As stated countless times before, autopilot in planes isn't even geared towards handing most flight scenarios or challenging conditions. Tesla is technically correct to call it this, even though this naming is confusing to consumers who think "plane flies itself" and think it means their car can drive itself in all conditions and avoid at-fault incidents - which most likely will indeed lead to more deaths.
As stated countless times in response, it doesn't matter what autopilot actually does when the concern is the public perception of the marketing.
If "autopilot" sounds to the general public like "it drives itself" (which is the simple etymology of the word), then it doesn't matter one flying fig what autopilot on planes actually does.
But I have the same concerns about all marketing that positions cars as being capable enough that people don't have to pay attention. Until we hit true Level 4 or Level 5 self driving cards, I'm extremely concerned about the public's perception that they don't have to operate a motor vehicle. *Especially* if the vehicle is capable of enough automated driving that the driver doesn't need to pay attention during most of the operation of the vehicle.
To your specific point though, I think in general the public would view something marketed at "autopilot" as more capable than something marketed as "co-pilot", despite the significant capability advantage that a "co-pilot" actually offers over an "autopilot" inside the cockpit of an airplane.
Not interested in leading the pack; happy enough to follow, crush smaller competition by their bloat, declare bankruptcy and take in hundreds of billions in handouts because of their irresponsibility and ineptitude.
Legacy branding doesn't mean anything when it comes to implementing and marketing self driving vehicles.
I care about the quality and level of the implementation, and the marketing positioning.
me: "you have the controls"
co-pilot: "I have the controls"
me: "you have the controls"
I am no longer flying the aircraft or even paying much attention to it. I could even get up and walk away from the controls. That's why co-pilots exist
It doesn't matter. At. All. How the operations work inside the cockpit of an airplane. What actually happens in an airplane is 0% important to the conversation.
What actually matters is the public at large's perception of the term "autopilot" and their perception of the term "co-pilot". If the public perceives "co-pilot" as being less functional than "autopilot" then it does not matter at all that in aviation a co-pilot is actually more capable than an autopilot.
It's another perception/reality thing. I realize that the co-pilot shares the load, and is capable of being the pilot-in-charge, or having control of the aircraft. But one implies self piloting (Tesla), the other implies an intelligent assistant pilot.
Co-pilot says that the two of you are doing it together. Co-operatively.
Auto = automatic = you no longer have to do it.
Think of an automatic vs. stick shift car. And automatic car you no longer have to shift.
What could save lives is intelligent automatic breaking - because that is something we are currently capable of. Humans as a species is terrible at paying attention to boring tasks and quickly react - so these gimmick autopilot takes are dangerous if anything.
From a marketing perspective however, robotaxis are just around the corner.
If the average consumer was also an airline pilot then it would make sense to use an industry term with nuanced meaning. Instead, the average consumer assumes a straightforward meaning of the term, especially with pop culture throwing out phrases like "planes practically fly themselves these days".
Claiming "autopilot is technically correct" would only approach being true if Tesla & others went into great detail to educate buyers about the limits of the avionic autopilot features referenced by the term, and difficulties of flying a plane in non-optimal conditions, so they actually understood the "technical" meaning and could apply it correctly to the car they're buying.
It's not even flying the car!
https://jalopnik.com/a-tesla-stan-dmd-me-to-show-what-they-t...
No, there’s not many self driving cars that have driven into pedestrians but Uber ATG’s car notably did, and there is certainly a lot of room for failure.