that's the fundamental attribution error again, attributing poor judgement/negligence to the driver, who's the visible actor, rather than the inherent systemic flaws designed by other unseen actors who hold greater responsibility.
Obviously the system should improve to make errors less likely, but that doesn't absolve anyone of guilt in my view.
the wet bags behind the autopilot get bored, distracted, complacent, ill or reckless due a moltitude of factors some of which outside their control
it is well known at this point the human modes of failure, and that there was basically no mitigation is a reasonability of the system designer
A better system would have spotted this person was watching their phone not the road, but it would still have held them accountable and (at minimum) fired them!
That doesn't mean that an employee being clearly negligent doesn't also need to be held accountable.
Them being held accountable is one part of a good system.
in this case, the backup driver should shoulder some blame, but not the majority of it, and commensurately, should not face any of the harsh penalties associated with manslaughter.
Also, many people work at really boring jobs. If serious errors happens while you watch netflix, you'll get fired, for sure.
But again, sometimes listening to music is permissable.
I don't think it's realistic to expect people to function well under those conditions.
And I think it's wrong. If my car is on cruise control, that doesn't mean I can stop worrying about my speed. You can't always just blame the company because it's the bigger entity.
Which is all to say that "the system made me do it" really doesn't fly as an excuse for felonious behavior.
for instance, in the 737 max crashes, the pilots made errors, but the principal blame lies with boeing and their egregious systemic design flaws.