Two points I would make. One, according to professor Winfield, who specialises in artificial intelligence, we're as far away from human level congnative thinking in computers as we are from faster than light space travel.
Two, why would you want autonomous airliners? Saftey? Or cost? As for Saftey, it's mathamaticly proven that if something can happen, it will. No matter how much redundancy you build into a system it can and will fail. Cost? The cost of the flight crew is about a pint of beer on every fight ticket. Hardly going to be noticed by most people.
So the question I ask is what's the point? Fully automated, autonomous airliners will still crash, will still kill people. The reduction in cost will be quickly reversed by the added cost of system redundancy. Which will also fail.
And no, Tourist, I didn't read your 250+ posts on the topic. I'm sure they are very well researched, and you obviously have a passion for a full automated airliner of the future. However the overall argument of why you would want to go down that route has not been made. They will still crash, and the cost savings are negligible, if any.
Automation dependency is a very real and dangerous threat. How you go about mitigating that threat is what we should be taking about. Not immersing ourselves in a far off fantasy.