Yep, and a few other (maybe only one?) poster(s) actually got a bit testy with some of us, claiming we just didn't 'get it', inferring we were Luddites or some such. Even challenging a poster here who was deep into designing real Auto-pilot systems for real airplanes in real life!
So maybe they will finally all come around to my original, consistently held concept - that all these great technologies should be used to keep the driver attentive and involved and alert, and assist an active driver, and in no way try to 'take over' for them (except in emergencies).
Similar to having someone in the passenger seat who is also watching the road for you - you do your best to drive safely, but that passenger may see something you don't and can alert you to it. That makes for a safer drive (it would be interesting to see statistics on that, with a safety-engaged passenger, not one who is distracting the driver).
And in some cases, (like emergency braking), the car could take over, or even pull over and call for assistance if it senses you are not paying attention (drunk, sleepy, medical emergency, etc). Part of this concept, as I mentioned way back, would be to monitor the driver's head motions, and maybe eyes. Are they looking around, monitoring their mirrors, looking left, right - did they notice that truck ahead partially pulled over to the side of the road, but partially blocking the lane? A gentle reminder a few times, and then threats to pull the car over and stop.
That tech is far, far more do-able (and is already being done in some ways), and could enter the mainstream (average selling priced cars) long before any true SDC could be released. The old "Perfect is the enemy of good/better".
And all of this can be done in stages (as has been happening) and developed and improved over time. It's evolutionary, we don't need the "all or nothing" gate (no steering wheel, etc).
Time to get real.
-ERD50