Drivers will always "break the rules", which is the whole point of taking human factors into account in safe design*, and why the NTSB and consumer groups criticize Tesla for "the lack of system safeguards to prevent foreseeable
misuses of technology" when they have the capability to do so. It's also why CR rates Supercruise higher than A/P.
Examples of such human factors design for auto safety to prevent "foreseeable misuses of technology" are interlocks to require the driver's foot to be on the brake before turning the key, or the similar requirement in manual transmissions that requires the clutch to be fully depressed before starting the car. I gather you think both of these are unnecessary regulations, because any accident is the driver's fault. Yet people have been and will continue to be injured or killed by drivers of cars lacking these features, which is why they were made mandatory on all cars produced after a certain year, because the tech to do so exists and is affordable.
This is why the NTSB continues to criticize A/P (and the NHTSA), e.g. the NTSB report in the Delray Beach fatal trailer underrun, the second of this type while under the control of A/P. I guess that qualifies as "just another pointless study" to you, much like Dear Leader's attitude towards medical studies re Covid. The report says:
Based on system design, in an SAE-defined Level 2 partial automation system such as Autopilot, it is the driver's responsibility to monitor the automation, maintain situational awareness of traffic conditions, understand the limitations of the automation, and be available to intervene and take full control of the vehicle at any time. In practice, however, the NTSB and researchers have found that drivers are poor at monitoring automation and do not perform well on tasks requiring
Following the investigation of a fatal crash in Williston, Florida, which occurred in a scenario similar to that of the Delray Beach crash, the NTSB concluded that the way the Tesla Autopilot system monitored and responded to the driver's interaction was not an effective method of ensuring driver engagement.22 As a result, the NTSB recommended that Tesla and five other manufacturers of vehicles equipped with SAE Level 2 driving automation systems take the
Develop applications to more effectively sense the driver's level of engagement and alert the driver when engagement is lacking while automated vehicle control systems
are in use.
With regard to Safety Recommendation H-17-42, the other five manufacturers responded to
the NTSB describing the actions they planned to take, or were taking, to better monitor a driver's level of engagement.23 Tesla was the only manufacturer that did not officially respond to the NTSB about the recommendation. . . .24
The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the Delray Beach, Florida, crash was the truck driver's failure to yield the right of way to the car, combined with the car driver's inattention due to overreliance on automation, which resulted in his failure to react to the presence of the truck. Contributing to the crash was the operational design of Tesla's partial automation system, which permitted disengagement by the driver, and failure to limit the use of the system to the conditions for which it was designed. Further contributing to the crash was the failure of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to develop a method of verifying manufacturer incorporation of acceptable system safeguards for vehicles with Level 2 automation capabilities that limit the use of automated vehicle control systems to the conditions for which they were designed.
How tiresome you must find the NTSB, for rehashing the same ideology (of trying to prevent foreseeable accidents and save lives) over and over again.
What is the role of Human Factors in Vehicle Safety Research?
The role of human factors research is to provide an understanding of how drivers perform as a system component in the safe operation of vehicles. This role recognizes that driver performance is influenced by many environmental, psychological, and vehicle design factors.
The focus of the research is to determine which aspects of vehicle design should be modified to improve driver performance and reduce unsafe behaviors. An additional focus is to evaluate driver's capabilities to benefit from existing or new in-vehicle technologies. The research supports Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, safety defects investigations, consumer information, and advancement of knowledge about driver behaviors and performance that can be applied to development of vehicle technologies that are compatible with driver capabilities and limitations.
More damned armchair experts. It's bad enough that they tell us to wear masks, social distance and wash our hands to reduce the odds of contracting or transmitting a potentially fatal disease, but to research and regulate car design to reduce or eliminate accidents, injuries and death? How dare they!