Well, yeah, who knows if the driver of the car that causes the accident would seem responsible. Which is why I wouldn't want to own that kind of car. If they really are that much safer, then I should benefit from them being on the road anyway.
I though the same way: It's better if everyone else has one. But I don't think it'll play out that way.
You'll benefit from the additional safety.
On the other hand, if there is an accident involving you and the other car is a self-driving car, the assumption will be (and the manufacturer's lawyers will argue) that you, the human, are at fault. It might even be the case, but I suspect it'll be more of a guilty-until-proven-innocent situation regardless.
The situation where the human driver is assumed to be guilty without evidence seems self-contradictory. A self-driving car would have abundant telemetry and video. If it didn't, if say the information gathering mysteriously failed then by definition, it's at fault.
This fear makes no more sense to me as the sentiment that nobody will be able to afford to insure a non-self-driving car in the future.
