My first thought: We paper about what ChatGPT does with the trolley problem like a hole in the head.
My second thought—and don't confuse this for an endorsement of the paper—was much darker: we probably DO need work on this, and on how humans are influenced by it. The latter is the primary of the subject of the paper.
I was going to complain about how I think the authors rather naively talk about an LLM's moral stance as if such a thing could exist, but...
I'm sure all those exploited workers who were payed $1.25 to think about this for five minutes were carefully considering the philosophical implications of their answers. I guess you just have to put "ChatGPT" in the title and you get a pass through peer review.
BTW, Google offers a utilitarian answer too. I was hoping for some effective altruism but it let me down.
