How else is a manufacturer supposed to get feedback?
That is: their test results should be providing them with all the feedback they need. We're not talking about a broken UI on a shopping website. Broken "smarts" in a car is like broken brakes; it's not OK to just wait for users to find out for you.
If they "did the wrong thing" with car safety, then they shoun't be allowed to sell cars until the problem is fixed.
You can either stick your fingers in your ears and keep yelling "this can't happen!", or acknowledge that it does and try to do something about it.
Writing to or calling the manufacturer may be effective for small companies, or companies with a good track record in ethics. Otherwise, let the sales do the talking.
This will only work out for you (and others) if there are other manufacturers that don't add features like this at all. And since you haven't provided feedback to anyone about what you don't like, other manufacturers won't hear about this either, and may also add these sorts of features.
I agree that one person providing feedback isn't going to do much. But that's why everyone needs to do so. It's like voting: your individual vote usually won't change anything, but the votes of everyone can. Refusing to provide feedback (or vote) because your individual action won't change anything on its own doesn't solve anything, and just gives those in charge less data to work with to figure out what people actually do want.
And then the VW software team managers say "Look how great Tesla's are selling. It's because they have more autodrive features. Give me more money to add more features." Note, that was "add features" not "improve features".
"I categorize this software as 'safety' related, so it must be perfect on the first try and never need any improvements"
Existientialism is bad for your mental health, friend.
Making incorrect generalizations is bad for your health too.
I did not write that, thus they are not "contained in (my) comment."