Come on ThermionicScott, tell me how you really feel about my opinion.
That's certainly a very interesting response, but from a programmer's perspective, its significance is hard to quantify without knowing HOW it arrived at that answer.
Hope springs eternal, but I can't imagine an AI ever eclipsing the reasoning and decision-making ability of a human. The thing about humans is that we have something an AI can never have: imagination. It follows that we therefore also have insight. Because of this, no matter what situation arises, no matter how extreme the circumstance, no matter how unplanned the event, a human always has the capacity to evaluate the situation and develop some sort of rational response. It may not always be the best response, and it may not even be the correct response, but there will be a plan of action that takes the immediate factors of the situation into account.
I'm sure anyone who's ever spent any time with a computer or other electronic gadget (particularly if you've had to support, fix, or develop software) can relate to the concept of "babysitting" the software. You may have something that works very well, but every now and then there is that unforeseen scenario in which the software loses its "mind" and does something completely unpredicted or silly. Yet, a human might look at that scenario and know immediately what to do (or, at the very least, know that what the software is doing is NOT a good response).
The aviation industry has been into this field for a long time. Airplanes with the right equipment can practically fly themselves. But, we really can't trust the systems entirely. This point is driven into pilots throughout their training, and is reinforced through embarrassing incidents and tragic accidents. There are numerous instances in which an autopilot or flight control system will "throw its hands up" and simply quit flying the airplane (Air France 447, for instance), at which point the pilot (who has hopefully stayed in the loop, but often is not) must assume control. There are also other instances in which the computer does something strange and dangerous, something a human pilot would never do (though in most such cases, the computer will just give up and disengage, thanks to fail-safes built into the software).
Now, compare this to cars: quick, appropriate responses are FAR less important in an airplane, where a pilot (or computer) has the luxury of wandering around the sky a few thousand feet here or there, heading the wrong direction for a bit, not properly controlling airspeed, etc. That's a lot different from the world of driving, where we are regularly mere inches away from another car coming the opposite direction at a differential speed of 130mph+.
That's not to say I don't see driverless cars making a big impact in the future. If our road system is modified a bit and made more uniform, if the car is only expected to go on relatively improved roads, if GPS is always available and/or some sort of computer-friendly road marker system is devised, if extremely twisty or hilly roads can be properly dealt with by the computer, if specific types of inclement weather are avoided, and IF the driveless cars are kept in good repair (and we know some won't be), then they may be reasonably workable.
And, who knows, maybe there will be a paradigm shift in AI and we'll see something that completely bypasses the current AI pitfalls, and can truly challenge the human mind's ability to reason. I'm happy to be proven wrong.
Matt