That's why I think "A.I. ethics" is pretty much a non-problem. It's not about finding the one and only "right ethics", A.I. ethics is mostly about providing a set of constraints that act similar to systems of laws. These will be provided by legislation and/or by voluntary industry guidelines. Such sets of rules (with possible conflicts, soft and hard constraints, probabilistic or non-probabilistic, etc.) have been studied extensively as "normative systems", "input/output logics", and in decision making.
There are many interesting details and problems in this research area and there are plenty of conferences about it every year, but these problems are ultimately solvable. In any case, the content of those normative systems comes from humans (and human authorities/institutions), just like there are also laws, traffic regulations, and social norms in every country. Just like laws and regulations are not perfect and do not represent a morality carved in stone, A.I. systems will have revisable human-made contents that represent a more (or less) reasonable&lawful consensus.
There are many interesting details and problems in this research area and there are plenty of conferences about it every year, but these problems are ultimately solvable. In any case, the content of those normative systems comes from humans (and human authorities/institutions), just like there are also laws, traffic regulations, and social norms in every country. Just like laws and regulations are not perfect and do not represent a morality carved in stone, A.I. systems will have revisable human-made contents that represent a more (or less) reasonable&lawful consensus.