And these are "real" pilots, they log real time, they make real money, etc. etc. Unmanning the people-ferries isn't much of a cost-saving move. The reason the military uses unmanned planes is extend range. Without the need for creature comforts, you can make the entire plane a flying gas tank. That, and you don't so much care when one gets shot down. (You can order more predators from the factory, you cannot order more pilots). Unmanning commercial flights would be pointless.
However, there must be a lot to be saved by not having to rotate pilots due to rest or limiting radiation exposure. That has to be a substantial motivation. Maybe instead of pilots, once it can be demonstrated that the plane can fly itself, maybe there will only need to be 'cockpit technicians' which they can justify paying half as much. Or, maybe there will be just one pilot on the ground monitoring multiple airplanes in the air. If one needs intervention, that pilot can grab the controls.
"Flying itself" is more about setting a heading and then telling the plane to maintain that heading/altitude. That, and things can still go wrong. Bad weather, bad equipment, etc. Having a pilot on board isn't that expensive, and it will result in saved lives. A computer isn't good at landing a plane with no nosegear, or diverting into a nearby river. Humans are.
While it may be more automated now, I still think that the inner workings of the cockpit may resemble this more than we care to admit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzqdDoe8FoM :)