I don't think driving looks easier than untangling. You can untangle nice and slow with little outside involvement. When it comes to self-driving at 25mph without traffic, it pretty much is a solved problem.
I think this untangling problem gets underestimated because people aren't consciously aware of what they're using to analyze and address a tangle. The input is not all vision - you've got sensation in your fingers giving you feedback with which you update your model of the problem as you progress. The operation varies in strength depending on so many factors.
At the point you have enough sensor input, enough force application variability, and the power to process this in the ballpark of real-time (comparable to a human brain), you now have a being who's going to advocate for the removal of slavery and the application of rights.
On the other hand a dumb computer can figure out the exact topology of the threads.
Edit: Oh wait I forgot I actually said the 20 year number for doing mail. If that's the comparison to driving a car there's really no contest at all. Mail is so easy in comparison to comprehending traffic.
You seem to have missed why I said that. Let me try to reword.
Being able to go as slow as you want with no outside interference makes most problems a lot easier.
It's not an analogy, it's literal. Untangling has that huge huge benefit, self-driving doesn't.
It's the low-pressure version of self-driving that potentially looks like an easier problem. And that version is solved, so that undermines the argument of "this easier thing isn't solved after tons of effort, so what makes you think your thing would get solved in 20 years".
High-pressure self-driving doesn't look like it's easier than untangling. So it being unsolved isn't really evidence for anything.
