>You can learn to drive a self-driving car defensively

My point was that you can't learn to drive a normal car defensively if there are self-driving cars on the road (in their current form).

When a self-driving car decides to do something stupid, you won't see it coming because the decision tree is literally beyond human comprehension.

See: http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20181204-why-we-should-worry...

And Uber's and Tesla's accidents have shown us that you can't rely on the human in the car to catch it before it does something stupid. After all, teaching someone how to drive and watching them attentively is difficult work.

> (afaik) no one is marketing a self-driving car that doesn't also require a driver be attentive at all times.

Tesla's marketing videos for Autopilot have a caption along the lines of "driver is only present for legal reasons".

Wow, that's downright irresponsible.

>You can learn to drive a self-driving car defensively,

Then it is not a self driving car, maybe let's named them human supervised self running cars

Exactly, that was my point.

There are no self-driving cars on the market, or in development by major car manufacturers.

They all explicitly require human attention.

It's especially bad because us humans supervising the cars are going to be worried about preventing human-style accidents. Maybe you're worried about it following too close or not noticing the red light - so you don't notice the warning signs in time when it veers into the concrete barrier.