Right. It's situations like this that I point to when people say "AP is safer than human drivers" - because AP is disabled entirely when it is unable to work effectively. Humans don't have that luxury.
I suppose you count those as wins for yourself, but it seems smart and safe to insist on turning over control in that situation. Humans don't have a safe failure mode like that where they will stop driving or surrender control to an automated system when intoxicated, falling asleep, and so on.
I'm arguing that you can't point to numbers and say "Look, AP is safer than humans, because in the optimal subset of conditions where AP is 'able' to drive, it does better than humans in all conditions, even ones where AP would refuse to engage".
Sometimes it can make sense even for humans to stop driving and wait for better conditions. Rarely even humans are forced to give up driving (for example being stuck in snow).
Viewed in this light the statement that humans don't have the luxury to delegate is not always applicable.
But there is a large disparity between "conditions where _ALL_ drivers should stop driving and wait", and "conditions where AP will forcibly disengage, but an average human driver should have no issue carrying on with relative safety".
I've used AP in some situations where I was having a hard time clearly seeing the lines due to the rain. It held up pretty well, with me only very rarely intervening (from memory, 2 times in 100 miles). It probably helped that I slowed down pretty significantly due to the weather. I've also heard that the newer radarless vehicles are a little more picky.
In general, I'm surprised at how many things it can handle well, but it does still need a hand on the wheel for the few times that it will fail.
