I mean, try this yourself! Pull up to a stop light, close your eyes, and recite the distances to and orientations of the nearest five or six vehicles. Now read it off the screen. Think you'll beat the car? Really? In fact, no, it's quite clear that the car, with 360 degrees of camera coverage at 30 Hz and no fovea or neck scanning required, has a vastly better picture of its surroundings than the driver. It's not even close.
But yeah, the esimates aren't precise and yeah, they do jump around[1]. You're absolutely correct about the way the modelling works. You're just disastrously wrong about the way that the competing systems perform.
[1] I will grant that there's probably a human factors issue here. In fact the human driver really can't do much to process that display and it's probably best that details like just be left out or filtered down to a minimal subset.