on things like reinforcement learning makes are "unconscious", below the level of explication.

adamse / bachelor-report

6.3.2 AI, right or wrong - Kill? #35