If you have a human driving, you usually know who to blame.
Which, to me, is a horrible way of looking at things. If that were the only criterion, we could easily end up with ten times more car deaths simply because we're more comfortable with putting blame at people, even at the expense of lives.
If your car has shitty brakes you leave extra room. Good drivers realize that 'shitty brakes' is always relative.
Sounds to me like the solution to the problem in question - a computer could quickly periodically recompute the envelope of possible scenarios and never drive in the phase space into points from which it can't recover without hitting someone or something.
(disclaimer: I apparently have an IQ of 158. But god fucking knows I'm as average as can be.)
That's obvious from the fact that you forgot to mention the scale used and the test.
2) Anonymization of your data is really true
That has been shown to be increasingly difficult.
There is a lot of good data to be used to improve traffic in big cities for instance.
What does that have to do with a private taxi service collecting data on your movements? That's a matter for the municipal administration to solve.
The question of whether computers can think is just like the question of whether submarines can swim. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra