The person hitting you from behind would be at fault anyway, at least where I live you are required to keep enough distance to stop even for no apparent reason, if driving in a lane and not moving to another.
If you do it whilst moving in front of another car as it could be on you as you are required to yield and leave enough space to not hinder or endanger the driving of the other vehicle. This also includes brake-checks as your obligation to yield does not stop after you have merged into another highway lane and continues for an unspecified amount of time.
So there should not be an issue there, only problem is people can and will not understand the stopping distance of a car driving 100+kph and do not leave enough space. YMMV with respect to the laws involved as it's entirely possible you could be at fault at the place you are living.
The rear ender having to pay is just the base case that is used in the absence of other facts.
If you drive "in an asinine manner" (the definition of asinine is subject to discretion and negotiation between the relevant insurance companies) and manage to make the front of someone else's care meet the rear of yours in the process AND there are witnesses, dashcam footage or other evidince you will almost certainly wind up having to pay up.
Everybody knows that traffic doesn't follow the rules. Pretending like it does is a convenient legal fiction we use in order to make rule making easier.
There is intentionally tons of redundancy baked into the rules to cover for all the edge cases where people routinely don't follow the rules. Hence why other people's obligation to not crash into stuff isn't a blank check to do whatever. In cases where two people are breaking the rules usually whoever's breaking them in the more typical and predicable manner is the one given a pass (e.g. someone speeding "a normal amount" will likely not be found at fault if you roll a stop and get t-boned).
Maybe it's different in the states, I'm not up to date with all traffic rules everywhere.
So if autonomous systems hit the brakes much more severely than conditions warrant, it’s not obvious that the drivers behind you are going to have time to react.
Also people commenting here are likely from widely disparate parts of the world with different driving laws. Those differences are more than enough to preclude useful discussion here at the extremes.
So sure - the guy in front of you may have been extremely reckless, but no one involved is even going to want to hear that narrative.
Nobody cares about talk. Everybody lies when they have financial motive to do so and everyone who deals with accidents professionally knows this. That said, insurance companies care deeply about hard to falsify (i.e. anything better than heresay) evidince that show that their customer was not the cause of the loss (dashcam video, surveillance footage, 3rd party witness statements, etc) because the profitability of their business depends in large part on claims payouts.
For other accidents, yes - I've found they want to listen. Rear ending: Not really: They just want to know who was driving the car that rear ended the other car.
I got rear ended once. I spoke to the other party's insurance. Trust me - they didn't want to know why I had gotten hit. It's to their benefit to know, but for them it was an open and shut case. All they wanted to confirm was that it was their insured who had rear ended me.
I have a dashcam, if someone cuts me off and slams on their brakes I may not have time to react. The party in front could be responsible if you can prove it with a video. The insurance company WILL CARE if you have footage.
However, if someone seems to brake no reason, it is on the driver behind to stop.
Where is this place where drivers just magically pay for damages? Where I live in the US, the person who hits you from behind is probably going to back up and just drive away.
https://electrek.co/2022/08/30/tesla-faces-class-action-laws...
https://jalopnik.com/the-honda-cr-v-and-honda-accord-are-bei...
Most other brands seem pretty good. My 2019 Subaru has zero phantom braking events so far. (Although the adaptive cruise control does get confused when driving in the slow lane on freeways and slows down when the car ahead turns onto an offramp.)
Automatic emergency braking changes nothing from a crash liability standpoint. Generally the leading vehicle has the right of way, and the following driver must leave enough space to avoid a crash even if the leading vehicle brakes inappropriately.