It's actually less danger factor than it is the pleasure of competence, doing something well and smoothly. I live in London, where there are a lot of powered two-wheelers, filtering is legal, and it's just about the best way of getting from A to B in the congested city. Sure, it gets slightly more dangerous if you get into a bit of a race with someone else - the adrenaline of competition can push you a bit, but you're mostly just a risk to yourself.
But being able to skip past long queues of stopped or slowly moving traffic, safely and efficiently almost as if the traffic didn't exist, feels really good.
Honestly, I think inner city scooters don't really factor into this debate. As you mention you pose a limited risk to others and your choice to risk your own well being is exactly that- your choice.
2000kg passenger cars travelling at 60-100km/hr are another story altogether. My guess is that there would be a tiny fraction (<1%) of all road fatalities caused by purely mechanical failure. That leaves 99% (stats pulled from my ass) caused, or largely contributed to, by human error. For a large class of these errors a computer would never cause the problem or safely navigate around it.
Saying "I want to keep driving 'cos its fun!!" isn't really good enough in that context.
FWIW, it's not really an inner-city scooter - at 300cc, top speed about 140km/h, it's well capable of touring, and I have toured on it.
But even if it was, it seems to me that you're assuming a boundary where none exists. There is no fixed point in the road where it's suddenly urban vs suburban vs rural; the most marked points are entry and exit to motorways, but they have lower per-mile risks already.
I'd be the first guy to say that 2000+kg cars ought to be move more safely and predictably; I'm a committed biker, and that would be safer for me too. But in the chaos of UK traffic, I don't really see how it's workable without converting everything - absolutely everything, pretty much overnight - to automated vehicles.
I mean the streets have one lane most of the time, but occasionally two or more lanes between certain traffic lights, junctions are not regular, roadworks at some point in your journey are statistically almost certain, pedestrians are always wandering out into the road, wobbly cyclists, etc. The only way I can see an automated vehicle working in that environment is one that moves unacceptably slowly to mitigate the risk of tort suits against the manufacturer; or an entirely separate road network, strictly for automated vehicles.
It would be interesting to know the injury/fatality stats for the kind of roads you're describing. If the rates are high (relatively speaking) then I would argue that yes a total conversion to computer controlled driving (when available) is the only socially acceptable thing to do. Public safety would trump your personal enjoyment of the act of riding.
Realistically speaking though truly autonomous driving in tricky (even for humans) conditions like you describe is probably a long way off, although within our lifetimes I would think. The other option is a total rethink of the city/suburb nightmare that we now live in. But that's a debate for another time :)
But being able to skip past long queues of stopped or slowly moving traffic, safely and efficiently almost as if the traffic didn't exist, feels really good.