(d) The car would stop because unlike human drivers, a self-driving car would be programmed to avoid going so fast that it can't stop if a sudden obstacle would appear (aside from maybe something falling from the sky).
A human would drive too fast on in icy conditions... if the computer knows there are icy conditions and it doesn't slow down before it even senses trouble then the car was programmed to be going too fast. If it is so dangerous there is no way to remove these scenarios (like a blizzard) then a human should be forced to override the system in which case the human is at fault.
I trust sensors to detect icy conditions better than a trust myself.
[edit]
Most bridges where I am have signs that explicitly warn that bridges freeze over. And people intuitively know... bridge + recent precipitation + cold whether = slow down. I don't know why a computer wouldn't know that.
1000 m ahead a group of 5 people walks the pavement along the road. Should the car slow down so that it can stop on time if they suddenly try to cross the road?
If so - self-driving cars will be going much slower than manualy driven cars most of the time, which will probably hurt adoption.
I would like this to be the case, but I guess car companies will agree to some compromise to speed up adoption, and corner cases will be there. Should the software ignore them, or plan for them (= "planning to kill you").
I trust sensors to detect icy conditions better than a trust myself.
[edit] Most bridges where I am have signs that explicitly warn that bridges freeze over. And people intuitively know... bridge + recent precipitation + cold whether = slow down. I don't know why a computer wouldn't know that.