How often do humans not follow clearly painted lines and enter the opposing lane of traffic or ditch? As long as the machine does a better job than humans, we are better off.

It's hard to get consumers to buy into this point, though, because we all think that WE could do a better job, even if on average, statistics say otherwise.

Do the statistics say otherwise? It's a hard job finding them, but the last time I looked (sometime last year), autonomous vehicles would appear to have an accident rate considerably higher per driver mile than humans. Given the relatively benign environments they are being trained in (ie, not busy places like London, or even worse something like Kuala Lumpur), this consumer says "show me the evidence that the computers are better at this than people". Tesla seem to have hit on a system that is the worst of all possible worlds - good enough to cause drivers to disconnect and stop paying attention, but quite capable of doing bizarre and erratic things that cause accidents. The system would be more helpful if it was used to provide driver assistance through cues and alerts, rather than saying "hey, I'll do all the steering, just don't fall asleep because I'm not very good at it".

Note the anti-human spin you often find among the advocates of computer-driven cars, here that's the sneer, "we all think WE could do a better job." Not so. Some people know they're bad drivers and their insurance rates reflect that. Others know they're good drivers and can point to similar rates. My rates are remarkably low, reflecting 45 years of near perfect driving, much of it in difficult conditions, including snow, ice and heavy rain.

Yes, that is true. There is a reason that there are taxi-drivers and clients. While taxi-drivers are universally reviled, it has more to do with their aggressive style than their rate of accidents, which again is extremely low per mile driven.

Humans? What a silly idea. We're not remotely alike. Some people are terrible drivers and some are marvelous. It's silly to treat us all as if we conformed to the statistical mean.

Humans typically have at least 16 years of vision processing experience before they drive a vehicle. This experience allows a deeper understanding of the surroundings, such as recognizing the light pole marking the center line, which would cause a human to ignore the marks. Alternatively, in an occurrence like construction on one half of the road, it might be appropriate to drive left of the road center. This "big picture" understanding is well beyond any self driving car. Self driving is going to be great for properly marked roads, but don't plan on doing away with the driver for many non-ideal situations.

Some with a knack for murder mysteries could come up with an entire series that would exploit these deficiencies in various ways. A little white tape, for instance, could steer an unwanted someone off a cliff. Then the tape could be quickly taken away, leaving no evidence that a crime has taken place. "How unfortunate," the police would say, "that the computer driving failed in this case.

Good story line. Self driving should be able to note there is a cliff and stop.

Autopilot is good invention, but only to small, CONTROLLABLE areas like factory or airport. On a casual road there is no way to such stupid thing! Road has way more unpredictable situations that I NEVER trust my life to the stupid machine.
Funny to say - even airplane in the heaven, where there is no obstacles at all - they are driven by pilot. And yes, they crash.
Autodriving is overcounted by mediocres, somebody should stop this hype.

tesla autopilot indeed loaded with lots of features but i really don't have the confidence to use it, coz am sure at some point it will show a glitch as nothing is ideal.

I would be more impressed by this study if there had been a hazzard in the 'lane'
the Tesla was suckered into. Giive the lack of that kind of testing, my assessment there is almost zero chance that anything other than an illegal lane change would occur. I'll give the investigator an A for curiosity and an F for completeness.

Let the computer help you drive by giving you relevant information, and, when appropriate, emergency-braking for you.

Computers should NOT be driving the cars. It's too dangerous.