In addition to your points I think GM also acted with more integrity in naming the feature. Tesla calling it autopilot is irresponsible and dangerous.
So, I don't buy into their disclaiming of responsibility if the car fails in what it is doing autonomously.
That is, it's one thing if a safety measure fails to engage (for instance, the car fails to brake to avoid an accident while still under the human's control). However, it's a different matter when the car offers to actively perform a function in lieu of the human, then fails in properly performing it.
By the mere existence and offer of the function, the company is essentially making a claim as to the vehicle's fitness for that function and asking the human to trust that claim by assigning control to the vehicle. No amount of verbiage that tries to assign responsibility back to the human can offset the fact that the vehicle was under its own control when it failed.
Tesla themselves muddle the waters. On https://www.tesla.com/autopilot, it states "All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver."
Further down, it talks about "Full Self-Driving Capability", "All you will need to do is get in and tell your car where to go.", "The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat.", etc.
It's not shocking folks have gotten the impression it's a self-driving feature instead of a fancy cruise control.
"Tesla’s Enhanced Autopilot software has begun rolling out and features will continue to be introduced as validation is completed, subject to regulatory approval. "
"Please note that Self-Driving functionality is dependent upon extensive software validation and regulatory approval, which may vary widely by jurisdiction. It is not possible to know exactly when each element of the functionality described above will be available, as this is highly dependent on local regulatory approval."
The latter paragraph is very vaguely worded and certainly not very clear that it is non existent as yet.
But at any rate, this thread isn't about whether it's clear that the Full Self-Driving software is vaporware. The question is whether people are buying Teslas under the misunderstanding that regular Autopilot is the same thing as Full Self-Driving.
Modern autopilots are actually fully capable of handling takeoff, flight, and landing without interaction from the pilot. However, pilots continue to handle takeoff and landing procedures to maintain skills in those areas as generally an autopilot failure during those times would not be recoverable.
Self-flying isn't as difficult as people think it is. There are fewer obstacles and risks to deal with.
If you're claiming a feature exists "in the Dreamliner and the Airbus 380...over a decade" - well, [citation-needed], then: all the sources that I've managed to find are unanimous that it doesn't, e.g. http://www.askthepilot.com/questionanswers/automation-myths/
To quote the pilot above: "That fantasy insists on outpacing reality is perhaps symptomatic of our infatuation with technology, and the belief that we can compute our way out of every dilemma or complication."
No they're not. The pilot needs to initiate the sequences first, and good luck when something unexpected happens - a Tesla (or any truck/car with auto-distance-control) will brake when a car changes lanes right in front of it, a plane will blare sirens (okay, to be fully correct: it will tell the pilot a preferred course of action to avoid a collision) if another plane comes too close for comfort but not do any evasive action on its own.
Even in a perfectly ordinary flight there are always the ATCs to serve as master controllers for all airplanes... something you also have in railways, but not at all on the road. On the road everyone is on his own.
When a computerised voice in a sci fi movie says "Autopilot engaged" what does that usually mean?
They are not doing their utmost. They're doing the minimum necessary to avoid getting sued. Their sales people and marketing material are pushing autonomous hard, and being very quiet about the limitations. If you're not following the tech news on these issues and only going by what the sales guy at the dealership told you, then the confusion is very reasonable.