I think that should very much depend on the severity and the statistical impact of the bug. As long as the long doesn't raise the deaths-per-mile-driven number above what humans would be doing, I would say it would be ok to just leave it running and just update once it is fixed.
The goal is to get cars driving better than humans (which btw they already do by a huge margin, even with the fsd beta). so disabling the autopilot because of a potential bug would be condemning a lot more people to death than leaving it in. Interesting variation of the trolley problem i guess
I wonder if there would be a way to make an argument that would appeal to the public just the same: We can't add backdoors to encryption because it would endanger our children!
actually it's even simpler: don't let humans drive. Even today's rudimentary driverless systems are already vastly superior to humans in terms of events per mile driven. (i.e. pedestrians killed)
While this is an interesting idea, I'm not sure such an approach is going to work long term. This establishes that nothing outside of the project has an impact on the project itself. To make a rather extreme example (Godwin says hi), if Hitler picked up coding, a code-of-merit based project wouldn't object to him contributing to it, while most of the code of conducts I've seen would not. So it really comes down to: where do we draw the line?
i actually like it as well. not too unpopular after all it seems. sure, some things are a bit ugly, and language development is largely controlled by a single company (intersystems), but especially working in healthcare you can't get around it. And it does certain things quite well.