Raw LLM Responses
Inspect the exact model output for any coded comment.
Look up by comment ID
Random samples — click to inspect
G
CHATGPT told me, in 10 years they'll use Neuralink or other chips in our brain (…
ytc_UgwvW3Nld…
G
I fear we are all doomed to slow massive corporate layoffs replaced by Ai and ev…
ytc_UgzmFMSaL…
G
if they are going to automate their jobs then they should pay for the ex drivers…
ytc_UgjM1YdFQ…
G
So if I heard the witness correctly, if facial recognition is most effective on …
ytc_UgwenFlZi…
G
Umm ! So then , how do we deal with the corruption that usually and does go wit…
ytc_Ugy4o8O9W…
G
People who will literally believe anything they see. This guy did not fight a ro…
ytc_Ugy2qLcHj…
G
After watch Gothamchess videos, yes AI is really danger!
Imagine AI summoning m…
ytc_Ugw5XT4mv…
G
My college professor actually allows us to use ChatGPT for all assignments in hi…
ytc_UgwvbLiLj…
Comment
This is a very thought provoking subject. However, I do think the scenario outlined has a clear answer. Swerving into other drivers would obviously never be the answer. If a truck in front of you is hauling large heavy objects, the self driving car should make the premeditated decision to keep a safe distance. This way, if the heavy objects suddenly start falling off the back, there would be ample time to for the car to stop and allow the heavy objects to tumble forward away from the car. Minimizing risk to others doesn't have to mean heightened risk to self if the car is proactive in avoiding incidents. There will always be freak accidents that driving algorithms won't be able to compensate for, and that's where making cars safer structurally comes in.
Regardless, putting other people's lives in danger because of you or your car's misfortune due to a fluke will never be considered okay in my opinion. The video assumes that not swerving for the tumbling objects means certain death for occupants, and I don't see that being the case in most any scenario.
youtube
AI Harm Incident
2015-12-08T19:3…
Coding Result
| Dimension | Value |
|---|---|
| Responsibility | ai_itself |
| Reasoning | deontological |
| Policy | none |
| Emotion | approval |
| Coded at | 2026-04-27T06:24:59.937377 |
Raw LLM Response
[
{"id":"ytc_UghSiRcVXA-3FHgCoAEC","responsibility":"none","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"indifference"},
{"id":"ytc_Ugg36gd_wQOCXHgCoAEC","responsibility":"ai_itself","reasoning":"deontological","policy":"none","emotion":"approval"},
{"id":"ytc_UggzSEiGsQNLKngCoAEC","responsibility":"none","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"indifference"},
{"id":"ytc_UghidMHZsCybB3gCoAEC","responsibility":"ai_itself","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"approval"},
{"id":"ytc_UgjzNTXzuzIxOngCoAEC","responsibility":"distributed","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"regulate","emotion":"resignation"},
{"id":"ytc_UghfmsovrnUJPXgCoAEC","responsibility":"ai_itself","reasoning":"deontological","policy":"none","emotion":"approval"},
{"id":"ytc_UgjQy7gtc5pA_XgCoAEC","responsibility":"ai_itself","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"fear"},
{"id":"ytc_Ugio_pXgICTxCXgCoAEC","responsibility":"none","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"approval"},
{"id":"ytc_UggKQCpjXBYZKXgCoAEC","responsibility":"developer","reasoning":"contractualist","policy":"liability","emotion":"approval"},
{"id":"ytc_UgggitcG_CbrUXgCoAEC","responsibility":"ai_itself","reasoning":"deontological","policy":"none","emotion":"approval"}
]