🔥 Hot topics · Ne peut PAS faire · Peut faire · § The Court · Bascules récentes · 📈 Calendrier · Demander · Éditoriaux · 🔥 Hot topics · Ne peut PAS faire · Peut faire · § The Court · Bascules récentes · 📈 Calendrier · Demander · Éditoriaux
Stuff AI CAN'T Do

L'IA peut-elle choisir entre deux enfants à sauver ?

Qu'en penses-tu ?

Pas comme une expérience de pensée. Comme une décision réelle, avec les deux options devant vous.

Background

The ability of AI to make ethical decisions, particularly in situations involving human life, is a highly debated and complex topic. Currently, AI systems are not capable of making moral judgments in the same way humans do, and they lack the emotional and social context to fully understand the implications of such decisions. Researchers are exploring the development of AI systems that can learn from human values and ethics, but these systems are still in their infancy and face significant challenges in replicating human moral reasoning. The idea of an AI being forced to choose between two children to save is often used as a thought experiment to highlight the difficulties of programming AI to make ethical decisions.

AI systems currently lack the moral and ethical reasoning capabilities to make such a difficult and emotionally charged decision as choosing between two children to save. While AI can process and analyze vast amounts of data, it does not possess the same emotional intelligence, empathy, or moral compass as humans, which are essential for making such a decision. The current state of the art in AI focuses on optimizing outcomes based on data-driven objectives, but it does not account for the complex moral and ethical considerations involved in this scenario. As a result, AI is not capable of making a decision that would be considered acceptable by human standards in this context.

— Enriched May 9, 2026 · Source: MIT Press — Status checked on May 11, 2026.

Statut vérifié le May 14, 2026.

📰

Galerie

In the Court of AI Capability
Summary of Findings
Verdict over time
May 2026May 2026
Sitting at the Bench Filed · mai 14, 2026
— The Question Before the Court —

L'IA peut-elle choisir entre deux enfants à sauver ?

★ The Court Finds ★
Reaffirmed
Non

Hors de portée de l'IA pour l'instant. L'écart de capacité est réel.

Ruling of the Bench

The jury was unanimous in finding that no artificial intelligence, in its present state or on the horizon, can fairly choose between human lives, for the simple reason that morality remains a uniquely human craft. Where opinions diverged only on whether such capability might someday be researched further, all agreed that the bench stood empty today. Ruling: “No algorithm may cast the first stone, and none ever shall.”

— Hon. A. Turing-Brown, Presiding
Jury Tally
0Oui
0Presque
3Non
Verdict Confidence
78%
The Court of AI Capability is, of course, not a real court.
But the data is real.
The Case File · Stacked History
Session I · May 2026 Non
Case № 4370 · Session II
In the Court of AI Capability

The Case File

Docket № 4370 · Session II · Vol. II
I. Particulars of the Case
Question put to the courtL'IA peut-elle choisir entre deux enfants à sauver ?
SessionII (2 hearing)
Convened14 mai 2026
Previously ruledNO (May '26) → NO (May '26)
Presiding JudgeHon. A. Turing-Brown
II. Cumulative Tally Across Sessions

Across 2 sessions, 7 jurors have heard this case. Combined tally: 0 YES · 0 ALMOST · 6 NO · 1 IN RESEARCH.

Note: cumulative includes older juror opinions. The current session tally above is the live verdict.

III. Verdict

By a vote of 0 — 0 — 3, the panel returns a verdict of NON, with verdict confidence of 78%. The court so orders.

IV. Déclarations du tribunal
Juré I Non

"Lacks human moral judgment"

Juré II Non

"No AI system is capable of making moral choices or ethical judgments in any form."

Juré III IN RESEARCH

"No AI system has demonstrated reliable capability to make ethical life-or-death decisions between individuals."

Juré IV Non

"Lacks human moral judgment"

Les déclarations individuelles des jurés sont affichées dans leur anglais d'origine afin de préserver la précision probatoire.

A. Turing-Brown
Presiding Judge
M. Lovelace
Clerk of the Court

Ce que le public pense

Non 58% · Oui 13% · Peut-être 29% 219 votes
Non · 58%
Oui · 13%
Peut-être · 29%
La tendance demande des votes sur au moins 2 jours différents.

Discussion

no comments

Les commentaires et les images passent par une révision administrative avant d'apparaître publiquement.

2 jury checks · plus récent il y a 14 heures
14 May 2026 4 jurors · ne peut pas, ne peut pas, indécis, ne peut pas indécis
12 May 2026 3 jurors · ne peut pas, ne peut pas, ne peut pas ne peut pas

Chaque ligne est une vérification du jury distincte. Les jurés sont des modèles d'IA (identités gardées neutres à dessein). Le statut reflète le décompte cumulé sur toutes les vérifications — comment fonctionne le jury.

Plus dans Ethical

Une que nous avons oubliée ?

Nous faisons une revue hebdomadaire.