But the gauge for success shouldn't be whether it handles every situation better than humans, it should be whether the use of these tools leads to a lower rate

But the gauge for success shouldn't be whether it handles every situation better than humans, it should be whether the use of these tools leads to a lower rate of accidents/injuries/deaths. Just pointing out that there might specific situations where humans would do better, while downplaying all the situations where an automated system would do better, isn't all that useful. I mean, it works on an emotional level, but we should try to be objective by looking at the numbers. Saying everyone should just drive defensively isn't a solution. The evidence for that is the fact that that's what we currently try to tell everyone to do, and it's still a problem that people drive poorly.