There are many, many things computers can do better than man. And if an autopilot controlled from the ground flew my aircraft, relegating me to little more than a passenger, my aircraft would probably have been flown more efficiently and more accurately. And probably safer too. Every approach would have been stable and every touchdown would have been in the right place. But we all know there is a 'but' coming... That is apart from the birds I've missed, the three autopilot disconnects, the two lightning strikes that removed chunks of avionics necessary for automatic (and full panel flying) flight, the decisions regarding diversions, the taxiing on icy taxiways, the missing of FOD, people and vehicles on the apron, etc. Banging my own gong, I have improved the ride quality for the passengers, saved time and money by selecting more efficient routes and pride myself on a reasonable number of early departure by working with my colleagues on the ground. Finally, I haven't had six updates of software (bug fixes and "reliability solutions") and I dont really care that CPDLC refuses to work on my aircraft.
When the automatics are better than me, replace me. But never think they will be. That because I'm self programming and generally capable of providing a solution to an unforeseen problem. If I wasn't, I wouldn't have to consider a pension. Don't get me wrong; I'm sure we'll get close to autonomous flight in my life. But this won't happen until we have perfect aircraft systems, airports and weather.
And while we are here, remember that the greedy will try and save a few coppers by out-sourcing the software to somewhere cheap. That will serve them right. Just ask the project managers in charge of large systems how much their 'savings' have cost them. Cheap software is generally nasty software and in aircraft terms, lethal.
PM