There is a good argument to be made that the various AP/FSD iterations currently in production/Beta do nothing to prove the system is as good or better than a human driver. Perhaps they will someday, but currently the system only proves that a human/computer hybrid system is as good or better than either one of those 2 things separately.
As long as you can disengage and take over, you are not truly measuring any number of minor/major incidents per mile in terms of computer vs human. You are measuring the benefit of a human+computer hybrid system vs human alone. This is because the human part of the system (manual disengagement) causes any error/accident of autonomous system to be avoided, skewing statistical data.
Is my thinking wrong here? I’m fully aware I’m presenting one side of a debatable point, and am looking to spark a conversation. Cheers!